General Assembly, Prevention, Host Risk Mitigation - Local Factors: Proceedings of International Consensus on Orthopedic Infections

Clinical Outcomes and Complication Rate after Single-Stage Hardware Removal and Total Hip Arthroplasty: A Matched-Pair Controlled Study

BACKGROUND

Single-stage hardware removal and total hip arthroplasty is a complex surgical procedure, comparable to revision surgery. The purpose of the current study is to evaluate single-stage hardware removal and THA outcomes, compare this technique with a matched control group that has undergone primary THA and assess the risk of periprosthetic joint infection with a 24-month minimum follow-up.

METHODS

This study included all those cases treated with THA and concomitant hardware removal from 2008 to 2018. The control group was selected on a 1:1 ratio among patients who underwent THA for primary OA. The Harris Hip (HHS) and University of California at Los Angeles Activity (UCLA) scores, infection rate and early and delayed surgical complications were recorded.

RESULTS

One hundred and twenty-three consecutive patients (127 hips) were included, and the same number of patients was assigned to the control group. The final functional scores were comparable between the two groups; a longer operative time and transfusion rate were recorded in the study group. Finally, an increased incidence of overall complications was reported (13.8% versus 2.4%), but no cases of early or delayed infection were found.

CONCLUSIONS

Single-stage hardware removal and THA is a safe and effective but technically demanding technique, with a higher incidence of overall complications, making it more similar to revision THA than to primary THA.

Less Than 1-Year Quiescent Period After Septic Arthritis of the Hip is Associated With High Risk of Periprosthetic Joint Infection Following Total Hip Arthroplasty

BACKGROUND

Approximately 20,000 patients are diagnosed with septic arthritis annually, with 15% specifically affecting the hip joint. These cases exacerbate arthritic changes, often warranting a total hip arthroplasty (THA). Given their prior history of infection, these patients are predisposed to subsequent periprosthetic joint infections (PJIs). Multiple studies suggest delaying THA after a native septic hip, but no study utilizing a large cohort examined the specific timing to mitigate post-THA PJI risk within a short (<1 year) quiescent period after septic arthritis. We sought to compare patients who were diagnosed with septic hip arthritis at time intervals (0-6, or 6-12 months) prior to an ipsilateral primary THA to a cohort of THA patients who never had a septic hip history. Specifically, we assessed: from 90 days to 2 years (1) revisions due to PJI and (2) associated risk factors for PJI at 2-years.

METHODS

A national, all-payer database was queried to identify all patients who underwent a primary THA between 2010 and 2021 and patients who had prior ipsilateral septic hip arthritis were characterized using International Classification of Disease and Current Practice Terminology codes (n = 1,052). A randomized sample of patients who never had a history of septic arthritis prior to undergoing THA was used as a nonseptic group comparison (n = 5,000). The incidences of PJI at 90 days through two years were then identified and compared using bivariate chi-square analyses. Risk factors for post-THA PJIs were then analyzed using multivariate regression models.

RESULTS

The septic arthritis cohorts were more likely to require revisions due to PJIs, as compared to the non-septic group at 90 days, 1 year, and 2 years (all P < .0001). Patients who were diagnosed with septic arthritis between 0 and 6 months prior to THA were at greater PJI risk at both one-year (odds ratio (OR) of 43.1 versus 29.6, P < .0001) and two years (OR of 38.3 versus 22.1, P < .0001) compared to patients who had diagnoses between 6 and 12 months. Diabetes mellitus, obesity, and tobacco use were associated risk factors for PJIs at 2 years in the septic hip cohort in comparison to the cohort without a septic hip history.

CONCLUSION

Less than a 1-year quiescent period after septic arthritis is associated with a 38 times increased risk and a 22 times risk for post-THA PJI, at 0 and 6 months and 6 and 12 months, respectively. Though patients who undergo THA greater than 6 months after their septic arthritis treatment have a decreased risk compared to those between 0 and 6 months the risks are still high. Orthopaedic surgeons should be aware of the increased risks of PJIs when considering performing a THA in patients with a history of septic arthritis.

Periprosthetic Knee Infection - Part 1: Risk Factors, Classification and Diagnosis

Infection is one of the most feared complications in the postoperative period of knee arthroplasties. With the progressive aging of the population and the increased incidence of degenerative joint diseases, there is an exponential increase in the number of arthroplasties performed and, consequently, in the number of postoperative infections. The diagnosis of these should follow a hierarchical protocol, with well-defined criteria, which lead to diagnostic conclusion, thus guiding the most appropriate treatment. The aim of the present update article is to present the main risk factors, classifications and, mainly, to guide diagnostic investigation in an organized manner.

When Total Joint Arthroplasty After Septic Arthritis Can Be Safely Performed

Background:

Patients undergoing total joint arthroplasty (TJA) following septic arthritis are at higher risk for developing periprosthetic joint infection (PJI). Minimal literature is available to guide surgeons on the optimal timing of TJA after completing treatment for prior native joint septic arthritis. This multicenter study aimed to determine the optimal timing of TJA after prior septic arthritis and to examine the role of preoperative serology in predicting patients at risk for developing PJI.

Methods:

A total of 207 TJAs were performed after prior septic arthritis from 2000 to 2017 at 5 institutions. Laboratory values, prior treatment, time from the initial infection, and other variables were recorded. Bivariate analyses were performed to identify the association between the time from septic arthritis to TJA and the risk of developing subsequent PJI. A subanalysis was performed between patients who underwent TJA in 1 setting (n = 97) compared with those who underwent 2-stage arthroplasties (n = 110). Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve analysis was performed for serum markers prior to TJA in predicting the risk of a subsequent PJI.

Results:

The overall PJI rate was 12.1%. Increasing time from septic arthritis treatment to TJA was not associated with a reduction of PJI, whether considering time as a continuous or categorical variable, for both surgical treatment cohorts (all p > 0.05). Although the ROC curve analysis found that the optimal threshold for timing of TJA from the initial treatment was 5.9 months, there was no difference in the PJI rate when the overall cohort was dichotomized by this threshold and when stratified by 1-stage compared with 2-stage TJA. There was no significant difference in erythrocyte sedimentation rate (ESR) and C-reactive protein (CRP) level prior to conversion TJA between patients who subsequently developed PJI and those who did not.

Conclusions:

Serum markers have limited value in predicting subsequent PJI in patients who undergo TJA after prior septic arthritis. There was no optimal interim period between septic arthritis treatment and subsequent TJA; thus, delaying a surgical procedure does not appear to reduce the risk of PJI.

Level of Evidence:

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