2019•Journal of ISAKOS Joint Disorders & Orthopaedic Sports MedicineOpen access

Arthroscopic debridement has lower re-operation rates than arthrotomy in the treatment of acute septic arthritis of the knee: a meta-analysis

Taufiq Panjwani, Keng Lin Wong, Si Heng Sharon Tan, Zi Qiang Glen Liau, Narendra V. Vaidya, Lingaraj Krishna

Open full text 14 citations

Abstract

Importance Septic arthritis of the native knee joint is the most common bacterial joint infection. The management involves prompt surgical debridement and joint irrigation by arthroscopy or arthrotomy. This is the first systematic review and meta-analysis to compare arthroscopic debridement with arthrotomy for septic arthritis of native knee joint. Objective The purpose of this systematic review and meta-analysis is to compare re-operation rates, length of inpatient hospital stay (LOS) and functional outcome between arthroscopy and arthrotomy in the treatment of acute septic arthritis of the native knee joint. Evidence review This study was conducted in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines. PubMed, Embase and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials databases were searched from database inception to 31 May 2019. All original studies that compared re-operation rates and LOS between arthroscopy and arthrotomy for septic arthritis of knee were included. The research question and eligibility criteria were established a priori. Pertinent data were extracted and random-effects model was used to pool the data where possible. Findings A total of seven studies with 1089 knees were included, of which 723 underwent arthroscopic surgery and 366 knees underwent arthrotomy. The relative risk of re-operation was significantly lower in the arthroscopy group with a pooled relative risk of 0.69 (95% CI 0.56 to 0.86; p=0.0006). All studies reported shorter LOS and one study reported better functional outcomes in the arthroscopy group as compared with arthrotomy. However, the data could not be quantitatively synthesised due to variation in reporting among the studies included. Conclusions and relevance Based on the available evidence, we conclude that arthroscopy for the treatment of septic arthritis of the knee results in a lower re-operation rate than arthrotomy. It cannot be concluded whether arthroscopic treatment results in shorter LOS or better functional outcome as compared with arthrotomy. Level of evidence IV

About this research paper

What this paper is about

Importance Septic arthritis of the native knee joint is the most common bacterial joint infection. The management involves prompt surgical debridement and joint irrigation by arthroscopy or arthrotomy. This is the first systematic review and meta-analysis to compare arthroscopic debridement with arthrotomy for septic arthritis of native knee joint. Objective The purpose of this systematic review and meta-analysis is to compare re-operation rates, length of inpatient hospital stay (LOS) and functional outcome between arthroscopy and arthrotomy in the treatment of acute septic arthritis of the native knee joint. Evidence review This study was conducted in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines. PubMed, Embase and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials databases were searched from database inception to 31 May 2019. All original studies that compared re-operation rates and LOS between arthroscopy and arthrotomy for septic arthritis of knee were included. The research question and eligibility criteria were established a priori. Pertinent data were extracted and random-effects model was used to pool the data where possible. Findings A total of seven studies with 1089 knees were included, of which 723 underwent arthroscopic surgery and 366 knees underwent arthrotomy. The relative risk of re-operation was significantly lower in the arthroscopy group with a pooled relative risk of 0.69 (95% CI 0.56 to 0.86; p=0.0006). All studies reported shorter LOS and one study reported better functional outcomes in the arthroscopy group as compared with arthrotomy. However, the data could not be quantitatively synthesised due to variation in reporting among the studies included. Conclusions and relevance Based on the available evidence, we conclude that arthroscopy for the treatment of septic arthritis of the knee results in a lower re-operation rate than arthrotomy. It cannot be concluded whether arthroscopic treatment results in shorter LOS or better functional outcome as compared with arthrotomy. Level of evidence IV

Why it matters

OpenAlex reports 14 citations for this work. Citation counts describe recorded attention and do not establish research quality.

Key contribution

A contribution statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.

Method / approach

Method details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Main findings

Findings are not separately available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Limitations

Limitations are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Applications

Application details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Available abstract

Importance Septic arthritis of the native knee joint is the most common bacterial joint infection. The management involves prompt surgical debridement and joint irrigation by arthroscopy or arthrotomy. This is the first systematic review and meta-analysis to compare arthroscopic debridement with arthrotomy for septic arthritis of native knee joint. Objective The purpose of this systematic review and meta-analysis is to compare re-operation rates, length of inpatient hospital stay (LOS) and functional outcome between arthroscopy and arthrotomy in the treatment of acute septic arthritis of the native knee joint. Evidence review This study was conducted in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines. PubMed, Embase and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials databases were searched from database inception to 31 May 2019. All original studies that compared re-operation rates and LOS between arthroscopy and arthrotomy for septic arthritis of knee were included. The research question and eligibility criteria were established a priori. Pertinent data were extracted and random-effects model was used to pool the data where possible. Findings A total of seven studies with 1089 knees were included, of which 723 underwent arthroscopic surgery and 366 knees underwent arthrotomy. The relative risk of re-operation was significantly lower in the arthroscopy group with a pooled relative risk of 0.69 (95% CI 0.56 to 0.86; p=0.0006). All studies reported shorter LOS and one study reported better functional outcomes in the arthroscopy group as compared with arthrotomy. However, the data could not be quantitatively synthesised due to variation in reporting among the studies included. Conclusions and relevance Based on the available evidence, we conclude that arthroscopy for the treatment of septic arthritis of the knee results in a lower re-operation rate than arthrotomy. It cannot be concluded whether arthroscopic treatment results in shorter LOS or better functional outcome as compared with arthrotomy. Level of evidence IV

Key concepts: Arthrotomy, Medicine, Septic arthritis, Meta-analysis, Arthroscopy, Knee arthritis, Debridement (dental), Surgery

Related papers

Back to paper searchBrowse research topicsOriginal source
Arthroscopic debridement has lower re-operation rates than arthrotomy in the treatment of acute septic arthritis of the knee: a meta-analysis — Research Paper | ScholarLens