The Timing of Total Hip Arthroplasty After Intraarticular Hip Injection Affects Postoperative Infection Risk

The Timing of Injections Prior to Arthroscopic Rotator Cuff Repair Impacts the Risk of Surgical Site Infection

BACKGROUND

Corticosteroid injections are a common treatment for rotator cuff tears. Because of concerns of infection, a surgical procedure is often delayed following injections. The purpose of this investigation was to determine if there is a temporal relationship between corticosteroid injections and the risk of surgical site infection after arthroscopic rotator cuff repair. We hypothesized that the incidence of surgical site infection is higher in patients who received a preoperative injection and this relationship exists in a temporal manner as those patients receiving an injection closer to the operative date have a higher risk of infection.

METHODS

The PearlDiver database was reviewed for patients undergoing arthroscopic rotator cuff repair from 2007 to 2016. Patients were stratified into 2 cohorts: those undergoing arthroscopic rotator cuff repair within 1 year of injection (n = 12,060), and those undergoing arthroscopic rotator cuff repair without prior injection (n = 48,763). Patients with preoperative injections were further stratified by the duration in months that the injection was performed prior to the surgical procedure. Surgical site infection within 6 months of the surgical procedure was recorded. Statistical analysis included chi-square and multivariate binomial logistic regression analyses to identify risk factors for surgical site infection. Results were considered significant at p < 0.05.

RESULTS

There was no significant difference in the incidence of surgical site infection in patients receiving a shoulder injection at 0.7% compared with the control cohort at 0.8% (odds ratio [OR], 0.9 [95% confidence interval (CI), 0.7 to 1.1]; p = 0.2). However, patients receiving an injection within 1 month prior to operative management had a significantly higher rate of surgical site infection overall at 1.3% compared with the control group at 0.8% (OR, 1.7 [95% CI, 1.0 to 2.9]; p = 0.04). On multivariate analysis, male sex (OR, 1.7 [95% CI, 1.4 to 1.9]; p = 0.001), obesity (OR, 1.4 [95% CI, 1.2 to 1.6]; p < 0.001), diabetes (OR, 1.3 [95% CI, 1.1 to 1.5]; p < 0.001), smoking status (OR, 1.7 [95% CI, 1.4 to 1.9], p < 0.001), and preoperative corticosteroid injections within 1 month of the surgical procedure (OR, 2.1 [95% CI, 1.5 to 2.7]; p < 0.001) were independent risk factors for development of a surgical site infection.

CONCLUSIONS

Injections within 1 month of arthroscopic rotator cuff repair significantly increases the risk of surgical site infection. However, there is no increased risk of infection if the surgical procedure is delayed by 1 month following an injection.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Therapeutic Level III. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

Comparison of Infection Risk with Corticosteroid or Hyaluronic Acid Injection Prior to Total Knee Arthroplasty

BACKGROUND

Recent studies have shown that intra-articular injections ≤3 months before total knee arthroplasty increase the risk of periprosthetic joint infection. We are aware of no previous study that has differentiated the risk of periprosthetic joint infection on the basis of the type of medication injected. In addition, we are aware of no prior study that has evaluated whether hyaluronic acid injections increase the risk of infection after total knee arthroplasty. In this study, we utilized pharmaceutical data to compare patients who received preoperative corticosteroid or hyaluronic acid injections and to determine whether a specific injection type increased the risk of periprosthetic joint infection.

METHODS

Patients undergoing unilateral primary total knee arthroplasty were selected from a nationwide private insurer database. Ipsilateral preoperative injections were identified and were grouped by medication codes for corticosteroid or hyaluronic acid. Patients who had received both types of injections ≤1 year before total knee arthroplasty were excluded. The outcome of interest was periprosthetic joint infection that occurred ≤6 months following the total knee arthroplasty. The risk of periprosthetic joint infection was compared between groups (no injection, corticosteroid, hyaluronic acid) and between patients who received single or multiple injections. Statistical comparisons were performed using logistic regression controlling for age, sex, and comorbidities.

RESULTS

A total of 58,337 patients underwent total knee arthroplasty during the study period; 3,249 patients (5.6%) received hyaluronic acid and 16,656 patients (28.6%) received corticosteroid ≤1 year before total knee arthroplasty. The overall infection rate was 2.74% in the no-injection group. Multivariable logistic regression showed independent periprosthetic joint infection risk for both corticosteroid (odds ratio [OR], 1.21; p = 0.014) and hyaluronic acid (OR, 1.55; p = 0.029) given ≤3 months before total knee arthroplasty. There was no increased risk with injections >3 months prior to total knee arthroplasty. Direct comparison of corticosteroid and hyaluronic acid showed no significant difference (p > 0.05) between medications or between single and multiple injections.

CONCLUSIONS

Preoperative corticosteroid or hyaluronic acid injection ≤3 months before total knee arthroplasty increased the risk of periprosthetic joint infection. There was no difference in infection risk between medications or between multiple and single injections. On the basis of these data, we recommend avoiding both injection types in the 3 months prior to total knee arthroplasty.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Therapeutic Level III. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

Evaluating the use of intra-articular injections as a treatment for painful hip osteoarthritis: a randomized, double-blind, multicenter, parallel-group study comparing a single 6-mL injection of hylan G-F 20 with saline

OBJECTIVE

Hip osteoarthritis (OA) is difficult to treat. Steroid injections reduce pain with short duration. With widespread adoption of office-based, image-guided injections, hyaluronic acid is a potentially relevant therapy. In the largest clinical trial to-date, we compared safety/efficacy of a single, 6-mL image-guided injection of hylan G-F 20 to saline in painful hip OA.

METHOD

357 patients were enrolled in a multicenter, double-blind, randomized saline placebo- controlled trial. Subjects were ≥35 years of age, with painful (Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index [WOMAC]-A1:5.0-8.0; numeric rating scale [NRS]: 0-10) mild-to-moderate hip OA (Kellgren-Lawrence grade II/III) and minimal contralateral hip pain (WOMAC-A1 < 4). Outcome measures included "pain on walking" (WOMAC-A1 and -A), Patient Global Self-Assessment (PTGA), WOMAC-A1 responder rate (+≥2 points on NRS), and adverse events (AEs) over 26 weeks.

RESULTS

357 patients (hylan G-F 20 single:182; saline:175) were enrolled. Both groups demonstrated significant pain improvement from baseline over 26 weeks (P < 0.0001); saline-induced pain reduction was a remarkable 35%. WOMAC-A and PTGA scores also significantly improved (P < 0.0001). No statistically significant difference was observed between groups in WOMAC-A1 scores (hylan G-F 20 single:-2.19 ± 0.16; saline:-2.26 ± 0.17) or WOMAC-A1 responders (41-52%). Treatment-related AE rates at target hip were similar (hylan G-F 20 single:23 patients [12.8%]; saline:12 [7.0%]). Posthoc analysis found, despite protocol requirements, many patients had psychological (31%) or potential neuropathic pain (27.5%) conditions.

CONCLUSION

A single 6-mL hylan G-F 20 injection or saline for painful hip OA resulted in similar, statistically significant/clinically relevant pain and function improvements up to 6 months following injection; no differences between hylan G-F 20 and saline placebo were observed.

Corticosteroid or hyaluronic acid injections to the carpometacarpal joint of the thumb joint are associated with early complications after subsequent surgery

Truven MarketScan® Databases were used to identify patients with thumb carpometacarpal arthritis who underwent surgical treatment. Pre-operative corticosteroid or hyaluronic acid injections were identified, as were post-operative complications. Multivariable regressions assessed the relationship between injections and complications. Of 16,268 patients, 4462 had steroid injections and 252 received hyaluronic acid injections. Twenty-one per cent (3381 patients) had post-operative complications. Diabetes and smoking increased the odds of complications in all models. Odds of any complication, most notably infectious complications, were increased 20% by corticosteroids (OR 1.2; 95% CI: 1.1 to 1.3). More than three injections increased the odds of a complication by 70% (OR 1.7; 95% CI: 1.3 to 2.1). Hyaluronic acid increased the odds of wound-healing complications by 110% (OR 2.1; 95% CI: 1.3 to 3.4). Corticosteroid and hyaluronic acid injections for thumb carpometacarpal arthritis increase the odds of post-operative complications. Level of evidence: IV.

Fascia-iliaca compartment block vs intra-articular hip injection for preoperative pain management in intracapsular hip fractures: A blind, randomized, controlled trial

BACKGROUND

The aim of this study was to compare the fascia-iliaca compartment block and the intra-articular hip injection in terms of pain management and the need for additional systemic analgesia in the preoperative phase of intracapsular hip fractures.

METHODS

Patients >65 years old with an intracapsular hip fracture were randomized in this prospective, blind, controlled, parallel trial in a Level-I trauma center. Patients were randomly assigned to receive either the fascia-iliaca compartment block (cohort FICB) or the intra-articular hip injection (cohort IAHI) upon admission to the emergency department. The primary outcome was pain relief at 20 min, 12 h, 24 h and 48 h after the regional anesthesia, both at rest and during internal rotation of the fractured limb. The Numeric Rating Scale was used. Residual pain was managed with the same protocol in all patients. Additional analgesic drug administration during the 48 h from admission was recorded.

RESULTS

A total of 120 patients with comparable baseline characteristics were analyzed in this study: the FICB group consisted of 70 subjects, while the IAHI group consisted of 50 subjects. Pain was significantly lower in the IAHI group during movement of the fractured limb at 20 min (p < 0.05), 12 h (p < 0.05), 24 h (p < 0.05) and 48 h (p < 0.05). In the FICB cohort 72.9% of patients needed to take oxycodone, in contrast to 28.6% of the IAHI cohort (p < 0.05). In the FICB cohort 14.09 ± 11.57 mg of oxycodone was administered, while in the IAHI cohort 4.38 ± 7.63 mg (p < 0.05). No adverse events related to either technique were recorded.

CONCLUSIONS

Intra-articular hip injection provides better pre-operatory pain management in elder patients with intracapsular hip fractures compared to the fascia-iliaca compartment block. It also reduced the need for supplementary systemic analgesia.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Therapeutic Level I.

Hip replacement

Total hip replacement is a frequently done and highly successful surgical intervention. The procedure is undertaken to relieve pain and improve function in individuals with advanced arthritis of the hip joint. Symptomatic osteoarthritis is the most common indication for surgery. In paper 1 of this Series, we focus on how patient factors should inform the surgical decision-making process. Substantial demands are placed upon modern implants, because patients expect to remain active for longer. We discuss the advances made in implant performance and the developments in perioperative practice that have reduced complications. Assessment of surgery outcomes should include patient-reported outcome measures and implant survival rates that are based on data from joint replacement registries. The high-profile failure of some widely used metal-on-metal prostheses has shown the shortcomings of the existing regulatory framework. We consider how proposed changes to the regulatory framework could influence safety.

An epidural steroid injection in the 6 months preceding a lumbar decompression without fusion predisposes patients to post-operative infections

Background

To determine if the timing of a lumbar epidural steroid injection (LESI) effects rates of post-operative infection in patients receiving a non-fusion lumbar decompression (LDC) due to degenerative disc disease (DDD). Lumbar pain due to DDD can frequently be temporized or definitively treated with epidural injections. While there is ample literature regarding the infection risks associated with corticosteroid injections prior to hip/knee replacements, there are few studies relating to the spine.

Methods

A nationwide insurance database was queried to identify those who underwent LDC for DDD without instrumentation [2005-2014]. Lumbar fusion procedures were excluded. From this group those with a history of a LESI were identified and matched to a control group without a history of LESI. Four separate cohorts were examined: (I) LDC and no LESI within 6 months (control); (II) LDC performed within 0-1 month after LESI; (III) LDC between 1 and 3 months after LESI; (IV) LDC performed between 3 and 6 months after LESI.

Results

There was an increased odds of a 90-day postoperative infection if the LESI was within the 1-3 months (OR =4.69; P<0.001) and 3-6 months (OR =5.33; P<0.001) interval prior to the LDC.

Conclusions

While LESI is helpful for possibly delaying or avoid lumbar surgery, it may predispose patients to higher infection rates following lumbar decompressions without fusion. Surgeons and pain management specialist should counsel patients on these risks and.

Prevalence and changes in analgesic medication utilisation 1 year prior to total joint replacement in an older cohort of patients

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the prevalence and change in analgesic medications use prior to joint replacement in older patients between 2001 and 2012.

METHODS

A population based epidemiological study was conducted. Opioids, non-steroidal anti-inflammatories (NSAIDs), paracetamol, corticosteroid injections, medications for neuropathic pain, hypnotics, and muscle relaxants supplied 1 year prior to total knee replacement (TKR, n = 15,517) and hip replacement (THR, n = 10,018) were assessed. Patient characteristics and surgical indication adjusted prevalence ratios (PRs) and 95% confidence intervals (CI) are provided.

RESULTS

From 2001 to 2012, in the TKR cohort (median age 78.9) the prevalence of opioid use prior to surgery increased from 37% to 49% (PR = 1.01, 95% CI 1.00-1.01, P = 0.01), while in the THR cohort (median age 81.1) it increased from 44% to 54% (PR = 1.01, 95% CI 1.01-1.02, P < 0.001). Paracetamol use increased from 52% to 61% (PR = 1.0, 95% CI 1.0-1.0, P = 0.913) in the TKR cohort and from 55% to 67% (PR = 1.01, 95% CI 1.00-1.01, P = 0.005) in the THR cohort. Neuropathic pain medication use increased from 5% to 11% in the TKR cohort (PR = 1.04, 95% CI 1.02-1.06, P < 0.0001) and from 6% to 12% in the THR cohort (PR = 1.06, 95% CI 1.04-1.09, P < 0.0001). NSAID use decreased from 76% to 50% in the TKR cohort (PR = 0.96, 95% CI 0.95-0.96, P < 0.0001), and from 81% to 47% in THR cohort (PR = 0.95, 95% CI 0.94-0.95, P < 0.0001). Corticosteroid injections prevalence also decreased (TKR: 21-18%, PR = 0.97, 95% CI 0.96-0.97, P < 0.001, THR: 18-17%, PR = 0.97, 95% CI 0.96-0.98, P < 0.001).

CONCLUSION

Pain medication utilization prior to joint replacement surgery changed significantly in this national older cohort of patients during the 2000s.

The Timing of Hip Arthroscopy After Intra-articular Hip Injection Affects Postoperative Infection Risk

PURPOSE

To evaluate the association of preoperative intra-articular hip injection with surgical site infection after hip arthroscopy.

METHODS

A large administrative database was used to identify all patients undergoing hip arthroscopy from 2007 to 2015 within a single private insurer and from 2005 to 2012 within Medicare in the United States. Those that received an ipsilateral preoperative intra-articular hip injection were identified. The patients were then divided into the following groups based on the interval between preoperative injection and ipsilateral hip arthroscopy: (1) <3 months, (2) 3 to 6 months, and (3) 6 to 12 months. These groups were compared to a control group composed of patients with no history or a remote history (>12 months) of preoperative hip injection. Patients developing a surgical site infection within 6 months following hip arthroscopy were identified using International Classification of Diseases, Ninth Revision, and Current Procedural Terminology codes associated with infection. Groups were compared using a multivariate logistic regression analysis to control for age, gender, body mass index, smoking status, alcohol usage, and multiple medical comorbidities including diabetes mellitus, hemodialysis use, inflammatory arthritis, and peripheral vascular disease.

RESULTS

In total, 19% of privately insured and 6% of Medicare patients received a hip injection within 12 months of hip arthroscopy. The overall infection rate in privately insured and Medicare patients was 1.19% and 1.10%, respectively. Preoperative hip injection within 3 months of surgery was associated with a significantly higher risk of postoperative infection versus controls (2.16%, odds ratio [OR] 6.1, P < .001, for privately insured group; 2.80%, OR 1.99, P = .037, for Medicare group). In contrast, preoperative hip injection given after more than 3 months of surgery was not associated with an increased risk of postoperative infection versus controls.

CONCLUSIONS

Risk of infection after hip arthroscopy increased when preoperative intra-articular hip injections were given within 3 months of surgery.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level III, retrospective comparative study.

Editorial Commentary: Be Careful With Preoperative Injections Prior to Hip Arthroscopy-Use a Three-Month Threshold to Reduce Infection Risk

A large private insurer and Medicare in the United States was queried to evaluate the risk of postarthroscopic hip infection in patients who had preoperative injections. A 3-month threshold was established, showing a significant risk of postoperative infection (2.2% [odds ratio 6.1; P < .001] for private insured patients and 2.8% [odds ratio 2.0; P = .04] for Medicare patients) if performed within 3 months of surgery (vs controls not undergoing a preoperative injection).

The effect of preoperative lumbar epidural corticosteroid injection on postoperative infection rate in patients undergoing single-level lumbar decompression

BACKGROUND CONTEXT

Lumbar epidural corticosteroid injections (LECIs) are frequently used in the treatment of lumbar intervertebral disc herniation with radiculopathy and lumbar spinal stenosis. Although widely used, their effect on the outcomes and complications of subsequent surgery is unclear. Postoperative infection can be a morbid complication following spine surgery, and recent literature has suggested that the risk may be increased in patients undergoing lumbar spinal surgery who had previously received LECIs.

PURPOSE

The purpose of this study is to define the overall postoperative infection rate in patients undergoing lumbar spine decompression surgery in the Military Health System (MHS) patient population and examine the effects of LECIs on postoperative infection rates.

STUDY DESIGN/SETTING

This is a retrospective case control database study (Level III study).

PATIENT SAMPLE

The sample comprised all patients in the MHS who had a LECI before single-level lumbar decompression surgery from 2009 to 2014.

OUTCOME MEASURES

Postoperative infection within 90 days of surgery was used as the primary outcome measure for this study. Postoperative infection was identified using the International Classification of Diseases, 9th revision (ICD-9) diagnosis codes for postoperative infection.

METHODS

The Military Health System Data Repository (MDR) database was searched for all patients who underwent single-level lumbar spine decompression surgery from 2009 to 2014 using Current Procedural Terminology (CPT) codes. Current Procedural Terminology codes were used to identify the subset of patients who received preoperative LECIs. For patients receiving an injection, cohorts were established based on the timing of the preoperative injection: <30 days, 30-90 days, 91-180 days, 181-365 days, and >365 days. An age-based cohort, composed of patients 65 years of age and older, was also analyzed. A subgroup analysis of patients receiving more than one preoperative injection was performed. Postoperative infection within 90 days of surgery was identified using ICD-9 codes, and infection rates for all groups were calculated and compared with the control group who did not receive preoperative LECIs. No external funding was received for this study.

RESULTS

We identified 6,535 patients (847 preoperative LECI and 5,688 control) for analysis. The overall infection rate for patients undergoing single-level lumbar decompression surgery in the MHS was 0.81%. The rate ranged from 0% to 1.57% in the injection groups, with an overall infection rate in the injection group of 1.18% versus 0.76% in the control group. Despite an increased odds ratio of 1.57 following injection, no statistically significant differences were found between the control group and any injection group based on timing of injection, patient age, or number of preoperative injections.

CONCLUSIONS

The results of this study suggest that within the MHS, preoperative LECIs do not significantly increase the risk of postoperative infection after single-level lumbar decompression. If a difference does exist, it is likely small.

Factors That Affect Outcome Following Total Joint Arthroplasty: a Review of the Recent Literature

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

It is well established that certain patient-specific risk factors affect outcomes following total joint arthroplasty. The goal of this paper is to summarize the latest data on several variables that have been investigated in the last 3 years and to characterize the effects these factors have on the success of hip and knee replacement.

RECENT FINDINGS

Preoperative diagnoses of depression and anxiety, liver disease, hypoalbuminemia, vitamin D deficiency, and diabetes mellitus are associated with increased risk of postoperative complications and can lead to worse outcomes after joint replacement surgery. Recent investigations have clearly established a link between these patient-specific factors and poor outcomes after hip and knee arthroplasty, but future research is needed to determine best practices for stratifying and mitigating these risks for patients.

Multiple Hip Intra-Articular Steroid Injections Increase Risk of Periprosthetic Joint Infection Compared With Single Injections

BACKGROUND

Patients with hip osteoarthritis often temporize their symptoms with multiple intra-articular steroid hip injections (IASHIs) before undergoing total hip arthroplasty (THA). Although there is recent evidence to suggest that IASHI can lead to an increased risk of future periprosthetic joint infection (PJI), the potential increase in risk of PJI after multiple IASHIs compared with single IASHI remains largely unknown. The aim of the study was to evaluate whether multiple IASHIs are associated with increased risk of PJI compared with single IASHI in THA patients.

METHODS

We evaluated 2 cohorts of patients consisting of 106 patients who received 2 or more IASHI in the year before THA and a matched group of 350 patients who received one IASHI in the 12 months before THA.

RESULTS

The single and multiply-injected patient cohorts had an infection rate of 2.0% and 6.6% (7/350 and 7/106), respectively (P = .04, odds ratio 3.30) and average follow-up of 28.9 and 24.2 months. The 2 cohorts did not differ with regard to age, gender, American Society of Anesthesiologist score, presence of diabetes mellitus, or body mass index.

CONCLUSION

In comparison with patients with single IASHI, multiple IASHIs are associated with an increased risk of PJI significantly higher than the elevated risk reported with single injection before THA. The present study findings would be clinically useful in counseling patients who are considering temporizing their symptoms with multiple IASHIs before undergoing THA.

The impact of preoperative epidural injections on postoperative infection in lumbar fusion surgery

OBJECTIVE

Lumbar epidural steroid injections (LESIs) are performed for both diagnostic and therapeutic purposes for a variety of indications, including low-back pain, the leading cause of disability and expense due to work-related conditions in the US. The steroid agent used in epidural injections is reported to relieve nerve root inflammation, local ischemia, and resultant pain, but the injection may also have an adverse impact on spinal surgery performed thereafter. In particular, the possibility that preoperative epidural injections may increase the risk of surgical site infection after lumbar spinal fusion has been reported but has not been studied in detail. The goal of the present study was to use a large national insurance database to analyze the association of preoperative LESIs with surgical site infection after lumbar spinal fusion.

METHODS

A nationwide insurance database of patient records was used for this retrospective analysis. Current Procedural Terminology codes were used to query the database for patients who had undergone LESI and 1- or 2-level lumbar posterior spinal fusion procedures. The rate of postoperative infection after 1- or 2-level posterior spinal fusion was analyzed. These study patients were then divided into 3 separate cohorts: 1) lumbar spinal fusion performed within 1 month after LESI, 2) fusion performed between 1 and 3 months after LESI, and 3) fusion performed between 3 and 6 months after LESI. The study patients were compared with a control cohort of patients who underwent lumbar fusion without previous LESI.

RESULTS

The overall 3-month infection rate after lumbar spinal fusion procedure was 1.6% (1411 of 88,540 patients). The infection risk increased in patients who received LESI within 1 month (OR 2.6, p < 0.0001) or 1–3 months (OR 1.4, p = 0.0002) prior to surgery compared with controls. The infection risk was not significantly different from controls in patients who underwent lumbar fusion more than 3 months after LESI.

CONCLUSIONS

Lumbar spinal fusion performed within 3 months after LESI may be associated with an increased rate of postoperative infection. This association was not found when lumbar fusion was performed more than 3 months after LESI.

Operative Wound Complications Following Total Ankle Arthroplasty

BACKGROUND

Wound complications following total ankle replacement (TAR) potentially lead to devastating consequences. The aim of this study was to compare the operative and demographic differences in patients with and without major wound problems which required operative management. We hypothesized that increased tourniquet and operative time would negatively influence wound healing.

METHODS

We identified a consecutive series of 762 primary TARs performed between December 1999 and April 2014 whose data were prospectively collected. We then identified the subset of patients who required a secondary surgery to treat major wound complications (ie, operative debridement, split-thickness skin grafting, and soft tissue reconstruction). All patients requiring a second surgery had operative wound debridement. We then compared the demographics, operative characteristics, and functional scores to see if any differences existed between patients with and without major wound complications. Clinical outcomes including secondary procedures and implant failure rates were recorded.

RESULTS

Twenty-six patients (3.4%) had a total of 49 operative procedures to treat major wound issues. Eighteen patients had flaps and 14 had split-thickness skin grafts. The median time to operatively treating the wound was 1.9 (range: 0.5-12.5) months after the index TAR. The median follow-up time from the wound procedure was 12.7 (range: 1.2-170.8) months. Compared to the control group, patients with major wounds had a significantly longer mean surgery (214.8 vs 189.3 minutes, P = .041) time and trended toward a longer median tourniquet time (151 vs 141 minutes, P = .060). Patients without wound complications were more likely to have posttraumatic arthritis, whereas those with wound complications were more likely to have primary osteoarthritis ( P = .006). The control group trended toward having a higher mean BMI (29.5 vs 27.2, P = .056). There were 6 failures in the major wound complication cohort (23.1%), including 2 below the knee amputations.

CONCLUSION

Ankle wounds that required operative management had high failure rates and some resulted in devastating outcomes. We did not find any increase in major wound complications in those with various risk factors as identified by other studies. Given our data, we recommend limiting operative time. While correcting hindfoot and midfoot alignment is important for improving patient functionality and survivorship of the implant, thought should be given to staging the TAR if multiple pathologies are to be addressed at the time of surgery to limit operative time.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level III, retrospective comparative series.

Preoperative Hip Injections Increase the Rate of Periprosthetic Infection After Total Hip Arthroplasty

BACKGROUND

Intraarticular injections are both diagnostic and therapeutic for patients with osteoarthritis. A potential risk of periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) after total hip arthroplasty (THA) may occur from direct inoculation and/or immune suppression by corticosteroids. Large population-level databases were used to evaluate hip injection on the 1-year rate of PJI in patients undergoing primary THA.

METHODS

State-level ambulatory surgery and inpatient databases for Florida and California (2005-2012) were used to identify primary THA patients with 1-year preoperative and postoperative windows to evaluate possible injections or PJI, respectively. Patients were grouped as no injection or as THA performed 6-12 months, 3-6 months, or 0-3 months after injection. Risk adjustment was performed with multivariable regression.

RESULTS

A total of 173,958 patients were included; 5421 (3.1%) underwent THA after an injection: 1395 (1.1%) of patients after 6-12 months, 1863 patients after 3-6 months, and 2163 (1.2%) after 0-3 months. In the 0-3 month group, PJI was significantly increased at 3 months (1.58%, P = .015), 6 months (1.76%, P = .022), and 1 year (2.04%, P = .031) compared with the noninjection control group (1.04%, 1.21%, and 1.47%, respectively). There were no differences in the 3- to 6-month and 6- to 12-month injection groups.

CONCLUSION

There is an increased risk of PJI when THA is performed within 3 months of hip injection. We recommend that patients and their surgeons consider delaying elective THA until 3 months after an injection to avoid this elevated risk of infection.