Articles Vol. 67 No. CĐ5-NCKH 04/05/2026

INFECTION AFTER ARTHROSCOPIC ANTERIOR CRUCIATE LIGAMENT RECONSTRUCTION: DIAGNOSIS AND TREATMENT OUTCOMES.

Kieu Huu Thao1,2, Hoang Minh Thang3,4,5,6, Hoang Xuan Tuan Anh3,5, Nguyen Huy Phuong1,2,7,8
1 University Medical Center Hospital, Linh Dam campus.
2 Bệnh viện Đại học Y Dược, cơ sở Linh Đàm.
3 Hanoi Medical University Hospital
4 Hanoi Medical University
5 Bệnh viện Đại học Y Hà Nội
6 Trường Đại học Y Hà Nội
7 University of Medicine and Pharmacy - Vietnam National University, Hanoi
8 Trường Đại học Y Dược- Đại học Quốc gia Hà Nội
DOI: 10.52163/yhc.v67iCD5.4981
25 Views
6 Downloads
Abstract

Objective: Evaluation of Treatment Outcomes for Infections Following Arthroscopic Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction at Hanoi Medical University Hospital.

Subjects and Methods: A retrospective descriptive study was conducted on 18 patients diagnosed with infection after arthroscopic anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction at Hanoi Medical University Hospital from March 2021 to March 2025.

Results: The study included 18 patients with a mean age of 29.83 ± 9.79 years (range 16–44), with a male-to-female ratio of 5:1. The mean time to symptom onset was 19.41 ± 23 days. Clinically, 100% of patients presented with swelling, warmth, pain, and restricted range of motion. Regarding laboratory findings, both blood tests and synovial fluid analysis demonstrated markedly elevated leukocyte counts exceeding diagnostic thresholds. CRP and ESR levels were also significantly elevated. Medical treatment followed IDSA (2013) and AAOS (2020) recommendations for postoperative septic arthritis, using a combination of Vancomycin with either a third-generation cephalosporin or Clindamycin. The mean duration of antibiotic therapy was 32.94 ± 19.07 days. For surgical management, the graft removal group demonstrated better infection control compared with those treated with arthroscopic debridement alone. Successful graft retention yielded the most favorable functional outcomes (Lysholm 88.5 ± 3.74) and avoided reoperation. Although graft removal effectively controlled infection, 100% of these patients required subsequent reconstructive surgery, particularly in younger and more active individuals. At final follow-up, 100% of patients achieved complete infection resolution after prolonged antibiotic therapy, consistent with IDSA (2013) guidelines.

Conclusion: Postoperative infection following arthroscopic ACL reconstruction is uncommon but can lead to serious impairment of knee function. Early diagnosis and aggressive management facilitate graft preservation and favorable recovery.

References
[1]
Gobbi A, Karnatzikos G, Chaurasia S, Abhishek M, Bulgherhoni E, Lane J. Postoperative Infection After Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction. Sports Health. 2016;8(2):187-189. doi:10.1177/1941738115618638 Google Scholar
[2]
Torres-Claramunt R, Gelber P, Pelfort X, et al. Managing septic arthritis after knee ligament reconstruction. Int Orthop. 2016;40(3):607-614. doi:10.1007/s00264-015-2884-6 Google Scholar
[3]
Van Tongel A, Stuyck J, Bellemans J, Vandenneucker H. Septic arthritis after arthroscopic anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction: a retrospective analysis of incidence, management and outcome. Am J Sports Med. 2007;35(7):1059-1063. doi:10.1177/0363546507299443 Google Scholar
[4]
Mustamsir E, Aji AP, Fernando A. The effectiveness of arthroscopic irrigation and debridement in the management of septic arthritis following anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. Acta Orthop Traumatol Turc. 2025;59(1):7-17. doi:10.5152/j.aott.2025.24070 Google Scholar
[5]
Barker JU, et al. Risk Factors for Infection After ACL Reconstruction: A Meta-analysis. Published online 2019. Google Scholar
[6]
Zhang L, Yang R, Mao Y, Fu W. A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of Risk Factors for an Infection After Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction. Orthop J Sports Med. 2023;11(10):23259671231200822. doi:10.1177/23259671231200822 Google Scholar
[7]
Abdelaziz H, Rademacher K, Suero EM, et al. The 2018 International Consensus Meeting Minor Criteria for Chronic Hip and Knee Periprosthetic Joint Infection: Validation From a Single Center. J Arthroplasty. 2020;35(8):2200-2203. doi:10.1016/j.arth.2020.03.014 Google Scholar
[8]
Parvizi J, Tan TL, Goswami K, et al. The 2018 Definition of Periprosthetic Hip and Knee Infection: An Evidence-Based and Validated Criteria. J Arthroplasty. 2018;33(5):1309-1314.e2. doi:10.1016/j.arth.2018.02.078 Google Scholar
[9]
Schmitz JK, Omar O, Nordkvist A, Hedevik H, Janarv PM, Stålman A. Poorer patient-reported outcome and increased risk of revision at a 5-year follow-up among patients with septic arthritis following anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction: a register-based cohort study of 23,075 primary anterior cruciate ligament reconstructions. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc Off J ESSKA. 2023;31(10):4090-4098. doi:10.1007/s00167-023-07498-6 Google Scholar
[10]
Tande DBG, Patel R, Abdel MP, Berbari EF. Microbiology of hip and knee periprosthetic joint infections: a database study. Clin Microbiol Infect Off Publ Eur Soc Clin Microbiol Infect Dis. 2022;28(2):255-259. doi:10.1016/j.cmi.2021.06.006 Google Scholar
[11]
Lo Presti M, Costa GG, Grassi A, et al. Graft-Preserving Arthroscopic Debridement With Hardware Removal Is Effective for Septic Arthritis After Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction: A Clinical, Arthrometric, and Magnetic Resonance Imaging Evaluation. Am J Sports Med. 2020;48(8):1907-1915. doi:10.1177/0363546520924823 Google Scholar
[12]
Lewis DC, McNamara NE, Tabish EM, et al. Patients treated for infection following ACL reconstruction with graft removal have poorer outcomes than those treated with graft retention: A systematic review. J Exp Orthop. 2025;12(1):e70147. doi:10.1002/jeo2.70147 Google Scholar