Introduction: Periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) of the hip due to methicillin-resistant bacteria is difficult to treat and remain a challenge for arthroplasty surgeon. Material and Methods: Retrospective review was done to the patients who received two-stage revisions with an antibiotic loaded cement-spacer for PJI of the hip between January 2010 to May 2015. We found 65 patients (65 hips) with positive culture findings. Eight patients were lost to follow-up and excluded from the study. Among the rest of the 57 patients, methicillin-resistant infection (MR Group) was found in 28 cases. We also evaluate the 29 other cases that caused by the other pathogen as control group. We compared all of the relevant medical records and the treatment outcomes between the two groups. Results:The mean of follow-up period was 33.7 months in the methicillin-resistant group and 28.4 months in the control group (p = 0.27). The causal pathogens in the methicillinresistant group were: Methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) in 10 cases, Methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus epidermidis (MRSE) in 16 cases and Methicillin-resistant coagulase-negative Staphylococcus (MRCNS) in two cases. The reimplantation rate was 92.8% and 89.6% in the methicillin-resistant and control group, respectively (p= 0.66). The rates of recurrent infection after reimplantation were 23.1% (6/26) in the methicillin-resistant group and 7.6% (2/26) in the control group (p= 0.12). The overall infection control rate was 71.4% (20/28) and 89.6% (26/29) in the methicillin-resistant and control group, respectively (p = 0.08). Both groups showed comparable baseline data on mean age, BMI, gender distribution, preoperative ESR/CRP/WBC and comorbidities. Conclusions: Two-stage revision procedure resulted in low infection control rate and high infection recurrency rate for the treatment of methicillin-resistant periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) of the hip. Development of the treatment strategy is needed to improve the outcome of methicillin resistant periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) of the hip.

Stroke continues to be a major cause of morbidity and mortality in atrial fibrillation (AF) patients. Oral anticoagulation (OAC) provides protection against stroke and peripheral embolization in AF but significant proportion of patients could not be started on anticoagulation because of bleeding complications. Left atrial appendage harbors clot in about 90% of nonvalvular AF. The advent of left atrial appendage occlusion (LAAO) techniques has provided these patients with alternative to OAC for stroke prophylaxis. Multiple LAAO devices are currently available with Watchman and Amulet being the most commonly used in clinical practice. Randomized studies are available for Watchman device only. Data on Amplatzer Cardiac Plug, Amulet and Lariat devices are limited by the paucity of randomized data. Long-term data on different LAAO techniques are showing promising results. Device related thrombosis continues to be a serious complication associated with LAAO. Future studies should look into comparative effectiveness between different LAAO techniques, optimal patient selection, risk of complications, and anticoagulant treatment after LAAO. This article aims to provide current available evidence on efficacy and safety of different LAAO devices and future prospective.

Hip geometry abnormalities found in patients with hereditary multiple exostoses (HME) could promote premature hip joint degeneration which needs treatment. We report the case of a 45-year old male with right hip arthrosis who underwent two-incision minimally invasive (MIS-2) total hip arthroplasty (THA), with satisfactory outcome. This technique could be an alternative approach for performing THA in patients with hereditary multiple exostoses.

Stroke continues to be a major cause of morbidity and mortality in atrial fibrillation (AF) patients. Oral anticoagulation (OAC) provides protection against stroke and peripheral embolization in AF but significant proportion of patients could not be started on anticoagulation because of bleeding complications. Left atrial appendage harbors clot in about 90% of nonvalvular AF. The advent of left atrial appendage occlusion (LAAO) techniques has provided these patients with alternative to OAC for stroke prophylaxis. Multiple LAAO devices are currently available with Watchman and Amulet being the most commonly used in clinical practice. Randomized studies are available for Watchman device only. Data on Amplatzer Cardiac Plug, Amulet and Lariat devices are limited by the paucity of randomized data. Long-term data on different LAAO techniques are showing promising results. Device related thrombosis continues to be a serious complication associated with LAAO. Future studies should look into comparative effectiveness between different LAAO techniques, optimal patient selection, risk of complications, and anticoagulant treatment after LAAO. This article aims to provide current available evidence on efficacy and safety of different LAAO devices and future prospective.
Atrial Appendage ; Atrial Fibrillation ; Hemorrhage ; Humans ; Mortality ; Patient Selection ; Prospective Studies ; Stroke ; Thrombosis