Positive Culture During Reimplantation Increases the Risk of Reinfection in Two-Stage Exchange Arthroplasty Despite Administrating Prolonged Antibiotics: A Retrospective Cohort Study and Meta-Analysis

Description of reinfection of joint prosthesis after 2-stage replacement (infection of the 2nd stage prosthesis): A multicenter study

INTRODUCTION

Two-stage exchange is the gold standard in the surgical management of prosthetic joint infection (PJI). However, perioperative reinfections (RePJI) can occur to newly inserted prosthesis, which highlights the importance of an adequate antibiotic prophylaxis, although there is scarce evidence in this field. Our objective was to evaluate the characteristics of RePJI, its prognosis and the antibiotic prophylaxis that is commonly used in second-stage surgery.

METHODS

Multicentric retrospective observational study in Spanish hospitals including patients with RePJI between 2009 and 2018.

RESULTS

We included 92 patients with RePJI from 12 hospitals. The most frequent isolated microorganism was Staphylococcus epidermidis in 35 cases (38.5%); 61.1% of staphylococci were methiciliin-resistant. In 12 cases (13%), the same microoganism causing the primary PJI was isolated in RePJI. When comparing with the microbiology of primary PJI, there were more cases caused by Gram-negative bacteria (the most frequent was Pseudomonas spp.) and less by Gram-positive bacteria. Failure occured in 69 cases (75%). There were 43 different courses of antibiotic prophylaxis after the second-stage surgery; the most frequent was a unique preoperative cefazolin dose, but most patients received prophylaxis before and after the second-stage surgery (61 cases).

CONCLUSIONS

The most frequent microorganisms in RePJI are coagulase-negative staphylococci, although Gram-negative bacteria, especially Pseudomonas spp. are also common. There is a significant heterogeneity in antibiotic prophylaxis for a second-stage surgery. ReIPJI treatment has a high failure rate.

Use of Hinged Implants for Multi-Stage Revision Knee Arthroplasty for Severe Periprosthetic Joint Infection: Remission Rate and Outcomes After a Minimum Follow-Up of 5 Years

BACKGROUND

In severe periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) after total knee arthroplasty (TKA), multi-stage procedures are indicated for ongoing signs of infection after implant removal during the spacer interval of an intended two-stage exchange. In these cases, several additional debridement and spacer exchange surgeries may be necessary. Herein, we analyzed the complications, remission rate, and functional outcome after multi-stage revision arthroplasty using hinged TKAs.

METHODS

Patients (n = 79) treated with multi-stage revision arthroplasty after chronic PJI of the knee were included (2010 to 2018). During the prosthesis-free interval, a static spacer containing antibiotic-loaded bone cement was implanted. The mean number of surgeries, including implant removal and revision arthroplasty, was 3.8 (range, 3 to 8). The mean duration from implant removal to revision arthroplasty was 83 days (range, 49 to 318). Complications, remission, and mortality were analyzed after a minimum follow-up of 5 years. Outcomes were assessed based on the Knee Society Score (KSS) and the Western Ontario McMasters University Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC).

RESULTS

During follow-up, 24 (30.4%) patients underwent revision surgery, with a mean time to surgical revision of 99 weeks (range, 1 to 261). After follow-up, the infection-free remission rate and overall mortality were 87.3 and 11.4%, respectively. The mean KSS was 74.3 (range, 24 to 99); the KSS Function Score was 60.8 (range, 5 to 100); and the WOMAC, 30.2 (range, 5 to 83).

CONCLUSION

In difficult-to-treat cases, multi-stage revision arthroplasty showed high remission rates and low mortality after a follow-up of 5 years. The overall revision rate was comparably high, accounting for early and late reinfections most of the time. In cases of implant survival, functional outcomes comparable to those of revision hinge TKA reported in the literature can be achieved. Therefore, multi-stage procedures with additional debridement steps should be performed in cases of ongoing infections in intended two-stage procedures.

The Impact of Culture Negativity on the Outcomes of Revision Total Knee Arthroplasty for Chronic PJI

Culture-positive (CP) and culture-negative (CN) periprosthetic joint infections (PJI) remain a crucial area of research; however, current studies comparing these infections rely on unstandardized outcome reporting tools. Our study aimed to compare the outcomes of two-stage revision of CP and CN PJI using the standardized Musculoskeletal Infection Society (MSIS) outcome reporting tool. We retrospectively reviewed 138 patients who were diagnosed with PJI and indicated for two-stage revision total knee arthroplasty (rTKA). The majority of patients in both CP and CN cohorts achieved infection control without the need for reoperation (54.1% and 62.5%, respectively). There was a significant difference in the overall distribution of MSIS outcomes (p = 0.043), with a significantly greater rate of CN patients falling into Tier 1 (infection control without the use of suppressive antibiotics) (52.5% versus 29.6%, p = 0.011). There was also a significant difference in the distribution of septic versus aseptic reoperations after 2nd stage (p = 0.013), with more CP reoperations being septic and more CN reoperations being aseptic. The duration from first to second stage was significantly shorter in the CN cohort (p = 0.002). While overall infection control was similar between cohorts, these data suggest that the outcomes of two-stage rTKA are favorable in cases of CN PJI.

Impact of antibiotic prophylaxis in second-stage surgery in joint prosthesis infection treated with two-stage exchange. A multicenter case-control study

INTRODUCTION

After two-stage exchange due to prosthetic joint infection (PJI), the new prosthesis carries a high risk of reinfection (RePJI). There isn`t solid evidence regarding the antibiotic prophylaxis in 2nd-stage surgery. The objective of this study is to describe what antibiotic prophylaxis is used in this surgery and evaluate its impact on the risk of developing RePJI.

METHODS

Retrospective multicenter case-control study in Spanish hospitals. The study included cases of PJI treated with two-stage exchange and subsequently developed a new infection. For each case, two controls were included, matched by prosthesis location, center, and year of surgery. The prophylaxis regimens were grouped based on their antibacterial spectrum, and we calculated the association between the type of regimen and the development of RePJI using conditional logistic regression, adjusted for possible confounding factors.

RESULTS

We included 90 cases from 12 centers, which were compared with 172 controls. The most frequent causative microorganism was Staphylococcus epidermidis with 34 cases (37.8%). Staphylococci were responsible for 50 cases (55.6%), 32 of them (64%) methicillin-resistant. Gram-negative bacilli were involved in 30 cases (33.3%), the most common Pseudomonas aeruginosa. In total, 83 different antibiotic prophylaxis regimens were used in 2nd-stage surgery, the most frequent a single preoperative dose of cefazolin (48 occasions; 18.3%); however, it was most common a combination of a glycopeptide and a beta-lactam with activity against Pseudomonas spp (99 cases, 25.2%). In the adjusted analysis, regimens that included antibiotics with activity against methicillin-resistant staphylococci AND Pseudomonas spp were associated with a significantly lower risk of RePJI (adjusted OR = 0.24; 95% IC: 0.09-0.65).

CONCLUSIONS

The lack of standardization in 2nd-satge surgery prophylaxis explains the wide diversity of regimens used in this procedure. The results suggest that antibiotic prophylaxis in this surgery should include an antibiotic with activity against methicillin-resistant staphylococci and Pseudomonas.

Upcoming evidence in clinical practice of two-stage revision arthroplasty for prosthetic joint infection

Total joint arthroplasty is the recommended treatment for patients with end-stage osteoarthritis, as it reduces disability and pain and restores joint function. However, prosthetic joint infection is a serious complication of this procedure, with the two-stage exchange being the most common treatment method. While there is consensus on diagnosing prosthetic joint infection, there is a lack of agreement on the parameters that can guide the surgeon in performing definitive reimplantation in a two-stage procedure. One approach that has been suggested to improve the accuracy of microbiologic investigations before definitive reimplantation is to observe a holiday period from antibiotic therapy to improve the accuracy of cultures from periprosthetic tissues, but these cultures report some degree of aspecificity. Therefore, several pieces of evidence highlight that performing reimplantation using continuous antibiotic therapy should be considered a safe and effective approach, leading to higher cure rates and a shorter period of disability. Dosage of C-reactive protein (CRP), erythrocyte sedimentation rate (ERS) and D-dimer are helpful in diagnosing prosthetic joint infection, but only D-dimer has shown sufficient accuracy in predicting the risk of infection recurrence after a two-stage procedure. Synovial fluid analysis before reimplantation has been shown to be the most accurate in predicting recurrence, and new cutoff values for leukocyte count and neutrophil percentage have shown a useful predictive rule to identify patients at risk of unfavourable outcome. A new scoring system based on a numerical score calculated from the beta coefficient derived through multivariate analysis of D-dimer levels, synovial fluid leukocytes and relative neutrophils percentage has demonstrated high accuracy when it comes to guiding the second step of two-stage procedure. In conclusion, reimplantation may be a suitable option for patients who are on continuous therapy without local symptoms, and with CRP and ERS within the normal range, with low synovial fluid leukocytes (< 952/mL) and a low relative neutrophil percentage (< 52%) and D-dimer below 1100 µg/mL. A numerical score derived from analysing these three parameters can serve as a valuable tool in determining the feasibility of reimplantation in these patients.

Success Rate After 2-Stage Spacer-Free Total Hip Arthroplasty Exchange and Risk Factors for Reinfection: A Prospective Cohort Study of 187 Patients

BACKGROUND

Two-stage prosthesis exchange is the treatment of choice for chronic periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) of a total hip arthroplasty (THA), especially when the bone and surrounding soft tissues are compromised or difficult-to-treat pathogens are implicated. The aims of our study were as follows: (1) to determine the outcome of 2-stage prosthesis exchange for the treatment of PJI after THA and (2) to determine the risk factors for reinfection leading to subsequent revision surgeries after reimplantation.

METHODS

We prospectively enrolled 187 consecutive patients who underwent a 2-stage THA exchange with resection arthroplasty for PJI from 2013 to 2019. The mean (± SD) duration of follow-up was 54.2 ± 24.9 months (range, 36 to 96), and the mean interval until reimplantation was 9.8 ± 8.9 weeks (range, 2 to 38). All patients remained in a spacer-free girdlestone situation between the 2 stages of treatment. Patients who remained infection-free after their 2-stage treatment were considered to have achieved treatment success.

RESULTS

The overall success rate was 85.6%. The cumulative probability of reinfection was 11.5% after one year and 14% after 2 years after reimplantation. High virulence or difficult-to-treat pathogens were significant and independent risk factors for reinfection (HR [hazard ratio] = 3.71, 95% CI [confidence interval]: 1.47 to 9.36, P = .006 and HR = 3.85, 95% CI: 1.73 to 8.57, respectively, P = .001), as was previous 2-stage hip prosthesis exchange (HR = 3.58, 95% CI: 1.33 to 9.62, P = .01). Overall reoperation and revision rates were 26.2 and 16.6%, respectively. Re-infected patients had an 80% higher probability of reoperation than noninfected ones (P < .001, log-rank = 102.6), and they were 55% more likely to undergo revision surgery during their follow-up (P < .001, log-rank = 55.4).

CONCLUSIONS

Reinfection rates after 2-stage spacer-free THA revision for PJI still remain high but are comparable to those including cement spacers. Patients who have had prior failed 2-stage implant exchanges or are infected by high-grade or difficult-to-treat pathogens are at high risk for treatment failure.

Systemic Inflammation Response Index (SIRI) and Monocyte-to-Lymphocyte Ratio (MLR) Are Predictors of Good Outcomes in Surgical Treatment of Periprosthetic Joint Infections of Lower Limbs: A Single-Center Retrospective Analysis

BACKGROUND

Periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) is a devastating complication that develops after total joint arthroplasty (TJA), whose incidence is expected to increase over the years. Traditionally, surgical treatment of PJI has been based on algorithms, where early infections are preferably treated with debridement, antibiotics, and implant retention (DAIR) and late infections with two-stage revision surgery. Two-stage revision is considered the "gold standard" for treatment of chronic prosthetic joint infection (PJI) as it enables local delivery of antibiotics, maintenance of limb-length and mobility, and easier reimplantation. Many studies have attempted to identify potential predicting factors for early diagnosis of PJI, but its management remains challenging. In this observational retrospective study, we investigated the potential role of inflammatory blood markers (neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio (NLR), monocyte-to-lymphocyte ratio (MLR), platelet-to-lymphocyte ratio (PLR), systemic inflammatory index (SII), systemic inflammatory response index (SIRI), and aggregate index of systemic inflammation (AISI)) as prognostic factors in two-stage exchange arthroplasty for PJI.

METHODS

A single-center retrospective analysis was conducted, collecting clinical data and laboratory parameters from patients submitted to prosthetic explantation (EP) for chronic PJI. Laboratory parameters (PCR, NLR, MLR, PLR, SIRI, SII, and AISI) were evaluated at the explantation time; at 4, 6, and 8 weeks after surgery; and at reimplantation time. The correlation between laboratory parameters and surgery success was evaluated and defined as infection absence/resolution at the last follow-up.

RESULTS

A total of 57 patients with PJI were evaluated (62% males; average age 70 years, SD 12.14). Fifty-three patients with chronic PJI were included. Nine patients underwent DAIR revision surgery and chronic suppressive therapy; two patients died. Nineteen patients completed the two-stage revision process (prosthetic removal, spacer placement, and subsequent replanting). Among them, none showed signs of reinfection or persistence of infection at the last available follow-up. The other twenty-three patients did not replant due to persistent infection: among them, some (the most) underwent spacer retention; others (fewer in number) were submitted to resection arthroplasty and arthrodesis (Girdlestone technique) or chronic suppressive antibiotic therapy; the remaining were, over time, lost to follow-up. Of the patients who concluded the two-stage revision, the ones with high SIRI values (mean 3.08 SD 1.7 and p-value 0.04) and MLR values (mean 0.4 SD 0.2 and p-value 0.02) at the explantation time were associated with a higher probability of infection resolution. Moreover, higher variation in the SIRI and PCR, also defined, respectively, as delta-SIRI (mean -2.3 SD 1.8 and p-value 0.03) and delta-PCR (mean -46 SD 35.7 and p-value 0.03), were associated with favorable outcomes.

CONCLUSIONS

The results of our study suggest that, in patients with PJI undergoing EP, the SIRI and MLR values and delta-SIRI and delta-PCR values could be predictive of a favorable outcome. The evaluation of these laboratory indices, especially their determination at 4 weeks after removal, could therefore help to determine which patients could be successfully replanted and to identify the best time to replant. More studies analyzing a wider cohort of patients with chronic PJI are needed to validate the promising results of this study.

Impact of Positive Cultures During the Second Stage of a Two-Stage Exchange: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

BACKGROUND

Two-stage exchange is a frequently performed procedure in patients who have a periprosthetic joint infection. Positive cultures when performing the second stage are perceived as a risk factor for reinfection. This study aimed to determine the impact of positive cultures during the second stage on the outcome of patients undergoing a 2-stage septic exchange and the impact of stopping the antibiotic treatment before reimplantation.

METHODS

We systematically searched four databases. We performed a meta-analysis on the risk of complications after positive cultures during second stage and a subgroup analysis by antibiotic holiday period. We included 24 studies.

RESULTS

Failure in the positive group was 37.0% and in the negative group was 13.7% with an odds ratio (OR) of 4.05. In the subgroup analysis by antibiotic holidays, failure rate without holidays was 15% and with holidays was 17.3% (P = .21). Failure in each group was higher when cultures were positive (without holidays, 25 versus 12.2%, P = .0003, and with holidays 41.1 versus 12.7%, P < .0001), but the risk of failure when cultures were positive was higher in the holiday group (OR 4.798) than in the nonholiday group (OR 2.225) in comparison to those patients who were culture negative at the second stage.

CONCLUSIONS

Microbiological eradication at second stage was not obtained in 18% of cases and it was associated with a higher failure rate. In patients with positive cultures, withholding antibiotic treatment was associated with lower failure rate. Further studies to define the antibiotic strategy in 2-stage exchange procedure are necessary.

Interval between two-stage exchanges: what is optimal and how do you know?

BACKGROUND

Two-stage exchange arthroplasty remains the most popular option for the treatment of chronic periprosthetic joint infection (PJI). Determining infection eradication and optimal timing of reimplantation can be challenging. Information to allow for a truly informed evidence-based decision is scarce.

METHODS

We conducted a critical review of available evidence on the presently available tests to help determine timing of reimplantation.

RESULTS

Serology is traditionally used to follow up patients after the first stage. Despite tradition mandates waiting for normal inflammatory markers, there is actually no evidence that they correlate with persistent infection. The role of synovial fluid investigation between stages is also explored. Cultures lack sensitivity and neither differential leukocyte counts nor alternative biomarkers have proven to be accurate in identifying persistent infection with a spacer in situ. We also examined the evidence regarding the optimal time interval between resection and reimplantation and whether there is evidence to support the implementation of a two week "antibiotic holiday" prior to proceeding with reimplantation. Finally, wound healing and other important factors in this setting will be discussed.

CONCLUSION

Currently there are no accurate metrics to aid in the decision on the optimal timing for reimplantation. Decision must therefore rely on the resolution of clinical signs and down trending serological and synovial markers.

The Use of Intraoperative Cell Salvage in Two-Stage Revision of Septic Hip Arthroplasties: A Double-Center Retrospective Study

(1) Background: intraoperative cell salvage (ICS) devices can provide a valuable contribution to patient blood management. An infection of the surgical site presents a formal contraindication to the use of ICS. To date, there is no recommendation for the use of ICS in the context of reimplantation in two-stage septic exchange arthroplasty. (2) Methods: at two hospitals of maximum endoprosthetic care, a retrospective evaluation of patients who had received ICS blood during reimplantation of hip arthroplasties was performed. Patients' and surgical characteristics, intraoperative cultures, and the occurrence of septic complications in the short- and long-term follow-up were recorded. (3) Results: 144 patients were included. Detection of positive cultures during reimplantation occurred in 13 cases. A total of 127 patients showed no complication, 8 patients showed a non-specific septic complication, 6 patients a local persistence of infection, and 3 patients a possible bloodstream-associated infection. No significant correlation was found between the occurrence of complications and the detection of positive intraoperative cultures. (4) Conclusions: no clustering of septic complications due to the use of ICS during reimplantation was found. In the risk-benefit analysis, we considered the use of ICS during reimplantation to be indicated in terms of patient blood management, while the safety of the procedure during septic first-stage resection arthroplasty or septic one-stage exchange arthroplasty was not investigated. Given the paucity of comparative literature, further studies are needed on ideal patient blood management in the setting of septic revision arthroplasty.

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.

Comparable clinical outcomes of culture-negative and culture-positive periprosthetic joint infections: a systematic review and meta-analysis

PURPOSE

The aim of this study was to compare the clinical outcomes of culture-negative periprosthetic joint infection (CN PJI) with those of culture-positive periprosthetic joint infection (CP PJI).

METHODS

Data were obtained from Embase, Web of Science and EBSCO for all available studies comparing the clinical outcomes of CN PJI with those of CP PJI. The quality of the studies was scored using the Newcastle-Ottawa scale (NOS). Pooled odds ratios (ORs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were used to assess clinical outcomes. Subgroup analyses were performed to explain heterogeneity among the included studies. Publication bias was estimated using Begg's funnel plot. Sensitivity analysis was performed to test the stability of pooled results.

RESULTS

Thirty studies with 1630 (38.7%) CN PJI and 2577 (61.3%) CP PJI were included in this meta-analysis. The pooled results of the included studies showed that overall failure rate in CN PJI group (19.0%, 309/1630) was significantly lower than that in CP PJI group (23.4%, 604/2577) (OR 0.63, 95% CI 0.47-0.84, P = 0.002). We performed the subgroup analysis based on the surgical strategies, the pooled results of nine studies for patients undergoing debridement, antibiotics and implant retention (DAIR) revealed that failure rate in CN PJI group (22.2%, 53/239) was significantly lower than that in CP PJI group (29.3%, 227/775) (OR 0.62, 95% CI 0.43-0.90, P = 0.01), the pooled results of four studies for patients undergoing one-stage revision revealed that failure rate between CN PJI group (11.5%, 11/96) and CP PJI group (7.6%, 27/355) had no significant difference (OR 1.57, 95% CI 0.75-3.26, P = 0.23), and the pooled results of 19 studies for patients undergoing two-stage revision revealed that failure rate in CN PJI group (16.1%, 171/1062) was significantly lower than that in CP PJI group (20.4%, 206/1010) (OR 0.52, 95% CI 0.34-0.79, P = 0.002).

CONCLUSIONS

CN PJI group had similar or better survival rate when compared with CP PJI group for patients who underwent DAIR, one-stage or two-stage revision. Negative culture was not a worse prognostic factor for PJI.

Clinical impact of microbiological results in two-stage revision arthroplasty with spacer exchange

INTRODUCTION

Patients who require a spacer exchange as part of a two-stage procedure for the treatment of periprosthetic hip and knee joint infections (PJI) have high failure rates. Little is known about the clinical impact of microbiological results and changes in the microbiological spectrum and resistance pattern in these patients.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

Between 01/2011 and 12/2019, 312 patients underwent a total of 327 two-stage revision arthroplasties at our institution. A spacer exchange was required in 52/312 (16.7%) patients (27 knee/25 hip). Microbiological results, antibiotic resistance patterns, patient's host factors as well as re-revision and re-infection rates at a median follow-up of 47.8 months (range 12.2-116.7 months) were analyzed. A propensity score (PS)-matched analysis of patients who underwent spacer exchange and patients treated with standard two-stage procedure was performed.

RESULTS

We found a high number of microbiological spectrum changes in patients with multiple culture positive procedures between explantations and spacer exchanges (10/12 [83.3%]), spacer exchanges and reimplantations (3/4 [75%]) as well as between reimplantations and subsequent re-revision surgeries (5/6 [83.3%]). In 9/52 (17.3%) patients, same microorganisms were detected repeatedly in two different procedures. We observed changes in the antibiotic resistance patterns in 6/9 (66.7%) of these patients. High re-infection rates were found in patients with culture positive reimplantations (10/12 [83.3%]), and low re-infection rates were found in patients with culture negative reimplantations (2/40 [5%]; p < 0.001). Between patients with and without spacer exchange, no differences were found in the re-revision rates (13/52 [25%] with vs. 13/52 [25%] without; p = 1.00) as well as re-infection rates (12/52 [23.1%] with vs. 8/52 [15.4%] without; p = 0.32).

CONCLUSIONS

Changes in microbiological spectrum and antibiotic resistance patterns between stages are common in patients who require a spacer exchange. If eradication of the microorganism at reimplantation can be accomplished, comparable re-revision rates to standard two-stage procedures can be achieved.

Reimplantation after Periprosthetic Joint Infection: The Role of Microbiology

Periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) is among the most feared orthopedic complications. Critical questions are whether the infection is completely resolved before reimplantation and what the clinical significance of positive culture is at reimplantation. The aim of this study was to determine whether a correlation exits between culture results at reimplantation after spacer insertion for hip and knee PJI and treatment failure rate. The data of 84 patients who underwent two-stage exchange arthroplasty for hip or knee PJI were reviewed and the results of intraoperative culture at reimplantation were analyzed quantitatively and qualitatively. Correlations were sought between these patterns and treatment outcome. Our data indicate no evidence for a correlation between positive culture at reimplantation and greater risk of treatment failure. Nonetheless, we noted a higher, albeit statistically not significant rate of treatment failure in patients with at least two samples testing positive. The role of microbiology at reimplantation remains unclear, but a positive culture might signal increased risk for subsequent implant failure. Further studies are needed to elucidate the implications of this finding.

What Is the Normal Trajectory of C-Reactive Protein, Erythrocyte Sedimentation Rate, Plasma Fibrinogen and D-Dimer after Two-Stage Exchange for Periprosthetic Joint Infection?

Objective

C‐reactive protein (CRP), erythrocyte sedimentation rate (ESR), plasma fibrinogen and D‐Dimer are used as diagnostic biomarkers of prosthetic joint infection (PJI) after total joint arthroplasty (TJA). The purpose of the study was to investigate the normal trajectory of CRP, ESR, plasma fibrinogen and D‐Dimer at different time points after two‐stage exchange arthroplasty for PJI.

Methods

We studied 53 patients undergoing two‐stage exchange for PJI at five time points: preoperatively (T0), duration of hospital stays (T1), 30 days (T2), 30–90 days (T3), and 90–180 days (T4) after surgery. The medical records of all patients were well documented and carefully reviewed. The Shapiro–Wilk test was utilized to compare the normal distribution for continuous variables, and the nonnormally distributed data were used for Friedmann's one‐way repeat measures analysis of variances. Post hoc Dunnett's test was used to compare each pair of data to find differences from baseline.

Results

Compare with T0 point, the levels of CRP and ESR increased significantly and reached peak values at T1 point (all P < 0.001), with median values of 56.40 mg/L (range, 5.54–161.0 mg/L) and 49.00 mm/h (range, 13.00–113.0 mm/h), respectively. In addition, the levels of plasma fibrinogen and D‐Dimer increased significantly and reached peak values at T1 point (all P < 0.001), with median values of 4.13g/L (range, 2.27–6.80 mg/L) and 4.00 mg/L (range, 0.19–14.01 mg/L), respectively. CRP and ESR rapidly declined at the T2 point with significantly compared with T0 point (P = 0.001 and P < 0.001). The levels of CRP, ESR, plasma fibrinogen and D‐Dimer returned to preoperative levels of 5.23 mg/L (range, 1.01–21.70 mg/L), 19.00 mm/h (range, 6.00–60.00 mm/h), 3.38g/L (range, 1.71–5.10 g/L) and 2.33 mm/h (range, 0.19–6.87 mg/L) at T4 point, and there was no significant difference compared with T0 point (all P > 0.05).

Conclusions

The study demonstrated the normal trajectory of CRP, ESR, plasma fibrinogen and D‐Dimer at five time points in patients who underwent two‐stage exchange for PJI. Thus, the results have the possibility of providing signs of infection after the patient receives two‐stage exchange arthroplasty for PJI, which can benefit from early treatment.

Analysis of Failed Two-Stage Procedures with Resection Arthroplasty as the First Stage in Periprosthetic Hip Joint Infections

Resection arthroplasty can be performed as the first stage of a two-stage procedure in some patients with severe periprosthetic hip joint infections with poor bone stock. This retrospective study aimed to evaluate factors associated with the subsequent failure or success of these patients. Between 2011 and 2020; in 61 (26.4%) of 231 patients who underwent a two-stage protocol of periprosthetic hip joint infections; no spacer was used in the first stage. The minimum follow-up period was 12 months. Patient's demographics and various infection risk factors were analyzed. In total, 37/61 (60.7%) patients underwent a successful reimplantation, and four patients died within the follow-up period. Patients within the failure group had a significantly higher Charlson comorbidity index (p = 0.002); number of operations prior to resection arthroplasty (p = 0.022) and were older (p = 0.018). Failure was also associated with the presence of a positive culture in the first- and second-stage procedures (p = 0.012). Additional risk factors were persistent high postoperative CRP values and the requirement of a negative-pressure wound therapy (p ≤ 0.05). In conclusion, multiple factors need to be evaluated when trying to predict the outcome of patients undergoing resection arthroplasty as the first stage of a two-stage procedure in patients with challenging periprosthetic hip joint infections.

Analysis of Culture Positive First and Second Stage Procedures in Periprosthetic Knee and Hip Joint Infections

BACKGROUND

A positive microbiological result at reimplantation may lead to a failed 2-stage revision arthroplasty in the treatment of periprosthetic joint infections. Little is known about changes in microbiological spectrum and resistance pattern between culture positive first and second stage procedures in revision knee and hip arthroplasty.

METHODS

Between January 2011 and December 2019, we performed 327 two-stage revision arthroplasties on 312 patients. There were 37 of 312 (11.9%) patients (20 hips/17 knees) who had a positive microbiological culture during the first and second stage procedure. We analyzed the microbiological spectrum, antimicrobial resistance pattern, and clinical outcome of culture positive first and second stage procedures as well as subsequent re-revisions.

RESULTS

Re-revision was necessary in 40.5% (15/37) of patients with culture positive first and second stage procedure at a median follow-up of 3.5 years. We found microbiological changes in 83.8% (31/37) of patients between the first and second stage and in 88.9% (8/9) between the second stage and subsequent culture positive re-revision. Polymicrobial infections were found in 21.6% (8/37) of first and in 16.2% (6/37) of second stage procedures. In 27% (10/37) of patients, microorganisms persisted between the first and second stage procedure. The antimicrobial resistance pattern changed in 60% of persistent microorganisms between the first and second stage procedure.

CONCLUSION

Changes in microbiological spectrum and resistance pattern are common between culture positive first and second stage procedures as well as subsequent re-revisions. This has to be considered in the antimicrobial treatment of periprosthetic joint infections.

Positive frozen section during reimplantation increases the risk of treatment failure in two-stage exchange arthroplasty even in patients with normal ESR and CRP

AIMS

It can be extremely challenging to determine whether to perform reimplantation in patients who have contradictory serum inflammatory markers and frozen section results. We investigated whether patients with a positive frozen section at reimplantation were at a higher risk of reinfection despite normal ESR and CRP.

METHODS

We retrospectively reviewed 163 consecutive patients with periprosthetic joint infections (PJIs) who had normal ESR and CRP results pre-reimplantation in our hospital from 2014 to 2018. Of these patients, 26 had positive frozen sections at reimplantation. The minimum follow-up time was two years unless reinfection occurred within this period. Univariable and multivariable logistic regression analyses were performed to identify the association between positive frozen sections and treatment failure.

RESULTS

Treatment failure occurred in eight (30.77%) of the 26 PJI patients with positive frozen sections at reimplantation, compared with 13 (9.49%) of 137 patients with negative results. In the multivariate analysis, positive frozen section increased the risk of failure (odds ratio 4.70; 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.64 to 13.45). The mean number of months to reinfection was lower in the positive frozen section group than in the control group (p = 0.041). While there were nine (34.62%) patients with positive frozen section and 25 (18.25%) patients with negative frozen section who had prolonged antibiotic use (p = 0.042), the mean duration of antibiotic use was comparable in two groups. Synovial white blood cell count (p = 0.137) and polymorphonuclear leucocyte percentage (p = 0.454) were not associated with treatment failure in logistic regression model.

CONCLUSION

Positive frozen section at reimplantation was independently associated with subsequent failure and earlier reinfection, despite normal ESR and CRP levels pre-reimplantation. Surgeons should be aware of the risk of treatment failure in patients with positive frozen sections and carefully consider benefits of reimplantation. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2021;103-B(5):916-922.

The 2018 New Definition of Periprosthetic Joint Infection is Valuable for Diagnosis of Persistent Infection at Reimplantation in Patients without Synovial Fluid

BACKGROUND

Diagnosis of persistent infection at reimplantation of 2-stage exchange revision is a challenging problem. The aim of our study is to evaluate the performance of the 2018 new definition and Musculoskeletal Infection Society (MSIS) criteria in determining the persistent infection at reimplantation in patients without synovial fluid.

METHODS

We retrospectively reviewed 150 patients who underwent 2-stage exchange revision from 2014 to 2018. Two models were used to define persistent infection-model 1: identical major criteria of the MSIS criteria and new definition and model 2: identical major criteria of 2 criteria and/or subsequent infection after reimplantation. The predictive accuracy of the new definition and MSIS criteria was compared by using receiver operating characteristic curves.

RESULTS

The receiver operating characteristic curves showed that the new definition had good performance in determining the persistent infection, with the area under the curve (AUC) of 0.871 in model 1 and 0.835 in model 2. The optimal threshold for aggregate scores in new definition was 4. The MSIS criteria had limited diagnostic value in both model 1 (AUC = 0.708) and model 2 (AUC = 0.664). In model 1, the sensitivity and specificity were 86.96% and 84.25% in new definition, and 47.83% and 93.70% in MSIS criteria in patients without synovial fluid. In model 2, the sensitivity and specificity were 78.57% and 85.25% in new definition, and 39.29% and 93.44% in MSIS criteria.

CONCLUSION

The 2018 new definition of PJI is valuable in the diagnosis of persistent infection, which can improve diagnostic accuracy compared with the MSIS criteria in patients without synovial fluid.

Explantation, Followed by Serial Debridement Without Antibiotic Spacers and Subsequent Revision With Cementless Components, Is Associated With High Remission Rates and Low Mortality in Periprosthetic Hip Joint Infections

BACKGROUND

In difficult-to-treat cases, it is necessary to add debridement steps in prosthesis-free interval of 2-stage exchange. We aimed to analyze the functional and clinical outcome of patients treated with a multistage exchange of total hip arthroplasty without the use of spacers, rather only cementless implants.

METHODS

Between 2009 and 2018, 84 patients (mean age: 67.3 [39-90] years) suffering chronic late-onset periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) were treated using a multistage prosthesis exchange without spacers. The mean follow-up was 70 ± 45.3 [14-210] months. The treatment included prosthesis exchange and at least 1 additional revision step before a reimplantation, owing to ongoing acute infection in the prosthesis-free interval. High-efficiency antimicrobial therapy was administered in between, which was discontinued after cementless revision implantation.

RESULTS

The mean number of revisions between explantation and implantation was 2.6 (1-9). The most common microorganism was Staphylococcus epidermidis (53.6%) followed by Staphylococcus aureus (16.7%) and Cutibacterium acnes (11.9%). The bacterial load was more than one bacterium per patient in 38% of cases. All patients could be treated using a cementless implant. PJI remission was achieved in 92% of cases. Overall, 9 prostheses (11%) were replaced because of an ongoing PJI or fracture. The mean modified Harrison Hip Score was 63.4 (22-88) points. No patient died.

CONCLUSION

Multistage total hip arthroplasty exchange showed high remission rates and low mortality in difficult-to-treat cases. Spacer-free and multistage treatment had no negative effect on the success rate or functional outcome, consistent with the results of published 2-stage exchange studies. Implantation of an uncemented press-fit prosthesis was possible in all patients with no elevated periprosthetic fracture rate.

Two-stage exchange Arthroplasty is a viable treatment for Periprosthetic joint infection in inflammatory diseases

Background

Inflammatory diseases are chronic autoimmune systemic autoimmune diseases, which may increase the risk of prosthetic joint infection (PJI) after total joint arthroplasty (TJA). However, to our best knowledge, few studies have studied the association between inflammatory diseases and subsequent failure after two-stage exchange reimplantation. The aims of this study were to identify the differences in (1) serum markers, synovial indicators and pathology results and (2) treatment outcomes following two-stage exchange arthroplasty between patients with or without inflammatory diseases.

Methods

A retrospective review of 184 patients with PJI who underwent two-stage revision from 2014 to 2018 was conducted. PJI was diagnosed by using the MSIS criteria. Serum biomarkers, synovial fluid, organism and pathology results at the time of the PJI diagnosis and reimplantation were compared between patients with or without inflammatory diseases. Treatment success was defined according to the Delphi-based consensus criteria; Kaplan-Meier survivorship curves of the patients were generated and compared.

Results

There was no difference in the biomarkers, pathology results or organism profile at the time of the PJI diagnosis. At reimplantation, the patients with inflammatory diseases generally had higher values of serum markers than those without inflammatory diseases. However, synovial white blood cell count was comparable in patients with inflammatory diseases (1142.8 ± 1385.3*10⁹/mL) and group C (1315.8 ± 1849.3*10⁹/mL, p = 0.841). The total treatment success rate was 91.3% (92% for individuals with inflammatory diseases and 91.2% for the controls). The survivorship of the inflammatory disease group was comparable with that of the control group.

Conclusion

Two-stage exchange arthroplasty is a viable option for PJIs with inflammatory diseases. Synovial fluid analysis may be less affected by inflammatory diseases than serum markers did in the diagnosis persistent infection at reimplantation.

Do Positive Cultures at Second Stage Re-Implantation Increase the Risk for Reinfection in Two-Stage Exchange for Periprosthetic Joint Infection?

BACKGROUND

Intraoperative cultures are important in the diagnosis and targeted treatment of periprosthetic joint infection (PJI). Positive cultures at reimplantation during a two-stage exchange are discussed as a risk factor for reinfection. The aim of this study is the investigation of the incidence and risk factors for positive cultures during reimplantation.

METHODS

We retrospectively identified 204 patients (111 knees, 93 hips) who were treated between 2012 and 2016 for PJI using a two-stage exchange protocol at a median follow-up of 42 months. PJI was diagnosed using the criteria of the musculoskeletal infection society (MSIS) of 2011. All cultural findings from first and second stage surgery were recorded. The primary endpoint was revision for infection. Risk factors for positive cultures and reinfection were analyzed.

RESULTS

During reimplantation 25% (51/204) of patients had at least one positive culture, in 19.1% (39/204) only a single culture. Patients with culture-negative infections had a higher risk for positive cultures at reimplantation (HR 2.946 (95% CI 1.247-6.961), P = .014) and patients with infected total hip arthroplasty (THA) (HR 3.547 (95% CI 1.7-7.4), P = .001). Patients with positive cultures during reimplantation had a higher risk for reinfection (HR 2.27 (95% CI 1.181-4.363), P = .014) as well as patients with a single positive culture (HR 2.421 (95% CI 1.139-5.143), P = .021).

CONCLUSION

As positive cultures are common and increase reinfection risk irrespective of their numbers, longer antibiotic therapy following reimplantation can be an option. Single positive cultures in reimplantation surgery should not be considered contamination.

Changes in serum markers failed to predict persistent infection after two-stage exchange arthroplasty

Background

The proper timing of reimplantation is importation to treatment success in the two-stage exchange revision. The 2018 International Consensus Meeting suggested that a variation trend toward normalization in serum markers was useful for determining the proper timing of reimplantation. However, the opposite results were found by previous studies, and the normalization of serum markers was reported to fail to predict infection control. We investigated whether value changes and percent changes in four common serum markers (erythrocyte sedimentation rate (ESR), C-reactive protein (CRP), interleukin-6 (IL-6), and fibrinogen) can predict persistent infection.

Methods

A retrospective review of 141 patients treated with the two-stage revision from 2014 to 2018 was conducted. The variation trend in serum indicators was evaluated by the percent changes (using values of serum markers pre-reimplantation divided by values pre-resection) and value changes (using values of serum markers pre-resection minus values pre-reimplantation). Treatment success was defined according to the Delphi-based consensus criteria with a minimum follow-up of 1 year, and the receiver operator characteristic (ROC) was used to examine the usefulness of changes in serum markers.

Results

Twenty-two patients (15.60%) were persistently infected. No significant difference was found in either the value change or percent change in serum markers between reinfection and non-reinfection patients. When predicting persistent infection, the area under the curves (AUC) demonstrated that both percent changes and value changes in serum markers were poor indicators. The AUC of value changes was 0.533 for the CRP, 0.504 for the IL-6, 0.508 for the ESR, and 0.586 for fibrinogen when predicted persistent PJI. In addition, the AUC indicated that percent changes in the CRP (0.464), the IL-6 (0.534), the ESR (0.527), and fibrinogen (0.586) were all poor markers.

Conclusions

We have shown that both value changes and percent changes in serum markers were not sufficiently rigorous to aid in persistent infection diagnosis. The proper timing of reimplantation must, therefore, take into account various clinical tests rather than the downward trend of serum markers only.

Reinfection and re-revision rates of 113 two-stage revisions in infected TKA

Introduction: Two-stage revision is the most frequently performed revision procedure of a (suspected) periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) after total knee arthroplasty (TKA). The reported results of this treatment show large variability between studies, ranging between 0 - 40 percent failure. The purposes of this study were to determine long term (1) reinfection rate, (2) re-revision rates for any reason, and (3) the reinfection rate of patients with positive cultures at reimplantation.

Methods: We prospectively followed and retrospectively reviewed 113 consecutive two-stage revision TKAs, performed between 2003 and 2013 in our clinic with a minimum follow-up of 2 years. Diagnosis of PJI was based on the major Musculoskeletal Infection Society criteria for PJI.

Results: After a mean follow-up of 94 months (range 24-172 months), infection recurred in 23 cases (23%). Of these, nine cases (9%) were defined as relapse (same micro-organism as index revision) and in 14 cases another causative was found (14%). In 11 patients debridement, antibiotics and retention of the prosthesis successfully eradicated the reinfection. After overall follow-up 17 patients (17%) underwent re-revision surgery, 11 patients (11%) due to an infection and 6 patients (6%) for aseptic reasons.

Conclusions: Treatment of a (suspected) infection of a TKA by a two-stage revision had acceptable results based on re-revision and re-infection rates in the long term (>5 years), resembling the short-term results (<2 years). Focussing on the cultures at the index two-stage revision, episodes of relapse and new infections during follow-up were almost equally divided. Reinfection rates were higher in cases with positive cultures at reimplantation. Patients should be counselled appropriately in this particular situation.

Outcomes and predictors of treatment failure following two-stage total joint arthroplasty with articulating spacers for evolutive septic arthritis

Background

The treatment strategy for evolutive septic arthritis (SA) with coexistent degenerative joint disease is not well established. The purposes of this study were to 1) investigate treatment outcome and potential risk factors of treatment failure in patients with evolutive SA following two-stage procedure, including insertion of an antibiotic-loaded spacer at the first stage and subsequent implantation of a new prosthesis; and 2) determine the performance of serum erythrocyte sedimentation rate (ESR), C-reactive protein (CRP), and Interleukin-6 (IL-6) in predicting persisting infection at second-stage procedure.

Methods

We retrospectively reviewed 74 patients with evolutive SA of hips and knees who underwent a two-stage TJA between 2008 and 2015. The treatment success was defined according to the modified Delphi criteria and Kaplan-Meier survivorship curves were constructed to determine treatment success. A Cox regression model was performed to identify risk factors for treatment failure. Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves were generated to determine the prognostic value of ESR, CRP, and IL-6 in predicting persistent infection before second-stage prostheses implantation.

Results

Overall, the treatment success rate was 93% for hips and 100% for knees after the first-stage surgery. The treatment success rate was 89% for hips and 84% for knees after second-stage prosthesis implantation with a mean follow-up of 4.7 (range, 2.2 to 10.8) years. Older age (Hazard ratio [HR] [per 10-year increase], 1.20; 95% confidential interval [CI], 1.11 to 1.62), higher preoperative CRP level (HR [per 1-mg/dL increase], 1.15; 95% CI, 1.04 to 1.28) and resistant organism (HR, 13.96; 95% CI, 3.29 to 19.20) were associated with an increased risk of treatment failure. All serologic tests presented limited values in predicting persisting infection, with the area under ROC curve of ESR, CRP, IL-6 and combination of the three markers was 57.8, 61.6, 60.3, and 62.1%, respectively.

Conclusions

Two-stage TJA is an adequate management of infection control in patients with evolutive SA. The three potential risk factors (old age, high preoperative CRP, and resistant organism profile) may predict treatment failure following a two-stage procedure for evolutive SA. Additionally, serum ESR, CRP, and IL-6 had no benefit in predicting persisting infection before second-stage prostheses implantation. These findings may be useful when treating patients with evolutive SA.