Purpose: To identify the risk factors and effect of empirical glycopeptide on the failure of single arthroscopic debridement for septic knee arthritis in a native knee joint. Materials and Methods: Patients who underwent arthroscopic debridement for septic knee arthritis from March 2005 to December 2022 at one institution were included in this study. Demographic data, comorbidities, preoperative factors including history of previous surgery, history of injection, laboratory data including preoperative C-reactive protein (CRP) and white blood cell (WBC) count, isolated pathogens from synovial fluid culture, and Gachter stage were analyzed. Statistical analyses using univariate and logistic regression were performed. Results: Out of 132 patients, 17 patients (12.9%) had more than one additional arthroscopic debridement. History of diabetes mellitus (DM) (p<0.001), previous injection (p=0.041), isolated Staphylococcus aureus in synovial fluid (p=0.010), and high Gachter stage (p=0.002) were identified as risk factors, whereas age, history of previous knee surgery at the affected knee, CRP level, preoperative WBC, and preoperative neutrophil count of synovial fluid had no significant relation. Logistic regression analysis showed significant increase of risk in patients with DM [odds ratio (OR) 12.002, 95% confidence interval (CI) 3.243–44.418, p<0.001], previous injection history (OR 4.812, 95% CI 1.367–16.939, p=0.017), and isolation of Staphylococcus aureus in synovial fluid (OR 4.804, 95% CI 1.282–18.001, p=0.031) as independent risk factors for failure of infection eradication after single arthroscopic debridement. Conclusion Comorbidity of DM, history of previous injection, isolated Staphylococcus aureus in synovial fluid, and high Gachter stage were associated with a higher risk of failure to eradicate infection with a single arthroscopic procedure. Empirical glycopeptide administration also showed no significant benefit in reducing the risk of additional surgical procedures for infection control, suggesting against the routine administration of glycopeptide.

Purpose: To identify the risk factors and effect of empirical glycopeptide on the failure of single arthroscopic debridement for septic knee arthritis in a native knee joint. Materials and Methods: Patients who underwent arthroscopic debridement for septic knee arthritis from March 2005 to December 2022 at one institution were included in this study. Demographic data, comorbidities, preoperative factors including history of previous surgery, history of injection, laboratory data including preoperative C-reactive protein (CRP) and white blood cell (WBC) count, isolated pathogens from synovial fluid culture, and Gachter stage were analyzed. Statistical analyses using univariate and logistic regression were performed. Results: Out of 132 patients, 17 patients (12.9%) had more than one additional arthroscopic debridement. History of diabetes mellitus (DM) (p<0.001), previous injection (p=0.041), isolated Staphylococcus aureus in synovial fluid (p=0.010), and high Gachter stage (p=0.002) were identified as risk factors, whereas age, history of previous knee surgery at the affected knee, CRP level, preoperative WBC, and preoperative neutrophil count of synovial fluid had no significant relation. Logistic regression analysis showed significant increase of risk in patients with DM [odds ratio (OR) 12.002, 95% confidence interval (CI) 3.243–44.418, p<0.001], previous injection history (OR 4.812, 95% CI 1.367–16.939, p=0.017), and isolation of Staphylococcus aureus in synovial fluid (OR 4.804, 95% CI 1.282–18.001, p=0.031) as independent risk factors for failure of infection eradication after single arthroscopic debridement. Conclusion Comorbidity of DM, history of previous injection, isolated Staphylococcus aureus in synovial fluid, and high Gachter stage were associated with a higher risk of failure to eradicate infection with a single arthroscopic procedure. Empirical glycopeptide administration also showed no significant benefit in reducing the risk of additional surgical procedures for infection control, suggesting against the routine administration of glycopeptide.

Background: Meniscal scaffold implantation has been introduced as a treatment for meniscal injuries, but there is still no clear consensus on its clinical impact, including its chondroprotective effect. This review aimed to assess the chondroprotective effects, clinical outcomes, and survivorship of meniscal scaffold implantation compared to meniscectomy, as well as among different types of scaffolds. Methods: A comprehensive search strategy was performed on the databases of PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, and Google Scholar, encompassing articles published until June 1, 2024. Randomized controlled trials (RCT) and comparative studies published in English that reported results using collagen meniscal implant (CMI) and polyurethane meniscal scaffold for meniscal tear were included. Results: A total of 421 studies were initially identified across databases, and a systematic review was conducted on 8 studies involving 596 patients. Among the 5 studies that addressed the chondroprotective effect, none found that meniscal scaffolds had a higher chondroprotective effect compared to meniscectomy. In studies comparing CMI and meniscectomy, the Lysholm score results showed a mean difference (MD) range between –5.90 and –4.40. In the case of visual analog scale score, the MD ranged from –1.0 to 1.0. In studies comparing polyurethane meniscal scaffolds and CMI, the Tegner score results showed an MD range of –2.0 to 0.4. Conclusions There was no superiority in chondroprotective effects for both CMI and polyurethane meniscal scaffolds compared to meniscectomy. Although meniscal scaffolds may provide improvements in clinical outcomes, no clinically relevant differences were observed in comparison to meniscectomy. There are no discernible differences between the 2 types of scaffolds.

Purpose: To identify the risk factors and effect of empirical glycopeptide on the failure of single arthroscopic debridement for septic knee arthritis in a native knee joint. Materials and Methods: Patients who underwent arthroscopic debridement for septic knee arthritis from March 2005 to December 2022 at one institution were included in this study. Demographic data, comorbidities, preoperative factors including history of previous surgery, history of injection, laboratory data including preoperative C-reactive protein (CRP) and white blood cell (WBC) count, isolated pathogens from synovial fluid culture, and Gachter stage were analyzed. Statistical analyses using univariate and logistic regression were performed. Results: Out of 132 patients, 17 patients (12.9%) had more than one additional arthroscopic debridement. History of diabetes mellitus (DM) (p<0.001), previous injection (p=0.041), isolated Staphylococcus aureus in synovial fluid (p=0.010), and high Gachter stage (p=0.002) were identified as risk factors, whereas age, history of previous knee surgery at the affected knee, CRP level, preoperative WBC, and preoperative neutrophil count of synovial fluid had no significant relation. Logistic regression analysis showed significant increase of risk in patients with DM [odds ratio (OR) 12.002, 95% confidence interval (CI) 3.243–44.418, p<0.001], previous injection history (OR 4.812, 95% CI 1.367–16.939, p=0.017), and isolation of Staphylococcus aureus in synovial fluid (OR 4.804, 95% CI 1.282–18.001, p=0.031) as independent risk factors for failure of infection eradication after single arthroscopic debridement. Conclusion Comorbidity of DM, history of previous injection, isolated Staphylococcus aureus in synovial fluid, and high Gachter stage were associated with a higher risk of failure to eradicate infection with a single arthroscopic procedure. Empirical glycopeptide administration also showed no significant benefit in reducing the risk of additional surgical procedures for infection control, suggesting against the routine administration of glycopeptide.

Background: Meniscal scaffold implantation has been introduced as a treatment for meniscal injuries, but there is still no clear consensus on its clinical impact, including its chondroprotective effect. This review aimed to assess the chondroprotective effects, clinical outcomes, and survivorship of meniscal scaffold implantation compared to meniscectomy, as well as among different types of scaffolds. Methods: A comprehensive search strategy was performed on the databases of PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, and Google Scholar, encompassing articles published until June 1, 2024. Randomized controlled trials (RCT) and comparative studies published in English that reported results using collagen meniscal implant (CMI) and polyurethane meniscal scaffold for meniscal tear were included. Results: A total of 421 studies were initially identified across databases, and a systematic review was conducted on 8 studies involving 596 patients. Among the 5 studies that addressed the chondroprotective effect, none found that meniscal scaffolds had a higher chondroprotective effect compared to meniscectomy. In studies comparing CMI and meniscectomy, the Lysholm score results showed a mean difference (MD) range between –5.90 and –4.40. In the case of visual analog scale score, the MD ranged from –1.0 to 1.0. In studies comparing polyurethane meniscal scaffolds and CMI, the Tegner score results showed an MD range of –2.0 to 0.4. Conclusions There was no superiority in chondroprotective effects for both CMI and polyurethane meniscal scaffolds compared to meniscectomy. Although meniscal scaffolds may provide improvements in clinical outcomes, no clinically relevant differences were observed in comparison to meniscectomy. There are no discernible differences between the 2 types of scaffolds.

Background: Meniscal scaffold implantation has been introduced as a treatment for meniscal injuries, but there is still no clear consensus on its clinical impact, including its chondroprotective effect. This review aimed to assess the chondroprotective effects, clinical outcomes, and survivorship of meniscal scaffold implantation compared to meniscectomy, as well as among different types of scaffolds. Methods: A comprehensive search strategy was performed on the databases of PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, and Google Scholar, encompassing articles published until June 1, 2024. Randomized controlled trials (RCT) and comparative studies published in English that reported results using collagen meniscal implant (CMI) and polyurethane meniscal scaffold for meniscal tear were included. Results: A total of 421 studies were initially identified across databases, and a systematic review was conducted on 8 studies involving 596 patients. Among the 5 studies that addressed the chondroprotective effect, none found that meniscal scaffolds had a higher chondroprotective effect compared to meniscectomy. In studies comparing CMI and meniscectomy, the Lysholm score results showed a mean difference (MD) range between –5.90 and –4.40. In the case of visual analog scale score, the MD ranged from –1.0 to 1.0. In studies comparing polyurethane meniscal scaffolds and CMI, the Tegner score results showed an MD range of –2.0 to 0.4. Conclusions There was no superiority in chondroprotective effects for both CMI and polyurethane meniscal scaffolds compared to meniscectomy. Although meniscal scaffolds may provide improvements in clinical outcomes, no clinically relevant differences were observed in comparison to meniscectomy. There are no discernible differences between the 2 types of scaffolds.

Purpose: To identify the risk factors and effect of empirical glycopeptide on the failure of single arthroscopic debridement for septic knee arthritis in a native knee joint. Materials and Methods: Patients who underwent arthroscopic debridement for septic knee arthritis from March 2005 to December 2022 at one institution were included in this study. Demographic data, comorbidities, preoperative factors including history of previous surgery, history of injection, laboratory data including preoperative C-reactive protein (CRP) and white blood cell (WBC) count, isolated pathogens from synovial fluid culture, and Gachter stage were analyzed. Statistical analyses using univariate and logistic regression were performed. Results: Out of 132 patients, 17 patients (12.9%) had more than one additional arthroscopic debridement. History of diabetes mellitus (DM) (p<0.001), previous injection (p=0.041), isolated Staphylococcus aureus in synovial fluid (p=0.010), and high Gachter stage (p=0.002) were identified as risk factors, whereas age, history of previous knee surgery at the affected knee, CRP level, preoperative WBC, and preoperative neutrophil count of synovial fluid had no significant relation. Logistic regression analysis showed significant increase of risk in patients with DM [odds ratio (OR) 12.002, 95% confidence interval (CI) 3.243–44.418, p<0.001], previous injection history (OR 4.812, 95% CI 1.367–16.939, p=0.017), and isolation of Staphylococcus aureus in synovial fluid (OR 4.804, 95% CI 1.282–18.001, p=0.031) as independent risk factors for failure of infection eradication after single arthroscopic debridement. Conclusion Comorbidity of DM, history of previous injection, isolated Staphylococcus aureus in synovial fluid, and high Gachter stage were associated with a higher risk of failure to eradicate infection with a single arthroscopic procedure. Empirical glycopeptide administration also showed no significant benefit in reducing the risk of additional surgical procedures for infection control, suggesting against the routine administration of glycopeptide.

Background: Meniscal scaffold implantation has been introduced as a treatment for meniscal injuries, but there is still no clear consensus on its clinical impact, including its chondroprotective effect. This review aimed to assess the chondroprotective effects, clinical outcomes, and survivorship of meniscal scaffold implantation compared to meniscectomy, as well as among different types of scaffolds. Methods: A comprehensive search strategy was performed on the databases of PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, and Google Scholar, encompassing articles published until June 1, 2024. Randomized controlled trials (RCT) and comparative studies published in English that reported results using collagen meniscal implant (CMI) and polyurethane meniscal scaffold for meniscal tear were included. Results: A total of 421 studies were initially identified across databases, and a systematic review was conducted on 8 studies involving 596 patients. Among the 5 studies that addressed the chondroprotective effect, none found that meniscal scaffolds had a higher chondroprotective effect compared to meniscectomy. In studies comparing CMI and meniscectomy, the Lysholm score results showed a mean difference (MD) range between –5.90 and –4.40. In the case of visual analog scale score, the MD ranged from –1.0 to 1.0. In studies comparing polyurethane meniscal scaffolds and CMI, the Tegner score results showed an MD range of –2.0 to 0.4. Conclusions There was no superiority in chondroprotective effects for both CMI and polyurethane meniscal scaffolds compared to meniscectomy. Although meniscal scaffolds may provide improvements in clinical outcomes, no clinically relevant differences were observed in comparison to meniscectomy. There are no discernible differences between the 2 types of scaffolds.

Purpose: To identify the risk factors and effect of empirical glycopeptide on the failure of single arthroscopic debridement for septic knee arthritis in a native knee joint. Materials and Methods: Patients who underwent arthroscopic debridement for septic knee arthritis from March 2005 to December 2022 at one institution were included in this study. Demographic data, comorbidities, preoperative factors including history of previous surgery, history of injection, laboratory data including preoperative C-reactive protein (CRP) and white blood cell (WBC) count, isolated pathogens from synovial fluid culture, and Gachter stage were analyzed. Statistical analyses using univariate and logistic regression were performed. Results: Out of 132 patients, 17 patients (12.9%) had more than one additional arthroscopic debridement. History of diabetes mellitus (DM) (p<0.001), previous injection (p=0.041), isolated Staphylococcus aureus in synovial fluid (p=0.010), and high Gachter stage (p=0.002) were identified as risk factors, whereas age, history of previous knee surgery at the affected knee, CRP level, preoperative WBC, and preoperative neutrophil count of synovial fluid had no significant relation. Logistic regression analysis showed significant increase of risk in patients with DM [odds ratio (OR) 12.002, 95% confidence interval (CI) 3.243–44.418, p<0.001], previous injection history (OR 4.812, 95% CI 1.367–16.939, p=0.017), and isolation of Staphylococcus aureus in synovial fluid (OR 4.804, 95% CI 1.282–18.001, p=0.031) as independent risk factors for failure of infection eradication after single arthroscopic debridement. Conclusion Comorbidity of DM, history of previous injection, isolated Staphylococcus aureus in synovial fluid, and high Gachter stage were associated with a higher risk of failure to eradicate infection with a single arthroscopic procedure. Empirical glycopeptide administration also showed no significant benefit in reducing the risk of additional surgical procedures for infection control, suggesting against the routine administration of glycopeptide.

Growth hormone (GH) deficiency is caused by congenital or acquired causes and occurs in childhood or adulthood. GH replacement therapy brings benefits to body composition, exercise capacity, skeletal health, cardiovascular outcomes, and quality of life. Before initiating GH replacement, GH deficiency should be confirmed through proper stimulation tests, and in cases with proven genetic causes or structural lesions, repeated GH stimulation testing is not necessary. The dosing regimen of GH replacement therapy should be individualized, with the goal of minimizing side effects and maximizing clinical improvements. The Korean Endocrine Society and the Korean Society of Pediatric Endocrinology have developed a position statement on the diagnosis and treatment of GH deficiency. This position statement is based on a systematic review of evidence and expert opinions.