Current Reviews in Musculoskeletal Medicine

, Volume 11, Issue 3, pp 357–369 | Cite as

Centers for Disease Control and Prevention 2017 Guidelines for Prevention of Surgical Site Infections: Review and Relevant Recommendations

  • K. Keely BoyleEmail author
  • Sridhar Rachala
  • Scott R. Nodzo
Prosthetic Joint Infection (S Nodzo and N Frisch, section editors)
Part of the following topical collections:
  1. Topical Collection on Prosthetic Joint Infection


Purpose of Review

The associated patient morbidity and resource-intensive nature of managing surgical site infections (SSI) has focused attention toward not only improving treatment protocols but also enhancing preventative measures. The purpose of this review was to summarize the relevant updated CDC guidelines for the prevention of SSI that were released in 2017. The CDC recommends the integration of the guidelines for improvement in quality metrics, reportable outcomes, and patient safety.

Recent Findings

The updated guidelines include generalized recommendations for parenteral antimicrobial prophylaxis, non-parenteral antimicrobial prophylaxis, glycemic control, normothermia, oxygenation, and antiseptic prophylaxis. The arthroplasty section includes recommendations for blood transfusion, systemic immunosuppressive therapy, and antibiotics during drain use. There was low-quality evidence precluding recommendations for preoperative intra-articular corticosteroid injections, orthopedic surgical space suits, and biofilm management.


The recommendations provided throughout this review, including more recent guidelines from other organizations such as the AAOS and ACR, should assist clinicians in developing and/or refining surgical site prevention protocols for their patients undergoing total joint arthroplasty procedures.


Centers for Disease Control and Prevention Surgical site infection Total joint arthroplasty Prosthetic joint arthroplasty Guidelines 


Compliance with ethical standards

Conflict of Interest

The authors have nothing relevant to disclose.

Human and Animal Rights and Informed Consent

This article does not contain any studies with human or animal subjects performed by any of the authors.


Papers of particular interest, published recently, have been highlighted as: • Of importance •• Of major importance

  1. 1.
    Mu Y, Edwards JR, Horan TC, Berrios-Torres SI, Fridkin SK. Improving risk-adjusted measures of surgical site infection for the national healthcare safety network. Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol. 2011;32(10):970–86. Scholar
  2. 2.
    Al-Mulhim FA, Baragbah MA, Sadat-Ali M, Alomran AS, Azam MQ. Prevalence of surgical site infection in orthopedic surgery: a 5-year analysis. Int Surg. 2014;99(3):264–8. Scholar
  3. 3.
    de Lissovoy G, Fraeman K, Hutchins V, Murphy D, Song D, Vaughn BB. Surgical site infection: incidence and impact on hospital utilization and treatment costs. Am J Infect Control. 2009;37(5):387–97. Scholar
  4. 4.
    Kim SH, Wise BL, Zhang Y, Szabo RM. Increasing incidence of shoulder arthroplasty in the United States. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2011;93(24):2249–54. Scholar
  5. 5.
    Kurtz S, Ong K, Lau E, Mowat F, Halpern M. Projections of primary and revision hip and knee arthroplasty in the United States from 2005 to 2030. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2007;89(4):780–5. Scholar
  6. 6.
    Kurtz SM, Ong KL, Schmier J, Zhao K, Mowat F, Lau E. Primary and revision arthroplasty surgery caseloads in the United States from 1990 to 2004. J Arthroplasty. 2009;24(2):195–203. Scholar
  7. 7.
    • Springer BD, Cahue S, Etkin CD, Lewallen DG, BJ MG. Infection burden in total hip and knee arthroplasties: an international registry-based perspective. Arthroplast Today. 2017;3(2):137–40. Infection burden may be one measure of the overall success in registry populations as well as monitoring the steady state of infection worldwide. Despite global efforts to reduce postoperative infection, infection burden has actually increased in the selected registries over time. CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    •• Delanois RE, Mistry JB, Gwam CU, Mohamed NS, Choksi US, Mont MA. Current epidemiology of revision total knee arthroplasty in the United States. J Arthroplasty. 2017;32(9):2663–8. Infection was the most common etiology for revision TKA (20.4%), closely followed by mechanical loosening (20.3%). The most common revision TKA procedure performed was all component revision (31.3%). Medicare was the primary payor for the greatest proportion of revisions (57.7%). CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Krukhaug Y, Hallan G, Dybvik E, Lie SA, Furnes ON. A survivorship study of 838 total elbow replacements: a report from the Norwegian Arthroplasty Register 1994–2016. J Shoulder Elbow Surg. 2018;27(2):260–9. Most frequent reason for revision surgery was aseptic loosening, followed by defective polyethylene, infection and dislocation. CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Kurtz SM, Lau E, Schmier J, Ong KL, Zhao K, Parvizi J. Infection burden for hip and knee arthroplasty in the United States. J Arthroplasty. 2008;23(7):984–91. Scholar
  11. 11.
    Fry DE. The economic costs of surgical site infection. Surg Infect (Larchmt). 2002;3(Suppl 1):S37–43. Scholar
  12. 12.
    Urban JA. Cost analysis of surgical site infections. Surg Infect (Larchmt). 2006;7(Suppl 1):S19–22. Scholar
  13. 13.
    Umscheid CA, Mitchell MD, Doshi JA, Agarwal R, Williams K, Brennan PJ. Estimating the proportion of healthcare-associated infections that are reasonably preventable and the related mortality and costs. Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol. 2011;32(2):101–14. Scholar
  14. 14.
    •• Berrios-Torres SI, Umscheid CA, Bratzler DW, Leas B, Stone EC, Kelz RR, et al. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention Guideline for the Prevention of Surgical Site Infection. 2017. JAMA Surg. 2017;152(8):784–91. The recent CDC guideline is intended to provide new and updated evidence-based recommendations for the prevention of SSI and should be incorporated into comprehensive surgical quality improvement programs to improve patient safety. PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    McKibben L, Horan TC, Tokars JI, Fowler G, Cardo DM, Pearson ML, et al. Guidance on public reporting of healthcare-associated infections: recommendations of the Healthcare Infection Control Practices Advisory Committee. Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol. 2005;26(6):580–7. Scholar
  16. 16.
    US Department of Health and Human Services. National action plan to prevent health care–associated infections: road map to elimination. Published 2013.
  17. 17.
    Healthcare-associated infections in the United States, 2006–2016: a story of progress. https://wwwcdcgov/hai/surveillance/data-reports/data-summary-assessing-progress.html. Published 2017. Constitutes a high-level assessment of data reported to the National Healthcare Safety Network (NHSN) combined with data from other sources the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention uses, reflecting on several years of national progress toward elimination of major healthcare-associated infections (HAIs) in acute care hospitals.
  18. 18.
    Frietsch T, Krombholz K, Tolksdorf B, Nebe T, Segiet W, Lorentz A. Cellular immune response to autologous blood transfusion in hip arthroplasty: whole blood versus buffy coat-poor packed red cells and fresh-frozen plasma. Vox Sang. 2001;81(3):187–93.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Rosencher N, Kerkkamp HE, Macheras G, Munuera LM, Menichella G, Barton DM, et al. Orthopedic Surgery Transfusion Hemoglobin European Overview (OSTHEO) study: blood management in elective knee and hip arthroplasty in Europe. Transfusion. 2003;43(4):459–69.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Llewelyn CA, Taylor RS, Todd AA, Stevens W, Murphy MF, Williamson LM, et al. The effect of universal leukoreduction on postoperative infections and length of hospital stay in elective orthopedic and cardiac surgery. Transfusion. 2004;44(4):489–500. Scholar
  21. 21.
    Innerhofer P, Klingler A, Klimmer C, Fries D, Nussbaumer W. Risk for postoperative infection after transfusion of white blood cell-filtered allogeneic or autologous blood components in orthopedic patients undergoing primary arthroplasty. Transfusion. 2005;45(1):103–10. Scholar
  22. 22.
    Weber EW, Slappendel R, Prins MH, van der Schaaf DB, Durieux ME, Strumper D. Perioperative blood transfusions and delayed wound healing after hip replacement surgery: effects on duration of hospitalization. Anesth Analg. 2005;100(5):1416–21, table of contents. Scholar
  23. 23.
    Frietsch T, Karger R, Scholer M, Huber D, Bruckner T, Kretschmer V, et al. Leukodepletion of autologous whole blood has no impact on perioperative infection rate and length of hospital stay. Transfusion. 2008;48(10):2133–42. Scholar
  24. 24.
    Pedersen AB, Mehnert F, Overgaard S, Johnsen SP. Allogeneic blood transfusion and prognosis following total hip replacement: a population-based follow up study. BMC Musculoskelet Disord. 2009;10:167. Scholar
  25. 25.
    del Trujillo MM, Carrero A, Munoz M. The utility of the perioperative autologous transfusion system OrthoPAT in total hip replacement surgery: a prospective study. Arch Orthop Trauma Surg. 2008;128(10):1031–8. Scholar
  26. 26.
    Carson JL, Grossman BJ, Kleinman S, Tinmouth AT, Marques MB, Fung MK, et al. Red blood cell transfusion: a clinical practice guideline from the AABB*. Ann Intern Med. 2012;157(1):49–58. Scholar
  27. 27.
    Wessels JA, Huizinga TW, Guchelaar HJ. Recent insights in the pharmacological actions of methotrexate in the treatment of rheumatoid arthritis. Rheumatology (Oxford). 2008;47(3):249–55. CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Kawakami K, Ikari K, Kawamura K, Tsukahara S, Iwamoto T, Yano K, et al. Complications and features after joint surgery in rheumatoid arthritis patients treated with tumour necrosis factor-alpha blockers: perioperative interruption of tumour necrosis factor-alpha blockers decreases complications? Rheumatology (Oxford). 2010;49(2):341–7. Scholar
  29. 29.
    Momohara S, Kawakami K, Iwamoto T, Yano K, Sakuma Y, Hiroshima R, et al. Prosthetic joint infection after total hip or knee arthroplasty in rheumatoid arthritis patients treated with nonbiologic and biologic disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs. Mod Rheumatol. 2011;21(5):469–75. Scholar
  30. 30.
    Hirano Y, Kojima T, Kanayama Y, Shioura T, Hayashi M, Kida D, et al. Influences of anti-tumour necrosis factor agents on postoperative recovery in patients with rheumatoid arthritis. Clin Rheumatol. 2010;29(5):495–500. Scholar
  31. 31.
    Perhala RS, Wilke WS, Clough JD, Segal AM. Local infectious complications following large joint replacement in rheumatoid arthritis patients treated with methotrexate versus those not treated with methotrexate. Arthritis Rheum. 1991;34(2):146–52.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Visser K, Katchamart W, Loza E, Martinez-Lopez JA, Salliot C, Trudeau J, et al. Multinational evidence-based recommendations for the use of methotrexate in rheumatic disorders with a focus on rheumatoid arthritis: integrating systematic literature research and expert opinion of a broad international panel of rheumatologists in the 3E Initiative. Ann Rheum Dis. 2009;68(7):1086–93. Scholar
  33. 33.
    •• Goodman SM, Springer B, Guyatt G, Abdel MP, Dasa V, George M, et al. American College of Rheumatology/American Association of Hip and Knee Surgeons Guideline for the Perioperative Management of Antirheumatic Medication in Patients With Rheumatic Diseases Undergoing Elective Total Hip or Total Knee Arthroplasty. Arthritis Care Res (Hoboken). 2017;69(8):1111–24. Guideline developed to help decision-making by clinicians and patients regarding perioperative antirheumatic medication management at the time of elective THA or TKA. These conditional recommendations reflect the paucity of high-quality direct randomized controlled trial data. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Crawford RW, Gie GA, Ling RS, Murray DW. Diagnostic value of intra-articular anaesthetic in primary osteoarthritis of the hip. J Bone Joint Surg Br. 1998;80(2):279–81.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Friedman DM, Moore ME. The efficacy of intraarticular steroids in osteoarthritis: a double-blind study. J Rheumatol. 1980;7(6):850–6.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Gossec L, Dougados M. Intra-articular treatments in osteoarthritis: from the symptomatic to the structure modifying. Ann Rheum Dis. 2004;63(5):478–82. Scholar
  37. 37.
    Kaspar S, de VBJ. Infection in hip arthroplasty after previous injection of steroid. J Bone Joint Surg Br. 2005;87(4:454–7. Scholar
  38. 38.
    Papavasiliou AV, Isaac DL, Marimuthu R, Skyrme A, Armitage A. Infection in knee replacements after previous injection of intra-articular steroid. J Bone Joint Surg Br. 2006;88(3:321–3. Scholar
  39. 39.
    McIntosh AL, Hanssen AD, Wenger DE, Osmon DR. Recent intraarticular steroid injection may increase infection rates in primary THA. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2006;451:50–4. Scholar
  40. 40.
    Sreekumar R, Venkiteswaran R, Raut V. Infection in primary hip arthroplasty after previous steroid infiltration. Int Orthop. 2007;31(1):125–8. Scholar
  41. 41.
    Desai A, Ramankutty S, Board T, Raut V. Does intraarticular steroid infiltration increase the rate of infection in subsequent total knee replacements? Knee. 2009;16(4):262–4. Scholar
  42. 42.
    Hochberg MC, Altman RD, April KT, Benkhalti M, Guyatt G, McGowan J, et al. American College of Rheumatology 2012 recommendations for the use of nonpharmacologic and pharmacologic therapies in osteoarthritis of the hand, hip, and knee. Arthritis Care Res (Hoboken). 2012;64(4):465–74.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  43. 43.
    American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons: Clinical Practice Guideline on Treatment of Osteoarthritis of the Knee: evidence-based guideline, ed 2. Rosemont, IL, American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons. May 2013. [Context Link].
  44. 44.
    Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Siegel JD, Rhinehart E, Jackson M, Chiarello L, Healthcare Infection Control Practices Advisory Committee. 2007 Guideline for Isolation Precautions: preventing transmission of infectious agents in healthcare settings 2007; Available at:
  45. 45.
    •• Matzkin EG, Curry EJ, Kong Q, Rogers MJ, Henry M, Smith EL. Efficacy and treatment response of intra-articular corticosteroid injections in patients with symptomatic knee osteoarthritis. J Am Acad Orthop Surg. 2017;25(10):703–14. Patients receiving intra-articular corticosteroid injections had improved pain and function. Clinicians should expect less improvement in patients with obesity and/or advanced arthritis. Clinical benefits of intra-articular injections in these patients are less predictable. CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  46. 46.
    Bedard NA, Pugely AJ, Elkins JM, Duchman KR, Westermann RW, Liu SS, et al. The John N. Insall Award: do intraarticular injections increase the risk of infection after TKA? Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2017;475(1):45–52. Scholar
  47. 47.
    Chambers AW, Lacy KW, Liow MHL, Manalo JPM, Freiberg AA, Kwon YM. Multiple hip intra-articular steroid injections increase risk of periprosthetic joint infection compared with single injections. J Arthroplasty. 2017;32(6):1980–3. Scholar
  48. 48.
    Schairer WW, Nwachukwu BU, Mayman DJ, Lyman S, Jerabek SA. Preoperative hip injections increase the rate of periprosthetic infection after total hip arthroplasty. J Arthroplasty. 2016;31(9 Suppl):166–9 e1. Scholar
  49. 49.
    Turpie AG, Bauer KA, Eriksson BI, Lassen MR. Fondaparinux vs enoxaparin for the prevention of venous thromboembolism in major orthopedic surgery: a meta-analysis of 4 randomized double-blind studies. Arch Intern Med. 2002;162(16):1833–40.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  50. 50.
    Patel VP, Walsh M, Sehgal B, Preston C, DeWal H, Di Cesare PE. Factors associated with prolonged wound drainage after primary total hip and knee arthroplasty. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2007;89(1):33–8. Scholar
  51. 51.
    Eriksson BI, Borris LC, Friedman RJ, Haas S, Huisman MV, Kakkar AK, et al. Rivaroxaban versus enoxaparin for thromboprophylaxis after hip arthroplasty. N Engl J Med. 2008;358(26):2765–75. Scholar
  52. 52.
    Kakkar AK, Brenner B, Dahl OE, Eriksson BI, Mouret P, Muntz J, et al. Extended duration rivaroxaban versus short-term enoxaparin for the prevention of venous thromboembolism after total hip arthroplasty: a double-blind, randomised controlled trial. Lancet. 2008;372(9632):31–9. Scholar
  53. 53.
    Lassen MR, Ageno W, Borris LC, Lieberman JR, Rosencher N, Bandel TJ, et al. Rivaroxaban versus enoxaparin for thromboprophylaxis after total knee arthroplasty. N Engl J Med. 2008;358(26):2776–86. Scholar
  54. 54.
    Turpie AG, Lassen MR, Davidson BL, Bauer KA, Gent M, Kwong LM, et al. Rivaroxaban versus enoxaparin for thromboprophylaxis after total knee arthroplasty (RECORD4): a randomised trial. Lancet. 2009;373(9676):1673–80. Scholar
  55. 55.
    Asensio A, Antolin FJ, Sanchez-Garcia JM, Hidalgo O, Hernandez-Navarrete MJ, Bishopberger C, et al. Timing of DVT prophylaxis and risk of postoperative knee prosthesis infection. Orthopedics. 2010;33(11):800. PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. 56.
    Bozic KJ, Vail TP, Pekow PS, Maselli JH, Lindenauer PK, Auerbach AD. Does aspirin have a role in venous thromboembolism prophylaxis in total knee arthroplasty patients? J Arthroplasty. 2010;25(7):1053–60. Scholar
  57. 57.
    Parvizi J, Ghanem E, Joshi A, Sharkey PF, Hozack WJ, Rothman RH. Does “excessive” anticoagulation predispose to periprosthetic infection? J Arthroplasty. 2007;22(6 Suppl 2):24–8. Scholar
  58. 58.
    Sachs RA, Smith JH, Kuney M, Paxton L. Does anticoagulation do more harm than good?: a comparison of patients treated without prophylaxis and patients treated with low-dose warfarin after total knee arthroplasty. J Arthroplasty. 2003;18(4):389–95.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  59. 59.
    Falck-Ytter Y, Francis CW, Johanson NA, Curley C, Dahl OE, Schulman S, et al. Prevention of VTE in orthopedic surgery patients: antithrombotic therapy and prevention of thrombosis, 9th ed: American College of Chest Physicians Evidence-Based Clinical Practice Guidelines. Chest. 2012;141(2 Suppl):e278S–325S. Scholar
  60. 60.
    Lieberman JR. American College of Chest Physicians evidence-based guidelines for venous thromboembolic prophylaxis: the guideline wars are over. J Am Acad Orthop Surg. 2012;20(6):333–5. Scholar
  61. 61.
    • Lieberman JR, Heckmann N. Venous thromboembolism prophylaxis in total hip arthroplasty and total knee arthroplasty patients: from guidelines to practice. J Am Acad Orthop Surg. 2017;25(12):789–98. To help orthopaedic surgeons select an appropriate VTE prophylaxis regimen for their THA and TKA patients, the American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons and the American College of Chest Physicians have developed guidelines. An individualized prophylaxis regimen that balances efficacy and safety is recommended for each patient, based on various risk factors. CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  62. 62.
    Anderson FA Jr, Spencer FA. Risk factors for venous thromboembolism. Circulation. 2003;107(23 Suppl 1):I9–16. Scholar
  63. 63.
    • Nam D, Nunley RM, Johnson SR, Keeney JA, Clohisy JC, Barrack RL. Thromboembolism prophylaxis in hip arthroplasty: routine and high risk patients. J Arthroplasty. 2015;30(12):2299–303. This was a prospective study of 1859 THAs where a VTE risk stratification protocol was utilized. “Routine” risk patients receive a mobile compression device with aspirin and “high” risk patients receive warfarin for thromboprophylaxis after hip arthroplasty. Use of the authors risk stratification protocol allowed the avoidance of more aggressive anticoagulation in 75% of patients while achieving a low overall incidence of symptomatic VTE. CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  64. 64.
    Parvizi J, Huang R, Raphael IJ, Arnold WV, Rothman RH. Symptomatic pulmonary embolus after joint arthroplasty: stratification of risk factors. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2014;472(3):903–12. Scholar
  65. 65.
    Bohl DD, Maltenfort MG, Huang R, Parvizi J, Lieberman JR, Della Valle CJ. Development and validation of a risk stratification system for pulmonary embolism after elective primary total joint arthroplasty. J Arthroplasty. 2016;31(9 Suppl):187–91. This point-scoring system predicts risk for PE after TJA and may help surgeons to optimize selection of chemical prophylaxis. CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  66. 66.
    Vulcano E, Gesell M, Esposito A, Ma Y, Memtsoudis SG, Gonzalez Della Valle A. Aspirin for elective hip and knee arthroplasty: a multimodal thromboprophylaxis protocol. Int Orthop. 2012;36(10):1995–2002. Scholar
  67. 67.
    Pasquarella C, Pitzurra O, Herren T, Poletti L, Savino A. Lack of influence of body exhaust gowns on aerobic bacterial surface counts in a mixed-ventilation operating theatre. A study of 62 hip arthroplasties. J Hosp Infect. 2003;54(1):2–9.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  68. 68.
    Miner AL, Losina E, Katz JN, Fossel AH, Platt R. Deep infection after total knee replacement: impact of laminar airflow systems and body exhaust suits in the modern operating room. Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol. 2007;28(2):222–6. Scholar
  69. 69.
    Hooper GJ, Rothwell AG, Frampton C, Wyatt MC. Does the use of laminar flow and space suits reduce early deep infection after total hip and knee replacement?: the ten-year results of the New Zealand Joint Registry. J Bone Joint Surg Br. 2011;93(1:85–90. Scholar
  70. 70.
    Chiu FY, Lin CF, Chen CM, Lo WH, Chaung TY. Cefuroxime-impregnated cement at primary total knee arthroplasty in diabetes mellitus. A prospective, randomised study. J Bone Joint Surg Br. 2001;83(5):691–5.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  71. 71.
    Chiu FY, Chen CM, Lin CF, Lo WH. Cefuroxime-impregnated cement in primary total knee arthroplasty: a prospective, randomized study of three hundred and forty knees. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2002;84-A(5):759–62.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  72. 72.
    Anglen JO, Gainor BJ, Simpson WA, Christensen G. The use of detergent irrigation for musculoskeletal wounds. Int Orthop. 2003;27(1):40–6. PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  73. 73.
    Dirschl DR, Wilson FC. Topical antibiotic irrigation in the prophylaxis of operative wound infections in orthopedic surgery. Orthop Clin North Am. 1991;22(3):419–26.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  74. 74.
    Anglen JO. Comparison of soap and antibiotic solutions for irrigation of lower-limb open fracture wounds. A prospective, randomized study. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2005;87(7):1415–22. Scholar
  75. 75.
    McHugh SM, Collins CJ, Corrigan MA, Hill AD, Humphreys H. The role of topical antibiotics used as prophylaxis in surgical site infection prevention. J Antimicrob Chemother. 2011;66(4):693–701. Scholar
  76. 76.
    Brown NM, Cipriano CA, Moric M, Sporer SM, Della Valle CJ. Dilute betadine lavage before closure for the prevention of acute postoperative deep periprosthetic joint infection. J Arthroplasty. 2012;27(1):27–30. Scholar
  77. 77.
    van Meurs SJ, Gawlitta D, Heemstra KA, Poolman RW, Vogely HC, Kruyt MC. Selection of an optimal antiseptic solution for intraoperative irrigation: an in vitro study. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2014;96(4):285–91. Scholar
  78. 78.
    Frisch NB, Kadri OM, Tenbrunsel T, Abdul-Hak A, Qatu M, Davis JJ. Intraoperative chlorhexidine irrigation to prevent infection in total hip and knee arthroplasty. Arthroplast Today. 2017;3(4):294–7. The authors were unable to discern a difference in infection rates between chlorhexidine irrigation and their prior protocols using dilute Betadine for THA and 0.9% saline for TKA. The theoretic advantages of dilute CHG retention during closure appear to be safe without infectious concerns. CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  • K. Keely Boyle
    • 1
    Email author
  • Sridhar Rachala
    • 2
  • Scott R. Nodzo
    • 3
  1. 1.Department of Orthopaedics, State University of New York at BuffaloErie County Medical CenterBuffaloUSA
  2. 2.Department of OrthopaedicsBuffalo General Medical CenterBuffaloUSA
  3. 3.Department of OrthopaedicsMike O’Callaghan Medical CenterLas VegasUSA

Personalised recommendations