Rates of periprosthetic infection and surgical revision in Beijing (China) between 2014 and 2016: a retrospective multicenter cross-sectional study

Which Combination is Best? A Comparison of the Predictive Potential of Serum Biomarker Combinations to Diagnose Periprosthetic Joint Infection

BACKGROUND

Without a gold standard test, recent periprosthetic joint infections (PJI) literature has explored the utility of combining serological results, with promising findings. However, previous studies evaluated fewer than 200 patients and often studied only 1 to 2 test combinations. The purpose of this study was to accumulate a large single institution cohort of revision total joint arthroplasty (rTJA) patients to determine the diagnostic utility of combination serum biomarkers to identify PJI.

METHODS

A single institution longitudinal database was assessed to identify all patients who underwent rTJA from 2017 to 2020. There were 1,363 rTJA patients (715 rTKA patients and 648 rTHA patients) including 273 PJI cases (20%) analyzed. The PJI was diagnosed post-rTJA utilizing 2011 Musculoskeletal Infection Society (MSIS) criteria. Erythrocyte sedimentation rate (ESR), C-reactive protein (CRP), D-dimer, and interleukin 6 (IL-6) were systematically collected for all patients.

RESULTS

The rTKA combination markers of CRP+ESR (sensitivity: 78.3%, specificity: 88.8%, positive predictive value (PPV): 70.0%, negative predictive value (NPV): 92.5%), CRP+D-dimer (sensitivity: 60.5%, specificity: 92.6%, PPV: 63.4%, NPV: 91.7%), and CRP+IL-6 (sensitivity: 38.5%, specificity: 100.0%, PPV: 100.0%, NPV: 92.9%) all yielded higher specificity than CRP alone (sensitivity: 94.4%, specificity: 75.0%, PPV: 55.5%, NPV: 97.6%). Similarly, the rTHA combination markers of CRP+ESR (sensitivity: 70.1%, specificity: 88.8%, PPV: 58.1%, NPV: 93.1%), CRP+D-dimer (sensitivity: 57.1%, specificity: 90.1%, PPV: 43.2%, NPV: 94.1%), and CRP+IL-6 (sensitivity: 21.4%, specificity: 98.4%, PPV: 60.0%, NPV: 91.7%) all yielded higher specificity than CRP alone (sensitivity: 84.7%, specificity: 77.5%, PPV: 45.4%, NPV: 95.8%).

CONCLUSIONS

Overall, in diagnosing PJI for both rTKA and rTHA, two marker combinations yielded higher specificity, while three marker combinations yielded higher sensitivity compared to CRP alone. However, compared to all two and three marker combinations, CRP demonstrated superior overall diagnostic utility. These findings suggest that routine combination testing of markers for PJI diagnosis may be excessive and an unnecessary use of resources, especially in resource-limited situations.

Description of surgical treatment methods of hip and knee periprosthetic joint infections in the Chinese mainland: a national multi-centre survey

PURPOSE

Periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) is a serious hip and knee arthroplasty complication. Despite the increased incidence of primary joint replacements, there is no clear guideline for treating PJI in the Chinese mainland yet. We aim to measure the current situation and basis for surgical treatment methods of PJI in major orthopaedic hospitals in the Chinese mainland.

METHODS

We conducted a national survey on PJI treatment in Mainland China. Forty-one top arthroplasty centers were included, with 82.9% (34/41) response rate. The data were analyzed using Microsoft Excel version 20.0 and described as numbers and percentages.

RESULTS

For acute infections, prosthesis-preserving procedures (DAIR) are used in all centres. For hip and knee PJI, 20.5% (7/34) and 35% (12/34) of the centres used a one-stage exchange. If applied, this treatment will necessitate the previous patients' selection for a satisfactory outcome. All centres execute the two-stage exchange. Between phases, the majority of centres implant a cemented spacer. Revisions for infected hips included 21 (4.3%) cases of DAIR, 95 (19.9%) cases of single-stage exchange, 362 (75.2%) cases of two-stage exchange, and 2 (0.007%) cases of hip dissection. Revisions for infected knee comprised 88 (19.0%) cases of DAIR, 48 (10.3%) cases of single-stage exchange, 324 (69.8%) cases of two-stage exchange, and 5 (0.02%) cases of knee fusion.

CONCLUSIONS

The centers do not have a uniform PJI standard. Most patients have two-stage revision with a cemented spacer in China. These concepts can help establish treatment guidelines.

Megaprosthesis anti-bacterial coatings: A comprehensive translational review

Periprosthetic joint infections (PJI) are catastrophic complications for patients with implanted megaprostheses and pose significant challenges in the management of orthopaedic oncology patients. Despite various preventative strategies, with the increasing rate of implanted orthopaedic prostheses, the number of PJIs may be increasing. PJIs are associated with a high rate of amputation. Therefore, novel strategies to combat bacterial colonization and biofilm formation are required. A promising strategy is the utilization of anti-bacterial coatings on megaprosthetic implants. In this translational review, a brief overview of the mechanism of bacterial colonization of implants and biofilm formation will be provided, followed by a discussion and classification of major anti-bacterial coatings currently in use and development. In addition, current in vitro outcomes, clinical significance, economic importance, evolutionary perspectives, and future directions of anti-bacterial coatings will also be discussed. Megaprosthetic anti-bacterial coating strategies will help reduce infection rates following the implantation of megaprostheses and would positively impact sarcoma care. STATEMENT OF SIGNIFICANCE: This review highlights the clinical challenges and a multitude of potential solutions to combating peri-prosthetic join infections in megaprotheses using anti-bacterial coatings. Reducing infection rates following the implantation of megaprostheses would have a major impact on sarcoma care and major trauma surgeries that require reconstruction of large skeletal defects.

Microbiology of Periprosthetic Hip and Knee Infections in Surgically Revised Cases from 34 Centers in Mainland China

Background and Aim

Periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) is one of the most devastating complications after total joint arthroplasty (TJA). However, the antibiotic resistance of infecting pathogens can significantly vary in different parts of the country. In the current study, we analyzed the demographic and microbiological profiles of knee and hip PJI over three years and compared the microbiological differences between them.

Methods

A multicenter retrospective study of PJI patients in 34 referral medical centers in mainland China from January 2015 to November 2017 was performed.

Results

A total of 925 PJI patients were recruited, 452 were identified as knee PJIs, and 473 were hip PJIs. The most common causative pathogens were Staphylococcus aureus (26.5%) and coagulase-negative staphylococci (14.3%). Methicillin-resistant staphylococci were involved in 25.6% (237/925) of all PJI cases. Mycobacterium and fungus only accounted for 6.5% (61) of all cases. Enteric gram-negative bacilli, anaerobes, and polymicrobial pathogens were more common in hip joint prostheses than in knee PJI (P = 0.014; P = 0.006; P = 0.002, respectively).

Conclusion

While the majority of causative pathogens in PJI cases are staphylococcal species, the prevalence of atypical organisms and resistant pathogens should also be given attention and warrant the need for empiric antibiotic treatment.