Management of periprosthetic infection after reverse shoulder arthroplasty

One- vs. Two-Stage Revision for Periprosthetic Shoulder Infections: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Periprosthetic shoulder infection (PSI) remains a challenging complication after shoulder arthroplasty. Therapeutic options include one- or two-stage revision, irrigation and debridement, and resection arthroplasty. With our systematic review and meta-analysis, we aimed to compare one- and two-stage revisions for periprosthetic shoulder joint infections and determine the most appropriate therapeutic procedure. We performed an extensive literature search in PubMed, Ovid Medline, Cochrane Library, Web of Science, and CINAHL and filtered out all relevant studies. The meta-analysis was performed using the random-effects model, heterogeneity was analyzed using I2, and publication bias was assessed using the Egger's test. A total of 8 studies with one-stage revisions, 36 studies with two-stage revisions, and 12 studies with both one-stage and two-stage revisions were included. According to the random-effects model, the reinfection rate for the entirety of the studies was 12.3% (95% Cl: 9.6-15.3), with a low-to-moderate heterogeneity of I2 = 47.72%. The reinfection rate of the one-stage revisions was 10.9%, which was significantly lower than the reinfection rate of the two-stage revisions, which was 12.93% (p = 0.0062). The one-stage revision rate was significantly lower with 1.16 vs. 2.25 revisions in the two-stage revision group (p < 0.0001). The postoperative functional outcome in one-stage-revised patients was comparable but not statistically significant (p = 0.1523). In one- and two-stage revisions, most infections were caused by Cutibacterium acnes. In summary, our systematic review and meta-analysis show the superiority of single-stage revision regarding reinfection and revision rates in periprosthetic shoulder joint infection.

Periprosthetic shoulder infection management: one-stage should be the way: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

There is still no consensus among surgeons on whether to perform a 1- or 2-stage surgical revision in infected shoulder arthroplasties. The aim of this systematic review and meta-analysis is to rigorously synthesize published studies evaluating the clinical outcomes, recurrence of infection, and other clinical complications in order to discuss which is the best strategy for treating periprosthetic joint infection after shoulder arthroplasty.

METHODS

Upon research using the PubMed, Scopus, and Web of Science databases, in November 2022, studies that presented 1- or 2-stage surgical revision as a treatment for periprosthetic joint infection after shoulder arthroplasty and assessed the reinfection rate on these patients, as well as other clinical outcomes, with a minimum follow-up of 12 months, were included. Study quality was evaluated using the Methodological Index for Non-Randomized Studies (MINORS) score. Reinfection and complication rates were extracted, and pooled estimates were calculated using the random-effect model.

RESULTS

After careful screening, 44 studies were included, 5 reporting on 1-stage and 30 on 2-stage revisions and 9 assessing both strategies. A total of 185 shoulders were reported in 1-stage revision studies, whereas 526 shoulders were reported in 2-stage revision studies. The overall pooled random-effects reinfection rate was 6.68% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 3.76-10.13), with low heterogeneity (I2 = 28%, P = .03). One-stage revision showed a reinfection rate of 1.14% (95% CI: 0.00-4.88), whereas 2-stage revision analysis revealed a reinfection rate of 8.81% (95% CI: 4.96-13.33). There were significant statistical differences between 1- and 2-stage reinfection rates (P = .04). The overall pooled rate for other clinical complications was 16.76% (95% CI: 9.49-25.15), with high heterogeneity (I2 = 70%, P < .01). One-stage revision had a complication rate of 6.11% (95% CI: 1.58-12.39), whereas the 2-stage revision complication rate was 21.26% (95% CI: 11.51-32.54). This difference was statistically significant (P = .03).

CONCLUSIONS

This is the first systematic review and meta-analysis showing significant statistical differences between 1- and 2-stage surgical revision in infected shoulder arthroplasties. Provided the right conditions exist, 1-stage revision shows better results in infection control, with lower clinical complications and possible better clinical outcomes.

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

BACKGROUND

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

METHODS

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

RESULTS

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

CONCLUSIONS

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

Outcomes after débridement, antibiotics, and implant retention for prosthetic joint infection in shoulder arthroplasty

BACKGROUND

Patients who undergo total shoulder arthroplasty usually have excellent long-term outcomes. However, a subset of patients is diagnosed with a prosthetic joint infection (PJI) requiring revision procedures and prolonged recovery. The purpose of this study was to evaluate rates of recurrent shoulder PJI in patients undergoing débridement, antibiotics, and implant retention (DAIR), single-stage revision, and 2-stage revision. We also sought to compare outcomes and complications across procedures.

METHODS

Retrospective chart review was conducted for patients diagnosed with PJI after primary shoulder arthroplasty between January 2010 and August 2021. Patients were included if they underwent treatment with DAIR, single-stage revision, or 2-stage revision. Demographic information, surgical details, complications, laboratory data, postoperative antibiotic regimen, and infectious pathogen were collected. Postoperative patient-reported outcomes were collected: American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons Standardized Shoulder Assessment Form, Single Assessment Numeric Evaluation, Shoulder Activity Scale, and PROMIS Upper Extremity. Chi-square, t test, and 1-way analysis of variance were used as appropriate to evaluate each factor.

RESULTS

Sixty-five patients were included in the study, 26% treated with DAIR, 9% treated with single-stage revision, and 65% treated with 2-stage revision. There were no significant differences in patient comorbidities. Patients undergoing DAIR were diagnosed significantly earlier than those undergoing single- and 2-stage revision procedures (12.6 ± 22.9 months vs. 49.6 ± 48.4 vs. 25.0 ± 26.6, P = .010). Recurrent PJI was noted in 23.1% of patients: 29.4% of DAIR patients, no single-stage patients, and 23.8% of 2-stage patients (P = .330). Patients undergoing 2-stage revision with treatment failure had a significantly higher Elixhauser Comorbidity Index (0.2 ± 3.7 vs. 3.7 ± 3.9, P = .027). There was no significant difference in patient-reported outcomes across groups.

CONCLUSION

Patients undergoing treatment of shoulder PJI with DAIR did not have an increased rate of reinfection compared with single-stage and 2-stage revision procedures. Patients treated with DAIR were diagnosed with PJI significantly earlier than those undergoing single-stage and 2-stage revision procedures. There was no difference in complication rates between groups. This information adds to the body of work detailing outcomes after DAIR for shoulder PJI and provides encouraging data for use in this patient population. Future studies with a larger sample size may be conducted to further investigate specific pathogens, infection timelines, and antibiotic regimens that reduce the risk of treatment failure.

Effect of osteophyte removal on simulated range of motion using 3-dimensional preoperative planning software for reverse total shoulder arthroplasty

Background

Glenohumeral osteophytes (OPs) can adversely influence postoperative range of motion (ROM) following shoulder arthroplasty due to mechanical impingement. Though commercial three-dimensional preoperative planning software (3D PPS) is available to simulate ROM before and after OP resection, little is known about the magnitude of effect OPs and their subsequent removal have on simulated glenohumeral ROM.

Methods

Included patients were 1) indicated for reverse total shoulder arthroplasty (rTSA) using 3D PPS and 2) presented with glenoid and/or humeral head OPs on preoperative two-dimensional computed tomography (2D-CT) imaging. Thirty patients met the inclusion criteria (9 females, 21 males; mean age 70.45 ± 4.99 years, range 63-80 years). All subjects (n = 30) presented with humeral OPs (mean volume: 2905.16 mm3, range 109.1-11,246 mm3), while 11 subjects also presented with glenoid OPs (mean volume 108.06 mm3, range 37.59-791.4 mm3). Preoperative CTs were used to calculate OP volume (mm3) and OP circumferential extent (clockface). Mean clockface position for circumferential humeral OPs originated at 6:09 (range 4:30-7:15) and extended to 8:51 (range 8:15-10:15). Mean clockface position for glenoid OPs originated at 3:00 (range 2:00-5:00) and extended to 6:16 (range 3:00-7:30). 3D implants on PPS were standardized to achieve 0° of version, 0° of inclination and 4 mm of net lateralization. Thirty-nine and thirty-six mm glenospheres were used for males and females, respectively. 3D PPS was used to evaluate simulated ROM differences before and after OP removal in the planes of adduction (ADD), abduction, internal rotation (IR), external rotation (ER), extension, and flexion. Impact of OP volume and circumferential extent on pre and postop removal ROM were also analyzed.

Results

Humeral OP removal significantly increased impingement-free ADD, IR, ER, extension, and flexion. Removal of larger (mm3) humeral OPs positively correlated with improvement in IR (R = 0.452, P = .011), ER (R = 0.394, P = .033), and flexion (R = 0.500, P < .01). Greater circumferential extent of humeral OPs correlated with worse preremoval ROM in the planes of ADD (R = 0.364, P = .02) and extension (R = 0.403, P = .04), and improvements in ER postop removal (R = 0.431, P = .03).

Conclusion

Humeral OP removal significantly increases impingement-free ADD, IR, ER, extension, and flexion in simulated 3D PPS models following rTSA. Magnitude of simulated ROM improvement is influenced by initial humeral OP volume and circumferential clockface extent. Surgeons should consider these effects when using 3D PPS for rTSA planning to optimize postoperative ROM prognostics.

High infection control rate after systematic one-stage procedure for shoulder arthroplasty chronic infection

PURPOSE

The two stage revision procedure is the gold standard surgical technique in chronic shoulder periprosthetic joint infection (PJI). Series of one stage revision have been published with similar outcomes but with preoperative selection of patients. The aim of this work was to report the outcomes (infection eradication, functional, and radiographic) after systematic one stage revision, without preoperative selection of patients, in chronic shoulder PJI.

METHODS

This was a retrospective monocentric study including 40 patients (14 women and 26 men) with a diagnosis of periprosthetic joint infection after a shoulder arthroplasty. A one stage shoulder prosthesis revision was performed in all patients, for a PJI evolving for more than three weeks, without preoperative patient selection. The primary endpoint was the absence of signs of persistent infection at a minimum follow-up of two years. Secondary endpoints were clinical and radiological outcomes.

RESULTS

At the last follow-up, 36/40 patients had no recurrence of infection after the one stage revision, i.e., 90% of our series. In 45% (18/40) of the cases, the microbial organism was not known at the time of the one stage revision. Cutibacterium acnes was the most frequent pathogen, found in 67.5% (27/40) of the patients. The infection was polymicrobial in 40% (16/40) of the cases. At last follow-up, mean absolute Constant score was 48.4% (16-93) and weighted score was 65.5% (22-100), and satisfaction was evaluated by the patients as excellent or good in 75% (30/40). About 20% (8/40) of the patients had a postoperative complication.

CONCLUSION

A one stage revision procedure, combined with appropriate antibiotic therapy, made it possible to eradicate the PJI in 90% of the shoulders in our series with satisfactory functional outcomes.

One-stage revision for infected shoulder arthroplasty: prospective, observational study of 37 patients

Background

Periprosthetic joint infection is a severe complication of joint replacement surgery. Thus two-stage exchange remains the gold standard, one-stage exchange is now widely recommended. We hypothesized that, for patients with chronic periprosthetic shoulder infection (PSI), treatment with a one-stage exchange would be an effective approach to eradicate infection, relieve pain, and restore function to the involved shoulder.

Materials and methods

This monocenter cohort study in a Bone and Joint Infection Referral Center (11/2003-05/2020) included all patients with confirmed PSI treated by one-stage revision. Data were extracted from the prospective database, including demographics, infection characteristics, and functional evaluations (range of motion and Constant Score at admission and last follow-up). The primary outcome was the 2-year reinfection-free rate.

Results

We included 37 patients. The refection-free rate was 5%. The most commonly isolated pathogen was Cutibacterium acnes (68%), isolated alone (15 patients, 41%) or as polymicrobial infections (10 patients, 27%). The Constant Score increased significantly from 24 to 53 (P = .001). Range of motion (forward elevation, abduction) was also significantly improved after surgery. Mean active forward elevation increased significantly by 45° from 60° to 105° postoperatively (P < .001), mean abduction increased by 42° from 55° to 97° (P < .001).

Discussion

Results from our prospective cohort-extracted series suggest that one-stage revision is a reliable treatment with a low infection recurrence rate. Improved functional outcomes can be achieved with one-stage exchange. Our patients' overall functional results were similar to those previously reported for one-stage revision and better than those reported after two-stage exchange. Patients with multiple previous surgeries seem to have worse functional outcomes than the subgroup without surgery before the index arthroplasty.

Conclusions

Our results and literature search findings suggest that one-stage revisions effectively eradicate PSIs, with good functional outcomes.

Survivorship of shoulder arthroplasty in young patients with osteoarthritis: an analysis of the Australian Orthopaedic Association National Joint Replacement Registry

BACKGROUND

The treatment of shoulder osteoarthritis in the young patient remains challenging. The higher functional demands and higher expectations of the young patient cohort are often coupled with increased failure and revision rates. Consequently, shoulder surgeons are faced with a unique challenge with implant selection. The aim of this study was to compare the survivorship and reasons for revision of 5 classes of shoulder arthroplasty in patients aged <55 years with a primary diagnosis of osteoarthritis by use of data from a large national arthroplasty registry.

METHODS

The study population included all primary shoulder arthroplasty procedures undertaken for osteoarthritis in patients aged <55 years and reported to the registry between September 1999 and December 2021. Procedures were grouped into the following classes: total shoulder arthroplasty (TSA), hemiarthroplasty resurfacing (HRA), hemiarthroplasty stemmed metallic head (HSMH), hemiarthroplasty stemmed pyrocarbon head (HSPH), and reverse total shoulder arthroplasty (RTSA). The outcome measure was the cumulative percent revision, which was defined using Kaplan-Meier estimates of survivorship to describe the time to the first revision. Hazard ratios (HRs) were calculated from Cox proportional hazards models, adjusting for age and sex, to compare revision rates among groups.

RESULTS

There were 1564 shoulder arthroplasty procedures in patients aged <55 years, of which 361 (23.1%) were HRA, 70 (4.5%) were HSMH, 159 (10.2%) were HSPH, 714 (45.7%) were TSA, and 260 (16.6%) were RTSA. HRA had a higher rate of revision than RTSA after 1 year (HRA = 2.51 (95% CI 1.30, 4.83), P = .005), with no difference prior to that time. In addition, HSMH had a higher rate of revision than RTSA for the entire period (HR, 2.69 [95% confidence interval, 1.28-5.63], P = .008). There was no significant difference in the rate of revision for HSPH and TSA when they were compared with RTSA. Glenoid erosion was the most common cause of revision for HRA (28.6% of revisions) and HSMH (50%). Instability/dislocation was the leading cause of revision for RTSA (41.7%) and HSPH (28.6%), and for TSA, the majority of revisions were for either instability/dislocation (20.6%) or loosening (18.6%).

CONCLUSION

These results should be interpreted within the context of the lack of availability of long-term data on RTSA and HSPH stems. RTSA outperforms all implants regarding revision rates at mid-term follow-up. The high early dislocation rate associated with RTSA, as well as the lack of revision options available to address this, indicates that careful selection of patients and a greater appreciation of anatomic risk factors are needed in the future.

Management of periprosthetic joint infection of shoulder arthroplasty: Single-stage versus two-stage protocols. A systematic review and meta-analysis of the literature

Background

The treatment of shoulder prosthetic joint infections (PJIs) requiring removal of the prosthesis is not well defined. This article aims to systematically review and compare the results of the literature in single-stage and two-stage protocols in the treatment of shoulder PJI.

Methods

An in-depth search on PubMed/Scopus/Web of Science databases and cross-referencing search was carried out concerning the articles reporting detailed data on the topic.

Results

A total of 486 shoulder PJIs were included: 137 treated with single-stage and 349 with two-stage procedure. A similar distribution between early and not-early infections (19.1% vs 80.9%) was found between the two groups. The overall rate of success in terms of PJI eradication was significantly higher in the single-stage group (95.6% vs 85.7%, p < 0.001). The non-infection-related complications rate was 13.8% in the single-stage group and 37.6% in the two-stage group (p < 0.001), the non-infection-related revision rate was 8% and 18.9%, respectively (p = 0.005).

Discussion

The single-phase protocol showed a higher success rate in eradicating the infection and a lower complication rate. However, the low number of patients included, the low quality of the articles, the lack of data on clinical severity and bacteriological virulence suggest caution in conclusions.

Diabetes increases risk for readmission and infection after shoulder arthroplasty: A national readmissions study of 113,713 patients

Background

The recent increasing popularity of shoulder arthroplasty has been paralleled by a rise in prevalence of diabetes in the United States. We aimed to evaluate the impact of diabetes status on readmission and short-term complications among patients undergoing shoulder arthroplasty.

Methods

We analyzed the Healthcare Cost and Utilization Project National Readmissions Database (NRD) between the years 2016-2018. Patients were included in the study if they underwent anatomic total shoulder arthroplasty (aTSA) or reverse total shoulder arthroplasty (rTSA) according to ICD-10 procedure codes. Postoperative complications including surgical site/joint infection, dislocation, prosthetic complications, hardware-related complications, non-infectious wound complications, 30-day, and 90-day readmission were collected.

Results

A total of 113,713 shoulder arthroplasty patients were included. 23,749 (20.9%) had a diagnosis of diabetes and 89,964 (79.1%) did not. On multivariate analysis, a diagnosis of diabetes led to an increased risk of 30-day (OR: 1.24; 95% CI: [1.14, 1.34]; p < 0.001) and 90-day (OR: 1.18; 95% CI: [1.12, 1.25]; p < 0.001) readmission, surgical site/joint infection (OR: 1.21; 95% CI: [1.06, 1.38]; p = 0.005), respiratory complication (OR: 1.34; 95% CI: [1.09, 1.64]; p = 0.005), postoperative infection (OR: 1.22; 95% CI [1.07, 1.39]; p = 0.003), and deep vein thrombosis (OR: 1.38; 95% CI: [1.09, 1.74]; p = 0.007).

Conclusions

Our findings suggest that patients with diabetes may be at an increased risk of readmission, infection, respiratory complication, and deep vein thrombosis following shoulder arthroplasty. Shoulder surgeons should consider these potential adverse events when planning postoperative care for patients with diabetes.

Success of staged revision reverse total shoulder arthroplasty in eradication of periprosthetic joint infection

INTRODUCTION

Management of periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) in shoulder arthroplasty remains a challenge, with no established gold standard treatment. This study presents the unique experience of a high-volume single-surgeon, single-institution approach on staged revision reverse total shoulder arthroplasty (RTSA) for infection. The authors theorize that staged revision RTSA is an effective treatment for PJI.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Between 2013 and 2018, 38 patients underwent a staged RTSA for treatment of PJI. Patient histories were collected and classified using Cierny-Mader classification. Infection workup for all patients included radiographs, laboratory indices, and computed tomographic aspiration arthrogram. PJI was identified based on high clinical and radiographic suspicion, elevated serologic markers, and/or aspirate culture results per 2018 International Consensus Meeting Shoulder guidelines on Orthopedic Infections. All patients underwent first stage with implant removal, irrigation and débridement, and antibiotic spacer placement. Next, intravenous antibiotics were administered by infectious disease consultants for a minimum of 6 weeks. Infection workup was then repeated and, if normalized, final-stage revision commenced with antibiotic spacer removal and revision to RTSA. If indices were persistently abnormal, an additional stage of débridement and spacer placement procedure was performed. Treatment failure was defined as recurrent periprosthetic infection after final prosthesis implantation or persistently elevated indices despite adequate débridement and spacer placement.

RESULTS

Mean age of the cohort was 68 (standard deviation [SD] 8.9) years and mean follow-up was 33 (SD 14) months with 34 Cierny-Mader C hosts and 4 B hosts. Patients underwent a mean of 2 (SD 1.1) previous surgeries. The staged revision protocol was successful in 34 (89.5%) patients for management of PJI. Four patients (10.5%) were considered failures with recurrent infections at a mean of 13 months (range 2-26 months) after the final RTSA implantation and underwent repeat staged revisions. Of the 34 patients who had successful infection eradication, 31 had 2-stage treatment and 3 had to undergo 3 stages. There were no treatment-associated mortalities and 10 major complications (26%), including permanent neuropathy, instability, and periprosthetic fractures. The most common cultured microorganism was Cutibacterium acnes (18%), with no polymicrobial infections detected.

DISCUSSION

Although there are multiple treatment options for PJI management, staged revision remains an effective means of treatment. Although there were several patients who required an additional stage of treatment, and a significant complication rate, staged revision RTSA proved successful in the ultimate eradication of the PJI.

[Shoulder periprosthetic infections-what to do? : Diagnosis and treatment]

Treatment of an infected shoulder prosthesis differs significantly from other joint infections because of the unique microbiome, dominated by Cutibacterium acnes. The cause of an infection, its time of onset, the bacterial spectrum and comorbidities have to be considered for evaluation and treatment. The diagnostic workup is sometimes complex, and the recognition of a chronic and low-grade infection is often difficult because typical clinical and laboratory markers may be normal. Treatment is surgical; the therapeutic spectrum ranges from arthroscopic irrigation and open debridement with the exchange of components to one- and two-stage revisions using antibiotic-loaded spacers. Early detection and a targeted, appropriate therapy are crucial to avoid extensive soft tissue and bone damage.

Prosthetic joint infections of the shoulder: A review of the recent literature

Introduction

Shoulder arthroplasty is a common treatment for shoulder arthritis. Prosthetic joint infection of the shoulder (PJIS) is a debilitating complication to the patient and the healthcare system. Incidence of infection is 0.98-5% for primary arthroplasty. The mean hospital cost for two-stage revision was approximately $35,824. The aim of this paper is to review the recent literature and collate the latest evidence to aid diagnosis and treatment of this serious complication.

Methods

A literature review was performed using PubMed and Google Scholar databases. A search strategy was adopted using the keywords: 'infection' AND 'shoulder arthroplasty' OR 'total shoulder arthroplasty'OR 'TSA' OR 'reverse shoulder arthroplasty' OR 'RSA' OR 'rTSA'. This initial search resulted in 349 articles. A PRISMA flowchart process was followed. Duplicates were removed, screening was performed and the resulting full texts were analysed and further excluded, leaving 46 articles suitable for inclusion. A PICO search strategy was also used.

Results and interpretation

Risk factors for PJIS include procedure type, trauma indications and patient factors.The organism commonly isolated is Cutebacterium acnes, which makes diagnosis challenging due to its indolent nature. Investigations include biochemical tests, synovial aspirate, tissue cultures and radiological examinations.Treatment depends on the depth of the infection and the patient requirements. Medical treatment with antibiotics to local debridement, cement spacer and revision arthroplasty have all been described in the literature. A multidisciplinary decision is made on the microbiological evidence and patient factors.

Conclusion

PJIS is a rare but potentially devastating complication of shoulder arthroplasty and diagnosis is often challenging. There has been much research performed recently, providing more evidence on how to optimise management.

Risk Factors for Periprosthetic Joint Infection after Shoulder Arthroplasty: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) after shoulder arthroplasty is a devastating complication that requires several additional surgeries. The purpose of this study was to assess the evidence regarding risk factors for PJI and identify those that contribute to infection by performing a meta-analysis. We searched the PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Library databases for studies that assessed the risk factors for infection after shoulder arthroplasty. After performing screening and quality assessment on the articles, we obtained two case-control studies and six retrospective cohort studies (total of 420 infected cases and 28,464 controls). Review Manager 5.4 was used to assess the heterogeneity and odds ratio for 20 different factors that broadly included demographic factors, perioperative factors, and comorbidities. Factors that are markedly associated with PJI after shoulder arthroplasty were male sex, operation history, revision arthroplasty, acute trauma, and non-osteoarthritis as a preoperative diagnosis. Statistical analysis revealed that diabetes mellitus, liver disease, alcohol overuse, iron-deficiency anemia, and rheumatoid arthritis were risk factors for PJI after shoulder arthroplasty. The result of analysis shows that several specific factors can be targeted to prevent infections after shoulder arthroplasty. Surgeons should consider the risk factors and perform the appropriate management for patients.

Outcomes after resection arthroplasty versus permanent antibiotic spacer for salvage treatment of shoulder periprosthetic joint infections: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Although revision to new components is favored after shoulder periprosthetic joint infections (PJIs), implant exchange is not always feasible. In certain cases, definitive treatment may be retainment of an antibiotic spacer or resection arthroplasty. The purpose of this investigation was to systematically review the literature for studies reporting on outcomes after resection arthroplasty or permanent antibiotic spacer for salvage treatment of shoulder PJIs.

METHODS

A systematic review was performed using Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. PubMed, SCOPUS, and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials were searched for Level I-IV studies that reported on the final treatment of periprosthetic shoulder infections using resection arthroplasty or a permanent antibiotic spacer. Data recorded included study demographics, causative infectious organism, shoulder-specific range of motion and outcome measures, and infection eradication rate. Study methodological quality was analyzed using the Methodological Index for Non-Randomized Studies score. Forest plots of proportions and meta-analyses of single means were generated for infection eradication rates and outcomes, respectively. Heterogeneity was quantified using the I² statistic. A P value of .05 was set as significant.

RESULTS

The initial search yielded 635 articles (211 duplicates, 424 screened, 57 full-text review). Twenty-three articles (126 resection arthroplasty and 177 retained antibiotic spacer patients, 51% females, mean age range 37-78.5 years, mean Methodological Index for Non-Randomized Studies score 9.6 ± 0.7) were included and analyzed. The pooled infection eradication rate was 82% (72%-89%) after resection arthroplasty and 85% (79%-90%) after permanent antibiotic spacer. The pooled mean forward flexion (71.5° vs. 48.7°; P < .001) and mean American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons score (53.5 vs. 31.0; P < .001) were significantly higher for patients treated with a permanent antibiotic spacer compared with resection arthroplasty. No significant differences were found for mean external rotation (13.5° vs. 20.5°; P = .07), abduction (58.2° vs. 50.3°; P = .27), or visual analog scale pain (3.7 vs. 3.4; P = .24) between groups. There was a statistically significant, but not clinically significant, difference in mean Constant score between permanent antibiotic spacer and resection arthroplasty patients (33.6 vs. 30.0; P < .001).

CONCLUSION

When implant exchange after shoulder PJI is not feasible, permanent antibiotic spacers and resection arthroplasty are both salvage procedures that provide similar rates of infection eradication. Although both can decrease pain levels, the permanent antibiotic spacer may result in better functional outcomes compared with resection arthroplasty.

Periprosthetic Infections of the Shoulder Joint: Characteristics and 5-Year Outcome of a Single-Center Series of 19 Cases

Periprosthetic shoulder infection (PSI) remains a devastating complication after total shoulder arthroplasty (TSA). Furthermore, there is a paucity in the literature regarding its diagnostic and therapeutic management, especially the absence of therapy concepts devised exclusively for PSI. The aim of the presenting study is to examine the characteristics and outcome of patients with PSI who were treated according to well-established algorithms developed originally for periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) of the hip and knee and determine if these algorithms can be applied to PSI. This single-center case series included all patients with a PSI presenting between 2010 and 2020. Recorded parameters included age, sex, affected side, BMI, ASA score, Charlson comorbidity index, preoperative anticoagulation, indication for TSA (fracture, osteoarthritis or cuff-arthropathy), and type of infection (acute or chronic PSI). The outcome was divided into treatment failure or infect resolution. Staphylococcus epidermidis and aureus were the commonest infecting pathogens. Acute PSI was mainly treated with debridement, irrigation, and retention of the prosthesis (DAIR) and chronic cases with two/multiple-stage exchange. The treatment failure rate was 10.5%. C-reactive protein was preoperatively elevated in 68.4% of cases. The mean number of operative revisions was 3.6 ± 2.6, and the mean total duration of antibiotic treatment was 72.4 ± 41.4 days. The most administered antibiotic was a combination of clindamycin and fluoroquinolone. In summary, the data of the current study suggest that therapeutical algorithms and recommendations developed for the treatment of PJI of the hip and knee are also applicable to PSI.