BackgroundThe increasing number of patients experiencing periprosthetic total knee arthroplasty (TKA) infections and the cost of treating them suggest that we seek alternatives to two-stage revision. Single-stage revision is a potential alternative to the standard two-stage procedure because it involves only one surgical procedure, so if it is comparably effective, it would be associated with less patient morbidity and lower cost.Questions/purposesWe compared (1) the degree to which our protocol of a highly selective single-stage revision approach achieved infection control compared with a two-stage revision approach to TKA infections; and (2) Knee Society scores and radiographic evidence of implant fixation between the single-stage and two-stage patients who were treated for more complicated infections.MethodsBetween 2004 and 2009, we treated 102 patients for chronic TKA infections, of whom 28 (27%) were treated using a single-stage approach and 74 (73%) were treated using a two-stage approach. All patients were available for followup at a minimum of 3 years (mean, 6.5 years; range, 3–9 years). The indications for using a single-stage approach were minimal/moderate bone loss, the absence of immunocompromise, healthy soft tissues, and a known organism with known sensitivities for which appropriate antibiotics are available. Participants included 38 men and 64 women with a mean age of 65 years (range, 45–87 years). We used the Musculoskeletal Infection Society definition of periprosthetic joint infection to confirm infection control at the last followup appointment. Radiographs were evaluated for signs of loosening, and patients completed Knee Society Scores for clinical evaluation.ResultsNone of the patients in the single-stage revision group developed recurrence of infection, and five patients (93%) in the two-stage revision group developed reinfection (p = 0.16). Patients treated with a single-stage approach had higher Knee Society scores than did patients treated with the two-stage approach (88 versus 76, p < 0.001). However, radiographic findings showed a well-fixed prosthesis in all patients with no evidence of loosening at last followup in either group.ConclusionsOur data provide preliminary support to the use of a single-stage approach in highly selected patients with chronically infected TKAs as an alternative to a two-stage procedure. However, larger, multicenter, prospective trials are called for to validate our findings.Level of EvidenceLevel III, therapeutic study. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

Introduction Total knee replacement (TKR) is a very common surgical procedure. Improved pain management techniques, surgical practices and the introduction of novel interventions have enhanced the patient’s postoperative experience after TKR. Safe, efficient pathways are needed to address the increasing need for knee arthroplasty in the UK. Enhanced recovery programmes can help to reduce hospital stays following knee replacements while maintaining patient safety and satisfaction. This review outlines common evidence-based pre, intra and postoperative interventions in use in enhanced recovery protocols following TKR. Methods A thorough literature search of the electronic healthcare databases (MEDLINE®, Embase™ and the Cochrane Library) was conducted to identify articles and studies concerned with enhanced recovery and fast track pathways for TKR. Results A literature review revealed several non-operative and operative interventions that are effective in enhanced recovery following TKR including preoperative patient education, pre-emptive and local infiltration analgesia, preoperative nutrition, neuromuscular electrical stimulation, pulsed electromagnetic fields, perioperative rehabilitation, modern wound dressings, different standard surgical techniques, minimally invasive surgery and computer assisted surgery. Conclusions Enhanced recovery programmes require a multidisciplinary team of dedicated professionals, principally involving preoperative education, multimodal pain control and accelerated rehabilitation; this will be boosted if combined with minimally invasive surgery. The current economic climate and restricted healthcare budget further necessitate brief hospitalisation while minimising costs. These non-operative interventions are the way forward to achieve such requirements.

This review summarises the key points in taking a history and performing a comprehensive clinical examination for patients with foot and/or ankle problems. It is a useful guide for residents who are preparing for their specialty exams, as well as family doctors and any other doctor who has to deal with foot and ankle problems in adults.

Using general practitioner records and hospital notes and through direct telephone conversation with patients, we investigated the accuracy of nine patient-reported complications gathered from a self-completed questionnaire after elective joint replacement surgery of the hip and knee. A total of 402 post-discharge complications were reported after 8546 elective operations that were undertaken within a three-year period. These were reported by 136 men and 240 women with a mean age of 71.8 years (34 to 93). A total of 319 reported complications (79.4%; 95% confidence interval 75.4 to 83.3) were confirmed to be correct. High rates of correct reporting were demonstrated for infection (94.5%) and the need for further surgery (100%), whereas the rates of reporting deep-vein thrombosis (DVT), pulmonary embolism, myocardial infarction and stroke were lower (75% to 84.2%). Dislocation, peri-prosthetic fractures and nerve palsy had modest rates of correct reporting (36% to 57.1%). More patients who had knee surgery delivered incorrect reports of dislocation (p = 0.001) and DVT (p = 0.013). Despite these variations, it appears that post-operative complications may form part of a larger patient-reported outcome programme after elective joint replacement surgery.