{"status":"ok","message-type":"work","message-version":"1.0.0","message":{"indexed":{"date-parts":[[2026,9,30]],"date-time":"2026-09-30T21:18:00Z","timestamp":1790803080423,"version":"4.1.0"},"reference-count":27,"publisher":"Ovid Technologies (Wolters Kluwer Health)","issue":"1","license":[{"start":{"date-parts":[[2026,1,1]],"date-time":"2026-01-01T00:00:00Z","timestamp":1767225600000},"content-version":"unspecified","delay-in-days":0,"URL":"http:\/\/creativecommons.org\/licenses\/by-nc-nd\/4.0\/"}],"content-domain":{"domain":["lww.com","ovid.com"],"crossmark-restriction":true},"short-container-title":[],"abstract":"\n Background:<\/jats:title>\n During periprosthetic joint infection revision surgeries, intraoperative irrigation is performed to clear debris, blood, purulence, and microbes from the surgical wound. Dental evidence suggests motorized agitation is effective in removing established biofilms. The purpose of this study was to investigate how pulsatile irrigation and sonicated brushing affect mature staphylococcal biofilm on real arthroplasty components.<\/jats:p>\n <\/jats:sec>\n \n Methods:<\/jats:title>\n \n Five identically sized, never implanted tibial base plates (TBPs) underwent keel removal with a wire electrical discharge machine. Implants were passivated in 25% nitric acid, autoclaved, and submerged in Methicillin sensitive\u00a0\n Staphylococcus aureus<\/jats:italic>\n (MSSA) infected tryptic soy broth. Biofilm was grown for 72 hours, with media replaced every 24 hours. Following growth, TBPs were assigned to 6 experimental conditions: control (no treatment), low-speed pulsatile lavage, high-speed pulsatile lavage, sonication brushing, combination of low-speed pulsatile lavage followed by sonication brushing, and combination of high-speed pulsatile lavage followed by sonication brushing. Pulsatile lavage lasted 5 seconds, while sonication brushing lasted 20 seconds using a modified commercial brush. Experiments were performed in sextuplicate. Posttreatment TBPs were either put in a sonication bath to dislodge remaining bacteria to count colony-forming units (CFUs) or stained with crystal violet to quantify residual biofilm biomass.\n <\/jats:p>\n <\/jats:sec>\n \n Results:<\/jats:title>\n All mechanical methods significantly reduced CFU counts. Low-speed pulsatile lavage, high-speed pulsatile lavage, sonication brushing, and brushing without sonication reduced CFU counts by 64%, 68%, 87%, and 82%, and reduced biofilm biomass by 74%, 68%, 78%, and 77%, respectively, as compared with controls. The combination of pulsatile lavage and brushing lowered CFU counts by 99%, and biofilm biomass was reduced by 86%. Scanning electron microscope (SEM) imaging confirmed biofilm removal from the locking mechanism by sonication brushing only.<\/jats:p>\n <\/jats:sec>\n \n Conclusions:<\/jats:title>\n Combining pulsatile lavage and mechanical debridement methods more effectively removes biofilm from implant surfaces compared with either method alone.<\/jats:p>\n <\/jats:sec>\n \n Clinical Relevance:<\/jats:title>\n Mechanical methods including pulsatile lavage and sonication brushing remove biofilm from orthopaedic implants. Clinicians should be aware of these tools and consider using them.<\/jats:p>\n <\/jats:sec>","DOI":"10.2106\/jbjs.oa.25.00296","type":"journal-article","created":{"date-parts":[[2026,2,17]],"date-time":"2026-02-17T19:00:23Z","timestamp":1771354823000},"update-policy":"https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1097\/lww.0000000000001000","source":"Crossref","is-referenced-by-count":2,"title":["Pulsatile Lavage Is Not Enough to Remove Implant Biofilm"],"prefix":"10.2106","volume":"11","author":[{"ORCID":"https:\/\/orcid.org\/0000-0003-2060-5368","authenticated-orcid":false,"given":"Christina A.","family":"Chao","sequence":"first","affiliation":[{"name":"Research Institute, Hospital for Special Surgery, New York, New York"}],"role":[{"vocabulary":"crossref","role":"author"}]},{"ORCID":"https:\/\/orcid.org\/0000-0002-3378-6770","authenticated-orcid":false,"given":"Tyler Kim","family":"Khilnani","sequence":"additional","affiliation":[{"name":"Research Institute, Hospital for Special Surgery, New York, New York"},{"name":"Weill Cornell Medical College, New York, New York"}],"role":[{"vocabulary":"crossref","role":"author"}]},{"ORCID":"https:\/\/orcid.org\/0000-0001-7242-5348","authenticated-orcid":false,"given":"Mohammed","family":"Hammad","sequence":"additional","affiliation":[{"name":"Research Institute, Hospital for Special Surgery, New York, New York"}],"role":[{"vocabulary":"crossref","role":"author"}]},{"ORCID":"https:\/\/orcid.org\/0000-0003-0906-7554","authenticated-orcid":false,"given":"Mathias P.G.","family":"Bostrom","sequence":"additional","affiliation":[{"name":"Hospital for Special Surgery, Adult Reconstruction & Joint Replacement, New York, New York"}],"role":[{"vocabulary":"crossref","role":"author"}]},{"ORCID":"https:\/\/orcid.org\/0000-0002-3129-705X","authenticated-orcid":false,"given":"Alberto V.","family":"Carli","sequence":"additional","affiliation":[{"name":"Hospital for Special Surgery, Adult Reconstruction & Joint Replacement, New York, New York"}],"role":[{"vocabulary":"crossref","role":"author"}]}],"member":"276","published-online":{"date-parts":[[2026,1]]},"reference":[{"key":"R1-20260217","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"43","DOI":"10.21037\/aoj-20-85","article-title":"Biofilm formation in periprosthetic joint infections","volume":"6","author":"Staats","year":"2021","journal-title":"Ann Joint"},{"issue":"6","key":"R2-20260217","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"189","DOI":"10.5194\/jbji-6-189-2021","article-title":"Pursuit of the ideal antiseptic irrigation solution in the management of periprosthetic joint infections","volume":"6","author":"Siddiqi","year":"2021","journal-title":"J Bone Joint Infect"},{"issue":"4","key":"R3-20260217","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"e38.1-2","DOI":"10.2106\/JBJS.ST.19.00019","article-title":"Irrigation and debridement, modular exchange, and implant retention for acute periprosthetic infection after total knee arthroplasty","volume":"9","author":"Choo","year":"2019","journal-title":"JBJS Essent Surg Tech"},{"issue":"4","key":"R4-20260217","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"464","DOI":"10.1302\/0301-620X.104B4.BJJ-2021-1264.R1","article-title":"Debridement, antibiotics, and implant retention after revision arthroplasty: antibiotic mismatch, timing, and repeated DAIR associated with poor outcome","volume":"104-B","author":"Veerman","year":"2022","journal-title":"Bone Joint J"},{"issue":"1","key":"R5-20260217","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"305","DOI":"10.1016\/j.arth.2020.07.081","article-title":"Success rates of debridement, antibiotics, and implant retention in 230 infected total knee arthroplasties: implications for classification of periprosthetic joint infection","volume":"36","author":"Zhu","year":"2021","journal-title":"J Arthroplasty"},{"issue":"6 Supple A","key":"R6-20260217","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"185","DOI":"10.1302\/0301-620X.103B6.BJJ-2020-2278.R1","article-title":"Results of debridement, antibiotics, and implant retention for periprosthetic knee joint infection supplemented with the use of intraosseous antibiotics","volume":"103-B","author":"Kildow","year":"2021","journal-title":"Bone Joint J"},{"issue":"2","key":"R7-20260217","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"127","DOI":"10.2106\/JBJS.23.01118","article-title":"Not all antiseptic solutions are equivalent in removing biofilm: a comparison across different orthopaedic surfaces","volume":"107","author":"Chao","year":"2025","journal-title":"J Bone Joint Surg Am"},{"issue":"7S","key":"R8-20260217","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"S26","DOI":"10.1016\/j.arth.2021.02.033","article-title":"The AAHKS best podium presentation research award: comparing the efficacy of irrigation solutions on staphylococcal biofilm formed on arthroplasty surfaces","volume":"36","author":"Premkumar","year":"2021","journal-title":"J Arthroplasty"},{"issue":"1","key":"R9-20260217","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"25","DOI":"10.3390\/antibiotics14010025","article-title":"Antimicrobial efficacy of five wound irrigation solutions in the periprosthetic joint infection microenvironment in vitro and ex vivo","volume":"14","author":"Honegger","year":"2025","journal-title":"Antibiotics (Basel)"},{"key":"R10-20260217","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"101593","DOI":"10.1016\/j.artd.2024.101593","article-title":"Efficacy of adjunctive antiseptic lavage solution in managing acute hip\/knee prosthetic joint infection: a comparative study in a tertiary revision center","volume":"31","author":"Quinn","year":"2025","journal-title":"Arthroplast Today"},{"issue":"1","key":"R11-20260217","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"327","DOI":"10.1007\/s00068-022-02067-x","article-title":"Pulsatile lavage systems and their potential to penetrate soft tissue","volume":"49","author":"Knappe","year":"2023","journal-title":"Eur J Trauma Emerg Surg"},{"issue":"1","key":"R12-20260217","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"28","DOI":"10.3390\/dj8010028","article-title":"Dental plaque removal by ultrasonic toothbrushes","volume":"8","author":"Digel","year":"2020","journal-title":"Dent J (Basel)"},{"issue":"4","key":"R13-20260217","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"864","DOI":"10.1016\/j.ultsonch.2010.11.016","article-title":"The characterization of acoustic cavitation bubbles\u2013an overview","volume":"18","author":"Ashokkumar","year":"2011","journal-title":"Ultrason Sonochem"},{"issue":"4","key":"R14-20260217","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"470","DOI":"10.1016\/j.ultsonch.2006.09.016","article-title":"Bubbles in an acoustic field: an overview","volume":"14","author":"Ashokkumar","year":"2007","journal-title":"Ultrason Sonochem"},{"issue":"1","key":"R15-20260217","first-page":"13","article-title":"Is a new sonic toothbrush more effective in plaque removal than a manual toothbrush?","volume":"16","author":"Re","year":"2015","journal-title":"Eur J Paediatr Dent"},{"issue":"4","key":"R16-20260217","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"e0231389","DOI":"10.1371\/journal.pone.0231389","article-title":"Comparison of sonication with chemical biofilm dislodgement methods using chelating and reducing agents: implications for the microbiological diagnosis of implant associated infection","volume":"15","author":"Karbysheva","year":"2020","journal-title":"PLoS One"},{"issue":"1","key":"R17-20260217","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"555","DOI":"10.1186\/s12879-022-07532-x","article-title":"Streptococcal and Staphylococcus aureus prosthetic joint infections: are they really different?","volume":"22","author":"Kherabi","year":"2022","journal-title":"BMC Infect Dis"},{"issue":"1","key":"R18-20260217","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"90","DOI":"10.1186\/s13018-020-01613-w","article-title":"Ability of adhesion and biofilm formation of pathogens of periprosthetic joint infections on titanium-niobium nitride (TiNbN) ceramic coatings","volume":"15","author":"Bidossi","year":"2020","journal-title":"J Orthop Surg Res"},{"issue":"9","key":"R19-20260217","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"e23417","DOI":"10.1002\/jcla.23417","article-title":"Research on the effect of TiO2 nanotubes coated by gallium nitrate on Staphylococcus aureus-Escherichia coli biofilm formation","volume":"34","author":"Dong","year":"2020","journal-title":"J Clin Lab Anal"},{"issue":"1","key":"R20-20260217","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"15","DOI":"10.3390\/dj8010015","article-title":"Safety and design aspects of powered toothbrush: a narrative review","volume":"8","author":"Ng","year":"2020","journal-title":"Dent J (Basel)"},{"issue":"2","key":"R22-20260217","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"245","DOI":"10.3109\/17453670902947457","article-title":"Sonication is superior to scraping for retrieval of bacteria in biofilm on titanium and steel surfaces in vitro","volume":"80","author":"Bjerkan","year":"2009","journal-title":"Acta Orthop"},{"issue":"6 Suppl B","key":"R23-20260217","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"9","DOI":"10.1302\/0301-620X.107B6.BJJ-2024-0848.R2","article-title":"Effective treatment using a single-stage revision with non-contact low frequency ultrasonic debridement in the treatment of periprosthetic joint infection: a prospective single-arm study","volume":"107-B","author":"Ji","year":"2025","journal-title":"Bone Joint J"},{"issue":"12","key":"R24-20260217","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"2949","DOI":"10.1243\/09544062JMES1671","article-title":"Research applications and opportunities in power ultrasonics","volume":"223","author":"Lucas","year":"2009","journal-title":"Proc Inst Mech Eng C J Mech Eng Sci"},{"issue":"2","key":"R25-20260217","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"279","DOI":"10.2319\/042516-334.1","article-title":"Effectiveness of a motionless ultrasonic toothbrush in reducing plaque and gingival inflammation in patients with fixed orthodontic appliances","volume":"87","author":"Saruttichart","year":"2017","journal-title":"Angle Orthod"},{"issue":"2","key":"R26-20260217","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"361","DOI":"10.2319\/0003-3219(2007)077[0361:EOUEAM]2.0.CO;2","article-title":"Efficacy of ultrasonic, electric and manual toothbrushes in patients with fixed orthodontic appliances","volume":"77","author":"Costa","year":"2007","journal-title":"Angle Orthod"},{"issue":"2","key":"R27-20260217","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"177","DOI":"10.1111\/j.1600-0722.2010.00723.x","article-title":"Energy transfer, volumetric expansion, and removal of oral biofilms by non-contact brushing","volume":"118","author":"Busscher","year":"2010","journal-title":"Eur J Oral Sci"},{"issue":"2","key":"R28-20260217","first-page":"83","article-title":"Clinical evaluation of the effects of a sonic toothbrush with ultrasound waveguide in disrupting plaque with and without bristle contact","volume":"21","author":"Biesbrock","year":"2008","journal-title":"Am J Dent"}],"container-title":["JBJS Open Access"],"original-title":[],"language":"en","link":[{"URL":"https:\/\/www.ovid.com\/10.2106\/JBJS.OA.25.00296","content-type":"unspecified","content-version":"vor","intended-application":"similarity-checking"}],"deposited":{"date-parts":[[2026,8,26]],"date-time":"2026-08-26T13:41:21Z","timestamp":1787751681000},"score":1,"resource":{"primary":{"URL":"https:\/\/www.ovid.com\/10.2106\/JBJS.OA.25.00296"}},"subtitle":["An In Vitro Evaluation of Sonication Brushing"],"short-title":[],"issued":{"date-parts":[[2026,1]]},"references-count":27,"journal-issue":{"issue":"1","published-online":{"date-parts":[[2026]]}},"URL":"https:\/\/doi.org\/10.2106\/jbjs.oa.25.00296","relation":{},"ISSN":["2472-7245"],"issn-type":[{"value":"2472-7245","type":"electronic"}],"subject":[],"published":{"date-parts":[[2026,1]]}}}