Nudelman Brandon M, Piple Amit S, Ferkel Richard D
Southern California Orthopedic Institute, Van Nuys, California, USA.
San Francisco Orthopedic Residency Program, San Francisco, California, USA.
Am J Sports Med. 2025 Jul;53(8):2007-2012. doi: 10.1177/03635465241285878. Epub 2025 Jan 11.
Surgical options for septic arthritis include open arthrotomy or an arthroscopic procedure. The optimal surgical technique remains a matter of debate as acceptable results have been reported for both.
To evaluate the efficacy of arthroscopy versus arthrotomy for the treatment of septic arthritis in large and intermediate-sized joints.
Systematic review; Level of evidence, 3.
A literature search was performed of the PubMed and Cochrane online databases through September 2023 identifying articles comparing arthroscopy with arthrotomy for the treatment of septic arthritis. Eligible articles included retrospective or prospective comparative studies investigating reoperation, perioperative complications, or clinical outcomes after arthroscopic or open treatment for septic arthritis of the shoulder, elbow, wrist, hip, knee, or ankle in adults.
In total, 23 articles with 34,248 patients met the inclusion criteria comparing arthroscopy with arthrotomy. In 14 of the 20 (70%) studies that reported on reoperation rates, there was no significant difference in arthroscopic versus open surgical management for septic arthritis. Four (20%) studies reported lower reoperation rates when arthroscopy was utilized compared with open arthrotomy. One single-institution study found arthrotomy to be more effective for shoulder septic arthritis, and another favored open surgery only in the presence of erosions. In 11 of 23 (47.8%) studies, no difference in complications or clinical outcomes was found. However, 11 of 23 (47.8%) studies comprising the shoulder, wrist, hip, knee, and ankle reported a significant benefit to arthroscopy for improved outcomes.
Arthroscopic surgery for the treatment of septic arthritis involving the shoulder, wrist, hip, knee, and ankle appears to be safe and effective. Reoperation rates, short-term complications, and functional outcomes tend to be similar or in favor of arthroscopy when compared with arthrotomy.
化脓性关节炎的手术选择包括切开手术或关节镜手术。由于两种手术方式均有可接受的治疗效果,因此最佳手术技术仍存在争议。
评估关节镜手术与切开手术治疗大关节和中等大小关节化脓性关节炎的疗效。
系统评价;证据等级为3级。
通过检索PubMed和Cochrane在线数据库,检索截至2023年9月比较关节镜手术与切开手术治疗化脓性关节炎的文章。符合条件的文章包括回顾性或前瞻性对照研究,调查成人肩、肘、腕、髋、膝或踝关节化脓性关节炎经关节镜或切开治疗后的再次手术情况、围手术期并发症或临床结局。
共有23篇文章、34248例患者符合纳入标准,比较了关节镜手术与切开手术。在20项(70%)报告再次手术率的研究中,有14项研究表明,关节镜手术与切开手术治疗化脓性关节炎的效果无显著差异。4项(20%)研究报告,与切开手术相比,采用关节镜手术时再次手术率较低。一项单机构研究发现,切开手术治疗肩关节化脓性关节炎更有效,另一项研究仅在存在侵蚀时支持切开手术。在23项(47.8%)研究中,有11项未发现并发症或临床结局存在差异。然而,在23项(47.8%)涉及肩、腕、髋、膝和踝关节的研究中,有11项报告关节镜手术对改善结局有显著益处。
关节镜手术治疗涉及肩、腕、髋、膝和踝关节的化脓性关节炎似乎是安全有效的。与切开手术相比,再次手术率、短期并发症和功能结局往往相似或更有利于关节镜手术。