Intra-Articular Vancomycin Powder in Primary Total Knee Arthroplasty: A Retrospective Observational Study.
retrospective_cohort · Level III
Where this comes from
- Record sourced from PubMed, PMID 42347848.
- Also identified by DOI 10.3928/01477447-20260615-01.
- No licence information is recorded for this record.
- Because redistribution is not established, this page shows the abstract only. Follow the links below for the full text.
Abstract
Periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) is one of the most serious complications following total knee arthroplasty (TKA). Vancomycin powder has been proposed as a low-cost adjunct to reduce infection by providing high local antibiotic concentrations with minimal systemic exposure; however, clinical evidence remains inconsistent. This study aimed to evaluate the effect of intra-articular vancomycin powder on PJI, aseptic wound complications, and renal function in primary TKA. Patients who underwent primary TKA between 2022 and 2024 with at least 1 year of follow-up were retrospectively analyzed. A total of 661 patients were included: 247 received 1 g intra-articular vancomycin powder and 414 served as controls. All procedures were performed with standardized perioperative protocols. Demographics, comorbidities, and high-risk status were recorded. Outcomes included PJI, aseptic wound complications, and acute kidney injury. PJI occurred in 7 patients (1.1%): 6 in the control group (1.4%) and 1 in the vancomycin group (0.4%), with no significant difference (<i>P</i> = .266). Aseptic wound complications were observed in 28 patients (4.2%), including 20 control patients (4.8%) and 8 vancomycin patients (3.2%) (<i>P</i> = .326). Acute kidney injury occurred in 12 patients (1.8%), with comparable rates between groups (<i>P</i> = 1.000). Intra-articular vancomycin powder did not result in a statistically significant reduction in PJI rates, while demonstrating a favorable safety profile. Although safe, routine use may not provide additional measurable benefit in optimized surgical settings with low baseline infection rates. Larger, well-designed randomized trials are required to identify patient subgroups who may benefit from selective application.