Single-Stage Hip and Knee Exchange for Periprosthetic Joint Infection

Antiseptics' Concentration, Combination, and Exposure Time on Bacterial and Fungal Biofilm Eradication

Background

This study aims to assess the activity of solutions containing povidone-iodine (PI) and hydrogen peroxide (H2O2) alone or combined on the biofilm of microbial species in the contest of periprosthetic joint infection (PJI).

Methods

Different antiseptic solutions were tested on 2-day-old biofilms of Gram-positive and Gram-negative bacteria and fungi at 1 and 3 minutes of exposure. The efficacy of these solutions was evaluated by measuring the biofilm metabolic activity by methoxynitrosulfophenyl-tetrazolium carboxanilide (XTT) reduction assay. The anti-biofilm effect of 5% PI and 0.3% PI + 0.5% H2O2 was tested on a 5-day-old biofilm using colony-forming unit counts and an XTT reduction assay.

Results

PI and H2O2 solutions showed concentration-dependent anti-biofilm activity except for E. faecalis. PI at 5% was the most active solution against the 2-day-old biofilm of all test microorganisms. The 0.3% PI + 0.5% H₂O₂ solution had a significant effect only at 3 minutes. The 5% PI and 0.3% PI + 0.5% H₂O₂ effect was evaluated on 5-day-old biofilms. PI at 5% produced a significant reduction in metabolic activity at both 1 and 3 minutes; 0.3% PI + 0.5% H₂O₂ caused a significant activity against all Gram-positive strains after 3 minutes, with a greater metabolic activity reduction than 5% PI.

Conclusions

In the case of PJI caused by Gram-positive bacteria, 0.3% PI + 0.5% H₂O₂ could be used for wound irrigation for 3 minutes of exposure. In the case of PJI with a different etiological agent or PJI with an unknown etiology, it is advisable to use 5% PI for 1 minute of exposure.

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.

A Review of Surgical Irrigation Solutions for Infection Prevention in Orthopaedic Surgery

» Intraoperative surgical irrigation is a common practice in orthopaedic procedures, although there is no universally established standard of care due to a lack of concrete data supporting an optimal irrigation agent.» Isotonic normal saline has long been considered a safe and cost effective solution for wound irrigation as compared with other antibiotic and antiseptic irrigation solutions.» Currently, the only adjunct to saline that is formally supported by American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, and World Health Organization is povidone-iodine.» Further in vivo clinical studies are needed to identify the ideal irrigation solution that carries low cytotoxic effects while also exerting optimal antimicrobial properties.

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.

Outcomes in revision knee arthroplasty: Preventing reoperation for infection Keynote lecture - BASK annual congress 2023

Revision total knee arthroplasty (TKA) patients have a lower survival rate and lower post-surgical outcomes compared to primary TKA patients. Infection and aseptic loosening are the most common reasons for revision and re-revision TKAs, with infection accounting for nearly half of re-revision cases. To prevent infection, patient optimization addressing obesity, diabetes, malnutrition, and smoking cessation is crucial. Advancements in irrigation solutions, antibiotic-impregnated bone fillers, bacteriophage therapy, and electrochemical therapy hold promise for preventing infection. Technical strategies such as obtaining sufficient component fixation, joint line restoration, and using robot assistance may improve revision TKA outcomes. As the burden of revision TKA continues to rise, substantial efforts remain for mitigating future revision TKAs and their associated complications.

Clinical and Histological Features of Prosthetic Joint Infections May Differ in Patients With Inflammatory Arthritis and Osteoarthritis

Background: Patients with inflammatory arthritis are at increased risk of prosthetic joint infections (PJIs), but diagnosis in these patients can be challenging because active inflammatory arthritis produces elevated inflammatory markers that may mimic those seen in PJI. Purpose: In this pilot study, we sought to identify the clinical, microbiologic, and histopathologic features of culture-positive and culture-negative PJI in patients with inflammatory arthritis who underwent total hip arthroplasty (THA) or total knee arthroplasty (TKA). We also sought to obtain preliminary data to support a definitive study of optimal methods for PJI diagnosis in patients with inflammatory arthritis. Methods: We performed a retrospective analysis of TKA and THA patients treated for PJI from 2009 to 2018 at a single tertiary care orthopedic institution. Data were extracted from a longitudinally maintained hospital infection database. We reviewed hematoxylin and eosin slides of osteoarthritis and inflammatory arthritis PJI cases matched 3:1, respectively, by age, sex, and culture status. Clinical characteristics were evaluated using the Fisher exact test, χ² test, Student t test, and Mann-Whitney U test where appropriate. Results: A total of 807 PJI cases were identified (36 inflammatory arthritis and 771 osteoarthritis cases). Patients with inflammatory arthritis presented younger, had a higher Charlson Comorbidity Index, more frequently used glucocorticoids, were more likely women, and had a higher proportion of culture-negative PJI compared with osteoarthritis patients. Of the 88 inflammatory arthritis cases reviewed for histopathology, a higher proportion of culture-positive than culture-negative PJI cases had >10 polymorphonuclear leucocytes per high-power field and met Musculoskeletal Infection Society criteria but presented with less chronic inflammation. Conclusions: This retrospective prognostic study suggests that culture-negative PJI may be more frequent in patients with inflammatory arthritis than in those with osteoarthritis. Chronic infections, antibiotic use, or misdiagnosis may be contributing factors to unclear PJI diagnoses among culture-negative cases. This preliminary work supports the need for further studies to assess the differences in clinical features between culture-negative and culture-positive PJI in patients with inflammatory arthritis and the ability of biological diagnostic markers to discriminate between them in this population.

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.

Complete blood platelet and lymphocyte ratios increase diagnostic accuracy of periprosthetic joint infection following total hip arthroplasty

INTRODUCTION

Systemically, changes in serum platelet to lymphocyte ratio (PLR), platelet count to mean platelet volume ratio (PVR), neutrophil to lymphocyte ratio (NLR) and monocyte to lymphocyte (MLR) represent primary responses to early inflammation and infection. This study aimed to determine whether PLR, PVR, NLR, and MLR can be useful in diagnosing periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) in total hip arthroplasty (THA) patients.

METHODS

A total of 464 patients that underwent revision THA with calculable PLR, PVR, NLR, and MLR in 2 groups was evaluated: 1) 191 patients with a pre-operative diagnosis of PJI, and 2) 273 matched patients treated for revision THA for aseptic complications.

RESULTS

The sensitivity and specificity of PLR combined with erythrocyte sedimentation rate (ESR), C-reactive protein (CRP), synovial white blood cell count (WBC) and synovial polymorphonuclear leukocytes (PMN) (97.9%; 98.5%) is significantly higher than only ESR combined with CRP, synovial WBC and synovial PMN (94.2%; 94.5%; p < 0.01). The sensitivity and specificity of PVR combined with ESR, CRP and synovial WBC, and synovial PMN (98.4%; 98.2%) is higher than only ESR combined with CRP, synovial WBC and synovial PMN (94.2%; 94.5%; p < 0.01).

CONCLUSION

The study results demonstrate that both PLR and PVR calculated from complete blood counts when combined with serum and synovial fluid markers have increased diagnostic sensitivity and specificity in diagnosing periprosthetic joint infection in THA patients.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

III, case-control retrospective analysis.

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.

Irrigation Solutions in Total Joint Arthroplasty

INTRODUCTION

Despite advancements in the field of adult reconstruction, prosthetic joint infection (PJI) remains a common and devastating complication of total joint arthroplasty. Eradication of these infections can often prove difficult, and they remain a source of considerable morbidity and mortality. This clinical review paper will focus on some of the more commonly used irrigation solutions; povidone-iodine (PI), chlorhexidine (CHG), acetic acid (AA), hydrogen peroxide (HP), antibiotic irrigations, taurolidine, and polyhexanide-betaine (PB).

SUMMARY OF THE EVIDENCE

Significant research has been performed on the prevention of PJI, including use of intraoperative joint irrigation solutions. Several solutions have been theorized to aid in infection prevention, but no evidence-based practice guidelines in this area of orthopaedics have been established. There is a paucity of prospective randomized control trials to compare the efficacy of these joint irrigation solutions.

CONCLUSIONS

The authors present a review regarding seven major categories of commonly used intraoperative joint irrigation solutions. The current literature fails to demonstrate a clear consensus for a preferred solution and concentration for povidone-iodine, chlorhexidine, hydrogen peroxide, acetic acid, antibiotic irrigations, taurolidine, and polyhexanide-betaine. Prospective, randomized control trials directly comparing these different irrigation solutions are needed.

Cell Toxicity Study of Antiseptic Solutions Containing Povidone–Iodine and Hydrogen Peroxide

The increasing incidence of periprosthetic joint infections (PJIs) has led to a growing interest in developing strategies to prevent and treat this severe complication. The surgical site’s application of antiseptic solutions to eliminate contaminating bacteria and eradicate the bacterial biofilm has been increasing over time. Even though it has been proven that combining antimicrobials could enhance their activities and help overcome acquired microbial resistance related to the topical use of antibiotics, the toxicity of integrated solutions is not well described. This study aimed to evaluate the cytotoxicity of solutions containing povidone–iodine (PI) and hydrogen peroxide (H2O2), alone or in combination, after 1.3 and 5 min of exposure. Chondrocytes, tenocytes, and fibroblast-like synoviocytes were used for cytotoxicity analysis. Trypan blue stain (0.4% in PBS) was applied to evaluate the dead cells. All solutions tested showed a progressive increase in toxicity as exposure time increased except for PI at 0.3%, which exhibited the lowest toxicity. The combined solutions reported a reduced cellular killing at 3 and 5 min than H2O2 at equal concentrations, similar results to PI solutions.

Irrigation Solutions and Antibiotic Powders: Should I Use Them in Primary and Revision Total Joint Arthroplasty?

BACKGROUND

The prevention and treatment of periprosthetic joint infection is of utmost importance to orthopedic surgeons. Irrigation solutions have become a popular additive to the prevention and treatment armamentarium.

METHODS

This symposium summarizes the mechanism of action, basic science, and clinical research to date on the use of irrigation solutions. The four most commonly used irrigation solutions, povidone iodine, chlorhexidine, hydrogen peroxide, and acetic acid, are discussed. In addition, the role of antibiotic powers is reviewed.

RESULTS

Each solution has its risks and benefits that must be weighed by the surgeon. There is no clear irrigation solution that is superior. The role of additive antibiotic powder (vancomycin) remains controversial.

CONCLUSION

More rigorous prospective clinical trials are needed to determine the optimal irrigation solution for the prevention and treatment of periprosthetic joint infection.

High-Dose Antibiotic Cement Spacers Independently Increase the Risk of Acute Kidney Injury in Revision for Periprosthetic Joint Infection: A Prospective Randomized Controlled Clinical Trial

BACKGROUND

Standard treatment for periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) involves 2-stage exchange with placement of an antibiotic-impregnated cement spacer (ACS). Conflicting evidence exists on the role of ACS in development of acute kidney injury (AKI) after first-stage surgery. In this randomized clinical trial, we aimed to compare the incidence of AKI between the first-stage of a planned 2-stage exchange vs 1-stage exchange. This study design isolates the effect of the ACS in otherwise identical treatment groups.

METHODS

The primary outcome variable was AKI, defined as a creatinine ≥1.5 times baseline or an increase of ≥0.3 mg/dL. Risk factors for AKI were evaluated using bivariate statistical tests and multivariable logistic regression.

RESULTS

Patients who underwent the first stage of a planned 2-stage exchange were significantly more likely to develop AKI compared with the 1-stage exchange group (15 [22.7%] vs 4 [6.6%], P = .011). On multivariable regression analysis, ACS placement (odds ratio 7.48, 95% confidence limit 1.77-31.56) and chronic kidney disease (odds ratio 3.84, 95% confidence limit 1.22-12.08) were independent risk factors for AKI.

CONCLUSION

Our study provides evidence that high-dose antibiotic cement spacers for treatment of PJI are an independent risk factor for AKI. Therefore, efforts to minimize nephrotoxicity should be employed in revision for PJI when possible.

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.

On the value and limitations of incorporating a "clean phase" into the surgical treatment of prosthetic joint infections - an illustrative cadaveric study using fluorescent powder

Purposes

A septic revision of an artificial joint is routinely split up in a so-called dirty phase and a clean phase. The measures taken to initiate the start of the clean phase vary significantly between musculoskeletal infection centers. We performed simulations of one-step exchanges of infected THAs and sought to 1) determine the effect of different clean phase protocols on the sterile field, and 2) determine whether or not it is possible to re-implant the new prosthesis completely clean.

Methods

Nine fresh frozen cadaveric hips were used and primary THA was undertaken via a direct anterior approach. Before implantation of the components varying amounts of fluorescent powder (GloGerm) were deposited, simulating bacterial infection. Second, a one-step exchange was performed via a posterolateral approach. After implant removal, debridement, and lavage, randomization determined which clean phase protocol was followed, i.e. no, some or full additional measures. Finally, the new prosthesis was re-implanted.

In order to determine the effect of different clean phase protocols on contamination of the sterile field standardized UV light-enhanced photographs were obtained of 1) the gloves, 2) the instrument table, 3) the drapes, and 4) the wound and these were ranked on cleanliness by a blinded panel of hip surgeons.

In order to determine whether or not it is possible to re-implant the prosthesis completely clean, the implant was taken out again at the end of the one-step exchange and inspected for contamination under UV light.

Results

The gloves, the instrument table, the drapes and the wound were significantly cleaner after a clean phase using full additional measures compared to partial or no additional measures (p < 0.000). Partial measures were able to reduce some of the contamination of the gloves and the wound, but had no effect on the drapes and the instrument table. All re-implanted implants were contaminated with some amount of fluorescent powder at the end of the one-step exchange.

Conclusions

We advise to incorporate a clean phase with full additional measures into the surgical treatment of prosthetic joint infections, as partial measures seem to be a poor compromise.

Level of evidence

Not applicable (cadaveric study).

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s40634-022-00467-x.

Results of 'two-in-one' single-stage revision total knee arthroplasty for infection with associated bone loss : prospective five-year follow up

Aims

Periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) occurs in approximately 1% to 2% of total knee arthroplasties (TKA) presenting multiple challenges, such as difficulty in diagnosis, technical complexity, and financial costs. Two-stage exchange is the gold standard for treating PJI but emerging evidence suggests 'two-in-one' single-stage revision as an alternative, delivering comparable outcomes, reduced morbidity, and cost-effectiveness. This study investigates five-year results of modified single-stage revision for treatment of PJI following TKA with bone loss.

Methods

Patients were identified from prospective data on all TKA patients with PJI following the primary procedure. Inclusion criteria were: revision for PJI with bone loss requiring reconstruction, and a minimum five years’ follow-up. Patients were followed up for recurrent infection and assessment of function. Tools used to assess function were Oxford Knee Score (OKS) and American Knee Society Score (AKSS).

Results

A total of 24 patients were included with a mean age of 72.7 years (SD 7.6), mean BMI of 33.3 kg/m² (SD 5.7), and median ASA grade of 2 (interquartile range 2 to 4). Mean time from primary to revision was 3.0 years (10 months to 8.3 years). At revision, six patients had discharging sinus and three patients had negative cultures from tissue samples or aspirates. Two patients developed recurrence of infection: one was treated successfully with antibiotic suppression and one underwent debridement, antibiotics, and implant retention. Mean AKSS scores at two years showed significant improvement from baseline (27.1 (SD 10.2 ) vs 80.3 (SD 14.8); p < 0.001). There was no significant change in mean AKSS scores between two and five years (80.3 (SD 14.8 ) vs 74.1 (SD 19.8); p = 0.109). Five-year OKS scores were not significantly different compared to two-year scores (36.17 (SD 3.7) vs 33.0 (SD 8.5); p = 0.081).

Conclusion

‘Two-in-one’ single-stage revision is effective for treating PJI following TKA with bone loss, providing patients with sustained improvements in outcomes and infection clearance up to five years post-procedure.

Cite this article: Bone Jt Open 2022;3(2):107–113.

Use of Adjunct Antiseptic Agents in Periprosthetic Joint Infections

Periprosthetic joint infection is a leading cause for failure of contemporary total hip arthroplasty and total knee arthroplasty projected to nearly double in the next decade and reach an economic burden of $1.85 billion in the United Sates by 2030. Although multiple treatments for periprosthetic joint infection have been described, a thorough débridement and joint lavage to decrease bacterial bioburden and to remove biofilm remains a critical component of treatment. Various adjunct antiseptic agents such as chlorhexidine, povidone-iodine, hydrogen peroxide, acetic acid, and chlorine compounds are currently in off-label use in this capacity. Each antiseptic agent, however, has a distinct mechanism of action and targets different organisms, and some combinations of agents may lead to tissue toxicity. In this review, currently available adjunct antiseptic washes will be described in detail based on their mechanism of action and the evidence for their use will be reviewed. Furthermore, this review puts forward an evidence-based treatment algorithm based on the specific causative organism.

Resection of the proximal femur during one-stage revision for infected hip arthroplasty : risk factors and effectiveness

AIMS

One-stage revision hip arthroplasty for periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) has several advantages; however, resection of the proximal femur might be necessary to achieve higher success rates. We investigated the risk factors for resection and re-revisions, and assessed complications and subsequent re-revisions.

METHODS

In this single-centre, case-control study, 57 patients who underwent one-stage revision arthroplasty for PJI of the hip and required resection of the proximal femur between 2009 and 2018 were identified. The control group consisted of 57 patients undergoing one-stage revision without bony resection. Logistic regression analysis was performed to identify any correlation with resection and the risk factors for re-revisions. Rates of all-causes re-revision, reinfection, and instability were compared between groups.

RESULTS

Patients who required resection of the proximal femur were found to have a higher all-cause re-revision rate (29.8% vs 10.5%; p = 0.018), largely due to reinfection (15.8% vs 0%; p = 0.003), and dislocation (8.8% vs 10.5%; p = 0.762), and showed higher rate of in-hospital wound haematoma requiring aspiration or evacuation (p = 0.013), and wound revision (p = 0.008). The use of of dual mobility components/constrained liner in the resection group was higher than that of controls (94.7% vs 36.8%; p < 0.001). The presence and removal of additional metal hardware (odds ratio (OR) = 7.2), a sinus tract (OR 4), ten years' time interval between primary implantation and index infection (OR 3.3), and previous hip revision (OR 1.4) increased the risk of proximal femoral resection. A sinus tract (OR 9.2) and postoperative dislocation (OR 281.4) were associated with increased risk of subsequent re-revisions.

CONCLUSION

Proximal femoral resection during one-stage revision hip arthroplasty for PJI may be required to reduce the risk of of recurrent or further infection. Patients with additional metalware needing removal or transcortical sinus tracts and chronic osteomyelitis are particularly at higher risk of needing proximal femoral excision. However, radical resection is associated with higher surgical complications and increased re-revision rates. The use of constrained acetabular liners and dual mobility components maintained an acceptable dislocation rate. These results, including identified risk factors, may aid in preoperative planning, patient consultation and consent, and intraoperative decision-making. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2021;103-B(11):1678-1685.

Diagnosis and management of infected arthroplasty

Periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) is one of the most dreadful complications after THA and TKA. Though prevention is of utmost importance in PJI management, the last decade has seen many remarkable developments in PJI diagnosis, including the introduction of several standardized PJI diagnostic definitions and biomarkers. Depending on the specific clinical situation, a myriad of treatment options for PJI are offered. Our review aims to summarize the pertinent information on PJI diagnosis and synthesize literature on the different treatment methods currently used in clinical practice. One of the most accepted PJI diagnostic definitions was developed by the Musculoskeletal Infection Society (MSIS) in 2011, later modified in the 2013 International Consensus Meeting (ICM). After promising results from studies, alpha-defensins and D-dimer were recently incorporated into the 2018 ICM PJI definition. The management choices for PJI include irrigation and debridement (DAIR), one-stage exchange arthroplasty, or two-stage exchange arthroplasty, to name a few. While two-stage revision has traditionally been the treatment of choice in the United States, there has been a growing body of evidence framing one-stage revision as a comparable choice. One-stage revision should be offered in patients meeting strict selection criteria: no sinus tract, proper soft tissue available for wound closure, appropriate bone stock, a favorable identifiable organism with encouraging antibiotic sensitivities (for cement and oral suppression later), and robust immunological status. DAIR can be considered in case of early infections with sensitive infecting organisms. Patients with multiple unsuccessful revisions or those who refuse further surgical intervention for PJI can be offered antibiotic suppression. If nothing seems to work, salvage procedures (resection arthroplasty and arthrodesis) are available as a last resort. Further research is encouraged to improve on diagnostic capabilities and develop evidence on the best treatment of choice for PJI.

What Is the Optimal Irrigation Solution in the Management of Periprosthetic Hip and Knee Joint Infections?

BACKGROUND

Thorough irrigation and debridement using an irrigation solution is a well-established treatment for both acute and chronic periprosthetic joint infections (PJIs). In the absence of concrete data, identifying the optimal irrigation agent and protocol remains challenging.

METHODS

A thorough review of the current literature on the various forms of irrigations and their additives was performed to evaluate the efficacy and limitations of each solution as pertaining to pathogen eradication in the treatment of PJI. As there is an overall paucity of high-quality literature comparing irrigation additives to each other and to any control, no meta-analyses could be performed. The literature was therefore summarized in this review article to give readers concise information on current irrigation options and their known risks and benefits.

RESULTS

Antiseptic solutions include povidone-iodine, chlorhexidine gluconate, acetic acid, hydrogen peroxide, sodium hypochlorite, hypochlorous acid, and preformulated commercially available combination solutions. The current literature suggests that intraoperative use of antiseptic irrigants may play a role in treating PJI, but definitive clinical studies comparing antiseptic to no antiseptic irrigation are lacking. Furthermore, no clinical head-to-head comparisons of different antiseptic irrigants have identified an optimal irrigation solution.

CONCLUSION

Further high-quality studies on the optimal irrigation additive and protocol for the management of PJI are warranted to guide future evidence-based decisions.

Comparison of patient reported outcome measures after single versus two-stage revision for chronic infection of total hip arthroplasty: a retrospective propensity score matched cohort study

INTRODUCTION

Two-stage revision is the current gold standard treatment for infected total hip arthroplasties (THA) with good clinical outcomes. Single-stage revision THA offers the advantage of only a single surgical intervention, potentially leading to improved functional outcomes. This study aimed to compare the differences in patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) and complications between single and two-stage revision THA for chronic periprosthetic joint infection (PJI).

METHODS

A total of 159 consecutive revision THA patients for chronic PJI with complete pre-and post-operative patient-reported outcome measures (PROM) was investigated. A total of 46 patients with single-stage revision THA was matched to 92 patients following two-stage revision THA using propensity score matching, yielding a total of 136 propensity score-matched patients for analysis.

RESULTS

Single and two-stage revision THA improved PROM scores post-operatively, with significantly higher PROMs for single-stage revision THA (HOOS-PS: 50.7 vs 46.4, p = 0.04; Physical SF 10A: 42.1 vs 36.6, p < 0.001; PROMIS SF Physical: 41.4 vs 37.4, p < 0.001; PROMIS SF Mental: 52.8 vs 47.6, p < 0.001). There was no significant difference between both cohorts for reinfection rates (p = 0.81) and 90-day mortality rates (p = 1.0).

CONCLUSION

This study found a demonstrable functional benefit of single-stage revision compared to two-stage revision for THA with chronic periprosthetic joint infection, suggesting that single-stage revision THA may provide an effective alternative to two-stage revision in selected patients with chronic PJI.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level III, case-control retrospective analysis.

Hydrogen Peroxide: Its Use in an Extensive Acute Wound to Promote Wound Granulation and Infection Control - Is it Better Than Normal Saline?

Background: Hydrogen peroxide (H₂O₂) is used as a topical antiseptic in contaminated wounds caused by road traffic accidents. It kills bacteria by producing oxidation through local, nascent, free oxygen radicals. It also removes dirt from the wound due to its frothing action. H₂O₂ is synthesized by various cells as an active biochemical agent that affects cell biological behavior through complex chemical reactions. H₂O₂ has also been used as a wound cleaning agent, removing debris, preventing infection, and causing hemostasis due to its exothermic reaction with blood. Despite its widespread use, there is scanty literature on its use to promote granulation tissue formation. Objective: In the orthopaedics literature, studies on H₂O₂ use are very limited and its potential is underestimated. In the present study, we would like to report our protocol of use of H₂O₂ for its tremendous potential for stimulating granulation and early wound healing. Material and Methods: A total of 53 patients with large acute extensive lower limb contaminated wounds reported to the emergency department have been included with and without lower limb fracture. In group A (43 patients) wound management was done using 7% H₂O₂ and group B (10 patients) was treated by only saline dressing as a control group. Results: In the present study, daily dressing by 7% H₂O₂ solution and provide solution gives excellent results compared to the Saline group. Granulation tissue appeared much earlier with a mean SD 6.3 ± 6.8 days in the hydrogen peroxide group as compared to the Saline group where granulation tissue appeared in 9.3 ± 8.4 days. Conclusion: Spontaneous wound healing is a controlled balance between destructive and healing processes. It is mandatory to remove damaged tissue to promote healing by secondary intention and minimize infection. The dynamic effect of H₂O₂ promotes faster healing, stimulates granulation, and minimizes infection by oxidative stress.

Pursuit of the ideal antiseptic irrigation solution in the management of periprosthetic joint infections

Irrigation and debridement in the treatment of periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) serve an integral role in the eradication of bacterial burden and subsequent re-infection rates. Identifying the optimal irrigation agent, however, remains challenging, as there is limited data on superiority. Direct comparison of different irrigation solutions remains difficult because of variability in treatment protocols. While basic science studies assist in the selection of irrigation fluids, in vitro results do not directly translate into clinical significance once implemented in vivo. Dilute povidone iodine, hydrogen peroxide, chlorhexidine gluconate, acetic acid, sodium hypochlorite, hypochlorous acid, and preformed combination solutions all have potential against a broad spectrum of PJI pathogens with their own unique advantages and disadvantages. Future clinical studies are needed to identify ideal irrigation solutions with optimal bactericidal properties and low cytotoxicity for PJI treatment.

Outcome of Irrigation and Debridement With Topical Antibiotics Delivery for the Management of Periprosthetic Joint Infection Occurring Within 3 Months Since the Primary Total Joint Arthroplasty

BACKGROUND

Irrigation and debridement with modular component exchange is appealing for surgeons to treat early-stage periprosthetic joint infection (PJI). However, the indication, perioperative protocol, and success rate remain controversial. This study is the first one to present results of debridement, antibiotics, and implant retention (DAIR) with integrated MIT (modular component exchange, povidone-iodine and topical antibiotics delivery) protocol for treating PJI occurring within 3 months since the primary total joint arthroplasty.

METHODS

We retrospectively analyzed patients who received DAIR with MIT protocol in our department between January 2011 and May 2018. Topical antibiotics were delivered in all cases. Topical antibiotics infusion was applied for those infected with multidrug-resistant bacteria, fungus, polymicrobial infection, and culture negative one. Failure was defined as additional surgical intervention for infection after DAIR; persistent sinus tract, drainage or excessive joint pain; need for suppressive antibiotics therapy due to the infection; infection relapse with the same pathogen; reinfection with different microorganism; and infection-related death.

RESULTS

A total of 73 patients with a mean age of 63.30 ± 10.97 years were included in this study, including 43 men and 30 women. There are 41 knees and 32 hips. Thirty patients had sinus tract. With a mean follow-up of 63.79 ± 18.57 months, there were 9 failures in total with an overall success rate of 87.67%. The success rate was 88.57% and 86.84% for those receiving topical antibiotics infusion postoperatively and those without.

CONCLUSIONS

DAIR with a standard MIT protocol is a viable and safe option for PJI occurring within 3 months since the primary total joint arthroplasty.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level 4, therapeutic study.

Origin and Use of Hydrogen Peroxide in Neurosurgery

Hydrogen peroxide (H2O2) is a chemical with a wide range of applications. This includes its use in the medical field, in which its use has been ubiquitous but is most useful as an antiseptic and in achieving hemostasis. Neurosurgeons have been using H2O2 for well over a century, primarily for its hemostatic and antiseptic effects. This is in spite of the fact that the actual effectiveness of H2O2 as an antiseptic is questionable, and its use, in general, may be more dangerous than it appears. We review the application of H2O2 in medicine generally and, more specifically, in neurosurgery. This review outlines the reasoning behind the use of H2O2 as an antiseptic and details why it may not be as effective as one might think. We also detail its use as a hemostatic agent in neurosurgery, reviewing a number of techniques in which it has been useful in this role. Finally, we review the documented cases of complications associated with the use of H2O2 in neurosurgery. Ultimately, we conclude that the use of H2O2 in neurosurgery be reconsidered because of its lack of effectiveness as an antiseptic and potentially fatal complications.

Results at 10-24 years after single-stage revision arthroplasty of infected total hip arthroplasty in patients under 45 years of age

INTRODUCTION

The management of periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) of the hip is a challenging procedure. One-stage exchange is carried out in specialist centres with comparable infection free survival rates. However, there is a paucity of long-term results of this approach in young patients.

METHODS

All patients undergoing one-stage exchange due to PJI with a known causative organism ⩽45 years of age with a minimum of 10-year follow-up (mean 15 years; range 10-24 years) were enrolled in this retrospective study. Patients older than 45 years of age or patients with a two-stage procedure were excluded from the study. The primary outcome measure was failure rate with special focus on reinfection at latest follow-up. Failure was defined as revision surgery for infection. Furthermore, functional outcome using the Harris Hip Score was determined initially and at latest follow-up. 26 patients fulfilled the inclusion criteria and were available for final follow-up.

RESULTS

The study cohort consists of 16 male and 10 female patients with a mean age of 36.8 years (range 20-45 years) and a mean BMI of 29.8 kg/m2 (range 20.7-40.6 kg/m2). Prior to the single-stage procedure, the patients underwent an average of 3.1 previous surgical interventions (range 1-9). The mean hospital stay after septic revision was 19.7 days (11-33 days). Most infections were caused by Staphylococcus epidermidis (n = 8, 30.8%), followed by Staph. aureus (n = 7, 26.9%) and Propionibacterium acnes (n = 6, 23.1%). At latest follow-up, the overall survival rate was 76.9 %, while infection control could be achieved in 96.2%. At final examination, the mean Harris Hip Score improved from 46.2 to 78.9 (range 18.0-99; SD, 22.6).

CONCLUSIONS

Single-stage revision surgery for the management of PJI in patients ⩽45 years is a successful treatment option with high infection control, even after long-term follow-up.

High rate of infection eradication following cementless one-stage revision hip arthroplasty with an antibacterial hydrogel coating

PURPOSE

We conducted a retrospective study to evaluate the outcomes of one-stage revision total hip arthroplasty (THA) following periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) in terms of eradication of the infection, improvement of pain and joint function. We hypothesized that this treatment strategy could lead to satisfying results in selected patients after preoperative microorganism isolation.

METHODS

Ten patients underwent cementless one-stage revision hip arthroplasty with antibacterial hydrogel coating for the treatment of an infected THA. Inclusion criteria were: the presence of a known organism with known sensitivity, patients non-immunocompromised with healthy soft tissues with minimal or moderate bone loss. Mean age at surgery was 69.4 years. Assessment included objective examination, Harris hip score, visual analog scale pain score, standard X-rays.

RESULTS

At a mean follow-up of 3.1 years (range, 2-5 years), none of the patients had clinical or radiographic signs suggesting recurrent infection. Follow-up examination showed significant improvement of all variables compared to pre-operative values (p < 0.05). Radiographs did not show progressive radiolucent lines or change in the position of the implant.

CONCLUSIONS

One-stage revision THA with antibacterial hydrogel coated implants represents a safe and effective procedure providing infection eradication and satisfying subjective functional outcomes in selected patients.

Treatment options in PJI - is two-stage still gold standard?

Total knee arthroplasty (TKA) is a successful treatment for osteoarthritis with good clinical outcomes 1,2. Periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) in TKA has a low incidence between 0.5 and 3% but it is nevertheless one of the most dreadful complications 3-6. Two-staged revisions are considered to be the gold standard for revision in chronic PJI with infection eradication rates of over 90% 7. Recently, similar infection eradication rates after one-staged revision arthroplasty have been reported 8-10, raising the question whether the two-staged approach can still be considered the gold standard. We therefore performed a literature review to analyse the correlation of one-staged and two-staged TKA revisions with recurrent infection rates and functional outcomes. Studies concerning PJI treated by one- or two-staged revision published between 2000 and 2020 were retrieved by searching the databases PubMed/Medline and the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews. 29 studies were included in this qualitative synthesis. Mean follow-up was at 4.9 ± 2.6 years. The mean infection eradication rate after one-staged revision vs. two-staged revision in TKA was 87 ± 8.8% vs. 83 ± 11.7%. The functional outcome measured by the mean Knee Society Score (KSS) of one-staged revision vs. two-staged revision in TKA was 80 ± 5.9 vs. 80 ± 3.9 points. One-staged revision arthroplasty in TKA appears to have similar infection eradication rates and functional outcomes compared to two-staged revision arthroplasty. However, these results should be interpreted with caution, since selection bias may have played a significant role. Several criteria to guide the surgeon in selecting the appropriate procedure have been described, but the current recommendations are based on poor evidence as randomized controlled trials are lacking 11,12. Two-staged revision remains a successful treatment option which is rightly the gold standard. However, there is a variety of cases in which one-staged revision is a viable alternative, where similar success rates and functional outcome can be expected 7,13.

A Low Percentage of Patients Satisfy Typical Indications for Single-stage Exchange Arthroplasty for Chronic Periprosthetic Joint Infection

BACKGROUND

Periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) is a leading cause of revision arthroplasty. Considerable controversy still exists whether single- or two-stage exchange is the better approach for patients with chronic PJI. Historically, single-stage exchange arthroplasty was thought to have an unacceptably high risk of reinfection compared with two-stage exchange but recent studies have demonstrated that this may not be the case. To be considered for single-stage exchange, patients should meet certain criteria including a preoperatively identified nonvirulent pathogen in an immunocompetent host with an uncompromised soft tissue envelope. It is unclear what proportion of patients with chronic PJI actually meet these criteria. Additionally, patients who meet the criteria for single-stage exchange are selected because, in principle, they may be more likely to be able to overcome the infection, but it is unknown what the reinfection risk is in patients undergoing two-stage exchange who might have met selection criteria for single-stage exchange.

QUESTIONS/PURPOSES

(1) What percentage of patients with chronic PJI treated at our institution met the International Consensus Meeting criteria for single-stage exchange arthroplasty? (2) Is the risk of persistent or recurrent infection lower for patients treated with two-stage exchange who met International Consensus Meeting criteria for single-stage exchange than it is among those who did not meet those inclusion criteria?

METHODS

Between 2012 and 2016, one referral center treated 120 patients with chronic PJI as determined by Musculoskeletal Infection Society (MSIS) criteria. During this time, we used single-stage exchange only rarely in patients with chronic PJI (3%; four of 120), and only in oncologic patients with mega-prosthesis implants; 7% (eight of 120) underwent other procedures (resection arthroplasty or arthrodesis). Of the remaining 108, 16% (17) were lost to follow-up; the remaining 91 were evaluated in this retrospective study. To answer our first question, we applied the International Consensus Meeting indications for single-stage exchange, which were a known nonvirulent preoperative organism, an immunocompetent host, and a healthy soft-tissue envelope without a sinus tract; we then calculated the percentage of patients who would have met those criteria. To answer our second question, we compared those who would and would not have met those criteria in terms of the proportion who were determined to be infection-free at 2 years using the MSIS criteria.

RESULTS

Only 19% (20 of 108) of patients met the International Consensus Meeting criteria for single-stage exchange. With the numbers available, there was no difference between those who met and did not meet those criteria in terms of the proportion of patients who had persistent or recurrent infection 2 years after treatment (three of 15 versus 32% [24 of 76]; p = 0.38).

CONCLUSIONS

We found that only a small proportion of patients who presented with chronic PJI to a referral center would have been suitable for single-stage direct exchange; with the numbers available, we found no difference in the reinfection risk after two-stage revision in those patients compared with those who would not have met those criteria. Consequently, it is possible that a small proportion of patients may benefit from single-stage exchange, but our small sample size may have missed important differences in reinfection risk, and so our findings on that question must be considered preliminary. Larger studies randomizing patients who meet single-stage criteria to either single- or two-stage exchange will better elucidate the true reinfection risk in this patient population.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level III, therapeutic study.

Treatment and Outcome of Periprosthetic Joint Infection in Unicompartmental Knee Arthroplasty

BACKGROUND

Periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) after unicompartmental knee arthroplasty (UKA) is a devastating but poorly understood complication, with a paucity of published data regarding treatment and outcomes. This study analyzes the largest cohort of UKA PJIs to date comparing treatment outcome, septic and aseptic reoperation rates, and risk factors for treatment failure.

METHODS

Twenty-one UKAs in 21 patients treated for PJI, as defined by Musculoskeletal Infection Society criteria, were retrospectively reviewed. Minimum and mean follow-up was 1 and 3.5 years, respectively. Fourteen (67%) patients had acute postoperative PJIs. Surgical treatment included 16 debridement, antibiotics, and implant retentions (DAIRs) (76%), 4 two-stage revisions (19%), and 1 one-stage revision (5%). Twenty (95%) PJIs were culture positive with Staphylococcus species identified in 15 cases (71%).

RESULTS

Survivorship free from reoperation for infection at 1 year was 76% (95% confidence interval, 58%-93%). Overall survival from all-cause reoperation was 57% (95% confidence interval, 27%-87%) at 5 years. Two additional patients (10%) underwent aseptic revision total knee arthroplasty for lateral compartment degeneration 1 year after DAIR and tibial aseptic loosening 2.5 years after 2-stage revision. All patients who initially failed PJI UKA treatment presented with acute postoperative PJIs (5 of 14; 36%).

CONCLUSION

Survivorship free from persistent PJI at 1 year is low at 76% but is consistent with similar reports of DAIRs for total knee arthroplasties. Furthermore, there is low survivorship free from all-cause reoperation of 71% and 57% at 2 and 5 years, respectively. Surgeons should be aware of these poorer outcomes and consider treating UKA PJI early and aggressively.

The Role of Poly(Methyl Methacrylate) in Management of Bone Loss and Infection in Revision Total Knee Arthroplasty: A Review

Poly(methyl methacrylate) (PMMA) is widely used in joint arthroplasty to secure an implant to the host bone. Complications including fracture, bone loss and infection might cause failure of total knee arthroplasty (TKA), resulting in the need for revision total knee arthroplasty (rTKA). The goals of this paper are: (1) to identify the most common complications, outside of sepsis, arising from the application of PMMA following rTKA, (2) to discuss the current applications and drawbacks of employing PMMA in managing bone loss, (3) to review the role of PMMA in addressing bone infection following complications in rTKA. Papers published between 1970 to 2018 have been considered through searching in Springer, Google Scholar, IEEE Xplore, Engineering village, PubMed and weblinks. This review considers the use of PMMA as both a bone void filler and as a spacer material in two-stage revision. To manage bone loss, PMMA is widely used to fill peripheral bone defects whose depth is less than 5 mm and covers less than 50% of the bone surface. Treatment of bone infections with PMMA is mainly for two-stage rTKA where antibiotic-loaded PMMA is inserted as a spacer. This review also shows that using antibiotic-loaded PMMA might cause complications such as toxicity to surrounding tissue, incomplete antibiotic agent release from the PMMA, roughness and bacterial colonization on the surface of PMMA. Although PMMA is the only commercial bone cement used in rTKA, there are concerns associated with using PMMA following rTKA. More research and clinical studies are needed to address these complications.

Primary Total Knee Arthroplasty Implants as Functional Prosthetic Spacers for Definitive Management of Periprosthetic Joint Infection: A Multicenter Study

BACKGROUND

There are limited data on the utility of a standard primary total knee arthroplasty (TKA) femoral component with an all polyethylene tibia as a functional prosthetic spacer in place of a conventional all cement spacer for the management of periprosthetic joint infection (PJI). The aim of this multicenter study was to retrospectively review (1) ultimate treatment success; (2) reimplantation rates; (3) reoperation rates; and (4) change in knee range of motion in patients managed with functional prosthetic spacers following TKA PJI.

METHODS

A retrospective review was performed for patients at 2 tertiary care centers who underwent a functional prosthetic spacer implantation as part of a functional single-stage (n = 57) or all cement spacer conventional two-stage (n = 137) revision arthroplasty protocol over a 5-year period. Outcomes including reinfection, reimplantation, and reoperation rates, success rate as defined by the Delphi criteria, and final range of motion were compared between the 2 cohorts at a minimum of 2-year follow-up.

RESULTS

There was no significant difference in reinfection (14.0 vs 24.1%), reoperation (19.3 vs 27.7%), or success rates (78.9 vs 70.8%; P > .05 for all) between the one-stage and two-stage revision TKA cohorts. Mean final total arc of motion was also similar between the 2 groups (105.8 vs 101.8 degrees, respectively).

CONCLUSION

Functional prosthetic spacers offer the advantage of a single procedure with decreased overall hospitalization and improved cost-effectiveness with analogous success rates (78.9%) compared with two-stage exchange (70.8%) at mid-term follow-up. Although long-term data are required to determine its longevity and efficacy, the outcomes in this study are encouraging.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

3.

The influence of a calcium sulphate bone void filler on the third-body damage and polyethylene wear of total knee arthroplasty

OBJECTIVES

Bone void fillers are increasingly being used for dead space management in arthroplasty revision surgery. The aim of this study was to investigate the influence of calcium sulphate bone void filler (CS-BVF) on the damage and wear of total knee arthroplasty using experimental wear simulation.

METHODS

A total of 18 fixed-bearing U2 total knee arthroplasty system implants (United Orthopedic Corp., Hsinchu, Taiwan) were used. Implants challenged with CS-BVF were compared with new implants (negative controls) and those intentionally scratched with a diamond stylus (positive controls) representative of severe surface damage (n = 6 for each experimental group). Three million cycles (MC) of experimental simulation were carried out to simulate a walking gait cycle. Wear of the ultra-high-molecular-weight polyethylene (UHMWPE) tibial inserts was measured gravimetrically, and damage to articulating surfaces was assessed using profilometry.

RESULTS

There was no significant difference (p  >  0.05) between the wear rate of implants challenged with CS-BVF (3.3 mm3/MC (95% confidence interval (CI) 1.8 to 4.8)) and the wear rate of those not challenged (2.8 mm3/MC (95% CI 1.3 to 4.3)). However, scratching the cobalt-chrome (CoCr) significantly (p < 0.001) increased the wear rate (20.6 mm3/MC (95% CI 15.5 to 25.7)). The mean surface roughness of implants challenged with CS-BVF was equivalent to negative controls both after damage simulation (p = 0.98) and at the conclusion of the study (p = 0.28).

CONCLUSION

When used close to articulating surfaces, a low-hardness, high-purity CS-BVF had no influence on wear. When trapped between the articulating surfaces of a total knee arthroplasty, CS-BVF did not scratch the surface of CoCr femoral components, nor did it increase the wear of UHMWPE tibial inserts compared with undamaged negative controls.Cite this article: R. M. Cowie, S. S. Aiken, J. J. Cooper, L. M. Jennings. The influence of a calcium sulphate bone void filler on the third-body damage and polyethylene wear of total knee arthroplasty. Bone Joint Res 2019;8:65-72. DOI: 10.1302/2046-3758.82.BJR-2018-0146.R1.

Usefulness of Culturing the Periprosthetic Membrane or Neosynovium for the Diagnosis of Infection During Hip and Knee Revision Arthroplasty

INTRODUCTION

Identification of microorganisms is critical for correct management of an infected arthroplasty. Our hypothesis is that the culture yield depends on the location around the prosthesis from which samples are obtained.

METHODS

This prospective study included 298 revisions of the hip (123) and knee (175). We compared the yield of the intraoperative samples obtained, which included synovial fluid (two), neosynovium (two), and periprosthetic membrane (two).

RESULTS

Cultures were positive in 28 cases, in which 15 had the same diagnosis considering either the neosynovium or the membrane, and there were 3 cases in which the infection could have been diagnosed only by considering the combination of both. In all, there were 8 cases in which the infection might have been misdiagnosed unless considering a combination of both solid tissue samples (P = 0.004).

CONCLUSIONS

The yields of the periprosthetic membrane and neosynovium do not differ significantly, and we recommend considering a combination of both.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Diagnostic Level II.

Factors Associated with Choice and Success of One- Versus Two-Stage Revision Arthroplasty for Infected Hip and Knee Prostheses

BACKGROUND

Prosthetic joint infections (PJI) of hip and knee arthroplasties are becoming increasingly common with an aging population and an increasing demand for these procedures. Despite attempts at standardization, medical and surgical approaches vary widely among practitioners.

QUESTIONS/PURPOSES

We first sought to determine if there were specific factors associated with choice of one- versus two-stage revision. Then we investigated whether the type of revision approach influenced clinical treatment success. Finally, among two-stage revisions, we assessed if an antibiotic holiday prior to the second procedure affected clinical treatment success.

METHODS

We retrospectively reviewed patients who had revision surgery for infection of a hip or knee arthroplasty between January 1, 2000, and December 31, 2013, at the Sunnybrook Health Sciences Centre and the Holland Orthopedic and Arthritic Centre. PJI cases were identified using the Ontario Joint Replacement Registry. Infection was defined by gross intraoperative evidence of infection, positive intraoperative culture(s), and/or sinus tract prior to operation. The primary outcome was treatment failure at 1 year after revision surgery based on requirement for further surgery, ongoing infection, and/or continuous suppressive antibiotics.

RESULTS

Of 110 eligible patients identified, 35 patients had a one-stage and 75 patients had a two-stage revision. Choice of a one-stage approach was most influenced by particular surgeon preference and was more likely for hip revision versus knee revision (OR 3.39 (95%CI 1.85-6.23). There was no statistical difference in clinical treatment success rate between one-stage (33/35; 94.2% success) and two-stage revision (63/75; 84%; p = 0.13). Enterococcus spp. (21 versus 3%; p = 0.027) and Peptostreptococcus spp. (14 versus 1%; p = 0.042) were more common among clinical treatment failures than successes, with a trend towards the same for Staphylococcus aureus (29 versus 9%; p = 0.06). Additionally, treatment success was not influenced by whether the patient had an antibiotic holiday with a two-stage revision.

CONCLUSION

Our findings confirm the uncertainty of surgical strategy for treatment of PJI in hip and knee arthroplasty. Superiority of one- versus two-stage revision and the value of antibiotic-free periods prior to definitive revision remain unclear. Large prospective studies or randomized controlled trials are needed to inform best practice for treatment of these complex clinical problems.

One-Stage Exchange Arthroplasty: A Surgical Technique Update

BACKGROUND

Standard surgical treatment for a periprosthetic knee infection has been based on a staged surgical technique, in order to assure infection eradication prior to implantation of a new prosthesis.

METHODS

In this article, we discuss our surgical technique in undertaking a single-stage exchange of a chronic knee periprosthetic infection.

RESULTS

This technique, which is based on the fundamental principles of controlling infection, preventing recurrence, and restoring function, has been shown to deliver high success rates.

CONCLUSION

As demonstrated, when undertaken under appropriate circumstances, a single-stage exchange combined with local and systemic antibiotic delivery can result in infection eradication comparable to a 2-staged exchange.

Poor Outcomes of Irrigation and Debridement in Acute Periprosthetic Joint Infection With Antibiotic-Impregnated Calcium Sulfate Beads

BACKGROUND

One proposed strategy to increase the success of irrigation and debridement with implant retention for the treatment of acute periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) is the use of dissolvable antibiotic-impregnated calcium sulfate beads to provide a local depot of antibiotics. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the outcome of such an approach.

METHODS

Thirty-two patients with acute hematogenous (18 patients; 1 bilateral) or acute postoperative (14 patients) PJIs who underwent irrigation and debridement with implant retention and addition of antibiotic-impregnated calcium sulfate beads were retrospectively reviewed. PJI followed 27 total knee arthroplasties and 6 total hip arthroplasties. The most common infecting organisms were methicillin-sensitive Staphylococcus aureus (13 of 33) and Streptococcus (9 of 33). The primary outcome parameter was recurrence of infection according to the Musculoskeletal Infection Society criteria. Patients were followed up for a minimum of 3 months or until failure.

RESULTS

At a mean of 12.7 months (range, 3-30 months), 16 of the 33 patients failed (48%). Acute hematogenous and acute postoperative PJI had similar failure rates at 47% and 50%, respectively (P = .88). Seven failures required a 2-stage exchange, while 8 patients were treated with chronic antibiotic suppression, being unwilling or unable to undergo further surgical intervention.

CONCLUSION

The addition of antibiotic-impregnated calcium sulfate beads does not appear to improve outcomes of irrigation and debridement with implant retention in the setting of acute hematogenous or acute postoperative PJI. Given the short follow-up in this report, this represents a best-case scenario and the overall failure rate may be higher with further follow-up.

Hydrogen Peroxide Wound Irrigation in Orthopaedic Surgery

As the burden of deep hardware infections continues to rise in orthopaedics, there is increasing interest in strategies for more effective debridement of colonized tissues and biofilm. Hydrogen peroxide has been used medically for almost a century, but its applications in orthopaedic surgery have yet to be fully determined. The basic science and clinical research on the antiseptic efficacy of hydrogen peroxide have demonstrated its efficacy against bacteria, and it has demonstrated potential synergy with other irrigation solutions such as chlorhexidine and povidone-iodine. While hydrogen peroxide is effective in infection reduction, there are concerns with wound healing, cytotoxicity, and embolic phenomena, and we recommend against hydrogen peroxide usage in the treatment of partial knee replacements, hemiarthroplasties, or native joints. Additionally, due to the potential for oxygen gas formation, hydrogen peroxide should not be used in cases of dural compromise, when pressurizing medullary canals, or when irrigating smaller closed spaces to avoid the possibility of air embolism. Finally, we present our protocol for irrigation and debridement and exchange of modular components in total joint arthroplasty, incorporating hydrogen peroxide in combination with povidone-iodine and chlorhexidine.

One-stage Exchange Arthroplasty for Periprosthetic Hip and Knee Joint Infections

Background:

Periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) is a devastating complication of joint replacement surgery. In an aging population of the developed world, the increasing numbers of hip and knee replacements will inevitably lead to increasing incidence of PJI, carrying with (it) significant patient morbidity and cost to the health care system. Two-stage exchange arthroplasty is currently the gold standard but it is associated with multiple operations, prolonged hospitalization and impaired functionality. One-stage exchange arthroplasty is similar to the two-stage procedure but the interval between removal of the prosthesis and reimplantation of a new one is only a few minutes. It has the theoretical benefits of a single anesthetic, shorter hospitalization, less cost and improved function.

Methods:

We reviewed the current literature regarding the outcomes of one-stage exchange arthroplasties focusing on re-infection rates and functional outcomes.

Results:

Current themes around the one-stage exchange procedure include the indications for the procedure, definition of re-infection, surgical techniques used to provide fixation and differences in approach for hip and knee replacements.

Conclusion:

The current literature on one-stage exchange procedure is promising, with comparable results to two-stage revisions for hips and knees in selected patients. However, there is a great need for a large multi-centred randomized control trial, focusing on re-infection rates and functional scores postoperatively, to provide concrete guidelines in managing this complex condition.

Single-stage revision for periprosthetic hip infection using antibiotic loaded impaction graft

BACKGROUND

Staged revision for periprosthetic infection of the hip is an accepted and widely used technique by many surgeons. However, single-stage exchange of the hip prosthesis remains an attractive option to others because of the advantages of reduced morbidity, shorter treatment time and hospital stay in addition to the reduced cost of treatment.

HYPOTHESIS

Single-stage revision for periprosthetic hip infection can achieve excellent results if a specific protocol for patients' selection and management is followed.

METHODS

52 patients with evidence of periprosthetic infection had preoperative aspiration of the affected hip. The infecting organisms were identified in 33/52 and single-stage revision was performed. The remaining 19 patients had a 2-stage exchange arthroplasty. Patients in the single-stage revision protocol had antibiotic loaded morsellized bone graft, a cemented cup and a long cementless stem.

RESULTS

At an average follow up of 6 (range 4-8) years postoperatively, only 1 case of persistent infection was found in the single-stage group - a 97% rate of eradicating infection was achieved.

DISCUSSION

Single-stage exchange achieves excellent success rate in patients with periprosthetic infection when a specific protocol for patient selection and management is followed.

Conversion of a failed hip resurfacing arthroplasty to total hip arthroplasty: pearls and pitfalls

Surface replacement arthroplasty (SRA) remains a viable alternative to total hip arthroplasty (THA) in appropriately selected, active adults with degenerative hip disease. However, orthopedic surgeons are facing a number of scenarios where revision of one or both components of an SRA is indicated. Indications for revision vary and impact the potential outcomes of conversion of a SRA to THA. While clinical outcomes are generally favorable, a growing body of data illustrates patients who undergo conversion of a SRA to THA to be at increased risk of requiring a repeat revision surgery and experiencing functional outcomes inferior to that of a primary THA. The results of patients undergoing conversion of a SRA to THA highlight the need for careful patient selection, thorough preoperative counseling, and technical precision when performing a SRA. Furthermore, a systematic approach to the failed SRA is necessary to ensure optimal clinical results.

One-Stage Revision for Infected Total Hip Arthroplasty

Prosthetic joint infection (PJI) is a challenging complication following total hip arthroplasty (THA). Two-stage exchange arthroplasty is preferred for treating chronic PJI of THA, although specialized centers have reported comparable outcomes with protocol-based, 1-stage exchange arthroplasty. A main requirement is presurgical determination of the infecting organism's sensitivity. The therapeutic goal is control of the infection and maintenance of joint function. It offers advantages, including a single operative procedure, fewer antibiotics, and reduced hospitalization time and relative overall costs.