Oral health implications in total hip and knee arthroplasty patients: A review

Preoperative dental screening can reduce periprosthetic infections of hip and knee endoprostheses in the first month after surgery: results of a cohort study

PURPOSE

The oral cavity and, in particular, potential oral foci might pose a risk of periprosthetic joint infection (PJI). The aim of this cohort study was to determine whether practical preoperative dental screening would reduce the prevalence of early PJI in the first month after surgery.

METHODS

Patients attending a specialized endoprosthesis implantation clinic between 2018 and 2022 were recruited. Two groups were examined. The test group consisted of patients attending the clinic between 2020 and 2022 and who were referred to their family dentist using a standardized form. The comparison group consisted of patients who were treated in the clinic between 2018 and 2020. They were not referred to their family dentist. The two groups were compared for the prevalence of PJI. Univariate analysis followed by multiple logistic regression was performed to confirm risk factors for PJI in this cohort.

RESULTS

2560 individuals (test group: 1227, comparison group: 1333) were included. The prevalence of PJI was significantly lower in the test group (0.8% vs. 1.8%, p = 0.04). Multiple logistic regression with PJI as the dependent variable showed that a dental referral was a strong predictor of a lower prevalence of PJI (OR: 0.43, CI95 0.205-0.917, p = 0.03). Male gender was also strongly associated with a higher frequency of PJI (OR: 2.68, CI95 1.32-5.42, p = 0.01). Age (OR: 1.06, CI95 1.01-1.10, p = 0.01) and BMI (OR: 1.11, CI95 1.05-1.17, p < 0.01) had little effect on the risk of PJI.

CONCLUSION

Dental referral using a standardized form can reduce the prevalence of early PJI. Accordingly, orthopedists and dentists should collaborate in this practical way.

Dental Therapy of Patients Prior to Endoprostheses: A Retrospective, Telephone-Based Cohort Study

The aim of this study was to assess, whether patients prior to endoprosthesis (EP) visit their dentist for need-oriented therapy and whether this would be associated with the occurrence of complications. Based on a cohort of patients, which was orally investigated prior to EP surgery between 04/2020 and 12/2021, a telephone interview was performed at least six months after EP implantation. Patients were classified into either low-risk (LR), moderate-risk (MR), or high-risk (HR) groups. Participants were interviewed based on a structured questionnaire regarding dental visits, dental therapy, and potential complications during the observational period. Out of the 311 patients from the baseline cohort, 96 patients after EP implantation could be included (participation rate of 31%). Nineteen patients were in LR (20%), 41 in MR (43%), and 36 in the HR group (37%). Overall, 79% (n = 76) of the patients followed the recommendation to visit their dentist; 94% of patients within the HR group visited the dentist (p = 0.02). Dental treatment procedures included tooth cleaning (57%), periodontal treatment (31%), restorative therapy/filling (28%), and tooth extraction (28%). In 64% of the HR patients (n = 23), the potential oral foci with a risk of EP infection were eliminated by their general dentist. Fourteen different complications occurred within the observation period, without any group effect (p > 0.05). In conclusion, most patients prior to EP visit their general dentist following referral, especially if they have a potential oral focus. The effect of dental clearance on infectious complications of EP remains unclear, whereby further clinical studies are needed.

Oral Health Screening for Risk Reduction for Early Periprosthetic Joint Infections of Hip and Knee Endoprostheses-Results of a Prospective Cohort Study

This prospective observational study had two aims: (I) to assess whether a preoperative dental screening before endoprosthesis (EP) implantation with need-based dental intervention would decrease the prevalence of periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) and (II) to evaluate whether instructed orthopedic surgeons would achieve similar results in oral screening as dentists. The preoperative oral health statuses of the patients, prior to EP insertion, were either evaluated by the patients' general dentists (Ia) or, if the patient had not visited a general dentist, by an instructed orthopedic surgeon (Ib). Both the dentist and orthopedic surgeon used standardized risk estimation (low risk, moderate risk, and high risk) for an oral-health-related infectious complication after EP insertion, including a recommendation for further management of the patient. If required, a need-based dental rehabilitation was performed. In addition, retrospective data evaluation of a comparison group (II) was performed, which had not been screened orally preoperatively. A total of 777 patients (screening group (I): n = 402, of which 229 were screened by a dentist (Ia), 173 were screened by an orthopedic surgeon (Ib); comparison group (II): n = 375) were included. No general association between early infection rate and preoperative oral screening in general was found (1% PJI in screening group (I), 1.6% PJI in comparison group (II); p = 0.455). However, screening performance (dentist vs. orthopedic surgeon) had a significant impact on the prevalence of developed PJIs (p = 0.021). Thereby, 100% of observed infections in the screening group (I) occurred in the group with previous oral screening by an orthopedic surgeon (Ib). Furthermore, the C-reactive protein (CRP) value at discharge was significantly lower when general preoperative oral screening had been performed (group I vs. group II, p = 0.03). Only preoperative oral screening by a dentist had the potential to reduce oral-focus-associated EP infections; therefore, increased attention should be paid to the further promotion of interdisciplinary work between dentists and orthopedic surgeons. Dental screenings, using objectifiable criteria, as applied in this study, seem reasonable but require further validation in larger cohorts.

Routine Preoperative Dental Clearance for Total Joint Arthroplasty: Is There a Benefit?

Background Periprosthetic joint infections (PJIs) place significant psychological and financial burdens on patients and healthcare systems. One measure to reduce the risk of PJIs is preoperative dental screening, for which there is no current consensus recommendation. This study aims to determine whether there is a difference in the rate of PJI and microorganism profile in patients who did and did not obtain preoperative dental clearance. Methodology A retrospective review was conducted among patients undergoing primary total hip arthroplasty and total knee arthroplasty from 2017 to 2021. A cohort of 8,654 patients who underwent routine dental clearance was matched with a cohort of patients who did not. Surgeons who changed their dental clearance protocol were also identified, and the rates of PJIs were compared before and after. Results No statistically significant difference was seen in the rate of PJIs between patients who did and did not undergo routine preoperative dental clearance. No statistically significant difference was seen in the rate of PJIs before and after for surgeons who changed their dental clearance protocol. The microorganism profile between the groups was also found to be without differences. Conclusions Eliminating dental clearance from routine preoperative clearance does not appear to increase the rates of acute PJIs following elective total joint arthroplasty (TJA) or to change the organism profile of the infections that did occur. It may be reasonable to not require routine preoperative dental clearance or to practice selective dental clearance in patients undergoing elective TJA, especially given the increased financial cost and delay in care experienced by patients.

Factors That Influence the Judgment of Oral Management Necessity in Preoperative Oral Screening

Oral management during the perioperative period is important to prevent the development of postoperative complications. However, there are no unified systems to examine the oral status of patients and very few studies have focused on preoperative oral screening. In this study, we examined the oral status of patients who underwent oral screening at a University Hospital. A total of 1173 patients who underwent oral screening for perioperative management from April 2020 to July 2021 were enrolled. The subjects’ medical data were retrospectively extracted from the dental records, and finally, the data of 1081 patients aged ≥20 years were analyzed. Oral screening based on seven categories was performed by dentists or dental hygienists. Our cumulative results determined whether patients required oral management during the perioperative period. “Poor oral hygiene” was the most frequent category (24%) of all oral categories examined. Logistic analysis revealed that tooth mobility had the highest odds ratio (21.476; 95% confidence interval: 11.462–40.239; p < 0.001) for oral management necessity during the perioperative period. Our study suggests that poor oral hygiene is most frequently observed in preoperative oral screening. Moreover, tooth mobility in preoperative oral screening may influence the judgment of oral management necessity during the perioperative period.