Is single-stage revision according to a strict protocol effective in treatment of chronic knee arthroplasty infections?

Review of recent advances in the diagnosis and management of periprosthetic joint infection after total knee arthroplasty part 2: single-stage or two-stage surgical technique?

Periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) after total knee arthroplasty is a complication that affects approximately 2-3% of patients. The management of this issue is complicated and expensive for both the patients and the healthcare system. Multiple management options are available including antibiotic suppressive therapy, surgical management, and salvage procedures. Surgical management is considered a popular option for treating PJI, with multiple available surgical techniques, including single-stage revision arthroplasty and two-stage revision arthroplasty among others. Two-stage revision has been considered the gold standard for treating PJI. This method consists of two surgical procedures with a time interval in between, the first procedure aims to eradicate the infection along with implanting either a static or a mobile spacer, while the second intervention aims to remove the spacer and implant a new prothesis. During the interval period the patient is closely monitored through a handful of laboratory tests and clinical signs that help in assessing the optimal time of undertaking the second stage. However, in recent years, the single-stage method has gained much attention for its comparable outcomes and fewer complications. Contrary to the two-stage method, the single-stage approach consists only of one procedure in which the old infected prosthesis is removed and a new one is implanted. Many articles have compared the two methods over the years but have not agreed on a particular approach to be more potent in eliminating infection and providing better outcomes. Plenty of questions are yet to be answered regarding the two methods, including the superior type of spacer, interim period duration, and single-stage revision inclusion criteria. We herein, aim to address these issues, highlighting recent advances in managing this morbid complication and discussing controversial topics in the staged procedures.

One-stage exchange strategy with extensive debridement for chronic periprosthetic joint infection following total knee arthroplasty is associated with a low relapse rate in non-selected patients: a prospective single-center analysis

PURPOSE

This prospective clinical cohort was undertaken to determine the long-term risks of reinfection and all-cause aseptic failure after 1-stage exchange total knee arthroplasties (TKA) in a large series of consecutive patients with periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) following TKA.

HYPOTHESIS

One-stage exchange for chronic PJI is an effective strategy, even in a non-selected population.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Non-selected patients (152 with 154 PJI) undergoing 1-stage-exchange TKA for PJI (January 2003-August 2015) were prospectively included and monitored for ≥2 years. PJI following TKA satisfying Musculoskeletal Infection Society diagnostic criteria were documented by microbiological culture results of preoperative joint aspirates and/or intraoperative samples. The cumulative incidences of total reinfections (i.e., relapses or new infections) and aseptic revisions were assessed. The mean follow-up (FU) duration was 7.5 years post-reimplantation.

RESULTS

At the last follow-up, 35 knees had developed reinfections: 7 relapses and 28 new infections, with respective 14-year cumulative incidences of 4.8% and 20.6%. The 2-, 5- and 14-year cumulative total reinfection incidences were 12.3%, 21.3% and 24.3%, respectively. Respective 2-, 5-, 10- and 14-year aseptic component-revision incidences were 0.7%, 3.2%, 5.4% and 13.4%. Multivariate analysis retained male sex (HR 3.27, p < 0.01) and preoperative atrial fibrillation (HR 3.03; p = 0.01) as being significantly associated with greater risk of reinfection.

CONCLUSIONS

One-stage-exchange TKA with aggressive debridement for chronic PJI is apparently a valid strategy, even for non-selected patients. It was associated with a low relapse rate, prevented morbidity and avoided economic social costs of 2-stage exchange. New infections with a different microorganism were observed more frequently and occurred even after years of FU.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

II; Therapeutic.

The Microbiology of Knee Prosthetic Joint Infection and its Influence on Persistent Infection

Periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) following total knee arthroplasty (TKA) is a severe complication causing a significant burden. The study aims were to establish the epidemiology of microorganisms in TKA PJI, the rate of persistent infection requiring further surgery, and the risk factors for this. Microbiological specimens between June 2002 and March 2017 at five regional hospital sites were identified with revision TKA procedures in the National Joint Replacement Registry. The time between procedures, type of revision strategy, and any subsequent further revision operations were collected. At minimum 2-year follow-up, 174 revision TKA were identified, with a mean patient age of 69 ± 11 years. A broad range of pathogens were identified. Fifty cases (29%) had persistent infection requiring at least one further operative procedure, 13 cases required 3 or more. Coagulase-negative Staphylococcus species (CNS) was seen most with failed surgery, polymicrobial infections also posing a significant risk factor. The best chance of a successful PJI surgical strategy was < 12 months from primary TKA, with the greatest risk between 3 and 5 years (p < 0.05). Younger age significantly increased the risk of further surgery (p < 0.05). Management varied; 103 (59%) debridement, antibiotic therapy and implant retention, with further surgery in 29%; 45 (17%) single-stage revision, with further surgery in 13%; and 26 (15%) two-stage revision, with further surgery in 12%. This study presents the most common causative pathogens for PJI in TKA, and the high rate of persistent infection after initial revision surgery. Risk factors for persistent infection and further revision surgery were polymicrobial and CNS infections, patients who presented between 3 and 5 years following primary TKA, and younger age. This study therefore raises important risk factors and areas for future research to reduce the burden of multiple operations after PJI.

Intramedullary Positive Tissue Culture Increases the Risk of Reinfection Following One-Stage Septic Revision Total Knee Arthroplasty

BACKGROUND

Intraoperative acquisition of representative tissue samples is essential during revision arthroplasty of the infected total knee arthroplasty (TKA). While the number of intraoperative tissue samples needed to identify the organism is well described in the literature, there is still a paucity of evidence regarding the location of positive intraoperative samples and their correlation to postoperative outcomes.

METHODS

There were forty-two patients who had septic failure following one-stage revision TKA for periprosthetic joint infection who were identified between January 2009 and December 2017. They were matched to a control group of patients who had successful one-stage revision TKA without septic failure. The location of positive intraoperative tissue samples was categorized as: 1) soft tissue; 2) interface between bone and prosthesis; and 3) intramedullary (IM). Chi-square, Student's t-, and Wilcoxon Mann-Whitney U-tests were used as appropriate. Univariate and multivariate logistic regression analyses were performed to evaluate predictors of septic failure.

RESULTS

Weight > 100 kilograms (P = .033), higher Charlson Comorbidity Index (P < .001), and positive IM cultures (P < .001) were associated with a higher risk of reinfection after one-stage revision TKA. A positive IM sample carried a nearly five-fold increase in odds of reinfection (odds ratio 4.86, 95% confidence interval 1.85 to 12.78, P = .001).

CONCLUSIONS

A positive IM culture sample is significantly associated with septic failure after one-stage exchange for periprosthetic joint infection of the knee. Patients who had positive IM cultures may benefit from longer postoperative antibiotic therapy for the treatment of one-stage exchange arthroplasty to minimize the risk of reinfection.

Effects of antiseptic irrigation solutions on osseointegration in a cementless tibial implantation mouse model

Despite the success of standard antiseptic irrigation solutions in reducing periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) rates, there is still a need for more effective solutions. Synergistic use of povidone-iodine (PI) and hydrogen peroxide (H2O2) has shown promising results; however, the optimal solution concentration balancing bactericidal activity and osseointegration remains unknown. This study aims to evaluate the impact of these antiseptic irrigation solutions on osseointegration and the bone-implant interface strength in vivo. Forty C57BL/6 mice underwent bilateral tibial implantation surgery and were randomly allocated into three groups receiving 0.3% PI, 10% PI mixed with 3% H2O2, or saline as irrigation solutions intraoperatively. Assessments were performed on postoperative Days 1 and 28, including plain radiographs, microcomputed tomography (microCT) evaluation, histological analysis, immunohistochemistry, and biomechanical pull-out testing. No wound complications were observed. MicroCT scans revealed no differences in peri-implant trabecular bone parameters. Biomechanical pull-out testing showed no differences in the bone-implant interface strength across groups. Histological analysis indicated no differences in bone and bone marrow percentage areas among treatment groups. Immunohistochemical analysis demonstrated no differences among groups in peri-implant osteocalcin, osterix, or endomucin-positive cells. In conclusion, using either antiseptic irrigation solution showed no differences in osseointegration parameters compared to the control group, demonstrating safety and the absence of toxicity. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: Dilute 0.3% povidone-iodine and a 1:1 combination of 10% povidone-iodine mixed with 3% hydrogen peroxide can be safely used during primary and revision total joint arthroplasty without compromising osseointegration or causing wound complications.

Can Periprosthetic Joint Infection of Tumor Prostheses Be Controlled With Debridement, Antibiotics, and Implant Retention?

BACKGROUND

Two-stage revision for periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) in patients who have undergone segmental replacement of the distal femur or proximal tibia after tumor resection can be associated with considerable morbidity, pain, and risk of complications because the procedure often results in removal of long, well-fixed stems from the diaphysis. A less-aggressive surgical approach, such as debridement, antibiotics, and implant retention (DAIR), may be attractive to patients and surgeons because of less morbidity, but the likelihood of eradicating infection in comparison to the traditional two-stage revision is not well established for oncology patients. Furthermore, the relative risk of subsequent amputation for DAIR versus two-stage revision has not been defined for this population.

QUESTIONS/PURPOSES

(1) How does DAIR compare with two-stage revision in terms of infection control for patients with distal femoral or proximal tibial segmental modular endoprostheses? (2) Is DAIR as an initial procedure associated with an increased risk of amputation compared with two-stage revision for infection?

METHODS

From the longitudinally maintained orthopaedic oncology surgical database at our institution, we identified 69 patients who had been treated for a clinical diagnosis of PJI at the knee between 1993 and 2015. We excluded 32% (22) of patients who did not meet at least one of the major criteria of the Musculoskeletal Infection Society (MSIS) for PJI, 3% (2) of patients who underwent immediate amputation, 3% (2) of patients who had a follow-up time of < 24 months, and 7% (5) of patients who did not have a primary tumor of the distal femur or proximal tibia. The study consisted of 38 patients, of whom eight underwent two-stage revision, 26 underwent DAIR, and four underwent extended DAIR (removal of all segmental components but with retention of stems and components fixed in bone) for their initial surgical procedure. To be considered free of infection, patients had to meet MSIS standards, including no positive cultures, drainage, or surgical debridement for a minimum of 2 years from the last operation. Factors associated with time-dependent risk of infection relapse, clearance, amputation, and patient survival were analyzed using Kaplan-Meier survivorship curves and the log-rank test to compare factors. Association of demographic and treatment factors was assessed using chi-square and Fisher exact tests.

RESULTS

Continuous infection-free survival at 5 years was 16% (95% CI 2% to 29%) for patients undergoing DAIR compared with 75% (95% CI 45% to 100%) for patients undergoing two-stage revision (p = 0.006). The median (range) number of total surgical procedures was 3 per patient (1 to 10) for DAIR and 2 (2 to 5) for two-stage revision. Twenty-nine percent (11 of 38) of patients eventually underwent amputation. Survival without amputation was 69% (95% CI 51% to 86%) for DAIR compared with 88% (95% CI 65% to 100%) for two-stage revision at 5 years (p = 0.34). The cumulative proportion of patients achieving infection-free status (> 2 years continuously after last treatment) and limb preservation was 58% (95% CI 36% to 80%) for patients initially treated with DAIR versus 87% (95% CI 65% to 100%) for patients first treated with two-stage revision (p = 0.001).

CONCLUSION

Infection control was better with two-stage revision than DAIR. The chance of eventual clearance of infection with limb preservation was better when two-stage revision was chosen as the initial treatment. However, the loss to follow-up in the two-stage revision group would likely make the true proportion of infection control lower than our estimate. Our experience would suggest that the process of infection eradication is a complex and difficult one. Most patients undergo multiple operations. Nearly one-third of patients eventually underwent amputation, and this was a serious risk for both groups. While we cannot strongly recommend one approach over the other based on our data, we would still consider the use of DAIR in patients who present with acute short duration of symptoms (< 3 weeks), no radiographic signs of erosion around fixed implants, and organisms other than Staphylococcus aureus. We would advocate the extended DAIR procedure with removal of all segmental or modular components, and we would caution patients that there is a high likelihood of needing further surgery. A prospective trial with strict adherence to indications may be needed to evaluate the relative merits of an extended DAIR procedure versus a two-stage revision.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level III, therapeutic study.

Clinical use and applications of a citrate-based antiseptic lavage for the prevention and treatment of PJI

Total joint arthroplasties (TJA) are some of the most commonly performed surgeries in the United States with the number of TJA expected to rise significantly over the next decade as the population ages and arthritic burden worsens. However, the rise in TJA volume correlates with a heightened risk of complications, notably prosthetic joint infections (PJI), despite their low occurrence rate of less than 2%. PJI imposes a significant burden on surgery success, patient well-being, and healthcare costs, with an estimated annual expense of 1.85 billion dollars for hip and knee PJI by 2030. This manuscript delves into the pathophysiology of PJI, exploring our current understanding of the role of bacterial biofilm formation on implanted foreign hardware, providing protection against the host immune system and antibiotics. The article reviews current agents and their efficacy in treating PJI, as well as their cytotoxicity toward native cells involved in wound healing, prompting the exploration of a novel citrate-based solution. The paper highlights the superior properties and efficacy of a novel citrate-based irrigation solution on the treatment and prevention of PJI via increased antimicrobial properties, greater biofilm disruption, increased exposure time, and reduced cytotoxicity compared to conventional solutions, positioning it as a promising alternative. It also provides a perspective on its clinical use in the operating theater, with a step-by-step approach in TJA, whether primary or revisionary.

Current Status and Perspectives of Diagnosis and Treatment of Periprosthetic Joint Infection

Periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) is a catastrophic complication following joint replacement surgery, posing significant challenges to orthopedic surgeons. Due to the lack of a definitive diagnostic gold standard, timely treatment initiation is problematic, resulting in substantial economic burdens on patients and society. In this review, we thoroughly analyze the complexities of PJI and emphasize the importance of accurate diagnosis and effective treatment. The article specifically focuses on the advancements in diagnostic techniques, ranging from traditional pathogen culture to advanced molecular diagnostics, and discusses their role in enhancing diagnostic accuracy. Additionally, we review the latest surgical management strategies, including everything from debridement to revision surgeries. Our summary aims to provide practical information for the diagnosis and treatment of PJI and encourages further research to improve diagnostic accuracy and treatment outcomes.

Systematic review and meta-analysis of single-stage versus two-stage revision for periprosthetic joint infection after knee arthroplasty: a call for a randomised trial

Purpose

Knee arthroplasty is an effective treatment for severe knee degeneration; however, periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) is one of its serious complications. Single- and two-stage revision are common treatments, but few studies have compared single- and two-stage revision for PJI after knee arthroplasty. This study aimed to compare the reinfection and reoperation rates of single- and two-stage revision through meta-analysis.

Methods

The review process was conducted according to the PRISMA guidelines. We searched the PubMed, Medline, Embase and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials databases for trials comparing single- and two-stage revision for PJI after knee arthroplasty from the respective inception dates to April 2023. Two researchers individually screened the studies, performed the literature quality evaluation and data extraction and used Stata 17 software for data analysis.

Results

The meta-analysis showed that the reinfection rate was significantly lower in the single-stage revision group than in the two-stage revision group. While the reoperation rates demonstrated no statistically significant difference between the two groups. We presented descriptive results because the discrepancies in the knee function scores and data reported in the studies meant that these data could not be combined in the meta-analysis.

Conclusion

Based on the available research, single-stage revision is a reliable option for PJI after knee arthroplasty. However, when developing the best treatment strategy, it is still necessary to consider the individual circumstances and needs of the patient, as well as the risks of postoperative rehabilitation and complications.

Total Knee Arthroplasty Periprosthetic Joint Infection With Concomitant Extensor Mechanism Disruption and Soft-Tissue Defect: The Knee Arthroplasty Terrible Triad

BACKGROUND

Periprosthetic infection (PJI) with concomitant extensor mechanism disruption (EMD) and soft-tissue defect-hereinafter termed the "Terrible Triad"-is a devastating complication following total knee arthroplasty. The purpose of this study was to define the surgical and clinical outcomes following management of a cohort of patients who have the Terrible Triad.

METHODS

From 2000 to 2022, 127 patients underwent operative management for PJI alone, 25 for PJI with soft-tissue defects (defined as defects requiring flap reconstruction or being a factor contributing to the decision of performing above-knee amputation or arthrodesis), 14 for PJI with EMD, and 22 for the Terrible Triad. A composite outcome of infection status, range of motion, extensor lag, and ambulatory status at final follow-up was used to compare the proportion of patients in each group with a favorable overall knee outcome. Differences between groups were determined using one-way analyses of variance with post hoc Tukey's tests and Pearson's Chi-square tests or Fisher's exact tests with post hoc Bonferroni adjustments, where applicable. Odds ratios (OR) were calculated for comparison of the overall knee outcome between groups. A Kaplan-Meier survival analysis for patient mortality was performed.

RESULTS

The mean follow-up was 8.4 years and similar between groups (P = .064). Patients who had the Terrible Triad had a 45.5% incidence of above-knee amputation, or arthrodesis, and an 86.4% incidence of an unfavorable outcome. Compared to patients in the PJI group, patients in the PJI who had a soft-tissue defect (OR = 5.8, 95% CI [confidence interval] 2.2 to 15.7), PJI with EMD (OR = 3.7, 95%CI 1.0 to 12.9), and Terrible Triad groups (OR = 11.6, 95% CI 3.3 to 41.5) showed higher odds of an unfavorable knee outcome.

CONCLUSIONS

This study demonstrates that the total knee arthroplasty Terrible Triad is a dreaded diagnosis with poor outcomes. Clinicians and patients might consider early treatment with amputation or arthrodesis.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

III.

Methodological Assessment of the 100 Most-Cited Articles in Total Knee Arthroplasty in the Last Decade Compared to the All-Time List

BACKGROUND

Recent advances in total knee arthroplasty (TKA) have been driven by a growing focus on evidence-based medicine. This transition is reflected in the critical appraisal of both, the quality of work and the potential impact on the orthopedic community. The purpose of our study was to (1) identify the top 100 most-cited articles in TKA in the last decade and from all-time, and (2) compare methodological rigor of the most-cited articles in TKA in the last decade to articles all-time by level of evidence.

METHODS

The top 100 cited articles were recorded for manuscripts from the last decade, January 1, 2012 to December 31, 2022, and manuscripts from all-time for TKA. We collected authors, year of publication, journal of the article, country of origin of authors, article type (basic science article, clinical research article), level of evidence, methodological index for non-randomized studies score, physiotherapy evidence database scale, and citation density (total citations/years published).

RESULTS

The largest number of studies for all-time TKA (53.0%) and decade TKA (42.0%) were Level III. The average methodological index for non-randomized studies score for comparative studies was 18.7 for all-time TKA and 20.7 for decade TKA (P < .001). The average physiotherapy evidence database score was 6.1 for all-time TKA and 8.1 for decade TKA (P > .05). The highest citation density for all-time TKA was 111 and for past decade was 63. The number of level II studies in TKA increased from 19.0% from all time to 38.0% from the last decade (P < .05).

CONCLUSIONS

Our findings of improved methodologies over time reflect positive steps toward evidence-based practice in TKA. A continued focus on producing methodologically sound studies may guide evidence-based clinical decision-making.

The influence of gut microbiome on periprosthetic joint infections: State-of-the art

Early periprosthetic joint infection constitutes one of the most frightening complications of joint replacement. Recently, some evidence has highlighted the potential link between dysregulation of the gut microbiota and degenerative diseases of joints. It has been hypothesized that microbiome dysbiosis may increase the risk of periprosthetic joint infection by facilitating bacterial translocation from these sites to the bloodstream or by impairing local or systemic immune responses. Although the processes tying the gut microbiome to infection susceptibility are still unknown, new research suggests that the presurgical gut microbiota-a previously unconsidered component-may influence the patient's ability to resist infection. Exploring the potential impact of the microbiome on periprosthetic joint infections may therefore bring new insights into the pathogenesis and therapy of these disorders. For a successful therapy, a proper surgical procedure in conjunction with an antibacterial concept is essential. As per the surgical approach, different treatment strategies include surgical irrigation, debridement, antibiotic therapy, and implant retention with or without polyethylene exchange. Other alternatives could be one-stage or two-stage revisions surgery. Interventions that either directly target gut microbes as well as interventions that modify the composition and/or function of the commensal microbes represent an innovative and potentially successful field to be explored. In recent times, innovative therapeutic methods have arisen in the realm of microbiome restoration and the management of gut-related ailments. These progressive approaches offer fresh perspectives on tackling intricate microbial imbalances in the gastrointestinal tract. These emerging therapies signify a shift towards more precise and individualized approaches to microbiome restoration and the management of gut-related disorders. Once a more advanced knowledge of the pathways linking the gut microbiota to musculoskeletal tissues is gained, relevant microbiome-based therapies can be developed. If dysbiosis is proven to be a significant contributor, developing treatments for dysbiosis may represent a new frontier in the prevention of periprosthetic joint infections.

Comparable Results of Single and Two-Stage Exchange for Select Periprosthetic Hip and Knee Infection

INTRODUCTION

Although two-stage exchange has been the standard of care for periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) in the United States, single-stage exchange is emerging as an option in select patients. The purpose of this study was to compare outcomes of patients undergoing single-stage and two-stage exchange using strict surgical indications.

METHODS

We reviewed a consecutive series of 196 patients with diagnosed PJI undergoing revision total knee and hip arthroplasty from 2017 to 2021. Patients were excluded if they had PJI history, plastic surgery coverage, or extensive bone loss requiring endoprosthesis. We compared the number of patients PJI-free at 1-year follow-up using MusculoSkeletal Infection Society criteria and patients requiring re-revision between the single-stage and two-stage groups.

RESULTS

In total, 126 patients met inclusion criteria. Of 61 knee patients (48.4%), 22 underwent single-stage (36%) and 39 underwent two-stage (63.9%). Of 65 hip patients (51.6%), 38 underwent single-stage (58.5%) and 27 underwent two-stage (41.5%). At a mean follow-up of 1.95 ± 0.88 years, a higher rate of knee patients were classified as having treatment success in the single-stage group (77.3% versus 69.2%, P = 0.501), however with comparable septic failure rates (18.1% single-stage versus 17.9% two-stage; P = 0.982). At a mean follow-up of 1.81 ± 0.9 years, a higher rate of hip patients were classified as having treatment success in the single-stage group (94.7% versus 81.5%, P = 0.089), and more patients had septic failures in the two-stage group (18.5% versus 5.3%; P = 0.089). No differences were observed in the microorganism profile. More total complications (P = 0.021) and mortalities were found in the single-stage knee cohort than in the two-stage cohort (22.7% versus 2.6%; P = 0.011).

CONCLUSION

Single-stage arthroplasty is a viable alternative to standard two-stage exchange in patients with PJI without a history of infection and with no bone or soft-tissue compromise. Additional studies with longer term follow-up are needed to evaluate its efficacy.

Single-stage revision in the management of prosthetic joint infections after total knee arthroplasty - A review of current concepts

Introduction

Prosthetic joint infection (PJI) is a devastating complication following total knee arthroplasty (TKA); and the gold standard surgical approach involves a two-staged, revision TKA (TSR). Owing to the newer, emerging evidence on this subject, there has been gradual shift towards a single-stage revision approach (SSR), with the purported benefits of mitigated patient morbidity, decreased complications and reduced costs. However, there is still substantial lacuna in the evidence regarding the safety and outcome of the two approaches in chronic PJI. This study aimed to comprehensively review of the literature on SSR; and evaluate its role within Revision TKA post PJI.

Methods

The narrative review involved a comprehensive search of the databases (Embase, Medline and Pubmed), conducted on 20th of January 2024 using specific key words. All the manuscripts discussing the use of SSR for the management of PJI after TKA were considered for the review. Among the screened manuscripts, opinion articles, letters to the editor and non-English manuscripts were excluded.

Results

The literature search yielded a total 232 studies. Following a detailed scrutiny of these manuscripts, 26 articles were finally selected. The overall success rate following SSR is reported to range from 73 % to 100 % (and is comparable to TSR). SSR is performed in PJI patients with bacteriologically-proven infection, adequate soft tissue cover, immuno-competent host and excellent tolerance to antibiotics. The main difference between SSR and TSR is that the interval between the 2 stages is only a few minutes instead of 6 weeks. Appropriate topical, intraoperative antibiotic therapy, followed by adequate postoperative systemic antibiotic cover are necessary to ascertain good outcome. Some of the major benefits of SSR over TSR include reduced morbidity, decreased complications (such as arthrofibrosis or anesthesia-associated adverse events), meliorated extremity function, earlier return to activities, mitigated mechanical (prosthesis-associated) complications and enhanced patient satisfaction.

Conclusion

SSR is a reliable approach for the management of chronic PJI. Based on our comprehensive review of the literature, it may be concluded that the right selection of patients, extensive debridement, sophisticated reconstruction strategy, identification of the pathogenic organism, initiation of appropriate antibiotic therapy and ensuring adequate follow-up are the key determinants of successful outcome. To achieve this will undoubtedly require an MDT approach to be taken on a case-by-case basis.

Debridement, Antibiotic Pearls, and Retention of the Implant (DAPRI) in the Treatment of Early Periprosthetic Knee Joint Infections: A Literature Review

(1) Background: Periprosthetic joint infections (PJIs) are severe and frightening complications in orthopaedic surgery, and they are generally divided into three categories: early infections (those occurring within the first 4-6 weeks), delayed infections (those occurring between 3 and 24 months), and late infections (those occurring more than 2 years after surgery). PJI treatment comprises "debridement, antibiotics, and implant retention" (DAIR), single-stage revision, and double-stage revision. Nowadays, to improve the chances of retaining an infected implant and to improve the traditional DAIR method, a modified surgical technique has been developed, named DAPRI (debridement, antibiotic pearls, and retention of the implant). Our study aims to present an up-to-date concept evaluation of the DAPRI technique and its success rate. (2) Methods: Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses (PRISMA) standards were followed, applying a protocol defined by the authors: a total of 765 articles were identified, and at the end of the screening process only 7 studies were included. (3) Results: Currently, the DAPRI procedure can be performed only on patients who have had PJI symptoms for less than 4 weeks, and in order to achieve the highest success rate, indications are quite strict: it is appropriate in patients with acute, superficial infections without sinus tract presence, and well-fixed implants with known sensitive bacteria. The DAPRI surgical method follows a step-by-step process consisting of a first phase of biofilm identification with intra-articular injection of methylene blue, followed by biofilm removal (thermic, mechanical, and chemical aggression), and a last step consisting of prevention of PJI recurrence by using calcium sulphate antibiotic-added beads. (4) Conclusions: The DAPRI approach improves the traditional DAIR technique. It is a correct treatment for acute and early haematogenous PJI, and improves the DAIR success rate.

A Meta-Analysis of Success Rates of One-Stage Versus Two-Stage Revisions in Knee Prosthetic Joint Infections

Prosthetic joint infections (PJIs) pose significant challenges following total joint arthroplasties and cause profound complications. They are associated with significant morbidity and mortality. One-stage revision involves the removal of the infected implant and simultaneous re-implantation of a new prosthesis in a single surgical procedure. The two-stage approach is traditionally more common in the United States and follows a deliberate sequence: the infected implant is first removed, followed by a period of antibiotic therapy, and then a second surgery for implant reinsertion. While two-stage revisions were traditionally considered the gold standard, recent advancements have introduced one-stage revisions as a viable alternative. One-stage revision offers the advantage of being a single procedure, significantly reducing the patient's downtime without a functioning knee. Currently, there has not been a comprehensive exploration of the comparative outcomes between two-stage revisions and one-stage revisions. This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to assess the outcomes of both one- and two-stage revisions for total knee arthroplasties (TKAs), by utilizing comparison studies as the foundation for analysis. Our search encompassed databases such as MEDLINE (Medical Literature Analysis and Retrieval System Online), Embase, and Cochrane to identify articles examining the comparative efficacy and outcomes of one- and two-stage revision procedures between January 2000 and June 2023. We employed keywords relevant to knee PJIs to identify comparative studies reporting on success rates, reinfection rates, microbiological findings, and other pertinent outcomes. Statistical analysis for this investigation was performed using Review Manager 5.4 (The Cochrane Collaboration, 2020) with a standard significance threshold set at a p-value less than .05. This meta-analysis incorporated six comparison articles and 802 patients. Two-stage revisions (547 patients) were associated with greater success rates (i.e., infection eradication) than one-stage revisions (255 patients) (p = .03). The studies did not suggest a difference in the microbiology of the infections. Two-stage revisions are associated with higher success rates than one-stage revisions in the treatment of knee PJIs. Future randomized controlled trials should evaluate the optimization of the management of these complications.

Application of the New Irrigation Protocol to Reduce Recurrence Rate in the Management Of Periprosthetic Joint Infection

OBJECTIVE

Irrigation is a conventional treatment for acute and chronic periprosthetic joint infections (PJI). However, there has been no unified standard for irrigation during surgery for PJI in the past, and the efficacy is uncertain. The purpose of this study is to create a new irrigation protocol to enhance the infection control rate and reduce the postoperative recurrence rate of PJI patients.

METHODS

We conducted a single-institution retrospective review with a total of 56 patients who underwent revision total hip or knee arthroplasties due to PJI from January 2011 to January 2022. Conventional irrigation (CI) was used in 32 cases, and standard operating procedure of irrigation (SOPI) was used in 24. The CI protocol carries out an empirical irrigation after debridement, which is quite random. Our SOPI protocol clearly stipulates the soaking concentration and time of hydrogen peroxide and povidone-iodine. The irrigation is carried out three times, and tissue samples are taken from multiple parts before and after irrigation, which are sent for microbial culture. The important statistical indicators were the rate of positive microbiological culture and postoperative recurrence rate with an average follow-up of 24 average months.

RESULTS

The drainage volume was lower in the SOPI group than in the CI group on postoperative day 3 (p < 0.01) and 7 (p = 0.016). In addition, the percentage of positive microbiological cultures after the third irrigation was less than that before (p < 0.01) and after (p < 0.01) the first irrigation. The most common causative organism was Staphylococcus aureus, which was detected in 25.0% and 12.5% of the SOPI and CI groups, respectively. The failure rate at the final follow-up was 8.3% and 31.3% (p = 0.039) for the SOPI and CI groups, respectively.

CONCLUSION

Compared with the traditional CI method, SOPI standardized the soaking time of hydrogen peroxide and povidone-iodine, increased the frequency of and irrigation, and proved that microorganisms were almost completely removed through the microbial culture of multiple tissues. SOPI has the potential to become a standardized irrigation process worthy of promotion, effectively reducing the postoperative recurrence rate of PJI patients.

Do one-stage indications predict success following two-stage arthroplasty for chronic periprosthetic joint infection?

Introduction: The 2018 International Consensus Meeting (ICM) proposed criteria for one-stage exchange arthroplasty in treating periprosthetic joint infection (PJI). Our study aimed to determine what proportion of PJI patients met the 2018 ICM criteria and how this affected infection-free survivorship for patients. Methods: All chronic PJI patients treated with two-stage exchange within our institution between 2017-2020 were retrospectively reviewed. Included cases met 2011 Musculoskeletal Infection Society (MSIS) criteria for PJI and had a 2-year minimum follow-up. Treatment success was defined as Tier 1A in the 2019 MSIS working group definition. ICM one-stage criteria included non-immunocompromised host, absence of sepsis, adequate soft tissue for closure, known preoperative pathogen, and susceptibility. Immunocompromised host was analyzed as two separate definitions. Kaplan-Meier survivorship, Cox regression, and univariate analyses were performed. Results: A total of 293 chronic PJI patients were included. Overall, treatment failure occurred in 64 / 293 (21.8 %) patients. Only 13 % (n = 37 ) met ICM criteria definition no. 1 for one-stage exchange; 12 % (n = 33 ) met definition no. 2. In both definitions, infection-free survivorship at 2 years did not differ between patients who met and did not meet criteria (p > 0.05 ). Cox proportional hazard regression analyses demonstrated that the only variable predicting treatment failure was knee joint involvement (p = 0.01 ). Conclusions: We found that a very limited number of chronic PJI patients were suitable for a one-stage exchange. Furthermore, the supposition that healthier hosts with known pathogens (the basis of the ICM criteria) yield better PJI treatment outcomes was not observed. These results justify the ongoing multicenter randomized control trial comparing one-stage versus two-stage treatment for chronic PJI.

Systematic review and meta-analysis of single-stage vs two-stage revision for periprosthetic joint infection: a call for a prospective randomized trial

BACKGROUND

Periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) is a severe complication of joint arthroplasty that causes significant pain and economic loss. This study aimed to determine whether the current evidence supports single-stage revision for PJI based on reinfection and reoperation rates.

METHODS

We searched the PubMed, EBSCO, Medline, and Cochrane Library databases from inception to 30 May 2023 to identify studies that compared single-stage revision and two-stage revision for PJI. Data on reinfection and reoperation rates were pooled.

RESULTS

This meta-analysis included a total of 40 studies with 8711 patients. Overall, there was no significant difference between single- and two-stage revision regarding the postoperative reinfection rate and reoperation rate. Subgroup analysis by surgery period and different surgical sites revealed no difference between the two groups in the reinfection and reoperation rates.

CONCLUSIONS

Based on the available evidence, our study did not identify a significant difference in reinfection and reoperation rates between single- and two-stage revision for PJI. Given the limitations in inclusion/exclusion criteria and the observed heterogeneity, we acknowledge the complexity of drawing strong conclusions. Therefore, we suggest that the choice between single- and two-stage revision should be carefully considered on an individual basis, taking into account patient-specific factors and further research developments.

Debridement, antibiotics, and implant retention (DAIR) for the early prosthetic joint infection of total knee and hip arthroplasties: a systematic review

PURPOSE

Early periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) represents one of the most fearsome complications of joint replacement. No international consensus has been reached regarding the best approach for early prosthetic knee and hip infections. The aim of this updated systematic review is to assess whether debridement, antibiotics, and implant retention (DAIR) is an effective choice of treatment in early postoperative and acute hematogenous PJI.

METHODS

This systematic review was performed using the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. The diagnostic criteria defining a PJI, the most present pathogen, and the days between the index procedure and the onset of the PJI were extracted from the selected articles. Additionally, the mean follow-up, antibiotic regimen, and success rate of the treatment were also reported.

RESULTS

The articles included provided a cohort of 970 patients. Ten studies specified the joint of their cohort in PJIs regarding either hip prostheses or knee prostheses, resulting in 454 total knees and 460 total hips. The age of the patients ranged from 18 to 92 years old. Success rates for the DAIR treatments in the following cohort ranged from 55.5% up to a maximum of 90% (mean value of 71%).

CONCLUSION

Even though the DAIR procedure is quite limited, it is still considered an effective option for patients developing an early post-operative or acute hematogenous PJI. However, there is a lack of studies, in particular randomized control trials (RCTs), comparing DAIR with one-stage and two-stage revision protocols in the setting of early PJIs, reflecting the necessity to conduct further high-quality studies to face the burden of early PJI.

The Practice Patterns of American Association of Hip and Knee Surgeons for the Management of Chronic Periprosthetic Joint Infection After Total Knee Arthroplasty

BACKGROUND

The management of periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) following total knee arthroplasty (TKA) has considerable variation. In order to better capture current preferences for the management of PJI, this study sought to poll the current members of American Association of Hip and Knee Surgeons (AAHKS) first to characterize the distribution of practice patterns.

METHODS

There were 32 questions in an online survey distributed to members of AAHKS. The questions were multiple choice regarding the management of PJI for TKA. There were 844 out of 2,752 members who completed the survey (response rate of 31%).

RESULTS

Most of the members were in private practice (50%) compared to 28% being in an academic setting. On average, members were performing between 6 to 20 PJI cases per year. Two-stage exchange arthroplasty was performed in over 75% of the cases with either a cruciate retaining (CR) or posterior stabilized (PS) primary femoral component used in over 50% of the cases and 62% using an all-polyethylene tibial implant. Most of the members were using vancomycin and tobramycin. Typically, 2 to 3 grams of antibiotics were added per bag of cement regardless of the cement type. When indicated, amphotericin was the most often-used antifungal. Post-operative management had major variability with range of motion, brace use, and weight-bearing restrictions.

CONCLUSION

There was variability in the responses from the members of AAHKS, but there was a preference toward performing a two-stage exchange arthroplasty with an articulating spacer using a metal femoral component and an all-polyethylene liner.

Characterizing recurrent infections after one-stage revision for periprosthetic joint infection of the knee: a systematic review of the literature

BACKGROUND

Periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) of the knee represents a severe complication after 1.5% to 2% of primary total knee replacement. Although two-stage revision was considered the gold-standard treatment for PJI of the knee, in the last decades, more studies reported the outcomes of one-stage revisions. This systematic review aims to assess reinfection rate, infection-free survival after reoperation for recurrent infection, and the microorganisms involved in both primary and recurrent infection.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

A systematic review of all studies reporting the outcome of one-stage revision for PJI of the knee up to September 2022, according to PRISMA criteria and AMSTAR2 guidelines, was performed. Patient demographics, clinical, surgical, and postoperative data were recorded.

PROSPERO ID

CRD42022362767.

RESULTS

Eighteen studies with a total of 881 one-stage revisions for PJI of the knee were analyzed. A reinfection rate of 12.2% after an average follow-up of 57.6 months was reported. The most frequent causative microorganism were gram-positive bacteria (71.1%), gram-negative bacteria (7.1%), and polymicrobial infections (8%). The average postoperative knee society score was 81.5, and the average postoperative knee function score was 74.2. The infection-free survival after treatment for recurrent infection was 92.1%. The causative microorganisms at reinfections differed significantly from the primary infection (gram-positive 44.4%, gram-negative 11.1%).

CONCLUSION

Patients who underwent a one-stage revision for PJI of the knee showed a reinfection rate lower or comparable to other surgical treatments as two-stage or DAIR (debridement, antibiotics, and implant retention). Reoperation for reinfection demonstrates a lower success compared to one-stage revision. Moreover, microbiology differs between primary infection and recurrent infection. Level of evidence Level IV.

Clinical Outcomes and Infection Rates Following Revision Total Knee Arthroplasty: Aseptic Failure versus Septic Failure

Background

It is controversial whether revision total knee arthroplasty (TKA) due to septic failure shows inferior clinical outcomes compared with TKA due to aseptic failure. Moreover, few studies have compared the infection rates after revision TKA between aseptic and septic failure. We aimed to compare the clinical outcomes and infection rates after aseptic and septic revision TKA.

Methods

Between April 2006 and May 2019, 68 and 26 patients underwent revision TKA due to aseptic failure (aseptic group) and septic failure (septic group), respectively. The postoperative range of motion (ROM), Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis index, Knee Society Knee Score (KSKS), Knee Society Function Score (KSFS), and infection rates were compared between the two groups.

Results

The mean follow-up durations in the aseptic and septic groups were 44.4 and 54.8 months, respectively. The septic group showed inferior postoperative ROM (124.1° and 109.4°, p = 0.004), KSKS (88.9 and 78.8, p = 0.001), and KSFS (72.8 and 59.0, p = 0.001). Three patients of aseptic group had infection. Three patients of septic group had recurred infection (same pathogen with the first infection) and 1 patient had a new infection (different pathogen). The septic group showed slightly higher but not significantly different infection rates (4.4% and 15.4%, p = 0.089).

Conclusions

Revision TKA with septic failure showed inferior postoperative clinical outcomes compared with aseptic revision surgery. A slightly higher infection rate was observed in the septic group but it was not significantly different.

Selecting a high-dose antibiotic-laden cement knee spacer

Prosthetic joint infection [PJI] after total knee arthroplasty (TKA) remains a common and challenging problem for joint replacement surgeons and patients. Once the diagnosis of PJI has been made, patient goals and characteristics as well as the infection timeline dictate treatment. Most commonly, this involves a two-stage procedure with the removal of all implants, debridement, and placement of a static or dynamic antibiotic spacer. Static spacers are commonly indicated for older, less healthy patients that would benefit from soft tissue rest after initial debridement. Mobile spacers are typically used in younger, healthier patients to improve quality of life and reduce soft-tissue contractures during antibiotic spacer treatment. Spacers are highly customizable with regard to antibiotic choice, cement variety, and spacer design, each with reported advantages, drawbacks, and indications that will be covered in this article. While no spacer is superior to any other, the modern arthroplasty surgeon must be familiar with the available modalities to optimize treatment for each patient. Here we propose a treatment algorithm to assist surgeons in deciding on treatment for PJI after TKA.

Survivorship and Etiologies of Failure in Single-stage Revision Arthroplasty for Periprosthetic Joint Infection: A Meta-analysis

INTRODUCTION

Single-stage revision arthroplasty for periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) may yield comparable infection-free survivorship with two-stage revision arthroplasty. It is unclear if the most common mode of failure of single-stage revision arthroplasty is infection or aseptic loosening. In this meta-analysis, we sought to (1) determine survivorship and (2) compare rates of different etiologies of failure of single-stage revision total hip arthroplasty (THA) and total knee arthroplasty (TKA).

METHODS

Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-analyses guidelines search was done using search terms for "single stage revision," "exchange arthroplasty," "periprosthetic infection," "PJI," and "single stage." Patient demographics such as age, body mass index, and mean follow-up time were recorded. Overall survivorship and rates of revision surgery were aggregated using a random-effects model. Comparison of septic and aseptic loosening rates was done by risk difference and associated 95% confidence interval (CI) calculation.

RESULTS

Twenty-four studies were identified with 2,062 and 147 single-stage revision THA and TKA procedures performed between 1984 and 2019, respectively. The weighted mean follow-up and age were 69.8 months and 66.3 years, respectively, with 55% men overall. The all-cause revision surgery rate was 11.1% and 11.8% for THA and TKA, respectively. The revision surgery rate secondary to infection and aseptic loosening and associated 95% CI for the risk difference for THA and TKA was 5.5% and 3.3% (-1.7% to 5.0%), and 3% and 8.8% (-11.4% to 2.3%), respectively. Revision surgeries due to instability and fracture combined and mortality rate were both less than 3%.

DISCUSSION

Single-stage revision THA and TKA for PJI demonstrated overall high rates of survivorship, low mortality, and revision surgeries secondary to infection and aseptic loosening to be equivalent. Aseptic loosening after single-stage revision TKA might be higher than in primary TKA. As implant survivorship from infection improves in PJI, surgeons should be aware of aseptic loosening as an equally common mode of failure.

Short Course of Oral Antibiotic Treatment After Two-Stage Exchange Arthroplasty Appears to Decrease Early Reinfection

BACKGROUND

Recent evidence has suggested a benefit to extended postoperative prophylactic oral antibiotics after two-stage exchange arthroplasty for treatment of periprosthetic joint infections. We sought to determine reinfection rates with and without a short course of oral antibiotics after two-stage exchange procedures.

METHODS

A retrospective review identified patients undergoing two-stage exchange arthroplasty for periprosthetic joint infection of the hip or knee. Patients were excluded if they failed a prior two-stage exchange, had positive cultures at reimplantation, prolonged intravenous antibiotics postoperatively, and/or life-long suppression. This resulted in 444 reimplantations (210 hips and 234 knees). Patients were divided into three cohorts based on the duration of oral antibiotics after reimplantation: no antibiotics (102), ≤2 weeks (266), or >2 weeks (76). The primary endpoint was reinfection within 1 year of reimplantation.

RESULTS

Within 1 year of reimplantation, there were 34 reinfections. In the no-antibiotic, ≤ 2-week, and >2-week cohorts the reinfection rates were 14.1, 7.0, and 6.4%, respectively. Multivariate Cox regression showed a reduced reinfection rate in the ≤2-week cohort relative to no antibiotics (hazard ratio [HR]: 0.38, P = .01). While the smaller cohort with >2 weeks of antibiotics did not significantly reduce the reinfection rate (HR: 0.41, P = .12), when combined with the ≤2-week cohort, use of oral antibiotics had an overall reduction of the reinfection rate (HR: 0.39, P = .01).

CONCLUSIONS

These data support the hypothesis that a short course of oral antibiotics after reimplantation decreases the 1-year reinfection rate. Future randomized studies should seek to examine the efficacy of different durations of oral antibiotics to reduce reinfection.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Prognostic Level IV.

Single-stage revision for chronic periprosthetic joint infection after knee and hip arthroplasties: indications and treatments

Single-stage revision for chronic periprosthetic joint infection has been introduced 40 years ago. This option is gaining more and more attention as well as popularity. It is a reliable treatment for the chronic periprosthetic joint infection after knee and hip arthroplasties when implemented by an experienced multi-disciplinary team. However, its indications and corresponding treatments remain controversial. This review focused on the indications and specific treatments related to the option, with an attempt to help surgeons to use this method with more favorable outcomes.

Stability analysis of tranexamic acid in the presence of various antiseptic solutions

Tranexamic acid (TXA) effectively reduces blood loss and transfusion risk during total joint arthroplasty. Additionally, intraoperative irrigation with various antiseptic solutions is often utilized for the management and prevention of surgical site infection. However, interactions between various antiseptic solutions and TXA have not been investigated. The purpose of this in vitro study is to evaluate the stability of TXA in the presence of common orthopedic antiseptic solutions. Five antiseptic solutions-0.1% chlorhexidine (CHX) gluconate, 10% povidone-iodine (BTD), 0.5% sodium hypochlorite (Dakin's), 3% hydrogen peroxide (H₂ O₂ ), and 1.5% H₂ O₂ -and a 0.9% normal saline (NS) control were obtained. A stock 100 mg/ml TXA solution was diluted in each antiseptic solution to a concentration of 10.0 mg/ml to generate reference standard and stability samples. TXA stability in each solution was measured using high performance liquid chromatography at t = 0 and t = 120 min and reported as mean percent of theoretical concentration (MPT) with associated relative standard deviation (RSD). All experiments were performed in triplicate at room temperature. At t = 0 min, TXA remained stable when mixed with 0.9% NS, 0.1% CHX, 10% BTD, 3% H₂ O₂ , and 1.5% H₂ O₂ (MPT range: 102.0%-105.0%, RSD range: 0.80%-2.92%). Only 0.5% Dakin's led to significant degradation of TXA at t = 0 min (MPT: 14.3%, RSD:1.28%). At t = 120 min, TXA stability persisted for all compounds except Dakin's 0.5% (MPT: 18.4%, RSD: 28.7%). TXA efficacy may be significantly diminished when 0.5% Dakin's is used as an intraoperative irrigation solution. CHX, BTD, and H₂ O₂ do not degrade TXA.

Successful eradication rate following one-stage septic knee and hip exchange in selected pre-operative culture-negative periprosthetic joint infections

PURPOSE

The main requirement for performing the one-stage septic exchange is the pre-operative identification of the pathogen and its susceptibility. The purpose of this study is to evaluate the success rate with special focus on reinfection in a cohort of patients who underwent one-stage septic knee or hip revision for pre-operative culture-negative PJI.

METHODS

We retrospectively analyzed 640 patients treated by one-stage revision for chronic knee or hip PJI between January 1, 2016, and December 31, 2018. Only cases with pre-operative culture-negative PJI, with culture-negative synovial aspirations and one negative open biopsy, were analyzed. We evaluated the septic and aseptic complication and the rate of complication-free survival defined as the time from the date of first operation and the date of complication events.

RESULTS

A total of 22 patients fulfilled the inclusion and were enrolled. The mean age of the group was 73.2 ± 9.8 years, with a median ASA score of 3 (range 3-4). After mean follow-up of 3.6 ± 2.6 years, 86.4% (19 out of 22) of patients reported no complications. Two patients (9.1%) after one-stage hip required revision arthroplasty due to septic failure, while one patient (4.5%) with one-stage knee had revision for femoral component aseptic loosening.

CONCLUSION

Our analysis suggests that the absence of pre-operative pathogen detection may not be contraindication to the one-stage revision in selected patients. The one-stage exchange might be considered in patients with pre-operative negative cultures in presence of ASA > 3 and multiple comorbidities that are not able to tolerate multiple surgeries.

Elevated ESR and CRP Prior to Second-Stage Reimplantation Knee Revision Surgery for Periprosthetic Joint Infection Are Associated with Increased Reinfection Rates

Although two-stage revision surgery is considered as the most effective treatment for managing chronic periprosthetic joint infection (PJI), there is no current consensus on the predictors of optimal timing to second-stage reimplantation. This study aimed to compare clinical outcomes between patients with elevated erythrocyte sedimentation rate (ESR) and C-reactive protein (CRP) prior to second-stage reimplantation and those with normalized ESR and CRP prior to second-stage reimplantation. We retrospectively reviewed 198 patients treated with two-stage revision total knee arthroplasty for chronic PJI. Cohorts included patients with: (1) normal level of serum ESR and CRP (n = 96) and (2) elevated level of serum ESR and CRP prior to second-stage reimplantation (n = 102). Outcomes including reinfection rates and readmission rates were compared between both cohorts. At a mean follow-up of 4.4 years (2.8-6.5 years), the elevated ESR and CRP cohort demonstrated significantly higher reinfection rates compared with patients with normalized ESR and CRP prior to second-stage reimplantation (33.3% vs. 14.5%, p < 0.01). Patients with both elevated ESR and CRP demonstrated significantly higher reinfection rates, when compared with patients with elevated ESR and normalized CRP (33.3% vs. 27.6%, p = 0.02) as well as normalized ESR and elevated CRP (33.3% vs. 26.3%, p < 0.01). This study demonstrates that elevated serum ESR and/or CRP levels prior to reimplantation in two-stage knee revision surgery for chronic PJI are associated with increased reinfection rate after surgery. Elevation of both ESR and CRP were associated with a higher risk of reinfection compared with elevation of either ESR or CRP, suggesting the potential benefits of normalizing ESR and CRP prior to reimplantation in treatment of chronic PJI.

Midterm Survival of a Varus-Valgus Constrained Implant following One-Stage Revision for Periprosthetic Joint Infection: A Single-Center Study

Revision total knee arthroplasty (TKA) is challenging to perform in patients with periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) due to the difficulty of eradicating the infection and potential for bone and ligamentous deficits. The current study aimed to evaluate the midterm survival of varus-valgus constrained (VVC) implants used in one-stage revision TKA for chronic PJI at our institution. This retrospective analysis included 132 patients with chronic PJI who underwent one-stage revision using a VVC implant. The average follow-up was 51.6 months (range: 24-85 months). Five-year survival analysis was performed to set recurrent infection and mechanical failure as the end point. Hospital for special surgery (HSS) as functional outcomes was evaluated preoperatively and at the latest follow-up. A total of 12 patients (9.1%) underwent retreatment for reinfection (nine patients) and mechanical failure (three patients). The overall 5-year revision-free survival was 82.7%, the infection-free survival was 91.1%, and the mechanical failure-free survival was 98.3%. The preoperative HSS knee score improved from 35.6 points (range: 24.3-47.7 points) preoperatively to 76.8 points (range: 57.2-87.6 points) at the latest follow-up. Complications were identified in 20 patients (15.2%) which included aseptic osteolysis in 4 cases, acceptable flexion instability in 3 cases, arthrofibrosis in 2 patients, hematomas in 2 cases, calf intermuscular venous thrombosis in 6 patients, and femoral stem tip pain in 3 cases. This is the first study to report the outcomes of one-stage revision using VVC implants for knee PJI. Improved functional outcomes and good midterm survival are demonstrated at an average follow-up of 51.6 months.

One- or two-stage reimplantation for infected total knee prosthesis?

A prosthetic joint infection (PJI) is possibly the most significant potential complication of total knee arthroplasty (TKA) and is associated with substantial morbidity and socioeconomic burden. It is a devastating complication for both the patient and the surgeon alike. A two-stage revision approach for infected TKA has been the standard for surgical management; however, there is growing interest in single-stage revision surgery due to fewer procedures, reduced inpatient hospital stay and reduced costs to healthcare systems. A one-stage exchange is indicated when there is no sign of systemic sepsis and in cases where a microorganism has been isolated. It involves removal of the old prosthesis, debridement of all infected tissue, a copious washout and re-draping, and finally, re-implantation of a new prosthesis. The two-stage approach involves the use of an antibiotic spacer before the second stage is carried out. The length of time between the stages is discussed. Patients with a PJI should be managed by a multidisciplinary team. We recommend these patients are managed in specialist arthroplasty centres by high volume revision arthroplasty specialists.

Survival analysis of one-stage exchange of infected unicompartmental knee arthroplasty: a single-center study with minimum 3 years follow-up

PURPOSE

The rates of unicompartmental knee arthroplasty (UKA) are increasing yet little data exists regarding management of periprosthetic joint infections (PJI) after UKA, particularly utilizing one-stage revision. The aim of this study was to determine the septic and all-cause revision-free survival of UKA PJIs treated with one-stage revision, as well as functional outcomes and risk factors for failure.

METHODS

A retrospective review of one-stage septic revisions with a hinged or rotating hinged implant between 2000 and 2015 at a single institution was performed. Results of 15 patients with a minimum of 3-year follow-up (mean = 93 months; range 37-217) were evaluated by means of infection control, survivorship, patient reported functional score and possible causal factors for a re-revision. Kaplan-Meier curves and Cox regression analysis were used.

RESULTS

After a mean of 8 years of follow-up infection control rate was 93.3%, the survivorship free of any reoperation, including both septic and aseptic causes, was 80% at 5 years and 64.2% at ten years and average Lysholm score was 72.7 ± 21.3 (33-100).

CONCLUSION

One-stage revision for PJI of UKA using a hinged knee design has excellent infection-free survival at mid to long-term follow-up. Likewise, patient reported functional outcomes are promising. However, one-third of patients required aseptic reoperation and aseptic loosening was the dominant etiology.

A Permanent Articulating Spacer Versus Two-Stage Exchange for Chronic Periprosthetic Joint Infection: A Propensity Score-Matched Study

BACKGROUND

Although 2-stage revision has been proposed as gold standard for periprosthetic joint infection treatment, limited evidence exists for the role of articulating spacers as definitive management. The purpose of this study was to compare clinical outcomes and costs associated with articulating spacers (1.5-stage) and a matched 2-stage cohort.

METHODS

A retrospective review was performed for patients who had chronic periprosthetic joint infections after total knee arthroplasty defined by Musculoskeletal Infection Society criteria and were matched via propensity score matching using cumulative Musculoskeletal Infection Society scores and a comorbidity index. Patients who maintained an articulating spacer (cemented cobalt-chrome femoral component and all-poly tibia) were included in the 1.5-stage cohort. Patients who underwent a 2-stage reimplantation procedure were included in the 2-stage cohort. Outcomes included visual analog scale pain scores, 90-day emergency department visits, 90-day readmission, unplanned reoperation, reinfection, as well as cost at 1 and 2-year intervals. A total of 116 patients were included for analyses.

RESULTS

The 90-day pain scores were lower in the 1.5-stage cohort compared to the 2-stage cohort (2.9 versus 4.6, P = .0001). There were no significant differences between readmission and reoperation rates. Infection clearance was equivalent at 79.3% for both groups. Two-stage exchange demonstrated an increased cost difference of $26,346 compared to 1.5-stage through 2 years (P = .0001). Regression analyses found 2 culture-positive results with the same organism decreased the risk for reinfection [odds ratio: 0.2, 95% confidence interval 0.04-0.8, P = .03].

CONCLUSION

For high-risk candidates, articulating spacers can preserve knee function, reduce morbidity from second-stage surgery, and lower the costs with similar rates of infection clearance as 2-stage exchange.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level III, therapeutic study.

Palliative arthroscopic debridement with continuous irrigation for infected total knee arthroplasty in high mortality risk patients

PURPOSE

This study aimed to evaluate the infection control rate of palliative arthroscopic debridement, antibiotics, and implant retention (DAIR) for the high mortality risk or terminal cancer stage patients.

METHODS

From March 2018 to August 2021, 21 patients met the following inclusion criteria: old age of more than 80, diagnosed as a terminal stage of cancer, high risk of mortality and morbidity representing as Charlson comorbidity index (CCI) ≥ 5, low daily activity with disabled extremity, and re-infection after two-stage revision. Each patient underwent arthroscopic DAIR and additional continuous irrigation for 48 hours. The need for subsequent re-arthroscopic DAIR or two-stage revision was determined by the post-operative trends of C-reactive protein (CRP) levels. Infection control was defined as continuing controlled status of infection based on clinical and laboratory results by one or two times of arthroscopic DAIR within initial two months. Treatment failure was defined as more than three times arthroscopic debridement, two-stage revision surgery, or expired due to uncontrolled infection.

RESULTS

Arthroscopic DAIR controlled the infection in 19 (90.5%) of the 21 cases. The other knee underwent a total of three times of re-arthroscopic DAIR and the other one underwent two-stage revision. Although five patients expired during the follow-up period due to worsening medical problems or terminal cancer, there were no deaths from uncontrolled infection, sepsis, or surgery-related complications.

CONCLUSIONS

Arthroscopic debridement with continuous irrigation for the infection TKA with high mortality risk or terminal cancer patients showed a 90.5% infection control rate. For high-risk patients, arthroscopic debridement with continuous irrigation can be an alternative treatment to improve the quality of life during survival.

One and a Half-Stage Revision With Prosthetic Articulating Spacer for Definitive Management of Knee Periprosthetic Joint Infection

This paper is a comprehensive review that describes indications, contraindications, clinical outcomes, and pearls and pitfalls of 1.5-stage revision total knee arthroplasty (TKA) utilizing a primary TKA femoral component, all-polyethylene tibial component, and hand-crafted antibiotic cement for the management of chronic periprosthetic joint infection. The 1.5-stage exchange TKA details placement of an articulating spacer for an indefinite period, prolonging revision until reinfection, deterioration of functional status, or construct failure. A 1.5-stage revision TKA technique is a viable option for treatment of chronic periprosthetic knee infections. The inherent advantages of decreased health-care costs, decreased morbidity and mortality, and improved emotional ease from having a single procedure is attractive, especially if reinfection rates are determined to be equivocal to 2-stage revision.

Comparison of Patient-Reported Outcomes Measures and Quality-Adjusted Life Years Following One- and Two-Stage Septic Knee Exchange

(1) Background: Periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) can be managed with one- or two-stage revision surgery protocol. Despite several studies analyzing the eradication rates between both procedures, there are no comparative studies that analyze patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) and quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) in both treatment strategies. (2) Methods: All patients who underwent a two-stage knee revision between January 2017 to December 2018, due to a periprosthetic joint infection were included in the study. From the time interval, we selected a comparative group with the one-stage septic procedure. All patients received the following questionnaires: Oxford Knee Score, EQ-5D-5L, SSQ-8, and the SF-36. Additionally, demographic patient data were collected. The quality-adjusted life years (QALY) were calculated using the EQ-5D-5L. (3) Results: A total of 35 patients with a mean age of 67.7 years (SD = 8.9) were included in the final evaluation. The mean follow-up period was 54.5 months (SD = 5.5). There was no statistically significant difference regarding the Charlson Comorbidity Index (CCI), postoperative complications, or all evaluated questionnaires. There was no statistically significant difference in QALYs between the one- and two-stage revision. (4) Conclusion: Our study results show that the one-stage revision for PJI achieves similar PROMs compared to two-stage revision.

Periprosthetic knee infection: treatment options

Infection is one of the most catastrophic complication following total knee arthroplasty (TKA) and represents the second most common cause of TKA failure. Treatment of a patient with periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) could require often costly and prolonged hospital stays, weeks or months of antibiotic therapy, and multiple surgical procedures. The best management is still highly debating, whereas many treatment options are available. These include suppressive antibiotics, arthroscopic irrigation and debridement, open debridement with insert exchange, single-stage reimplantation and two-stage reimplantation. The choice of the treatment depends on many variables, including integrity of implant, timing of the infection, host factors (age, health, immunologic status), virulence of the infecting organism and wishes of the patient. The aim of this review is to provide a comprehensive understaning of the different options for knee PJIs.

One-stage revision arthroplasty in a patient with ochronotic arthropathy accompanied by joint infection: A case report

BACKGROUND

Ochronotic arthropathy (OcA) is a rare disease, which is caused by the accumulation of homogentisic acid in the joint. Patients with OcA have obvious joint pain and the disease progresses rapidly, eventually resulting in disability. Arthroplasty is an efficacious treatment in patients with OcA. However, when OcA patients have joint infection, is joint replacement an option? In the present report, we performed total knee arthroplasty in a patient with OcA and knee infection under the guidance of one-stage revision theory.

CASE SUMMARY

A 64-year-old male was referred to our hospital due to severe left knee pain with limited mobility for 2 years. On physical examination, the patient was found to have dark brown pigmentation of the sclera and auricle. Laboratory test results showed elevations in C-reactive protein level (65.79 mg/L) and erythrocyte sedimentation rate (90.00 mm/h). The patient underwent debridement of the left knee joint, during which the cartilage surface of the knee joint was found to be black-brown in color. Bacterial culture of synovial fluid revealed Achromobacter xylosoxidans. We then carried out arthroplasty under the guidance of the theory of one-stage revision. After surgery, the patient's left knee joint pain disappeared and function recovered without joint infection.

CONCLUSION

OcA accompanied by joint infection is rare. One-stage revision arthroplasty may be a treatment option for this disease.

Against the Norm: Do Not Rely on Serum C-Reactive Protein and White Blood Cell Count Only When Assessing Eradication of Periprosthetic Joint Infection

Introduction: Periprosthetic joint infections (PJI) following primary arthroplasty continue to be a serious complication, despite advances in diagnostics and treatment. Two-stage revision arthroplasty has been commonly used as the gold standard for the treatment of PJI. However, much discussion persists regarding the interim of the two-stage procedure and the optimal timing of reimplantation. Serology markers have been proposed as defining parameters for a successful reimplantation. The objective of this matched-pair analysis was to assess the role of serum C-reactive protein (CRP) and white blood cell count (WBC) in determining infection eradication and proper timing of reimplantation. We investigated the delta (∆) change in CRP and WBC values prior to both stages of two-stage revision arthroplasty as a useful marker of infection eradication. Methods: We analyzed 39 patients and 39 controls, matched by propensity score matching (BMI, age, ASA-classification), with a minimum follow-up of 24 months and treated with a two-stage revision THA or TKA in our institution. Data of serum CRP and WBC values were gathered at two selected time points: prior to the explantation of the implant (preexplantation) and following the completion of antibiotic treatment regimen, both systemic and with a drug-eluting cement spacer (prereimplantation). Patient records were reviewed electronically for preexisting comorbidities, overall health status, synovial fluid cultures, inflammatory serologies, revision surgeries, and recurrent or persistent infection based on the modified Musculoskeletal Infection Society criteria. Patient demographics, ∆CRP, ∆WBC, and time interval to reimplantation were statistically analyzed using receiver operator curves (ROC), Pearson’s correlation coefficient, Levene’s test, and Student’s t-test. Results: Infection-free patients exhibited higher mean CRP and WBC than did patients who were reinfected at both time points. When comparing preexplantation with prereimplantation values, the median ∆CRP was 9.48 mg/L (interquartile range (IQR) 2.3−36.6 mg/L) for patients who did not develop a reinfection versus 2.74 mg/L (IQR 1.4−14.2 mg/L) for patients who developed reinfection (p = 0.069). The median ∆WBC was 1.5 × 109/L (IQR 0.6−4.0 × 109/L) for patients who remained infection-free versus 1.2 × 109/L (IQR 0.8−2.2 109/L) for patients who developed reinfection (p = 0.072). Analysis of areas under the curve (AUC) using ROC demonstrated poor prediction of persistent infection by ∆CRP (AUC = 0.654) and ∆WBC (AUC = 0.573). Although a highly significant correlation was found between the interim interval and infection persistence (r = 0.655, p < 0.01), analysis using ROC failed to result in a specific threshold time to reimplantation above which patients are at significantly higher risk for reinfection (AUC = 0.507). Conclusion: No association could be determined between the delta change in serum CRP and WBC before and after two-stage revision arthroplasty for PJI and reinfection risk. Even though inflammatory serologies demonstrate a downtrending pattern prior to reimplantation, the role of CRP and WBC in determining the optimal timing of reimplantation seems to be dispensable. Planning a second-stage reimplantation requires assessing multiple variables rather than relying on specific numeric changes in these inflammatory marker values.

A mean 4-year evaluation of infection control rates of hip and knee prosthetic joint infection-related revision arthroplasty: an observational study

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE

The long-term results of the 1- or 2-stage revision procedure and infection-free prosthesis survival in a tertiary referral center are unknown. In this retrospective observational study, the long-term results of infection control and infection-free prosthesis survival of the periprosthetic joint infection-related 1- and 2-stage revision procedure are evaluated. Furthermore, the merits of performing an antibiotic-free window in the 2-stage revision is evaluated.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

All patients who received a 1- or 2-stage revision procedure of the hip or knee between 2010 and 2017 were included. Data was collected on patient and infection characteristics. The primary treatment aim was successful infection control without the use of antibiotic therapy afterwards. Infection-free survival analysis was performed using the Kaplan-Meier method with type of periprosthetic joint infection-related revision as covariate. Within the group of 2-stage revisions, use of an antibioticfree window was selected as covariate.

RESULTS

128 patients were treated for a periprosthetic joint infection-related revision procedure (81 hips and 47 knees). Successful infection control was achieved in 18 of 21 cases for the 1-stage and 89 out of 107 cases for the 2-stage revision procedure (83%) respectively after follow-up of more than 4 years. In addition, 2-stage revision procedure infection control was achieved in 52 of 60 cases with an antibiotic-free interval and 37 of 45 cases without such interval (p = 0.6). The mean infection-free survival of the 1-stage revision was 90 months (95% CI 75-105) and 98 months (CI 90-106) for the 2-stage revision procedure.

INTERPRETATION

There seems to be no difference in infection control and infection-free survival between the 1- and 2-stage revision procedure. Second, an antibiotic-free window in the case of a 2-stage revision did not seem to influence treatment outcome. However, one must be cautious when interpreting these results due to confounding by indication and the small study population. Therefore, no definite conclusion can be drawn.

A novel activated-zinc antiseptic solution effective against MRSA and Pseudomonas aeruginosa: a pig model

OBJECTIVE

The purpose of this study was to investigate the antimicrobial efficacy of a novel activated zinc solution against meticillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) and Pseudomonas aeruginosa after one hour, and to evaluate any untoward effect of the solution on local wound tissue at 24 hours after solution exposure in a pig wound model.

METHOD

A pathogen-free, commercially raised, Yorkshire-cross female pig was acquired 12 days prior to the procedure. Within one week prior to the procedure, a small loopful of test bacteria, Pseudomonas aeruginosa (pig-isolate) and MRSA (ATCC-6538), were streaked and cultured on a non-selective agar. Full-thickness wounds (n=24) were created and evenly divided into three groups: control wounds (exposed to bacteria but untreated, n=8); wounds treated with Compound 1 (n=8), and wounds treated with Compound 2 (n=8). All wounds were dressed and monitored for one hour and 24 hours.

RESULTS

After one hour, the wounds treated with Compound 1 and Compound 2 had a mean recoverable total bacteria of 2.8 log colony forming units (CFUs) and 3.5 logCFUs, respectively. After one hour, the wounds treated with Compound 1 and Compound 2 had a mean recoverable MRSA of 2.3 logCFUs and 1.6 logCFUs, respectively (p=0.009). After one hour, the wounds treated with Compound 1 and Compound 2 had a mean recoverable Pseudomonas aeruginosa of 0.3 logCFUs and 0.0 logCFUs, respectively (p=0.000). After 24 hours of exposure to Compound 1 and Compound 2, there was no statistically significant increased necrosis (p=0.12, p=0.31, respectively) or neutrophilic infiltrate (Compound 2, p=0.12) when compared with control wounds.

CONCLUSION

The novel activated-zinc compound used in this study demonstrated a 99.5-99.9% reduction in total bacteria, a 99.9-99.98% reduction in MRSA, and 100% eradication of Pseudomonas aeruginosa one hour after exposure. This novel solution may provide another significant tool to treat and/or prevent wound infections.

Is a preoperative pathogen detection a prerequisite before undergoing one-stage exchange for prosthetic joint infection of the hip?

BACKGROUND

A preoperative pathogen detection is considered a prerequisite before undergoing one-stage exchange for prosthetic joint infection (PJI) according to most guidelines. This study compares patients with and without preoperative pathogen detection undergoing one-stage exchange for PJI of the hip. The authors put up the hypothesis that a preoperative pathogen detection is no prerequisite in selected cases undergoing one-stage exchange.

METHODS

30 consecutive patients with PJI of the hip, treated with one-stage exchange, between 2011 and 2021, were retrospectively included. Mean age was 70 years and mean follow-up 2.1 ± 1.8 years. PJI was defined according to the European Bone and Joint Infection Society. One-stage exchange was performed in (1) chronic PJI longer than 4 weeks, (2) well-retained bone condition, (3) absence of multiple prior revisions for PJI (≤ 2) with absence of difficult-to-treat pathogens in the past, and (4) necessity/preference for early mobility due to comorbidities/age.

RESULTS

One-stage exchange was performed in 20 patients with and in 10 without a preoperative pathogen detection. Age (71 years, 68 years, p = 0.519), sex (50% and 30% males, p = 0.440), American Society of Anesthesiologists Score (2.2, 2.4, p = 0.502), and Charlson Comorbidity Index (3, 4, p = 0.530) did not differ among the two groups. No significant differences were noted concerning preoperative CRP (15 mg/l, 43 mg/l, p = 0.228), synovial cell count (15.990/nl, 5.308/nl, p = 0.887), radiological signs of loosening (55%, 50%, p = 0.999), and intraoperative histopathology. Except a higher rate of coagulase-negative staphylococci (70%, 20%, p = 0.019) in patients with a preoperative pathogen detection, no significant differences in pathogen spectrum were identified among groups. Revision for PJI recurrence was performed in one patient with an initial preoperative pathogen detection (3.3%). Additional revisions were performed for dislocation in two and postoperative hematoma in one patient. Revision rate for both septic and aseptic causes (p = 0.999), stay in hospital (16 and 15 days, p = 0.373) and modified Harris Hip Score (60, 71, p = 0.350) did not differ between groups.

CONCLUSION

Patients with and without a preoperative pathogen detection did not show significant differences concerning baseline characteristics, clinical and functional outcomes at 2 years. An absent preoperative pathogen detection is no absolute contraindication for one-stage exchange in chronic PJI, if involving good bone quality and absence of multiple prior revisions.

Survival and Outcomes of 1.5-Stage vs 2-Stage Exchange Total Knee Arthroplasty Following Prosthetic Joint Infection

BACKGROUND

Traditional management of prosthetic joint infection following total knee arthroplasty (TKA) consists of a 2-stage approach. However, 1.5-stage exchange has seen preliminary success, whereby metal femoral and all-polyethylene tibia components are placed without intention for subsequent second stage. We sought to examine all patients who underwent a 1.5-stage exchange TKA at a single institution compared to historical 2-stage controls. We assessed the following: (1) infection-free survivorship and risk factors for reinfection; (2) 1-year surgical/medical outcomes; (3) patient-reported outcomes (ie, Knee Injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score for Joint Replacement [KOOS JR]); and (4) radiographic outcomes.

METHODS

We reviewed all patients undergoing a 1.5-stage (between 2015 and 2019) and 2-stage exchange TKA (between 2011 and 2016) at a single institution. A total of 162 knees were included (1.5-stage: 114; 2-stage: 48) with mean clinical follow-up of 2.6 years. KOOS JR scores and radiographic outcomes were evaluated at last clinical follow-up.

RESULTS

The 1.5-stage exchange TKA resulted in a 10.1% difference in infection-free survival (85.1% vs 75.0%, P = .158), compared to 2-stage exchange. Prior prosthetic joint infection was found to be an independent risk factor for reinfection (P = .030). Overall, postoperative complications were lower among 1.5-stage exchanges (8.8% vs 31.3%, P < .001). KOOS JR scores improved more from baseline among 1.5-staged (Δ24.7 vs Δ16.6, P < .001). Radiographic review did not demonstrate any progressive radiolucent lines, subsidences, or failures in either group.

CONCLUSION

A 1.5-stage exchange TKA is an effective alternative to the traditional 2-stage protocols with noninferior infection eradication and absence of radiographic complications at over 2 years of mean follow-up.

Application of structural allogenous bone graft in two-stage exchange arthroplasty for knee periprosthetic joint infection: a case control study

Background

Knee prosthetic joint infection (PJI) is a common but devastating complication after knee arthroplasty. The revision surgeries for knee PJI may become more challenging when it is associated with large bone defects. The application of structural bone allograft in knee revision surgeries with large bone defects is not a new technique. However, there is a lack of literature reporting its efficacy in PJI cases. This study aimed to investigate the outcome of structural fresh frozen allogenous bone grafts in treating patients in knee PJI with large bone defects.

Methods

We performed a retrospective cohort analysis of knee PJI cases treated with two-stage exchange arthroplasty at our institution from 2010 to 2016. 12 patients with structural allogenous bone graft reconstructions were identified as the study group. 24 patients without structural allograft reconstructions matched with the study group by age, gender, and Charlson comorbidity index were enrolled as the control group. The functional outcome of the study group was evaluated with the Knee Society Score (KSS). Treatment success was assessed according to the Delphi-based consensus definition. The infection relapse rate and implant survivorship were compared between groups.

Results

Revision knees with structural allograft presented excellent improvement in the KSS (33.1 to 75.4). There was no significant difference between infection relapse-free survival rate and prosthesis survival rate in the two groups. The 8-year prosthesis survival rate was 90.9% in the study group and 91% in the control group (p = 0.913). The 8-year infection relapse-free survival rate was 80 and 83.3% in the study group and control group, respectively (p = 0.377).

Conclusion

The structural fresh frozen allogenous bone graft provided an effective way for bone defect reconstruction in knee PJI with an accountable survival rate. Meanwhile, using structural allografts did not increase the relapse rate of infection.

Periprosthetic Knee Infection - Part 2: Treatment

Several treatment modalities are proposed for periprosthetic infections, with variable success rates. However, efficacy is related to the appropriate selection of cases for each type of treatment. Debridement with implant retention is indicated in acute infections with fixed implant, and its success depends on the type of infection, comorbidities of the host, and virulence of the etiological agent. One- or two-stage revision is required in cases in which biofilm is forming, or of implant loosening. The choice between performing the review in one or two stages depends on factors such as etiological agent identification, pathogen virulence, local and systemic host factors. Rescue procedures such as arthrodesis, amputation, resection arthroplasty or even antibiotic suppression are reserved for cases in which the infection has not been eradicated.

High revision rates following repeat septic revision after failed one-stage exchange for periprosthetic joint infection in total knee arthroplasty

AIMS

The outcome of repeat septic revision after a failed one-stage exchange for periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) in total knee arthroplasty (TKA) remains unknown. The aim of this study was to report the infection-free and all-cause revision-free survival of repeat septic revision after a failed one-stage exchange, and to determine whether the Musculoskeletal Infection Society (MSIS) stage is associated with subsequent infection-related failure.

METHODS

We retrospectively reviewed all repeat septic revision TKAs which were undertaken after a failed one-stage exchange between 2004 and 2017. A total of 33 repeat septic revisions (29 one-stage and four two-stage) met the inclusion criteria. The mean follow-up from repeat septic revision was 68.2 months (8.0 months to 16.1 years). The proportion of patients who had a subsequent infection-related failure and all-cause revision was reported and Kaplan-Meier survival for these endpoints was determined. Patients were categorized according to the MSIS staging system, and the association with subsequent infection was analyzed.

RESULTS

At the most recent follow-up, 17 repeat septic revisions (52%) had a subsequent infection-related failure and the five-year infection-free survival was 59% (95% confidence interval (CI) 39 to 74). A total of 19 underwent a subsequent all-cause revision (58%) and the five-year all-cause revision-free survival was 47% (95% CI 28 to 64). The most common indication for the first subsequent aseptic revision was loosening. The MSIS stage of the host status (p = 0.663) and limb status (p = 1.000) were not significantly associated with subsequent infection-related failure.

CONCLUSION

Repeat septic revision after a failed one-stage exchange TKA for PJI is associated with a high rate of subsequent infection-related failure and all-cause revision. Patients should be counselled appropriately to manage expectations. The host and limb status according to the MSIS staging system were not associated with subsequent infection-related failure. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2022;104-B(3):386-393.

[Strategic approach in periprosthetic joint infections]

With rising numbers of revisions of total arthroplasty procedures of the lower extremities, the annual number of cases of implant-associated infection are also increasing. The conventional two-stage replacement strategy often leads to increased morbidity and mortality of patients; however, in the literature a one-stage exchange procedure shows equally good results if the indications are strictly defined. In addition to the correct diagnostics, the patient history, the inserted implant, the state of health and when applicable the pathogens present play an important role. If, among other factors, the pathogen is uncomplicated combined with a good bone and soft tissue situation and without a large number of previous operations, a single stage replacement of the endoprosthesis may be a suitable option. Despite existing controversies in the literature, this treatment approach seems to demonstrate a reduced hospitalization, reduced costs and improved patient satisfaction with the same re-revision rate. This review article explains the strategic approach to chronic infections of endoprostheses of the lower extremities based on clinical examples and a review of the current literature.

What Is the Mid-term Survivorship of Infected Rotating-hinge Implants Treated with One-stage-exchange?

BACKGROUND

Despite the growing number of studies reporting on periprosthetic joint infection (PJI), there is little information on one-stage exchange arthroplasty for the revision of infected rotating-hinge prostheses, which can be among the most difficult PJI presentations to treat.

QUESTIONS/PURPOSES

After one-stage direct exchange revision for an infected rotating-hinge TKA prosthesis, and using a multimodal approach for infection control, we asked: (1) What is the survivorship free from repeat revision for infection and survivorship free from reoperation for any cause? (2) What is the clinical outcome, based on the Oxford Knee Score, of these patients at the latest follow-up?

METHODS

Between January 2011 and December 2017, we treated 101 patients with infected rotating-hinge knee prostheses at our hospital. All patients who underwent a one-stage exchange using another rotating-hinge implant were potentially eligible for this retrospective study. During that period, we generally used a one-stage approach when treating PJIs. Eighty-three percent (84 of 101) of patients were treated with one-stage exchange, and the remainder were treated with two-stage exchange. Of the 84 treated with one-stage exchange, eight patients died of unrelated causes and were therefore excluded, one patient declined to participate in the study, and another eight patients were lost before the minimum study follow-up of 2 years or had incomplete datasets, leaving 80% (67 of 84) for analysis in this study. The included study population consisted of 60% males (40 of 67) with a mean age of 64 ± 8 years and a mean (range) BMI of 30 ± 6 kg/m2 (21 to 40). The mean number of prior surgeries was 4 ± 2 (1 to 9) on the affected knee. Fifteen percent (10 of 67) of knees had a preoperative joint communicating sinus tract, and 66% (44 of 67) had experienced a prior PJI on the affected knee. The antimicrobial regimen was chosen based on the advice of our infectious disease consultant and individually adapted for the organism cultured. The mean follow-up duration was 6 ± 2 years. Kaplan-Meier survivorship analysis was performed using the endpoints of survivorship free from repeat revision for infection and survivorship free from all-cause revision. The functional outcome was assessed using the Oxford Knee Score (on a 12- to 60-point scale, with lower scores representing less pain and greater function), obtained by interviewing patients for this study at their most recent follow-up visit. Preoperative scores were not obtained.

RESULTS

The Kaplan-Meier analysis demonstrated an overall survivorship free from reoperation for any cause of 75% (95% CI 64% to 87%) at the mean follow-up of 6 years postoperatively. Survivorship free from any repeat operative procedure for infection was 90% (95% CI 83% to 97%) at 6 years. The mean postoperative Oxford Knee Score was 37 ± 11 points.

CONCLUSION

With an overall revision rate of about 25% at 6 years and the limited functional results based on the poor Oxford Knee Scores, patients should be counseled to have modest expectations concerning postoperative pain and function level after one-stage exchange of an infected rotating-hinge arthroplasty. Nevertheless, patients may be informed about a reasonable chance of PJI eradication and might opt for this approach as a means to try to avoid high transfemoral amputation or joint arthrodesis, which in this population often is associated with the inability to ambulate at all. Regarding the relatively high number of patients with aseptic loosening, future studies might focus on implant design of revision knee systems as well. A longer course of oral antibiotics after such procedures may also be warranted to limit the chance of reinfection but requires further study.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level IV, therapeutic study.

Experiences during Switching from Two-Stage to One-Stage Revision Arthroplasty for Chronic Total Knee Arthroplasty Infection

The objective of this study was to evaluate our preliminary results after changing our surgical strategy from 2-stage revision arthroplasty to 1-stage revision arthroplasty for patients with chronic knee periprosthetic joint infection. We conducted a prospective study of knee arthroplasty patients that had been diagnosed with chronic infection and treated using a 1-stage revision regardless of the traditional criteria applied for indication thereof. We evaluated two main variables: infection control and economic costs. The definitive diagnosis of infection of the revision was determined by using the criteria proposed by the Musculoskeletal Infection Society. The costs were calculated as average costs in USD, as described by Srivastava (2019), for 1-stage or 2-stage revisions. Eighteen patients were included in the study, and infection was controlled in 17 patients. The total economic savings for our hospital from these 18 patients amounted to USD 291,152. This clinical success has led to major changes in how our hospital approaches the treatment of chronically infected knee replacements, in addition to substantial economic advantages for the hospital.