Synovial Fluid Aspiration Should Not Be Routinely Performed during the Two-Stage Exchange of the Knee

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.

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.

Automatic Detection of Two Synovial Fluid Periprosthetic Joint Infection Biomarkers on an Integrated Microfluidic System

Post-arthroplasty periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) is a serious ailment that can be difficult to diagnose. Herein, we developed a novel integrated microfluidic system (IMS) capable of detecting two common PJI biomarkers, alpha defensin human neutrophil peptide 1 (HNP-1) and C-reactive protein (CRP), from synovial fluid (SF). A magnetic bead-based one-aptamer-one-antibody assay was carried out automatically within 45 min on a single chip for simultaneous detection of both biomarkers at concentration ranges of 0.01-50 (HNP-1) and 1-100 (CRP) mg/L. It is the first report for utilizing these two biomarkers as targets to establish the new one-aptamer-one-antibody assay to detect PJI on-chip, and the aptamers demonstrated high specificity to their SF targets. As 20 clinical samples were correctly diagnosed with our IMS (verified by a common gold standard kit), it could serve as a promising tool for PJI diagnostics.

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.

Against the Norm: Do Not Rely on Serum C-Reactive Protein and White Blood Cell Count Only When Assessing Eradication of Periprosthetic Joint Infection

Introduction: Periprosthetic joint infections (PJI) following primary arthroplasty continue to be a serious complication, despite advances in diagnostics and treatment. Two-stage revision arthroplasty has been commonly used as the gold standard for the treatment of PJI. However, much discussion persists regarding the interim of the two-stage procedure and the optimal timing of reimplantation. Serology markers have been proposed as defining parameters for a successful reimplantation. The objective of this matched-pair analysis was to assess the role of serum C-reactive protein (CRP) and white blood cell count (WBC) in determining infection eradication and proper timing of reimplantation. We investigated the delta (∆) change in CRP and WBC values prior to both stages of two-stage revision arthroplasty as a useful marker of infection eradication. Methods: We analyzed 39 patients and 39 controls, matched by propensity score matching (BMI, age, ASA-classification), with a minimum follow-up of 24 months and treated with a two-stage revision THA or TKA in our institution. Data of serum CRP and WBC values were gathered at two selected time points: prior to the explantation of the implant (preexplantation) and following the completion of antibiotic treatment regimen, both systemic and with a drug-eluting cement spacer (prereimplantation). Patient records were reviewed electronically for preexisting comorbidities, overall health status, synovial fluid cultures, inflammatory serologies, revision surgeries, and recurrent or persistent infection based on the modified Musculoskeletal Infection Society criteria. Patient demographics, ∆CRP, ∆WBC, and time interval to reimplantation were statistically analyzed using receiver operator curves (ROC), Pearson’s correlation coefficient, Levene’s test, and Student’s t-test. Results: Infection-free patients exhibited higher mean CRP and WBC than did patients who were reinfected at both time points. When comparing preexplantation with prereimplantation values, the median ∆CRP was 9.48 mg/L (interquartile range (IQR) 2.3−36.6 mg/L) for patients who did not develop a reinfection versus 2.74 mg/L (IQR 1.4−14.2 mg/L) for patients who developed reinfection (p = 0.069). The median ∆WBC was 1.5 × 109/L (IQR 0.6−4.0 × 109/L) for patients who remained infection-free versus 1.2 × 109/L (IQR 0.8−2.2 109/L) for patients who developed reinfection (p = 0.072). Analysis of areas under the curve (AUC) using ROC demonstrated poor prediction of persistent infection by ∆CRP (AUC = 0.654) and ∆WBC (AUC = 0.573). Although a highly significant correlation was found between the interim interval and infection persistence (r = 0.655, p < 0.01), analysis using ROC failed to result in a specific threshold time to reimplantation above which patients are at significantly higher risk for reinfection (AUC = 0.507). Conclusion: No association could be determined between the delta change in serum CRP and WBC before and after two-stage revision arthroplasty for PJI and reinfection risk. Even though inflammatory serologies demonstrate a downtrending pattern prior to reimplantation, the role of CRP and WBC in determining the optimal timing of reimplantation seems to be dispensable. Planning a second-stage reimplantation requires assessing multiple variables rather than relying on specific numeric changes in these inflammatory marker values.

Role of joint aspiration before re-implantation in patients with a cement spacer in place

BACKGROUND

The usefulness of a mandatory joint aspiration before re-implantation in patients with a cement spacer already in place is unclear.

AIM

To evaluate the role of culturing synovial fluid obtained by joint aspiration before re-implantation in patients who underwent a two-stage septic revision.

METHODS

A retrospective observational study was conducted, including patients that underwent a two-stage septic revision (hip or knee) from 2010 to 2017. After the first stage revision and according to intraoperative culture results, all patients were treated with an antibiotic protocol for 6-8 wk. Following 2 wk without antibiotics, a culture of synovial fluid was obtained. The results of these cultures were recorded and compared with cultures obtained during re-implantation surgery.

RESULTS

Forty-one patients (20 hip and 21 knee spacers) were included in the final analysis. In 39 cases, the culture of synovial fluid was negative, while in the remaining 2 cases (knee spacers) no analysis was possible due to dry tap. In 5 of the patients, two or more intraoperative cultures taken during the re-implantation surgery were positive.

CONCLUSION

We found no evidence to support mandatory joint aspiration before re-implantation in patients with a cement spacer in place.

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.

The role of synovial fluid aspiration in shoulder joint infections

BACKGROUND

Joint aspiration with analysis of synovial fluid white blood cell count (WBC) and microbiological culture is a widely established aspect in the diagnosis of shoulder joint infections (SJI). In case of a two stage revision for SJI, joint aspiration before re-/implantation of a total shoulder arthroplasty (TSA) was used to rule out persistent infection for years but its value is under debate. Shoulder specific data on all aspects is rare. The current study aims to answer the following research questions: Does joint aspiration have an insufficient predictive value in the diagnosis of SJI in (1) initial workup and (2) before definite arthroplasty with polymethylmethacrylate (PMMA)-Spacer in place?

METHODS

This retrospective evaluation investigates 35 patients that were treated for SJI with a two staged implantation of a TSA after debridement and implantation of an PMMA-Spacer. Joint aspirations were performed preoperatively (PA) and before re-/implantation of the prosthesis while spacer was in place (interstage aspiration, IA). Samples were taken for microbiological culture and analysis of WBC. Sensitivity and specificity were calculated with reference to intraoperative microbiological samples. Receiver Operating Characteristic (ROC), Area-Under-Curve analysis (AUC) and calculation of the Youden index were performed to find optimum cut-off for WBC.

RESULTS

The sensitivity of microbiological cultures from PA was 58.3% and the specificity was 88.9%. The mean WBC was 27,800 leucocytes/mm³ (range 400-96,300). The maximum Youden index (0.857) was a cut-off of 2600 leucocytes/mm³ with a sensitivity of 85.7% and a specificity of 100.0%. The sensitivity and specificity of IA were 0.0% and 88.5%, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

Preoperative aspiration is likely to miss Cutibacteria spp. and CoNS and cannot rule out infection for sure. However, we recommend it for its advantages of targeted antibiotic therapy in case of germ identification. Empiric antibiotic therapy should cover Cutibacteria and CoNS even if aspiration showed negative microbiological cultures. In contrast, the diagnostic value of interstage aspiration does not qualify for its routine use.

Do Pre-Reimplantation Erythrocyte Sedimentation Rate/C-Reactive Protein Cutoffs Guide Decision-Making in Prosthetic Joint Infection? Are We Flying Blind?

BACKGROUND

Two-stage exchange is a commonly used approach for treating chronic periprosthetic joint infections (PJI). A pre-reimplantation threshold value of erythrocyte sedimentation rate (ESR) and C-reactive protein (CRP) to determine infection eradication and the proper timing of reimplantation remains ill-defined.

METHODS

We retrospectively reviewed 483 potential patients for eligibility. In total, 178 patients were excluded. In addition, 305 joints were eligible who underwent 2-stage revision for prosthetic hip or knee joint infection (PJI). Serum ESR and CRP were recorded at 8 weeks post resection prior to stage 2 reimplantation. ESR and CRP were analyzed with receiver operating characteristic curves (ROC) for response failure.

RESULTS

In total, 252 patients had resections for chronic infections while 53 septic patients had resections for acute infections. Forty-one of 252 (16.3%) patients failed reimplantation. Median ESR at the time of reimplantation was 17 (normal less than 20 mm/h). Median CRP was 0.6 (normal less than 0.5 mg/dL). ROC plot for response failure in analyzing ESR found an area under the curve (AUC) of 0.47. ROC plot analyzing CRP found an AUC of 0.57. The ratio of ESR/CRP was also utilized and found an AUC of 0.60. All of the AUC data are in the "fail to discriminate category."

CONCLUSION

Although improvements in serology can be somewhat reassuring, there are no statistically significant values of ESR or CRP that would predict failure of reimplantation in the 2-stage treatment of PJI. Because we are flying blind consideration should be made for mandatory pre-reimplantation aspirates.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level IV, Retrospective Case Series.

Does the Implementation of the PRO-IMPLANT Foundation Treatment Algorithm Improve the Outcome of Chronic Periprosthetic Knee Infections? Mid-Term Results of a Prospective Study

BACKGROUND

Several treatment options for chronic periprosthetic joint infections have been published in the current literature, with an on-going discussion to determine effective management algorithms.

OBJECTIVES

To compare outcomes of the two-stage exchange procedure in revision TKA prior to and after implementation of the PRO-IMPLANT Foundation treatment algorithm. The primary endpoints were defined as (i) revisions during the interval time, (ii) duration of the interval time and (iii) successful PJI eradication.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

Between 02/2013 and 09/2016, 122 patients were included in a single-centre cohort analysis. 55 patients were treated according to the previously used algorithm (K1) and 67 according to the PRO-IMPLANT Foundation algorithm (K2). A minimum follow-up period of 3 years was set as the inclusion criterion. Successful eradication of infection was defined in accordance with the consensus criteria by Diaz-Ledezma et al. RESULTS: Successful eradication was achieved in 42 (67%) patients in K1 and 47 (85.5%) in K2 (p ≤ 0.005). The mean interval time was 88 days (range 51 - 353) in K1 and 52 days (range 42 - 126) in K2 (p ≤ 0.005). In K1, a mean of 0.8 (range 0 - 6) revisions were necessary during the interval period compared with 0.5 (range 0 - 4) in K2 (p = 0.066).

CONCLUSION

Implementation of the PRO-IMPLANT treatment algorithm led to significant improvement in the outcome of periprosthetic joint infections. During mid-term follow-up, infection eradication was highly successful, with decreases in the interval time as well as the number of revisions.

Diagnosis and management of infected arthroplasty

Periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) is one of the most dreadful complications after THA and TKA. Though prevention is of utmost importance in PJI management, the last decade has seen many remarkable developments in PJI diagnosis, including the introduction of several standardized PJI diagnostic definitions and biomarkers. Depending on the specific clinical situation, a myriad of treatment options for PJI are offered. Our review aims to summarize the pertinent information on PJI diagnosis and synthesize literature on the different treatment methods currently used in clinical practice. One of the most accepted PJI diagnostic definitions was developed by the Musculoskeletal Infection Society (MSIS) in 2011, later modified in the 2013 International Consensus Meeting (ICM). After promising results from studies, alpha-defensins and D-dimer were recently incorporated into the 2018 ICM PJI definition. The management choices for PJI include irrigation and debridement (DAIR), one-stage exchange arthroplasty, or two-stage exchange arthroplasty, to name a few. While two-stage revision has traditionally been the treatment of choice in the United States, there has been a growing body of evidence framing one-stage revision as a comparable choice. One-stage revision should be offered in patients meeting strict selection criteria: no sinus tract, proper soft tissue available for wound closure, appropriate bone stock, a favorable identifiable organism with encouraging antibiotic sensitivities (for cement and oral suppression later), and robust immunological status. DAIR can be considered in case of early infections with sensitive infecting organisms. Patients with multiple unsuccessful revisions or those who refuse further surgical intervention for PJI can be offered antibiotic suppression. If nothing seems to work, salvage procedures (resection arthroplasty and arthrodesis) are available as a last resort. Further research is encouraged to improve on diagnostic capabilities and develop evidence on the best treatment of choice for PJI.

Synchronous Periprosthetic Joint Infections: High Mortality, Reinfection, and Reoperation

BACKGROUND

Synchronous periprosthetic joint infections (PJIs) are a catastrophic complication with potentially high mortality. We aimed to report mortality, risk of reinfection, revision, reoperation, and implant survivorship after synchronous PJIs.

METHODS

We identified 34 patients treated for PJI in more than one joint within a single 90-day period from 1990 to 2018. PJIs involved bilateral knee arthroplasty (27), bilateral hip arthroplasty (4), 1 knee arthroplasty and 1 elbow arthroplasty (1), 1 knee arthroplasty and 1 shoulder arthroplasty (1), and bilateral hip and knee arthroplasty (1). Irrigation and debridement with component retention was performed in 23 patients, implant resection in 10 patients, and a combination of irrigation and debridement with component retention and implant resection in 1 patient. A competing risk model was used to analyze implant survivorship, and Kaplan-Meier survival was used for patient mortality. Mean follow-up was 6 years.

RESULTS

Mortality was high at 18% at 30 days and 27% at 1 year. The 1-year cumulative incidence of any reinfection was 13% and 27% at 5 years. The 1-year cumulative incidence of any revision or implant removal was 6% and 20% at 5 years. The 1-year cumulative incidence of unplanned reoperation was 25% and 35% at 5 years. Rheumatoid arthritis was associated with increased risk of mortality (HR 7, P < .01), as was liver disease (HR 4, P = .02).

CONCLUSION

In the largest series to date, patients with synchronous PJIs had a high 30-day mortality rate of 18%, and one-fourth underwent unplanned reoperation within the first year.

Occurrence of Rare Pathogens at the Site of Periprosthetic Hip and Knee Joint Infections: A Retrospective, Single-Center Study

The frequency and clinical relevance of rare pathogens at the site of periprosthetic infections of the hip and knee joint and their antibiotic resistance profiles have not yet been assessed in-depth. We retrospectively analyzed all periprosthetic hip and knee joint infections that occurred between 2016 and 2020 in a single center in southwest Germany. Among 165 infections, 9.7% were caused by rare microorganisms such as Veilonella sp., Pasteurella sp., Pantoea sp., Citrobacter koseri, Serratia marcescens, Parvimonas micra, Clostridium difficile, Finegoldia magna, Morganella morganii, and yeasts. No resistance to piperacillin/tazobactam, carbapenemes, fluoroquinolones, or gentamicin was observed. Some bacteria displayed resistance to ampicillin, ampicillin/sulbactam, and cefuroxime. We present follow-up data of patients with infections due to rare pathogens and discuss the importance of close, interdisciplinary collaboration between orthopedic surgeons and clinical microbiologists to carefully select the most appropriate anti-infective treatment regimens for the increasing number of patients with such infections.

When Total Joint Arthroplasty After Septic Arthritis Can Be Safely Performed

Background:

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

Methods:

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

Results:

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

Conclusions:

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

Level of Evidence:

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

Are Cement Spacers and Beads Loaded with the Correct Antibiotic(s) at the Site of Periprosthetic Hip and Knee Joint Infections?

The optimal impregnation of antibiotic-loaded bone cement in the treatment of periprosthetic hip and knee joint infection is unknown. It is also unclear, whether a suboptimal impregnation might be associated with a higher persistence of infection. A total of 93 patients (44 knee, 49 hip) were retrospectively evaluated, and the most common organism was a methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus epidermidis, followed by methicillin-susceptible Staphylococcus aureus. Of all the organisms, 37.1% were resistant against gentamicin and 54.2% against clindamycin. All organisms were susceptible against vancomycin. In 41 cases, gentamicin-loaded beads were inserted and in 52 cases, spacers: (2 loaded only with gentamicin, 18 with gentamicin + vancomycin, 19 with gentamicin + clindamycin, and 13 with gentamicin + vancomycin + clindamycin). The analysis of each antibiotic impregnation showed that complete susceptibility was present in 38.7% of the cases and partial susceptibility in 28%. In the remaining 33.3%, no precise statement can be made because either there was a culture-negative infection or the antibiotic(s) were not tested against the specific organism. At a mean follow-up of 27.9 months, treatment failure was observed in 6.7% of the cases. Independent of which antibiotic impregnation was used, when the organism was susceptible against the locally inserted antibiotics or not tested, reinfection or persistence of infection was observed in the great majority of cases. Future studies about the investigation of the optimal impregnation of antibiotic-loaded bone cement are welcome.

Do not exchange the spacer during staged TKA exchange!

Purpose

The aim of this study was to investigate the reinfection rate and risk factors for septic failure after two-stage exchange for chronic periprosthetic joint infections of primary total knee arthroplasties. Reinfections should be classified as new infection or as infection recurrence after two-stage exchange.

Methods

We performed a retrospective study of 60 knees with chronic periprosthetic joint infections. Follow-up information was extracted from the departments electronic database.

Results

The reinfection rate after a mean follow-up of 35.6 months (1–135) was 20.0%. The only significant risk factor for reinfection was spacer exchange during two-stage exchange (OR = 10.42; p = 0.001). Of the 12 cases with reinfection 6 cases were classified as new infection and 2 as infection recurrence.

Conclusions

Patient specific factors for reinfection remain furtive. If a spacer exchange is preformed, the risk of reinfection increases. Culture results indicate that the benefit of spacer exchanges during two-stage exchange is highly questionable, particularly because reinfection is an issue of new infection rather than of infection recurrence.