Artrotomía versus artroscopia en el tratamiento de artritis séptica en rodilla

Abstract

INTRODUCTION. Acute knee septic arthritis can cause serious joint damage or sepsis if early diagnosis and treatment is not achieved, including drainage of the joint, adequate antibiotic coverage and knee rest. Classically, the knee is drained with multiple arthrocentesis or arthrotomy. The arthroscopic approach is increasingly accepted, since it allows adequate drainage of purulent material and debridement with partial or total synovectomy of the joint. OBJECTIVE. To assess the differences between arthroscopy and arthrotomy in clinical outcomes and the recurrence rate in patients with septic arthritis of the knee joint. MATERIALS AND METHODS. Review of 20 scientific articles of the last 5 years of publication. In addition, the articles selected for this study were analyzed, as inclusion criteria were reviewed, which included recommendations about arthrotomy vs arthroscopy in the treatment of acute septic arthritis, excluding other types of surgical procedures. RESULTS A random selection of scientific articles was made. There was no difference in the effectiveness of the treatment in both groups. The pain was highest in those undergoing arthrotomy treatment at 7 and 14 days postoperatively. The return to activities of daily life took an average of 5,7 days for both groups: 7,1 days for the arthrotomy group and 4,3 days for the arthroscopy group. CONCLUSION. This review collected information without conclusive evidence demonstrating that arthroscopy is more effective in the management of septic arthritis. Arthrotomy remains the standard therapy in the treatment of septic knee arthritis.