Arthrofibrosis following primary total hip arthroplasty: a distinct clinical entity

Utility of histopathological examination in aseptic revision total hip arthroplasty: a preliminary analysis

INTRODUCTION

The utility of a routine histopathological examination in aseptic revision total hip arthroplasty (THA) has not been well explored. We aim to describe the approach and present the results of histopathological examination, focusing on its clinical usefulness in the setting of aseptic revision THA.

METHOD

We retrospectively reviewed 285 performed aseptic revision THA with available histopathological reports between 2015 and 2017 at a single institution. We described histopathological requests by the surgical team. Preoperative diagnoses, intraoperative findings, as well as histopathology and culture results were analysed.

RESULTS

13 painful THAs (4.5%) had preoperatively unknown diagnoses. In 10 of them, potential causes of pain were intraoperatively identified. Histopathology confirmed these findings in 8 THAs. 19 THAs (6.7%) revealed unexpected positive cultures (UPC). Histopathology was negative for infection in 18 of them. Among 16 consultants, 3 surgeons requested histopathology in 47% of the cases (130/285), usually to exclude infection (101/285; 35%). Documentation for tissue sample location was lacking in 51% (145/285), and for question asked by the surgeon in 47% (135/285).

CONCLUSIONS

Histopathology is deemed a useful confirmatory tool in the context of ruling out infection in UPCs, and in documenting intraoperative findings in painful THAs with unknown preoperative diagnoses. Importantly, the approach to requesting histopathology should be optimised. Further large-scale studies, including cost analyses, are warranted to explore the usefulness of histopathology in routine utility.

Unexpected positive cultures in patients with arthrofibrosis following total hip and total knee arthroplasty

PURPOSE

It has been suggested that low-grade infections could be the cause of arthrofibrosis. However, this hypothesis has not been conclusively proven. The aim of this study is to assess the incidence of unexpected positive cultures (UPC) in patients undergoing revision total joint arthroplasty for a diagnosis of arthrofibrosis.

METHODS

A retrospective single-centre review was performed. All patients who underwent an aseptic revision due to histologically confirmed arthrofibrosis (based on the synovial-like interface membrane (SLIM) criteria) were included. The incidence of UPC was then calculated.

RESULTS

A total of 147 patients were included. Of these, 100 underwent a total knee arthroplasty (TKA) procedure and 46 a total hip arthroplasty (THA) surgery. One patient had a periprosthetic joint infection and was therefore excluded. Of the 146 included patients, 6 had confirmed UPC (4.08%). The following bacteria were identified: Anaerococcus octavius, Staphylococcus epidermidis, Enterobacter cloacae, Staphylococcus hominis, Streptococcus pluranimalium, Staphylococcus pettenkoferi.

CONCLUSIONS

Our results suggest that the incidence of UPC in patients with arthrofibrosis is low. It is lower than that of UPC in patients that undergo a revision for other causes. There is no proven relationship between histologically confirmed arthrofibrosis following total joint arthroplasty and prosthetic joint infection.

[Arthrofibrosis of the hip joint : Diagnostic and therapeutic challenge]

Arthrofibrosis is a frequent complication after total knee arthroplasty (TKA). Recently, arthrofibrosis could be successfully verified histologically after primary total hip arthroplasty (THA) and the clinical presentation on the hip could be described for the first time. Possible diagnostic and therapeutic approaches have not yet been published. The diagnostic work-up differs only slightly from that for the knee joint. Other causes, such as aseptic loosening, malalignment or periprosthetic joint infection should be excluded. The gold standard is still invasive diagnostics with histological evidence of arthrofibrosis according to the synovia-like interface membrane (SLIM) criteria. Conservative treatment approaches include mobilization under anesthesia and medication according to Traut, analogous to the knee joint. Surgical treatment should be carried out under strict interpretation of the indications and after detailed clarification for the patient. In contrast to the knee joint, open arthrolysis should be preferred to arthroscopic arthrolysis of the hip joint. It must be taken into consideration that the evidence for conservative as well as surgical treatment, including possible revision arthroplasty, cannot be assessed due to the absence of clinical data. Studies under controlled conditions on the possible treatment approaches in the presence of arthrofibrosis are desirable and necessary in order to be able to assess the significance of the symptoms. In addition to treatment, great importance should also be attached to the diagnostics. Histological confirmation of the diagnosis of arthrofibrosis should only be considered to a limited extent in the case of an assumed, only moderately successful surgical intervention.

[Histopathological diagnostics of arthrofibrosis]

Joint surgery is one of the most important and successful disciplines in surgery; nevertheless, complications still occur, especially in total knee arthroplasty and surgery of the anterior cruciate ligament. A significant disease in this context is arthrofibrosis. This review article presents the cellular and molecular pathogenetic concept of arthrofibrosis, the spectrum of histopathological diagnostics and differential diagnostics and a classification into joint endoprosthesis-associated and non-joint endoprosthesis-associated arthrofibrosis is proposed. The basis of the histopathological diagnostics is the standardized tissue removal with subsequent fixation in formalin. In the case of joint implant failure and the problem of endoprosthesis-associated arthrofibrosis, the histopathological diagnostics can be carried out according to the consensus classification of synovia-like interface membrane (SLIM). Arthrofibrosis is characterized by fibrosis, a high fibroblast cellularity with immunohistochemical detection of cytoplasmic beta catenin expression. The presence of endoprosthesis-associated arthrofibrosis is probable above a threshold of 20 beta catenin positive fibroblasts per high-power field (HPF). The diagnosis of a non-endoprosthesis-associated arthrofibrosis can be classified according to the joint pathology algorithm. Diffuse non-endoprosthesis-associated arthrofibrosis is characterized by generalized proliferation of connective tissue in the whole joint and localized circumscribed arthrofibrosis is characterized by a nodose cyclops-like fibrosis. The clarification of the cause of arthrofibrosis is based on an interdisciplinary cooperation. In addition to the histopathological diagnostics, this includes clinical, surgical, biomechanical, arthroscopic, microbiological, laboratory parameter and radiological findings.