Revision procedures are mainly classified as aseptic, but in around 10% of the cases this is a false-negative diagnosis, and the loosening is caused by a periprosthetic joint infection (PJI).1
Given the higher likelihood of infection in revision arthroplasty and the catastrophic consequences of its occurrence2-3, the dual antibiotic-loaded bone cement COPAL® G+C supports the objective of more effective infection prevention.4
57% reduction of infection in aseptic knee revision arthroplasty
Watch study summary incl. study design
A retrospective study by Pablo Sanz-Ruiz reported that the use of dual antibiotic-loaded bone cement (DALBC) in aseptic revision total knee arthroplasty was associated with a significant reduction in PJI cases.
A PJI rate of 4.1% was found in the single antibiotic-loaded bone cement (SALBC) group (PALACOS®R+G) vs 0% in the COPAL® G+C group (p = 0.035). The relative risk reduction was 57%, the calculated total saving per patient was $1367.4
Study Summary: Is Dual Antibiotic-Loaded Bone Cement More Effective and Cost-Efficient Than a Single Antibiotic-Loaded Bone Cement to Reduce the Risk of Prosthetic Joint Infection in Aseptic Revision Knee Arthroplasty?
A Study by Sanz-Ruiz et al. published in the Journal of Arthrolasty in June 2020
You have not agreed to all cookies, which limits the use of the website and performance. To be able to use our website to its full extent, please agree to all cookies. You can change your preferences in the cookie settings.
Consider aseptic revision cases as possible septic ones
Learn more about "Septic or A-septic" in the lecture of Dr. Goosen
Aseptic revision carries the possibility of a low-grade infection.
Jacobs et al. with their study showed that up to 12% of all perceived aseptic knee and hip revisions showed positive cultures.
By using a dual antibiotic-loaded bone cement greater local antibiotic efficiency can be achieved – especially in revision procedures that in general have a higher risk of infection.5
Find out more about why it makes sense to consider aseptic cases as possible septic ones in the lecture of Jon H. M. Goosen, M.D.6
Lecture Goosen "Septic or Aseptic"
You have not agreed to all cookies, which limits the use of the website and performance. To be able to use our website to its full extent, please agree to all cookies. You can change your preferences in the cookie settings.
1 Jacobs et al., The unsuspected prosthetic joint infection – Incidence and consequences of positive intraoperative cultures in presumed aseptic knee and hip revision, Bone Joint J2017;99-B:1482–.9
2 Signore et al., Consensus document for the diagnosis of prosthetic joint infections: a joint paper by the EANM, EBJIS, and ESR (with ESCMID endorsement), European Journal of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging (2019) 46:971–988
3 McNally et al., The EBJIS definition of periprosthetic joint infection - A practical guide for clinicians, Bone Joint 2021;103-B(1):18–25
4 Sanz-Ruiz et al., Is Dual Antibiotic-Loaded Bone Cement More Effective and Cost-Efficient Than a Single Antibiotic-Loaded Bone Cement to Reduce the Risk of Prosthetic Joint Infection in Aseptic Revision Knee Arthroplasty?, The Journal of Arthroplasty Volume 35, Issue 12, P3724-3729, December 1, 2020
5Jacobs et al., The unsuspected prosthetic joint infection – Incidence and consequences of positive intraoperative cultures in presumed aseptic knee and hip revision, Bone Joint J2017;99-B:1482–.9
6Full webinar "How can we improve PJI prevention?" available
here
Heraeus Medical
You have come to the International website. Would you like to stay or be redirected to the US website?
You have not agreed to all cookies, which limits the use of the website and performance. To be able to use our website to its full extent, please agree to all cookies. You can change your preferences in the cookie settings .