Although arthroscopic treatment is a minimally invasive surgery that effectively treats septic arthritis of the knee joint, it requires general or regional anesthesia. This study aimed to compare the clinical results of lavage after tube insertion versus arthroscopic treatment. Patients treated with arthroscopic treatment were included in group I (n = 76), while those treated with lavage by tube were included in group II (n = 34). We investigated the following in all patients: demographics, underlying disorders, initial serum white blood cell (WBC) count, C-reactive protein (CRP) level, synovial fluid WBC and polymorphonuclear cell counts, causative organism, initial Kellgren-Lawrence grade, lavage number, interventional delay, hospitalization days, CRP normalization time, and Western Ontario McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis index scores for clinical outcomes at 3 months postoperative. The mean interventional delay was significantly greater in group I (23.6 ± 15.6 h vs. 8.7 ± 9.3 h, p < 0.001). The lavage by tube featured a significantly shorter interventional delay time than arthroscopy, while the CRP decrease rate did not differ between groups. Moreover, lavage by tube showed no significant differences in outcomes, including laboratory results and functional outcomes at 3 months postoperative.
Keywords: arthroscopic treatment; knee; lavage by tube; local anesthesia; septic arthritis; tube insertion.