Resuming motor vehicle driving following orthopaedic surgery or limb trauma.

Following elective orthopaedic surgery or the treatment of a fracture, patients are temporarily unable to drive. This loss of independence may have serious social and economic consequences for the patient. It is therefore essential to know when it is safe to permit such patients to return to driving. This article, based upon a review of the current literature, proposes recommendations of the time period after which patients may safely return to driving. Practical decisions are made based upon the type of surgical intervention or fracture. Swiss legislation is equally approached so as to better define the decision

Optimal diagnosis, prevention, and management of periprosthetic joint infection

Nathalie Tafer,1 Wilson Belaieff,1 Céline Cuérel,1 Matthieu Zingg,1 Pierre Hoffmeyer,1 Ilker Uçkay1,2 1Orthopedic Surgery Department, 2Division of Infectious Diseases, University of Geneva Hospitals and Medical School, Geneva, Switzerland Abstract: The pace of the aging population is steadily rising worldwide with a parallel increase in the demand for joint replacement procedures. With the increasing number of patients undergoing arthroplasty, there is also an increased risk for arthroplasty infection that may lead to severe complications, poorer outcome, and substantial extra costs for health care systems. Current rates of prosthetic joint infection are not dramatically different from the 1960s or 1970s, but some general principles are now better defined, and their management has been studied extensively during the past decades, thus resulting in a change in clinical practice. The purpose of this review is to summarize important principles of prosthetic joint infection to guide the clinician and to contribute to the optimal diagnosis, prevention, and management of periprosthetic joint infections. Keywords: arthroplasty infection, antibiotic therapy, biofilm, surgery, preventio

Poor performance of microbiological sampling in the prediction of recurrent arthroplasty infection

During a two-stage revision for prosthetic joint infections (PJI), joint aspirations, open tissue sampling and serum inflammatory markers are performed before re-implantation to exclude ongoing silent infection. We investigated the performance of these diagnostic procedures on the risk of recurrence of PJI among asymptomatic patients undergoing a two-stage revision. A total of 62 PJI were found in 58 patients. All patients had intra-operative surgical exploration during re-implantation, and 48 of them had intra-operative microbiological swabs. Additionally, 18 joint aspirations and one open biopsy were performed before second-stage reimplantation. Recurrence or persistence of PJI occurred in 12 cases with a mean delay of 218 days after re-implantation, but only four pre- or intraoperative invasive joint samples had grown a pathogen in cultures. In at least seven recurrent PJIs (58%), patients had a normal C-reactive protein (CRP, <10 mg/l) level before re-implantation. The sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive and negative predictive values of pre-operative invasive joint aspiration and CRP for the prediction of PJI recurrence was 0.58, 0.88, 0.5, 0.84 and 0.17, 0.81, 0.13, 0.86, respectively. As a conclusion, pre-operative joint aspiration, intraoperative bacterial sampling, surgical exploration and serum inflammatory markers are poor predictors of PJI recurrence. The onset of reinfection usually occurs far later than reimplantation