Plasma D-dimer Does Not Anticipate the Fate of Reimplantation in Two-stage Exchange Arthroplasty for Periprosthetic Joint Infection: A Preliminary Investigation

Advancements in treatment strategies for periprosthetic joint infections: A comprehensive review

Periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) presents a critical challenge in orthopedic care, contributing to significant patient morbidity and healthcare costs. This burden is expected to increase secondary to growing demand for total joint arthroplasty (TJA). Despite the profound significance of PJI, there is currently no universally accepted "gold standard" diagnostic criteria using serum biomarker thresholds; latest criteria fail to differentiate acute infections from chronic or consider time since initial surgery. Furthermore, contemporary PJI treatment, which conventionally requires 2-stage revision surgery in conjunction with rigorous antibiotic treatment, can be particularly taxing on patients. Fortunately, recent years have seen marked evolution in both PJI diagnosis and treatment methods. Contemporary research supports time-dependent serum biomarker thresholds with greater sensitivity and specificity than previously reported, as well as alternative surgical options which may be more suitable for certain patients. The following narrative review aims to describe the significance and pathogenesis of PJI before characterizing current challenges, novel innovations, and the future landscape of PJI diagnosis and management. Here, we spotlight the emerging utility of novel biomarkers and metagenomic next-generation sequencing for diagnosis, advancements in patient-centered surgical outcome prediction tools for PJI risk assessment and prevention, and evolving surgical techniques including 1-stage and a "hybrid" 1.5-stage revision surgeries. Additionally, we explore cutting-edge therapeutic modalities including peptide and bacteriophage-based treatments, intraoperative anti-biofilm gel, the VT-X7 antibiotic pump, and promising immune-based interventions. Ultimately, these advancements hold the potential to revolutionize PJI management, offering hope for improved outcomes and reduced burdens on healthcare systems.

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.

Rotational Thromboelastometry as a Diagnostic Tool for Persistent Infection in Two-Stage Exchange Arthroplasty

Background/Objectives: There is a lack of reliable biomarkers for diagnosis of infection eradication prior to second-stage reimplantation in two-stage exchange arthroplasty for periprosthetic joint infections (PJIs). The aim of this study was to assess the diagnostic accuracy of rotational thromboelastometry (ROTEM) for persistent infection in two-stage exchange arthroplasties. Methods: A pilot, retrospective analysis was performed including 70 patients who underwent a two-stage exchange arthroplasty for PJI. They were categorized as patients without (n = 64) or patients with persistent infection (n = 6) prior to reimplantation. Definition of persistent infection prior to reimplantation was based on the 2018 ICM criteria. Conventional coagulation biomarkers and ROTEM parameters were compared between groups. Results: Higher FIBTEM MCF values were associated with persistent infection (odds ratio [OR], 1.30, 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.04-1.63; p = 0.020), and FIBTEM MCF had the highest diagnostic accuracy for persistent infection prior to second-stage reimplantation (AUC, 0.907; 95% CI, 0.812-1.000). A cut-off value ≥ 18 mm for FIBTEM MCF was found to have 100.0% sensitivity and 73.4% specificity for diagnosing persistent infection prior to second-stage reimplantation. Moreover, the diagnostic accuracy of FIBTEM MCF was higher than that of fibrinogen levels (p = 0.036) and D-dimer (p = 0.006). Conclusions: Our findings indicate that ROTEM parameters have the potential to identify persistent infections before reimplantation in two-stage exchange arthroplasties for PJI. Such coagulation biomarkers could provide guidance regarding the optimal timing for reimplantation. Further studies in larger populations are warranted to validate the diagnostic accuracy of ROTEM parameters for persistent PJI.

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.

Does Performance of D-Dimer for Diagnosis of Periprosthetic Joint Infection Change with the Virulence of Infecting Organism?

INTRODUCTION

The impact of the organism virulence on diagnostic accuracy of D-Dimer for periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) is unknown. Our objective was to assess if the performance of D-Dimer in PJI diagnosis changes with the virulence of the organism(s).

METHODS

Retrospective review of 143 consecutive revision total hip/knee arthroplasties (THA/TKAs) with D-Dimer ordered preoperatively. Operations were performed by 3 surgeons at a single institution (November 2017 through September 2020). There were 141 revisions with complete 2013-International Consensus Meeting (ICM)-criteria initially included. This criteria was used to classify revisions as aseptic vs. septic. Culture-negative septic revisions (n=8) were excluded, and 133 revisions (47-hips/86-knees; 67-septic/66-aseptic) were analyzed. Based on culture results, septic-revisions were categorized into 'low-virulence (LV/n=40)' or 'high-virulence (HV/n=27)'. The D-Dimer threshold (850-ng/mL) was tested against 2013-ICM-criteria ("standard") in identifying septic-revisions (LV/HV) from aseptic-revisions. Sensitivity, specificity, and positive/negative-predictive-values (PPV/NPV) were determined. Receiver-operating-characteristic-curve-analyses were performed.

RESULTS

Plasma D-Dimer showed high sensitivity (97.5%) and NPV (95.4%) in LV septic cases, which appeared to reduce by about 5% in HV septic cases (sensitivity=92.5% and NPV=91.3%). However, this marker had poor overall accuracy (LV=57%; HV=49.4%), low specificity (LV and HV=31.8%), and PPV (LV=46.4%; HV=35.7%) to diagnose PJI. The area under the curve (AUC) was 0.647 and 0.622 in LV and HV vs. aseptic revisions, respectively.

CONCLUSION

D-Dimer performs poorly to identify septic from aseptic revisions in the setting of LV/HV infecting organisms alike. However, it shows high sensitivity for PJI diagnosis in cases of low virulence organisms which might be missed by most diagnostic tests.

Utility of D-dimer in total joint arthroplasty

As the number of patients receiving total joint replacements continues to rise, considerable attention has been directed towards the early detection and prevention of postoperative complications. While D-dimer has long been studied as a diagnostic tool in venous thromboembolism (VTE), this assay has recently received considerable attention in the diagnosis of periprosthetic joint infection (PJI). D-dimer values are substantially elevated in the acute postoperative period after total joint arthroplasty, with levels often exceeding the standard institutional cutoff for VTE (500 µg/L). The utility of D-dimer in detecting VTE after total joint replacement is currently limited, and more research to assess its value in the setting of contemporary prophylaxis protocols is warranted. Recent literature supports D-dimer as a good to excellent biomarker for the diagnosis of chronic PJI, especially when using serum sample technique. Providers should exercise caution when interpreting D-dimer levels in patients with inflammatory and hypercoagulability disorders, as the diagnostic value is decreased. The updated 2018 Musculoskeletal Infection Society criteria, which includes D-dimer levels > 860 µg/L as a minor criterion, may be the most accurate for diagnosing chronic PJI to date. Larger prospective trials with transparent lab testing protocols are needed to establish best assay practices and optimal cutoff values for D-dimer in the diagnosis of PJI. This review summarizes the most current literature on the value of D-dimer in total joint arthroplasty and elucidates areas for future progress.

Utility of Diagnostic Tests Before Reimplantation in Patients Undergoing 2-Stage Revision Total Joint Arthroplasty: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

INTRODUCTION

Periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) is a devastating complication after total joint arthroplasty (TJA), with treatment failure occurring in 12% to 28% after 2-stage revision. It is vital to identify diagnostic tools indicative of persistent infection or treatment failure after 2-stage revision for PJI.

METHODS

The Cochrane Library, PubMed (MEDLINE), and EMBASE were searched for randomized controlled trials and comparative observational studies published before October 3, 2021, which evaluated the utility of serum/plasma biomarkers (erythrocyte sedimentation rate [ESR], C-reactive protein [CRP], interleukin-6 [IL-6], fibrinogen, D-dimer), synovial biomarkers (white blood cell [WBC] count, neutrophil percentage [PMN %], alpha-defensin [AD], leukocyte esterase [LE]), tissue frozen section, tissue culture, synovial fluid culture, or sonicated spacer fluid culture indicative of persistent infection before the second stage of 2-stage revision for PJI or treatment failure after 2-stage revision for PJI.

RESULTS

A total of 47 studies including 6,605 diagnostic tests among 3,781 2-stage revisions for PJI were analyzed. Among those cases, 723 (19.1%) experienced persistent infection or treatment failure. Synovial LE (sensitivity 0.25 [0.10-0.47], specificity 0.99 [0.93-1.00], positive likelihood ratio 14.0 [1.45-135.58]) and serum IL-6 (sensitivity 0.52 [0.33-0.70], specificity 0.92 [0.85-0.96], positive likelihood ratio 7.90 [0.86-72.61]) had the highest diagnostic accuracy. However, no biomarker was associated with a clinically useful negative likelihood ratio. In subgroup analysis, synovial PMN %, synovial fluid culture, serum ESR, and serum CRP had limited utility for detecting persistent infection before reimplantation (positive likelihood ratios ranging 2.33-3.74; negative likelihood ratios ranging 0.31-0.9) and no utility for predicting failure after the second stage of 2-stage revision.

CONCLUSIONS

Synovial WBC count, synovial PMN %, synovial fluid culture, serum ESR, and serum CRP have modest sensitivity and specificity for predicting persistent infection during the second stage of 2-stage revision, suggesting some combination of these diagnostic tests might be useful before reimplantation. No biomarker or culture accurately predicted treatment failure after reimplantation.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

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

Paradoxical Behavior of Plasma d-Dimer From Explantation to Reimplantation in a Two-Stage Revision for Periprosthetic Joint Infection

BACKGROUND

The variation of plasma d-dimer, an inflammatory marker, from pre-explantation to pre-reimplantation in two-stage revision remains unclear. Our objective was to evaluate delta-changes (Δ) in d-dimer, erythrocyte sedimentation rate (ESR), and C-reactive-protein (CRP), to ascertain whether these delta-changes are associated with the outcome of reimplantation. We hypothesized a decrease in d-dimer before reimplantation.

METHODS

A retrospective review was performed on a consecutive series of 95 two-stage revisions indicated for periprosthetic joint infection. Surgeries were performed by 3 surgeons at a single institution (2018-2020). The minimum follow-up was 1 year. The inclusion criteria comprised availability of d-dimer results at pre-explantation and pre-reimplantation. As a result, only 30 reimplantations were included. Success of reimplantation was defined by Musculoskeletal Infection Society outcome reporting tool: Tier 1/Tier 2 vs Tier 3/Tier 4. Nonparametric tests and Mann-Whitney U-tests were conducted to compare Δd-dimer% (pre-explantation value - pre-reimplantation value/pre-explantation value × 100). The bootstrapped receiver operating characteristic curve analyses with 2,000 replicates of 30 cases were conducted.

RESULTS

The median time between explantation and reimplantation was 86 days (interquartile range [IQR] = 77.7-138.5 days). Overall, a paradoxical median percent increase (Δd-Dimer% [INCREMENT] = 12.6%) in d-dimer was found from pre-explantation to pre-reimplantation (IQR = -28.06% to 77.3%). However, there was a percentage decrease in ESR (ΔESR% [DECREMENT] = -40%; IQR = -70.52% to 3.85%) and CRP (ΔCRP% [DECREMENT] = -75%; IQR = -87.43% to -61.34%). The changes in all these markers were not different between Musculoskeletal Infection Society Tier 1/2 and 3/4 outcomes (Δd-Dimer%, P = .146; ΔESR%, P = .946; ΔCRP%, P = .463). With area under curve of 0.676, Δd-dimer% (INCREMENT) appeared to be performing best in diagnosing infection control, which was nonexplanatory.

CONCLUSION

Plasma d-dimer paradoxically increases before reimplantation while other inflammatory markers (ESR/CRP) decrease, emphasizing that surgeons shall adopt caution using d-dimer to make clinical decisions.

Synovial White Blood Cell Count and Differential to Predict Successful Infection Management in a Two-Stage Revision

BACKGROUND

An array of synovial white blood cell (WBC) count and polymorphonuclear differential (PMN%) thresholds have been reported using 2013 Musculoskeletal Infection Society (MSIS) definition which has a poor accuracy to confirm infection control before reimplantation. The workgroup of MSIS recently developed a comprehensive definition of successful infection management. Our objectives were to determine optimal thresholds for WBC count and PMN% associated with reimplantation success based on this new MSIS definition and assess if values above these thresholds indicate decreased survival time.

METHODS

A retrospective review was conducted on a consecutive series of 133 two-stage hip/knee arthroplasties performed by 15 surgeons (2014-2020) at 2 institutions. All surgeries had a minimum follow-up of 1 year. The inclusion criteria included reporting of preoperative synovial fluid aspiration results. Thus, 88 were finally included. Surgical success was defined by MSIS outcome reporting tool (Tiers 1-4). Receiver operating characteristic curve analyses were performed to estimate optimal thresholds of WBC count and PMN%. A Kaplan-Meier survival analyses with log-rank test were performed.

RESULTS

With area under the curve of 0.65, synovial PMN% showed superior accuracy than WBC count (area under the curve = 0.52) in determining outcome of reimplantation. The optimal PMN% threshold (62%) demonstrated sensitivity of 57% and specificity of 77%. The calculated WBC count threshold (2,733/μL) showed poor sensitivity (21%) but high specificity (95%). There was a significant difference in failure-free survival (24 months) between the cases with WBC count higher vs lower than 2,733/μL (P = .002). This was also true for PMN% at 5 months postoperatively (P = .009).

CONCLUSION

WBC count (2,733/μL) shows very high specificity to confirm successful reimplantation. Both WBC count and PMN% (62%) thresholds can significantly determine reimplantation survival.