Gaur Tribhuwan Narayan Singh, Verma Maneesh, Singh Mayank Pratap, Maravi Deepak S, Agrawal Dhruvkumar Rakeshkumar, Dhanopeya Ajay
Department of Orthopaedics, Government Medical College, Datia, Madhya Pradesh, India.
Dean and CEO, Government Medical College, Datia, Madhya Pradesh, India.
J Orthop Case Rep. 2025 May;15(5):300-304. doi: 10.13107/jocr.2025.v15.i05.5638.
Septic arthritis (SA) of the knee is a serious condition requiring prompt intervention. The choice between arthroscopic and open surgical approaches remains debated. This study compares the clinical outcomes of these two surgical techniques in the treatment of knee SA. The primary objective was to compare the need for additional surgical interventions between the arthroscopic and open surgery groups. Secondary outcomes included a range of motion (ROM), pain reduction, functional improvement, and infection control as measured by total leukocyte count (TLC).
This retrospective study included 32 adult patients diagnosed with acute native knee SA who underwent either arthroscopic or open surgical irrigation between January 2022 and November 2024 at an Indian Government Medical College. Data on demographics, clinical presentation, laboratory results, and surgical details were collected. Postoperatively, patients were assessed for ROM, pain reduction (Visual Analog Scale), functional improvement (WOMAC), and TLC. Statistical analysis was performed using Jamovi v2.3.28.
The arthroscopic group (n = 20) had a significantly younger mean age (35.4 ± 11.0 years) compared to the open surgery group (n = 12, 48.9 ± 10.6 years). Both groups showed significant improvement in joint function, ROM, pain reduction, and disability scores, with no significant difference between groups. The relapse rate was slightly higher in the open surgery group (33.3%) compared to the arthroscopic group (25%), but the difference was not statistically significant.
The clinical outcomes of both arthroscopic and open surgical approaches were equivocal, with both techniques leading to significant improvements in knee function, ROM, pain reduction, and overall disability. Arthroscopy is recommended as a first-line option for younger or less severely affected patients, whereas open surgery remains necessary for complex cases. Further studies are needed to refine treatment strategies.
膝关节化脓性关节炎(SA)是一种严重疾病,需要及时干预。关节镜手术和开放手术方法之间的选择仍存在争议。本研究比较了这两种手术技术在治疗膝关节SA中的临床结果。主要目的是比较关节镜手术组和开放手术组之间额外手术干预的必要性。次要结果包括通过总白细胞计数(TLC)测量的活动范围(ROM)、疼痛减轻、功能改善和感染控制。
这项回顾性研究纳入了32例诊断为急性原发性膝关节SA的成年患者,他们于2022年1月至2024年11月在一所印度政府医学院接受了关节镜手术或开放手术冲洗。收集了人口统计学、临床表现、实验室结果和手术细节的数据。术后,对患者进行ROM、疼痛减轻(视觉模拟量表)、功能改善(WOMAC)和TLC评估。使用Jamovi v2.3.28进行统计分析。
关节镜手术组(n = 20)的平均年龄(35.4±11.0岁)明显低于开放手术组(n = 12,48.9±10.6岁)。两组在关节功能、ROM、疼痛减轻和残疾评分方面均有显著改善,组间无显著差异。开放手术组的复发率(33.3%)略高于关节镜手术组(25%),但差异无统计学意义。
关节镜手术和开放手术方法的临床结果不明确,两种技术均能使膝关节功能、ROM、疼痛减轻和总体残疾状况得到显著改善。对于年轻或病情较轻的患者,建议将关节镜检查作为一线选择,而对于复杂病例,开放手术仍然是必要的。需要进一步研究以完善治疗策略。