Arthroscopic Treatment Is a Safe and Effective Alternative to Open Treatment for Acute Septic Arthritis of the Native Knee: A Systematic Review.

PURPOSE: To compare complication rates, reoperation rates, and subjective outcomes after arthroscopic and open irrigation and debridement for treatment of native knee septic arthritis.

METHODS

Following The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses guidelines, a systematic review of the Embase, Cochrane, and PubMed databases was performed. Comparative studies reporting clinical outcomes after arthroscopic versus open treatment for septic arthritis of the native knee in human adults were included. Excluded were case series with <10 patients, inclusion of patients <18 years old, studies on non-native joints, abstract-only publications, and studies without stratification of the involved joint. Two reviewers in duplicate independently performed search and data extraction. The quality of the included studies was assessed with the Methodological Index for Non-Randomized Studies instrument. The mean score among the included studies was 18.2 (range 16-23).

RESULTS

Eleven studies were included, comprising 2,343 knees treated arthroscopically, and 1,595 treated with arthrotomy. Studies reported no differences in erythrocyte sedimentation rate, C-reactive protein, peripheral white blood cells, or symptom chronicity between groups. Nine studies (81.8%) attempted to control for potentially confounding variables in their analyses, and 4 studies (36.4%) reported significant differences in patient characteristics. Reoperation rates ranged from 0% to 50% for arthroscopy and 6% to 71% for arthrotomy. Complication rates ranged from 0% to 39.4% arthroscopically and 0% to 49% for arthrotomy. Superior patient-reported outcomes were achieved after arthroscopy in 2 studies that analyzed subjective outcomes.

CONCLUSIONS

Arthroscopic management of native knee septic arthritis is a safe and effective alternative to open treatment and is associated with comparable complication rates, reoperation rates, hospitalization lengths, readmission rates, and superior patient-reported outcomes compared with open irrigation and debridement.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level IV, systematic review of Level I, III, and IV studies.