2020 Mark Coventry Award: Microorganism-directed oral antibiotics reduce the rate of failure due to further infection after two-stage revision hip or knee arthroplasty for chronic infection: a multicentre randomized controlled trial at a minimum of two years

Periprosthetic Joint Infection: What's New?

Total joint arthroplasty (TJA) ranks among the most commonly performed orthopedic surgeries, with its annual incidence on the rise globally. Periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) remains a leading cause of arthroplasty failure. This review aims to summarize recent literature updates on the epidemiology, diagnosis, and management of PJI.

Debridement, antibiotics and implant retention (DAIR) following hip and knee arthroplasty: results and findings of a multidisciplinary approach from a non-specialist prosthetic infection centre

INTRODUCTION

Prosthetic joint infection (PJI) is a catastrophic complication following arthroplasty surgery. Recently a debridement, antibiotics and implant retention (DAIR) procedure has gained popularity for PJI where a thorough debridement, irrigation and modular component exchange is undertaken.

METHOD

We present the outcome for DAIR, data collected prospectively, in a busy orthopaedic unit but not one specialising in PJI. All patients with PJI were included without loss of data or patients from 2012 to 2018 with a minimum follow-up of 5 years.

RESULTS

Four total knee replacements, 17 total hip replacements, one revision total hip replacement and three hip hemiarthroplasties are included with an average duration from onset of symptoms to the DAIR procedure of 11 days (range 1-22 days). Staphylococcus aureus (24%) and Staphylococcus epidermidis (32%) were the most common causative organisms, and the most common antibiotic regimens included intravenous teicoplanin and flucloxacillin. Average follow-up was 67 months (range 9-104 months). Only four patients went on to require revision surgery. An analysis of midterm patient outcome measures for 6 of the total hip replacement (THR) DAIR patients were compared with a database of 792 THRs (with a minimum two-year follow-up) carried out by the same surgeon revealed no significant difference in Oxford hip scores at one-year post-surgery (OHS DAIR 36.2 vs 39 for control group).

CONCLUSION

This study includes 25 consecutive patients treated with DAIR with only one reinfection, with a mean follow-up period of 5 years. Using a strict protocol, DAIR appears to offer a successful treatment strategy for the management of early PJI.

Material-based treatment strategies against intraosseous implant biofilm infection

Implant-associated infections present a significant clinical obstacle for orthopedic practitioners, with bacterial biofilm formation serving as a pivotal factor in the initiation, progression, and management of such infections. Conventional approaches have proven inadequate in fully eradicating biofilm-related infections. Consequently, novel material-based therapeutic strategies have been developed, encompassing the utilization of antimicrobial agents, delivery vehicles, and synergistic antibacterial systems. In this review, we provide a succinct overview of recent advancements in anti-biofilm strategies, with the aim of offering insights that may aid in the treatment of intraosseous implant infections.

Not so Fast: Extended Oral Antibiotic Prophylaxis Does Not Reduce 90-Day Infection Rate Following Joint Arthroplasty

BACKGROUND

Periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) is a devastating complication following both total hip (THA) and knee (TKA) arthroplasty. Extended oral antibiotic (EOA) prophylaxis has been reported to reduce PJI following TJA in high-risk patients. The purpose of this study was to determine if EOA reduces PJI in all-comers and high-risk THA and TKA populations.

METHODS

This is a retrospective cohort study, including 4,576 patients undergoing primary THA or TKA at a single institution from 2018 to 2022. Beginning in 2020, EOA prophylaxis was administered for 10 days following THA or TKA at our institution. Patients were separated into 2 cohorts (1,769 EOA, 2,807 no EOA) based on whether they received postoperative EOA. The 90-day and 1-year outcomes, with a focus on PJI, were then compared between groups. A subgroup analysis of high-risk patients was also performed.

RESULTS

There was no difference in 90-day PJI rates between cohorts (EOA 1 versus no EOA 0.8%; P = .6). The difference in the rate of PJI remained insignificant at 1 year (EOA 1 versus no EOA 1%; P = .9). Similarly, our subgroup analysis of high-risk patients demonstrated no difference in postoperative PJI between EOA (n = 254) and no EOA (n = 396) (0.8 versus 2.3%, respectively; P = .2). Reassuringly, we also found no differences in the incidence of Clostridium difficile infection (EOA 0.1 versus no EOA 0.1%; P > .9) or in antibiotic resistance among those who developed PJI within 90 days (EOA 59 versus no EOA 83%; P = .2).

CONCLUSIONS

With the numbers available for analysis, EOA prophylaxis was not associated with PJI risk reduction following primary TJA when universally deployed. Furthermore, among high-risk patients, there was no statistically significant difference. While we did not identify increased antibiotic resistance or Clostridium difficile infection, we cannot recommend wide-spread adoption of EOA prophylaxis, and clarification regarding the role of EOA, even in high-risk patients, is needed.

Effects of Vancomycin/Tobramycin-Doped Ceramic Composite (Polyvinyl Alcohol Composite-Vancomycin/Tobramycin-Polymeric Dicalcium Phosphate Dihydrate) in a Rat Femur Model Implanted With Contaminated Porous Titanium Cylinders

BACKGROUND

Periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) remains common and problematic. We hypothesized that using a bioceramic that provided rapid release of the antibiotics (vancomycin [VAN] or VAN and tobramycin [VAN and TOB]) from a polyvinyl-alcohol-composite (PVA) combined with a delayed and sustained antibiotic release from polymeric-dicalcium-phosphate-dihydrate (PDCPD) ceramic would inhibit S. aureus-associated implant infections.

METHODS

A total of 50 male Sprague Dawley rats were randomly divided into 5 groups-I: negative control; II: bacteria only; III: bacteria + saline wash; IV: bacteria + PVA-VAN-PDCPD, and V: bacteria + PVA-VAN-TOB-PDCPD. A porous titanium (Ti) implant was press-fit into the rat knee. S. aureus-containing broth was added into the joint space creating a PJI. After 1 week, the joints from groups III to V were washed with saline and the fluid collected for bacterial quantification. This was followed by saline irrigation treatment (groups III to V) and application of the antibiotic-loaded PVA-PDCPD bioceramic (groups IV and V). On day 21, joint fluid was collected, and the implants harvested for bacterial quantification.

RESULTS

No bacteria were isolated from the negative control (group I). The positive control (group II) was positive on both days 7 and 21. Bacteria were still present on day 21 in the fluid and implant in group III. Groups (IV and V) showed a decrease in the bacterial burden in the fluid and implant on day 21. There were significant differences in bacteria levels in the collected wash fluid and on the implant at day 21 between the saline wash (group III) and treatment groups (IV and V).

CONCLUSIONS

In this animal model of acute periprosthetic infection, treatment with PVA-VAN-PDCPD and PVA-VAN/TOB-PDCPD reduced bacterial load in the infected joint and the infected Ti implant. Application of PVA-VAN-PDCPD and/or PVA-VAN/TOB-PDCPD after saline irrigation could be used as an addition to the treatment of PJI.

Description of reinfection of joint prosthesis after 2-stage replacement (infection of the 2nd stage prosthesis): A multicenter study

INTRODUCTION

Two-stage exchange is the gold standard in the surgical management of prosthetic joint infection (PJI). However, perioperative reinfections (RePJI) can occur to newly inserted prosthesis, which highlights the importance of an adequate antibiotic prophylaxis, although there is scarce evidence in this field. Our objective was to evaluate the characteristics of RePJI, its prognosis and the antibiotic prophylaxis that is commonly used in second-stage surgery.

METHODS

Multicentric retrospective observational study in Spanish hospitals including patients with RePJI between 2009 and 2018.

RESULTS

We included 92 patients with RePJI from 12 hospitals. The most frequent isolated microorganism was Staphylococcus epidermidis in 35 cases (38.5%); 61.1% of staphylococci were methiciliin-resistant. In 12 cases (13%), the same microoganism causing the primary PJI was isolated in RePJI. When comparing with the microbiology of primary PJI, there were more cases caused by Gram-negative bacteria (the most frequent was Pseudomonas spp.) and less by Gram-positive bacteria. Failure occured in 69 cases (75%). There were 43 different courses of antibiotic prophylaxis after the second-stage surgery; the most frequent was a unique preoperative cefazolin dose, but most patients received prophylaxis before and after the second-stage surgery (61 cases).

CONCLUSIONS

The most frequent microorganisms in RePJI are coagulase-negative staphylococci, although Gram-negative bacteria, especially Pseudomonas spp. are also common. There is a significant heterogeneity in antibiotic prophylaxis for a second-stage surgery. ReIPJI treatment has a high failure rate.

Intramedullary Positive Tissue Culture Increases the Risk of Reinfection Following One-Stage Septic Revision Total Knee Arthroplasty

BACKGROUND

Intraoperative acquisition of representative tissue samples is essential during revision arthroplasty of the infected total knee arthroplasty (TKA). While the number of intraoperative tissue samples needed to identify the organism is well described in the literature, there is still a paucity of evidence regarding the location of positive intraoperative samples and their correlation to postoperative outcomes.

METHODS

There were forty-two patients who had septic failure following one-stage revision TKA for periprosthetic joint infection who were identified between January 2009 and December 2017. They were matched to a control group of patients who had successful one-stage revision TKA without septic failure. The location of positive intraoperative tissue samples was categorized as: 1) soft tissue; 2) interface between bone and prosthesis; and 3) intramedullary (IM). Chi-square, Student's t-, and Wilcoxon Mann-Whitney U-tests were used as appropriate. Univariate and multivariate logistic regression analyses were performed to evaluate predictors of septic failure.

RESULTS

Weight > 100 kilograms (P = .033), higher Charlson Comorbidity Index (P < .001), and positive IM cultures (P < .001) were associated with a higher risk of reinfection after one-stage revision TKA. A positive IM sample carried a nearly five-fold increase in odds of reinfection (odds ratio 4.86, 95% confidence interval 1.85 to 12.78, P = .001).

CONCLUSIONS

A positive IM culture sample is significantly associated with septic failure after one-stage exchange for periprosthetic joint infection of the knee. Patients who had positive IM cultures may benefit from longer postoperative antibiotic therapy for the treatment of one-stage exchange arthroplasty to minimize the risk of reinfection.

Serum and Synovial Markers in the Diagnosis of Periprosthetic Joint Infection of the Hip, Knee, and Shoulder: An Algorithmic Approach

➤ No single test has demonstrated absolute accuracy for the diagnosis of periprosthetic joint infection (PJI).➤ Physicians rely on a combination of serological tests, synovial markers, and clinical findings plus clinical judgment to help to guide preoperative decision-making.➤ Several organizations have proposed criteria for the diagnosis of hip or knee PJI on which we now rely.➤ Given that shoulder arthroplasty has only recently become popular, it is possible that a shoulder-specific definition of PJI will be introduced in the coming years.➤ Although a number of serum and synovial markers have demonstrated high accuracy for the diagnosis of PJI of the hip and knee, further research is needed in order to identify markers that may be more suitable for the diagnosis of shoulder PJI and for the potential development and identification of specific serological tests as screening tools for PJI.

Impact of antibiotic prophylaxis in second-stage surgery in joint prosthesis infection treated with two-stage exchange. A multicenter case-control study

INTRODUCTION

After two-stage exchange due to prosthetic joint infection (PJI), the new prosthesis carries a high risk of reinfection (RePJI). There isn`t solid evidence regarding the antibiotic prophylaxis in 2nd-stage surgery. The objective of this study is to describe what antibiotic prophylaxis is used in this surgery and evaluate its impact on the risk of developing RePJI.

METHODS

Retrospective multicenter case-control study in Spanish hospitals. The study included cases of PJI treated with two-stage exchange and subsequently developed a new infection. For each case, two controls were included, matched by prosthesis location, center, and year of surgery. The prophylaxis regimens were grouped based on their antibacterial spectrum, and we calculated the association between the type of regimen and the development of RePJI using conditional logistic regression, adjusted for possible confounding factors.

RESULTS

We included 90 cases from 12 centers, which were compared with 172 controls. The most frequent causative microorganism was Staphylococcus epidermidis with 34 cases (37.8%). Staphylococci were responsible for 50 cases (55.6%), 32 of them (64%) methicillin-resistant. Gram-negative bacilli were involved in 30 cases (33.3%), the most common Pseudomonas aeruginosa. In total, 83 different antibiotic prophylaxis regimens were used in 2nd-stage surgery, the most frequent a single preoperative dose of cefazolin (48 occasions; 18.3%); however, it was most common a combination of a glycopeptide and a beta-lactam with activity against Pseudomonas spp (99 cases, 25.2%). In the adjusted analysis, regimens that included antibiotics with activity against methicillin-resistant staphylococci AND Pseudomonas spp were associated with a significantly lower risk of RePJI (adjusted OR = 0.24; 95% IC: 0.09-0.65).

CONCLUSIONS

The lack of standardization in 2nd-satge surgery prophylaxis explains the wide diversity of regimens used in this procedure. The results suggest that antibiotic prophylaxis in this surgery should include an antibiotic with activity against methicillin-resistant staphylococci and Pseudomonas.

The Effect of Retained Hardware on Failure Among Prosthetic Joint Infections of the Knee in the Presence and Absence of Staphylococcus aureus

Background

The risk of failure associated with different surgical strategies for prosthetic joint infections (PJIs) among patients with and without Staphylococcus aureus is uncertain. The purpose of this study was to assess whether S. aureus modifies the association between retained hardware and failure following revision surgery for PJI of the knee.

Methods

This was a single-center retrospective cohort study of 106 first PJIs of the knee between 2016 and 2020 at a rural academic medical center. The exposure was retained hardware following revision surgery for PJI, and the outcomes were recurrent infection, any infection, and a composite outcome including any infection, unplanned revision, failure to undergo reimplantation, amputation, or death within 2 years of revision. We used negative binomial regression to quantify the association between the exposure and outcome and to assess the presence of S. aureus as an effect modifier.

Results

Retained hardware was significantly associated with failure when defined as recurrent infection among S. aureus PJI (adjusted risk difference [aRD], 0.38; 95% CI, 0.12-0.64) but not in the absence of S. aureus (aRD, -0.02; 95% CI, -0.17 to 0.13), and S. aureus was an effect modifier (P interaction = .01).

Conclusions

We report a significant association between the presence of retained hardware and recurrent infection among S. aureus PJI of the knee, but not for non-S. aureus PJI. This could help inform the surgical management of PJI of the knee in cases where the microbiology is known before surgery.

Pasteurella multocida From a Cat Scratch as a Cause of Recurrent Prosthetic Joint Infection After Previously Successful Single-Stage Exchange Arthroplasty

We report a case of a 74-year-old female with a history of a prosthetic joint infection that was successfully treated with a single-stage exchange arthroplasty, off antibiotics, and without symptoms for 20 months. She presented 1 week after a cat scratch with acute knee pain, and aspiration grew Pasteurella multocida. She was successfully treated with surgical debridement and a prolonged course of antibiotics. Debate remains in the literature regarding whether recurrent infections represent a previously undetected organism or a new infection. Our report provides convincing evidence that, at least in some circumstances, the infection is new. Furthermore, this is the first case described of P. multocida resulting in a recurrent prosthetic joint infection after a previously successful exchange arthroplasty due to a different causative organism.

Variation in North American Infectious Disease Specialists' Practice Regarding Oral and Suppressive Antibiotics for Adult Osteoarticular Infections: Results of an Emerging Infections Network (EIN) Survey

Background

Osteoarticular infections (OAIs) are commonly treated with prolonged intravenous (IV) antimicrobials. The Oral versus Intravenous Antibiotics for Bone and Joint Infection (OVIVA) trial demonstrated that oral (PO) antibiotics are noninferior to IV antibiotics in the treatment of OAIs. We surveyed infectious disease (ID) physicians about their use of PO antibiotics in the treatment of OAIs.

Methods

An Emerging Infection Network survey with 9 questions regarding antibiotic prescribing for the treatment of OAIs was sent to 1475 North American ID physicians. The questions were mostly multiple choice and focused on the use of definitive oral antibiotic therapy (defined as oral switch within 2 weeks of starting antibiotics) and chronic suppressive antibiotic therapy (SAT).

Results

Of the 413 physicians who reported treating OAIs, 91% used oral antibiotics at least sometimes and 31% used them as definitive therapy, most often for diabetic foot osteomyelitis and native joint septic arthritis. The oral antibiotics most frequently used for OAIs included trimethoprim-sulfamethoxazole, doxycycline/minocycline, and linezolid for Staphylococcus aureus, amoxicillin/cefadroxil/cephalexin for streptococci, and fluoroquinolones for gram-negative organisms. The most common rationales for not transitioning to oral antibiotics included nonsusceptible pathogens, comorbidities preventing therapeutic drug levels, and concerns about adherence. SAT use was variable but employed by a majority in most cases of periprosthetic joint infection managed with debridement and implant retention.

Conclusions

North American ID physicians utilize oral antibiotics and SAT for the management of OAIs, although significant practice variation exists. Respondents voiced a need for updated guidelines.

Infection Rates After Aseptic Revision Total Hip Arthroplasty With Extended Oral Antibiotic Prophylaxis

INTRODUCTION

Few US studies have investigated the efficacy of extended oral antibiotic prophylaxis (EOAP) in the prevention of periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) after aseptic revision total hip arthroplasty (R-THA). This study compared PJI rates in aseptic R-THA performed with EOAP with PJI rates in published studies of aseptic R-THA patients not receiving EOAP.

METHODS

Prospectively documented data on 127 consecutive aseptic R-THAs were retrospectively reviewed. Evidence-based perioperative infection prevention protocols were used, and all patients were discharged on 7-day EOAP. Superficial and deep infections at 30 and 90 days postoperatively and at mean latest follow-up of 27.8 months were statistically compared with all US studies reporting the prevalence of PJI after aseptic R-THA. Complications related to EOAP within 120 days of the index procedure also are reported.

RESULTS

No superficial or deep infections were observed at 30 and 90 days postoperatively when 7-day postdischarge EOAP was used. Superficial and deep infection rates were 1.57% (two patients) and 3.15% (four patients) at mean latest follow-up, respectively. Comparisons with published 30-day PJI rates of 1.37% ( P = 0.423) and 1.85% ( P = 0.257) were not statistically significant. Two of four comparisons with published 90-day PJI rates of 3.43% ( P = 0.027) and 5.74% ( P = 0.001) were statistically different. The deep PJI rate of 3.15% at mean latest follow-up was significantly lower than two of three published rates at equivalent follow-up including 10.10% ( P = 0.009) and 9.12% ( P = 0.041). No antibiotic-related complications were observed within 120 days of the index procedure.

DISCUSSION

Study findings possibly support the use of EOAP after aseptic R-THA to prevent catastrophic PJI with revision implants, indicating that the efficacy of EOAP cannot be definitively ruled-in or ruled-out based on available evidence.

Orthopedic Articular and Periarticular Joint Infections

Acute nontraumatic joint pain has an extensive differential. Emergency physicians must be adept at identifying limb and potentially life-threatening infection. Chief among these is septic arthritis. In addition to knowing how these joint infections typically present, clinicians need to be aware of host and pathogen factors that can lead to more insidious presentations and how these factors impact the interpretation of diagnostic tests.

Appropriate Duration of Antimicrobial Treatment for Prosthetic Joint Infections: A Narrative Review

Prosthetic joint infections are considered difficult to treat they needing aggressive surgery and long antimicrobial treatments. However, the exact duration of these therapies has been established empirically. In the last years, several studies have explored the possibility of reducing the length of treatment in this setting, with conflicting results. In this narrative review, we critically appraise the published evidence, considering the different surgical approaches (implant retention [DAIR] and one-step and two-step exchange procedures) separately. In patients managed with DAIR, usually treated for at least 12 weeks, a large, randomized trial failed to show that 6 weeks were non-inferior. However, another randomized clinical trial supports the use of 8 weeks, as long as the surgical conditions are favorable and antibiotics with good antibiofilm activity can be administered. In patients managed with a two-step exchange procedure, usually treated during 6 weeks, a randomized clinical trial showed the efficacy of a 4-week course of antimicrobials. Also, the use of local antibiotics may allow the use of even shorter treatments. Finally, in the case of one-step exchange procedures, there is a trend towards reducing the length of therapy, and the largest randomized clinical trial supports the use of 6 weeks of therapy.

Effect of Antibiotic Spacer Dosing on Treatment Success in Two-Stage Exchange for Periprosthetic Joint Infection

INTRODUCTION

In two-stage exchange for periprosthetic joint infection (PJI), adding antibiotics to cement spacers is the standard of care; however, little is known about optimal dosage. There is emphasis on using >3.6 g of total antibiotic, including ≥2.0 g of vancomycin, per 40 g of cement, but these recommendations lack clinical evidence. We examined whether recommended antibiotic spacer doses affect treatment success.

METHODS

This was a retrospective review of 202 patients who underwent two-stage exchange for PJI from 2004 to 2020 with at least 1-year follow-up. Patients were separated into high (>3.6 g of total antibiotic per 40 g of cement) and low-dose spacer groups. Primary outcomes were overall and infectious failure.

RESULTS

High-dose spacers were used in 80% (162/202) of patients. High-dose spacers had a reduced risk of overall (OR, 0.37; P = 0.024) and infectious (OR, 0.35; P = 0.020) failure for infected primary arthroplasties, but not revisions. In multivariate analysis, vancomycin dose ≥2.0 g decreased the risk of infectious failure (OR, 0.31; P = 0.016), although not overall failure (OR, 0.51; P = 0.147).

CONCLUSION

During two-stage exchange for PJI, spacers with greater than 3.6 g of total antibiotic may reduce overall and infectious failure for infected primary arthroplasties. Furthermore, using at least 2.0 g of vancomycin could independently decrease the risk of infectious failure.

How are Oral Antibiotics Being Used in Total Joint Arthroplasty? A Review of the Literature

While the role and benefit of perioperative intravenous (IV) antibiotics in patients undergoing total joint arthroplasty (TJA) is well-established, oral antibiotic use in TJA remains a controversial topic with wide variations in practice patterns. With this review, we aimed to better educate the orthopedic surgeon on when and how oral antibiotics may be used most effectively in TJA patients, and to identify gaps in the literature that could be clarified with targeted research. Extended oral antibiotic prophylaxis (EOAP) use in high-risk primary, aseptic revision, and exchange TJA for infection may be useful in decreasing periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) rates. When prescribing oral antibiotics either as EOAP or for draining wounds, patient factors, type of surgery, and type of infectious organisms should be considered in order to optimally prevent and treat PJI. It is important to maintain antibiotic stewardship by administering the proper duration, dose, and type of antibiotics and by consulting infectious disease when necessary.

Synergistic use of anti-inflammatory ketorolac and gentamicin to target staphylococcal biofilms

BACKGROUND

While antibiotics remain our primary tools against microbial infection, increasing antibiotic resistance (inherent and acquired) is a major detriment to their efficacy. A practical approach to maintaining or reversing the efficacy of antibiotics is the use of other commonly used therapeutics, which show synergistic antibacterial action with antibiotics. Here, we investigated the extent of antibacterial synergy between the antibiotic gentamicin and the anti-inflammatory ketorolac regarding the dynamics of biofilm growth, the rate of acquired resistance, and the possible mechanism of synergy.

METHODS

Control (ATCC 12600, ATCC 35984) and clinical strains (L1101, L1116) of Staphylococcus aureus and Staphylococcus epidermidis with varying antibiotic susceptibility profiles were used in this study to simulate implant-material associated low-risk and high-risk biofilms in vitro. The synergistic action of gentamicin sulfate (GS) and ketorolac tromethamine (KT), against planktonic staphylococcal strains were determined using the fractional inhibitory concentration measurement assay. Nascent (6 h) and established (24 h) biofilms were grown on 316L stainless steel plates and the synergistic biofilm eradication activity was determined and characterized using adherent bacteria count, minimum biofilm eradication concentration (MBEC) measurement for GS, visualization by live/dead imaging, scanning electron microscopy, gene expression of biofilm-associated genes, and bacterial membrane fluidity assessment.

RESULTS

Gentamicin-ketorolac (GS-KT) combination demonstrated synergistic antibacterial action against planktonic Staphylococci. Control and clinical strains showed distinct biofilm growth dynamics and an increase in biofilm maturity was shown to confer further resistance to gentamicin for both 'low-risk' and 'high-risk' biofilms. The addition of ketorolac enhanced the antibiofilm activity of gentamicin against acquired resistance in staphylococcal biofilms. Mechanistic studies revealed that the synergistic action of gentamicin-ketorolac interferes with biofilm morphology and subverts bacterial stress response altering bacterial physiology, membrane dynamics, and biofilm properties.

CONCLUSION

The results of this study have a significant impact on the local administration of antibiotics and other therapeutic agents commonly used in the prevention and treatment of orthopaedic infections. Further, these results warrant the study of synergy for the concurrent or sequential administration of non-antibiotic drugs for antimicrobial effect.

The microbial profile of infected endoprosthetic reconstructions after wide excision for patients with musculoskeletal tumors: A call for pathogen-based practices

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

Periprosthetic infection is a devastating complication following endoprosthetic reconstruction. This study utilized a large database of endoprostheses to describe the incidence, risk factors, and microbial profile of such infections to better catalogue and understand these catastrophic events.

METHODS

A retrospective review of endoprosthetic reconstructions for an oncologic indication from January 1, 1981 to December 31, 2020 was performed. Demographic, oncologic, procedural and outcome data was analyzed. Multivariable logistic regression was used to identify potential risk factors for infection with significance defined as p < 0.05.

RESULTS

Forty four out of 712 (6.2%) reconstructions resulted in infection at a mean time of 39.9 ± 44.5 months. Revision surgery (odds ratio [OR] 6.14, p < 0.001) or having a postoperative wound complication (OR 7.67, p < 0.001) were significantly associated with infection. Staphylococcus aureus and Staphylococcus epidermidis were the most commonly cultured organisms at a rate of 34.1% (15/44) and 22.7% (10/44), respectively. Ten infections resulted in amputation; five due to antimicrobial-resistant infections and three due to polymicrobial infections.

CONCLUSION

Understanding the microbial profile of patients undergoing endoprosthetic reconstruction is paramount. This study demonstrates a relatively high rate of polymicrobial and antibiotic-resistant infections that portend worse outcomes, thus suggesting that pathogen-specific infectious practices may be warranted.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Retrospective cohort study, level III.

Periprosthetic Joint Infection: Current Clinical Challenges

Over the last several decades, periprosthetic joint infection has been increasing in incidence and is occurring in more complex patients. While there have been advances in both surgical and medical treatment strategies, there remain important gaps in our understanding. Here, we share our current approaches to the diagnosis and management of periprosthetic joint infection, focusing on frequent clinical challenges and collaborative interdisciplinary care.

The Use of Oral Antibiotics After Total Joint Arthroplasty: A Critical Analysis Review

» There is conflicting and insufficient evidence that extended oral antibiotic (EOA) therapy prevents infection in high-risk patients undergoing primary total joint arthroplasty (TJA), limiting recommendation for or against the practice.» In the case of aseptic revision TJA, the evidence is also conflicting and limited by underlying confounders, preventing recommendation for use of EOA.» There is fair evidence that use of EOA after debridement antibiotic therapy and implant retention of the prosthesis prolongs infection-free survival, but randomized controlled trials are needed. On the other hand, there is strong evidence that patients undergoing 2-stage revision should receive a period of suppressive oral antibiotics after the second stage.» The optimal duration of EOA in primary TJA, aseptic revision, and debridement antibiotic therapy and implant retention of the prosthesis is unknown. However, there is strong evidence that 3 months of EOA suppression may be appropriate after reimplantation as part of 2-stage exchange arthroplasty.» Complications secondary to EOA are reported to be between 0% and 13.7%, yet are inconsistently reported and poorly defined. The risks associated with antibiotic use, including development of antimicrobial resistance, must be weighed against a possible decrease in infection rate.

Should We Use Rifampicin in Periprosthetic Joint Infections Caused by Staphylococci When the Implant Has Been Exchanged? A Multicenter Observational Cohort Study

Background

Previous studies demonstrated the efficacy of a rifampicin-based regimen in the treatment of acute staphylococcal periprosthetic joint infections (PJIs) treated with surgical debridement. However, evidence is lacking to support the use of rifampicin in cases where the implant is exchanged during revision.

Methods

We included all consecutive cases of staphylococcal PJIs treated from January 2013 to December 2018 with revision surgery in this international, retrospective, multicenter observational cohort study. PJI was defined according to the European Bone and Joint Infection Society diagnostic criteria. A relapse or reinfection during follow-up, the need for antibiotic suppressive therapy, the need for implant removal, and PJI-related death were defined as clinical failure. Cases without reimplantation or with follow-up <12 months were excluded.

Results

A total of 375 cases were included in the final analysis, including 124 1-stage exchanges (33.1%) and 251 2-stage exchanges (66.9%). Of those, 101 cases failed (26.9%). There was no statistically significant difference in failure of patients receiving rifampicin (22.5%, 42/187) and those not receiving rifampicin (31.4%, 59/188; P = .051). A subanalysis of chronic PJIs treated by 2-stage exchange arthroplasty demonstrated a lower failure rate in cases treated with rifampicin (15%) compared with the no-rifampicin group (35.5%; P = .005). In this subgroup, the use of rifampicin and an antibiotic holiday of >2 weeks were independent predictors of clinical success (odds ratio [OR], 0.36; 95% CI, 0.15-0.88; and OR, 0.19; 95% CI, 0.04-0.90; respectively).

Conclusions

Combination treatment with rifampicin increases treatment success in patients with chronic staphylococcal PJI treated with 2-stage exchange arthroplasty.

Design Characteristics and Recruitment Rates for Randomized Trials of Peri-Prosthetic Joint Infection Management: A Systematic Review

Prosthetic joint infections (PJI) present a major management challenge for practicing orthopedic surgeons and infectious disease physicians. There are few high-quality data to inform treatment guidelines. The aim of this systematic review was to report the design characteristics and recruitment rates for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of PJI management. Trials were considered eligible for inclusion if human participants were randomized to any management intervention for PJI. We searched Medline, PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, Cochrane Database, ANZ Clinical Trials Registry, ClinicalTrials.gov, and the EU Clinical Trials Register until the end of May 2023. The systematic review was registered with PROSPERO (CRD42018112646). We identified 15 published RCTs with a total of 1743 participants with PJI. The median (interquartile range [IQR]) number of successfully recruited participants was 63 (38-140), with 0.28 (0.13-0.96) enrolments per site per month. Only four trials (36.4%) achieved the target recruitment. All RCTs applied different primary endpoints and varying definitions of a 'good' outcome. Despite recent improvements, PJI RCTs are characterized by slow recruitment and heterogeneous endpoint assessments, which preclude synthesis in a standard meta-analytic framework. To inform international guidelines, future PJI trials should be run as multi-country trials at high-recruiting sites.

What Is the Most Reliable Concordance Rate of Preoperative Synovial Fluid Aspiration and Intraoperative Biopsy to Detect Periprosthetic Joint Infection in Knee, Hip and Shoulder Arthroplasty?

The accuracy of preoperative synovial fluid microbe detection in periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) is widely reported. However, the reliability of this diagnostic modality amongst the different joints is not yet described. We aimed to compare the concordance rate between preoperative synovial fluid and intraoperative tissue cultures in shoulder, knee and hip PJIs. A total of 150 patients who met the 2018 International Consensus Meeting criteria for shoulder, hip and knee PJI were retrospectively reviewed. This cohort was divided into three groups based on the involved joint (should, hip or knee), with 50 patients in each group. Cultures were collected and held for culture for 14 days. The overall concordance rate was 56.7%. Concordance rates between preoperative and intraoperative cultures were 60%, 56% and 54% for the knee, shoulder and hip joints, respectively. The analysis of high- or low-virulence and difficult- or not-difficult-to-treat germs did not reveal any significant differences between preoperative and intraoperative cultures in any of the groups. However, even considering the higher concordance in knee PJI, the overall discordance between preoperative and intraoperative cultures should prompt surgeons not to rely solely on preoperative synovial fluid culture data in determining appropriate treatment and antibiotics.

Change in organism between first- and second-stage revision for periprosthetic joint infection of knee arthroplasty independently associated with increased risk of failure

Aims

Achievement of accurate microbiological diagnosis prior to revision is key to reducing the high rates of persistent infection after revision knee surgery. The effect of change in the microorganism between the first- and second-stage revision of total knee arthroplasty for periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) on the success of management is not clear.

Methods

A two-centre retrospective cohort study was conducted to review the outcome of patients who have undergone two-stage revision for treatment of knee arthroplasty PJI, focusing specifically on isolated micro-organisms at both the first- and second-stage procedure. Patient demographics, medical, and orthopaedic history data, including postoperative outcomes and subsequent treatment, were obtained from the electronic records and medical notes.

Results

The study cohort consisted of 84 patients, of whom 59.5% (n = 50) had successful eradication of their infection at a mean follow-up of 4.7 years. For the 34 patients who had recurrence of infection, 58.8% (n = 20) had a change in isolated organism, compared to 18% (n = 9) in the infection eradication group (p < 0.001). When adjusting for confound, there was no association when the growth on the second stage was the same as the first (odd ratio (OR) 2.50, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.49 to 12.50; p = 0.269); however, when a different organism was identified at the second stage, this was independently associated with failure of treatment (OR 8.40, 95% CI 2.91 to 24.39; p < 0.001). There were no other significant differences between the two cohorts with regard to patient demographics or type of organisms isolated.

Conclusion

Change in the identified microorganism between first- and second-stage revision for PJI was associated with failure of management. Identification of this change in the microorganism prior to commencement of the second stage may help target antibiotic management and could improve the success of surgery in these patients.

A Rare Periprosthetic Knee Joint Infection With Clostridium perfringens, the Result of 2-Stage Exchange Treatment: A Case Report and Review of Current Literature

Prosthetic joint infections (PJIs) commonly result from aerobic gram-positive organisms and can lead to detrimental outcomes. However, it is rare for Clostridium perfringens to cause a PJI. Owing to its rarity, current literature lacks a comprehensive guide for the proper management of these PJIs. We report on the case of an 80-year old man who presented to our institution with concerns for sepsis secondary to a PJI with C. perfringens 25 years status post total knee arthroplasty. The patient was managed with two-stage revision and exchange. After stage one, the patient developed cholecystitis, which has been reported in prior cases of PJI due to C. perfringens. After concerns for sepsis had resolved and stage 1 was complete, the patient was managed with 6 weeks of IV antibiotics. Treatment was directed at gram-positives with IV vancomycin along with anerobic coverage determined by anerobic susceptibility testing. After the second stage, the patient was discharged with 3 months of oral antibiotic therapy. At the final 1-year follow-up, the patient was doing well without residual infection. This report reviews previous evidence on the management of C. perfringens PJI and presents a case demonstrating the successful diagnostic, surgical, and antimicrobial management of a PJI with C. perfringens.

Systemic antibiotics are not required for successful two-stage revision hip arthroplasty

The duration of systemic antibiotic treatment following first-stage revision surgery for periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) after total hip arthroplasty (THA) is contentious. Our philosophy is to perform an aggressive debridement, and to use a high local concentration of targeted antibiotics in cement beads and systemic prophylactic antibiotics alone. The aim of this study was to assess the success of this philosophy in the management of PJI of the hip using our two-stage protocol. The study involved a retrospective review of our prospectively collected database from which we identified all patients who underwent an intended two-stage revision for PJI of the hip. All patients had a diagnosis of PJI according to the major criteria of the Musculoskeletal Infection Society (MSIS) 2013, a minimum five-year follow-up, and were assessed using the MSIS working group outcome-reporting tool. The outcomes were grouped into 'successful' or 'unsuccessful'. A total of 299 two-stage revision THAs in 289 patients met the inclusion criteria, of whom 258 (86%) proceeded to second-stage surgery. Their mean age was 68.1 years (28 to 92). The median follow-up was 10.7 years (interquartile range (IQR) 6.3 to 15.0). A 91% success rate was seen in those patients who underwent reimplantation, decreasing to 86% when including those who did not proceed to reimplantation. The median duration of postoperative systemic antibiotics following the first stage was five days (IQR 5 to 9). There was no significant difference in outcome between those patients who were treated with antibiotics for ≤ 48 hours (p = 0.961) or ≤ five days (p = 0.376) compared with those who were treated with longer courses. Greater success rates were seen for Gram-positive PJIs (87%) than for Gram-negative (84%) and mixed-Gram PJIs (72%; p = 0.098). Aggressive surgical debridement with a high local concentration of targeted antibiotics at the time of first-stage revision surgery for PJI of the hip, without prolonged systemic antibiotics, provides a high rate of success, responsible antibiotic stewardship, and reduced hospital costs.

The Impact of Antimicrobial Therapy Duration in the Treatment of Prosthetic Joint Infections Depending on Surgical Strategies: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

The aim of this systematic review was to address the question if short antibiotic treatment (SAT; at least 4 but <12 weeks) versus long antibiotic treatment (LAT) affects outcomes in prosthetic joint infections (PJIs). Database research (Medline, Embase, Web of Science, Scopus, Cochrane) retrieved 3740 articles, of which 10 studies were included in the analysis. Compared to LAT, 11% lower odds of treatment failure in the SAT group were found, although the difference was not statistically significant (pooled odds ratio, 0.89 [95% confidence interval, .53-1.50]). No difference in treatment failure was found between SAT and LAT once stratified by type of surgery, studies conducted in the United States versus Europe, study design, and follow-up. There is still no conclusive evidence that antibiotic treatment of PJIs for 12 weeks or longer is associated with better outcomes, irrespective of the type of surgical procedure. Most recent, high-quality studies tend to favor longer antibiotic courses, making them preferable in most situations.

Short Course of Oral Antibiotic Treatment After Two-Stage Exchange Arthroplasty Appears to Decrease Early Reinfection

BACKGROUND

Recent evidence has suggested a benefit to extended postoperative prophylactic oral antibiotics after two-stage exchange arthroplasty for treatment of periprosthetic joint infections. We sought to determine reinfection rates with and without a short course of oral antibiotics after two-stage exchange procedures.

METHODS

A retrospective review identified patients undergoing two-stage exchange arthroplasty for periprosthetic joint infection of the hip or knee. Patients were excluded if they failed a prior two-stage exchange, had positive cultures at reimplantation, prolonged intravenous antibiotics postoperatively, and/or life-long suppression. This resulted in 444 reimplantations (210 hips and 234 knees). Patients were divided into three cohorts based on the duration of oral antibiotics after reimplantation: no antibiotics (102), ≤2 weeks (266), or >2 weeks (76). The primary endpoint was reinfection within 1 year of reimplantation.

RESULTS

Within 1 year of reimplantation, there were 34 reinfections. In the no-antibiotic, ≤ 2-week, and >2-week cohorts the reinfection rates were 14.1, 7.0, and 6.4%, respectively. Multivariate Cox regression showed a reduced reinfection rate in the ≤2-week cohort relative to no antibiotics (hazard ratio [HR]: 0.38, P = .01). While the smaller cohort with >2 weeks of antibiotics did not significantly reduce the reinfection rate (HR: 0.41, P = .12), when combined with the ≤2-week cohort, use of oral antibiotics had an overall reduction of the reinfection rate (HR: 0.39, P = .01).

CONCLUSIONS

These data support the hypothesis that a short course of oral antibiotics after reimplantation decreases the 1-year reinfection rate. Future randomized studies should seek to examine the efficacy of different durations of oral antibiotics to reduce reinfection.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Prognostic Level IV.

Spacer exchange in persistent periprosthetic joint infection: microbiological evaluation and survivorship analysis

PURPOSE

The purposes of this study were to determine demographics and characteristics of patients who underwent spacer exchange for persistent infection in the setting of two-stage arthroplasty for periprosthetic joint infection, to describe the microbiology of pathogens involved, to analyze survivorship free from infection in these patients.

METHODS

The institutional prospectively collected database was reviewed to enroll patients with minimum 2 years follow-up. Patients who underwent two-stage procedure for septic arthritis were excluded, as were patients who had spacer fracture or dislocation.

RESULTS

A total of 34 patients (41 procedures) were included. Mean age was 65.0 ± 12.8 years. Mean follow-up was 53.4 ± 24.8 months. Mean number of previous procedures was 3.6 ± 1.2. A total of 27 (79.4%) patients underwent final reimplantation. The most frequently isolated pathogen in spacer exchange was Staphylococcus epidermidis (10 cases, 28.6%). Polymicrobial cultures were obtained from 9 (25.71%) patients, 10 (28.6%) presented culture-negative infections. A total of 11 (32.4%) resistant pathogens were isolated, and 16 (47.0%) difficult to treat pathogens were detected. Eradication rate was 78.8%. Overall survivorship of implants after final reimplantation was 72.8% at 51.8 months.

CONCLUSION

Surgeons should be aware that subjects necessitating spacer exchange often present multiple comorbidities, previous staged revision failures, soft-tissue impairment and difficult to treat infection. In these patients, spacer exchange provides good clinical results and infection eradication, preventing arthrodesis or amputation.

Quality of life, infection control, and complication rates using a novel custom-made articulating hip spacer during two-stage revision for periprosthetic joint infection

INTRODUCTION

Two-stage revision remains the gold standard treatment for most chronically infected and complex total hip arthroplasty infections. To improve patient outcome and reduce complication rates, we have developed a novel custom-made articulating hip spacer technique and present our short-term results.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Between November 2017 and November 2019, 27 patients (mean age 70 years) underwent two-stage revision for periprosthetic joint infection of the hip using the articulating spacer design described here. We retrospectively analyzed spacer-related complications as well as rates for complication, infection control, and implant survivorship after final reimplantation. Furthermore, we prospectively collected patient-reported health-related quality of life (HRQoL) scores prior to spacer implantation, with the spacer and after reimplantation of the new prosthesis.

RESULTS

An additional round of spacer exchange was performed in two patients (8.3%), persistent wound discharge was the reason in both cases. We had one (4.2%) spacer-related mechanical complication, a dislocation that was treated with closed reduction. After reimplantation, infection control was achieved in 96% with an implant survivorship of 92% after a mean follow-up time of 19 (range 7-32, SD 7.2) months. While the scores for VR-12 MCS, VAS hip pain and patient-reported overall satisfaction significantly improved after first stage surgery, the scores for WOMAC, UCLA and VR-12 PCS significantly improved after second stage surgery.

CONCLUSIONS

Our two-stage approach for periprosthetic joint infection shows high infection eradication and implant survivorship rates at short-term follow-up. Spacer-related complication rates were low, and we achieved high patient satisfaction rates and low pain levels already during the spacer period. To further simplify comparison between different spacer designs, we propose a new hip spacer classification system.

Peri-Prosthetic Joint Infection in Patients Prescribed Suppressive Antibiotic Therapy Undergoing Primary Total Joint Arthroplasty: A 1:4 Case Control Matched Study

Background: Oral suppressive antibiotic therapy (SAT) has emerged as a potential means to increase rates of infection-free survival in many complex peri-prosthetic joint infection (PJI) cases after total joint arthroplasty (TJA). The purpose of the present study is to evaluate the risk of PJI of a new primary TJA in patients on oral SAT. Patients and Methods: A retrospective matched cohort study from five hospitals in a 20-year period within a large hospital network was performed. Inclusion criteria consisted of patients over age 18 undergoing primary TJA, with any order for oral long-term (>6 months duration) SAT, and minimum of one-year clinical follow-up. Patients were matched 1:4 on age, gender, body mass index (BMI), hip or knee surgery, diabetes mellitus, smoking status, and indication for primary TJA. Student t-test, Fisher exact, and χ² tests were utilized for group comparisons. Our study was powered to detect a 10.5% increase in PJI incidence compared with a 1% baseline rate of PJI. Results: We identified 45 TJA in 33 patients receiving SAT, which were matched to 180 control cases. There was no difference in the rate of development of PJI at any time point within follow-up between the SAT cohort and control group (2.22% vs. 1.11%; p = 0.561). Conclusions: We found a 2.22% rate of PJI in a cohort of patients receiving SAT identified over a 20-year period. As the clinical scenario of primary TJA while on SAT is rare but likely to become more prevalent, future large-scale studies can be performed to better clarify rates and risk of PJI in this population.

Extended Oral Antibiotic Prophylaxis After Aseptic Revision Total Hip Arthroplasty: Does It Decrease Infection Risk?

BACKGROUND

Extended oral antibiotic prophylaxis (EOA) has been shown to reduce infection after high-risk primary total hip arthroplasties (THAs) and reimplantations. However, data are limited regarding EOA after aseptic revision THAs. This study evaluated the impact of EOA on infection-related outcomes after aseptic revision THAs.

METHODS

We retrospectively identified 1,107 aseptic revision THAs performed between 2014 and 2019. Patients who received EOA >24 hours perioperatively (n = 370) were compared to those who did not (n = 737) using an inverse probability of treatment weighting model. Their mean age was 65 years (range, 19-98 years), mean body mass index was 30 kg/m² (range, 16-72), and 54% were women. Outcomes included cumulative probabilities of any infection, periprosthetic joint infection (PJI), and re-revision or reoperation for infection. Mean follow-up was 4 years (range, 2-8 years).

RESULTS

The cumulative probability of any infection after aseptic revision THA was 2.3% at 90 days, 2.7% at 1 year, and 3.5% at 5 years. The cumulative probability of PJI was 1.7% at 90 days, 2.1% at 1 year, and 2.8% at 5 years. There was a trend toward an increased risk of any infection (hazards ratio [HR] = 2.6; P = .058), PJI (HR = 2.6; P = .085), and re-revision (HR = 6.5; P = .077) or reoperation (HR = 2.3; P = .095) for infection in patients who did not have EOA at the final clinical follow-up.

CONCLUSIONS

EOA after aseptic revision THA was not associated with a statistically significant decreased risk of any infection, PJI, or re-revision or reoperation for infection at all time points.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level III.

Post-operative prophylactic antibiotics in aseptic revision hip and knee arthroplasty: a propensity score matching analysis

The use of extended antibiotic (EA) prophylaxis (> 24 h) remains controversial in aseptic revision arthroplasty. We sought to determine whether EA prophylaxis reduces the risk of periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) in aseptic revision hip and knee arthroplasty. A total of 2800 patients undergoing aseptic revision hip and knee arthroplasty at five institutional databases from 2008 to 2017 were evaluated. One to two nearest-neighbor propensity score matching analysis was conducted between patients who did and did not receive extended antibiotic prophylaxis. The matching elements included age, sex, body mass index, Charlson comorbidity index, hospital distribution, year of surgery, joint (hip or knee), surgical time, CRP, preoperative hemoglobin, albumin, and length of stay. The primary outcome was the development of PJI, which was assessed at 30 days, 90 days, and 1 year following revision and analyzed separately. A total of 2467 (88%) patients received EA prophylaxis, and 333 (12%) patients received standard antibiotic (SA) prophylaxis (≤ 24 h). In the propensity-matched analysis, there was no difference between patients who received EA prophylaxis and those who did not in terms of 30-day PJI (0.3% vs. 0.3%, p = 1.00), 90-day PJI (1.7% vs. 2.1%, p = 0.62) and 1- year PJI (3.8% vs. 6.0%, p = 0.109). For revision hip, the incidence of PJI was 0.2% vs 0% at 30 days (p = 0.482), 1.6% vs 1.4% at 90 days (p = 0.837), and 3.4% vs 5.1% at 1 year (p = 0.305) in the EA and SA group. For revision knee, the incidence of PJI was 0.4% vs 0.9% at 30 days (p = 0.63), 1.8% vs 3.4% at 90 days (p = 0.331), and 4.4% vs 7.8% at 1 year (p = 0.203) in the EA and SA group. A post hoc power analysis revealed an adequate sample size with a beta value of 83%. In addition, the risks of Clostridium difficile and resistant organism infection were not increased. This multi-institutional study demonstrated no difference in the rate of PJIs between patients who received extended antibiotic prophylaxis and those who did not in aseptic revision arthroplasty. The risk of C. difficile and resistant organism infection was not increased with prolonged antibiotic use.

Rates of Antimicrobial Resistance With Extended Oral Antibiotic Prophylaxis After Total Joint Arthroplasty

Background

There is increased interest and utilization of extended oral antibiotic prophylaxis (EOAP) following primary and revision total hip arthroplasties (THAs) and total knee arthroplasties (TKAs). The purpose of this study was to look for potential associations between EOAP and differential rates of antimicrobial resistance or epidemiology of organisms causing periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) following primary and aseptic revision THAs/TKAs.

Methods

Patients who developed PJI following a primary or aseptic revision TKA/THA at a single institution from 2009 to 2020 were retrospectively identified. Patients who received at least 7 days of EOAP following the surgery were noted. Rates of antimicrobial resistance were compared between standard antibiotic prophylaxis and EOAP cohorts using the Fisher's exact test.

Results

One hundred twenty-eight cultures were obtained from 119 patients with PJI. Fourty-four cases (37%) developed PJI after EOAP. Staphylococcus aureus was the most frequently isolated organism (30% of all cultures; 78% were methicillin-sensitive). Rates of antimicrobial resistance were similar between standard antibiotic prophylaxis and EOAP cohorts in all but 2 instances: Increased resistance to erythromycin and trimethoprim-sulfamethoxazole was observed in coagulase-negative Staphylococci isolates in the EOAP cohort (89% vs 21%, P < .01; 44% vs 0%, P = .02). An increased frequency of gram-negative organisms was observed in the EOAP group (22% vs 8%, P = .03).

Conclusions

Rates of antimicrobial resistance were not significantly different between EOAP and standard antibiotic prophylaxis cohorts except in coagulase-negative Staphylococci. The increased frequency of gram-negative infections was present in the EOAP cohort. Larger, multicenter studies are needed to better understand the impact of EOAP on antimicrobial resistance and PJI epidemiology.

Level of Evidence

Level III; retrospective cohort study.

The Fate and Relevance of the Patella in Two-Stage Revision Total Knee Arthroplasty for Periprosthetic Joint Infection

BACKGROUND

It remains unclear whether reimplantation of a patellar component during a two-stage revision for periprosthetic total knee arthroplasty infection (PJI) affects patient reported outcome measures (PROMs) or implant survivorship. The purpose of this study was to evaluate whether patellar resurfacing during reimplantation confers a functional benefit or increases implant survivorship after two-stage treatment for PJI.

METHODS

Two-stage revisions for knee PJI performed by three surgeons at a single tertiary care center were reviewed retrospectively. All original patellar components and cement were removed during resection and the patella was resurfaced whenever feasible during reimplantation. PROMs, implant survivorship, and radiographic measurements (patellar tilt and displacement) were compared between knees reimplanted with a patellar component versus those without a patellar component.

RESULTS

A total of 103 patients met the inclusion criteria. Forty-three patients (41.7%) underwent reimplantation with, and 60 patients (58.3%) without a patellar component. At a mean follow-up of 33.5 months, there were no significant differences in patient demographics or PROMs between groups (P ≥ .156). No significant differences were found in the estimated Kaplan-Meier all-cause, aseptic, or septic survivorship between groups (P ≥ .342) at a maximum of 75 months follow-up. There was no significant difference in the change (pre-resection to post-reimplant) of patellar tilt (P = .504) or displacement (P = .097) between the groups.

CONCLUSION

Patellar resurfacing during knee reimplantation does not appear to meaningfully impact postoperative PROMs or survivorship. Given the risk of potential extensor mechanism complications with patellar resurfacing, surgeons may choose to leave the patella without an implant during total knee reimplantation and expect similar clinical outcomes.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level III.

Extended Oral Antibiotics Increase Bacterial Resistance in Patients Who Fail 2-Stage Exchange for Periprosthetic Joint Infection

BACKGROUND

Although studies have demonstrated reductions in recurrent periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) with the administration of prolonged oral antibiotics at second-stage reimplantation, the potential for increasing bacterial resistance has not been studied. The purpose of this study was to determine if oral antibiotics at second-stage reimplantation increased the rate of antibiotic resistance in subsequent infections.

METHODS

We retrospectively reviewed patients who underwent 2-stage exchange for chronic PJI from 2014 to 2019. We compared those who had received prolonged oral antibiotics at the time of stage 2 reimplantation with those who did not. The primary outcome was the presence of resistant organisms in any subsequent infection. The secondary outcome was the overall rate of recurrent PJI in the 2 groups. Multivariable analyses controlling for demographics and comorbid conditions were used.

RESULTS

Of the 211 patients who underwent 2-stage exchange for PJI, 158 patients received prolonged oral antibiotics. The mean follow-up was 2.2 years. Recurrent PJI was diagnosed in 24 of 158 (15%) patients who received oral antibiotics compared with 11 of 53 (21%) patients who did not receive antibiotics (P = .35). PJI with resistant organisms was identified in 16 of 24 (67%) patients who received antibiotics compared with 0 of 11 (0%) patients who did not receive antibiotics (P = .0001).

CONCLUSIONS

Prolonged oral antibiotics following 2-stage exchange increase drug resistance to that antibiotic in subsequent PJI. We recommend further research in the area to refine antimicrobial protocols as we consider the risks and benefits of prolonged antibiotic treatment.

Diagnosis and Treatment of Culture-Negative Periprosthetic Joint Infection

Identification of the causative organism(s) in periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) is a challenging task. The shortcomings of traditional cultures have been emphasized in recent literature, culminating in a clinical entity known as "culture-negative PJI." Amidst the growing burden of biofilm infections that are inherently difficult to culture, the field of clinical microbiology has seen a paradigm shift from culture-based to molecular-based methods. These novel techniques hold much promise in the demystification of culture-negative PJI and revolutionization of the microbiology laboratory. This article outlines the clinical implications of culture-negative PJI, common causes of this diagnostic conundrum, established strategies to improve culture yield, and newer molecular techniques to detect infectious organisms.

Extended Oral Antibiotic Prophylaxis After Aseptic Revision TKA: Does It Decrease Infection Risk?

BACKGROUND

Extended oral antibiotic prophylaxis (EOA) has been shown to potentially reduce infection rates after high-risk primary total knee arthroplasties (TKAs) and reimplantations. However, data is limited regarding EOA after aseptic revision TKAs. This study evaluated the impact of EOA on infection-related outcomes after aseptic revision TKAs.

METHODS

904 aseptic revision TKAs from 2014-2019 were retrospectively identified. Patients who received EOA >24 hours perioperatively (n = 267) were compared to those who did not (n = 637) using an inverse probability of treatment weighting model. Mean age was 66 years, mean BMI was 33 kg/m², and 54% were female. Outcomes included cumulative probabilities of any infection, periprosthetic joint infection (PJI), superficial infection, and re-revision or reoperation for infection.

RESULTS

The cumulative probability of any infection after aseptic revision TKA was 1.9% at 90 days, 3.5% at 1 year, and 8.1% at 5 years. Patients without EOA had a higher risk of any infection at 90 days (HR = 7.1; P = .01), but not other time points. The cumulative probability of PJI after aseptic revision TKA was 0.8% at 90 days, 2.3% at 1 year, and 6.5% at 5 years. Patients without EOA did not have an increased risk of PJI. There were no differences in re-revision or reoperation for infection at any time point between groups.

CONCLUSION

Extended oral antibiotics after aseptic revision TKA were associated with a 7-fold decreased risk of any infection at 90 days. The results suggest a potential role for EOA after aseptic revision TKA and warrant additional prospective studies.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level III.

Educational Impact of #IDJClub, a Twitter-Based Infectious Diseases Journal Club

BACKGROUND

Journal clubs have been an enduring mainstay of medical education, and hosting these on social media platforms can expand accessibility and engagement. We describe the creation and impact of #IDJClub, an infectious diseases (ID) Twitter journal club.

METHODS

We launched #IDJClub in October 2019. Using the account @IDJClub, an ID physician leads a 1-hour open-access Twitter discussion of a recent publication. All participants use the hashtag #IDJClub. Sessions started monthly, but increased due to demand during the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic. We used Symplur 's Healthcare Hashtag project to track engagement of #IDJClub per 60-minute discussion plus the following 30 minutes to capture ongoing conversations. We also conducted an online anonymous survey using Likert scales and open-ended questions to assess educational impact.

RESULTS

In its first 20 months, 31 journal clubs were held, with medians of 42 (interquartile range [IQR], 28.5-60) participants and 312 (IQR, 205-427.5) tweets per session. 134 participants completed the survey, of whom 39% were ID physicians, 19% pharmacists, 13% ID fellows, and 10% medical residents. Most agreed or strongly agreed that #IDJClub provided clinically useful knowledge (95%), increased personal confidence in independent literature appraisal (72%), and was more educational than traditional journal clubs (72%). The format addressed several barriers to traditional journal club participation such as lack of access, subject experts, and time.

CONCLUSIONS

#IDJClub is an effective virtual journal club, providing an engaging, open-access tool for critical literature appraisal that overcomes several barriers to traditional journal club participations while fostering connectedness within the global ID community.

Reduced Infection Rate After Aseptic Revision Total Knee Arthroplasty With Extended Oral Antibiotic Protocol

BACKGROUND

The optimal postoperative antibiotic duration has not been determined for aseptic revision total knee arthroplasty (R-TKA) where the risk of periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) is 3%-7.5%. This study compared PJI rates in aseptic R-TKA performed with extended oral antibiotic prophylaxis (EOAP) to published rates.

METHODS

Aseptic R-TKAs consecutively performed between 2013 and 2017 at a tertiary care referral center in the American Midwest were retrospectively reviewed. All patients were administered intravenous antibiotics while hospitalized and discharged on 7-day oral antibiotic prophylaxis. Infection rates and antibiotic-related complications were assessed.

RESULTS

Sixty-seven percent of the 176 analysis patients were female, with an average age of 64 years and body mass index of 35 kg/m². Instability and aseptic loosening comprised 86% of revision diagnoses. Overall, 87.5% of intraoperative cultures were negative, and the remainder were single positive cultures considered contaminants. PJI rates were 0% at 90 days, 1.8% (95% confidence interval 0.4%-5.3%) at 1 year, and 2.2% (95% confidence interval 0.6%-5.7%) at mean follow-up of approximately 3 years (range, 7-65 months).

CONCLUSION

EOAP after aseptic R-TKA resulted in a PJI rate equivalent to primary TKA, representing a 2- to-4-fold decrease compared with published aseptic R-TKA infection rates. Further study on the benefits and costs of EOAP after aseptic R-TKA is encouraged.

Debridement, antibiotics, and implant retention in non-oncological femoral megaprosthesis infections: minimum 5 year follow-up

PURPOSE

Megaprostheses are increasingly utilised outside of the oncological setting, and remain at significant risk of periprosthetic joint infection (PJI). Debridement, antibiotic, and implant retention (DAIR) is an established treatment for PJI, however its use in non-oncological patients with femoral megaprostheses has not been widely reported. There are significant differences in patient physiology, treatment goals, and associated risks between these patient cohorts.

METHODS

We identified 14 patients who underwent DAIR for a PJI of their femoral megaprostheses, between 2000 and 2014, whom had their index procedure secondary to non-oncological indications. Patients were managed as part of a multidisciplinary team, with our standardised surgical technique including exchange of all mobile parts, and subsequent antibiotic therapy for a minimum of 3 months. Patients were followed up for a minimum of 5 years.

RESULTS

Patients included six proximal femoral replacements, five distal femoral replacements, and three total femoral replacements. No patients were lost to follow-up. There were six males and eight females, with a mean age of 67.2 years, and mean ASA of 2.3. Nine patients (64.3%) successfully cleared their infection following DAIR at a minimum of 5 year follow-up. Five patients (35.7%) required further revision surgery, with four patients cleared of infection. No patients who underwent DAIR alone suffered complications as a result of the procedure.

CONCLUSIONS

The use of DAIR in these complex patients can lead to successful outcomes, but the risk of further revision remains high. The success rate (64.3%) remains on par with other studies evaluating DAIR in megaprostheses and in primary arthroplasty. This study indicates judicious use of DAIR can be an appropriate part of the treatment algorithm.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

II.

Time Required for Planned and Unplanned Episodes of Care in Septic Two-Stage Revision Hip and Knee Arthroplasty

BACKGROUND

Septic revision total hip (rTHA) and knee (rTKA) arthroplasty requires more effort but is reimbursed less than primary procedures per minute of intraoperative time. This study quantified planned and unplanned work performed by the surgical team for septic 2-stage revision surgeries during the entire episode-of-care "reimbursement window" and compared that time to allowable reimbursement amounts.

METHODS

Between October 2010 and December 2020 all unilateral septic 2-stage rTHA and rTKA procedures performed by a single surgeon at a single institution were retrospectively reviewed. Time dedicated to planned work was calculated over each episode of care, from surgery scheduling to 90 days postoperatively. Impromptu patient inquiries and treatments after discharge, but within the episode of care, involving the surgeon/surgeon team constituted unplanned work. Planned and unplanned work minutes were summed and divided by the number of patients reviewed to obtain average minutes of work per patient.

RESULTS

Sixty-eight hips and 64 knees were included. For 2-stage rTHA and rTKA the average time per patient for planned care was 1728 and 1716 minutes and for unplanned care was 339 and 237 minutes. Compared to the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services' allowable reimbursement times, an additional 799 and 887 minutes of uncompensated time was required to care for 2-stage rTHA and rTKA patients.

CONCLUSION

Two-stage revision procedures are substantially more complex than primary procedures. Financially disincentivizing surgeons to care for these patients reduces access to care when high-quality care is most needed. These findings support increasing the allowable times for 2-stage septic revision cases.

Patients Who Undergo Early Aseptic Revision TKA Within 90 Days of Surgery Have a High Risk of Re-revision and Infection at 2 Years: A Large-database Study

BACKGROUND

Early aseptic revision within 90 days after primary TKA is a devastating complication. The causes, complications, and rerevision risks of aseptic revision TKA performed during this period are poorly described.

QUESTIONS/PURPOSES

(1) What is the likelihood of re-revision within 2 years after early aseptic TKA revision within 90 days compared with that of a control group of patients undergoing primary TKA? (2) What are the indications for early aseptic TKA revision within 90 days? (3) What are the differences in revision risk between different indications for early aseptic revision TKA?

METHODS

Patients who underwent unilateral aseptic revision TKA within 90 days of the index procedure were identified in a national insurance claims database (PearlDiver Technologies) using administrative codes. The exclusion criteria comprised revision for infection, history of bilateral TKA, and age younger than 18 years. The PearlDiver database was selected for its large and geographically diverse patient base and the availability of outpatient follow-up data that are unavailable in other databases focused on inpatient care. A total of 481 patients met criteria for early aseptic revision TKA, with 14% (67) loss to follow-up at 2 years. This final cohort of 414 patients was compared with a control group of patients who underwent primary TKA without revision within 90 days. For the control group, 137,661 patients underwent primary TKA without early revision, with 13% (18,138) loss to follow-up at 2 years. Among these patients, 414 controls were matched using a one-to-one propensity score method; no differences in age, gender, and Charlson comorbidity index score were observed between the groups. Indications for initial revision and 2-year re-revision were recorded. The Kaplan-Meier method was used to assess survival between the early revision and control groups.

RESULTS

Two-year survivorship free from additional revision surgery was lower in the early aseptic revision cohort compared with the control (78% [95% confidence interval 77% to 79%] versus 98% [95% CI 96% to 99%]; p < 0.001). Among early revisions, 10% (43 of 414) of the patients underwent re-revision for periprosthetic infection with an antibiotic spacer within 2 years. The reasons for early aseptic revision TKA were instability/dislocation (37% [153 of 414]), periprosthetic fracture (23% [96 of 414]), aseptic loosening (23% [95 of 414]), pain (11% [45 of 414]), and arthrofibrosis (6% [25 of 414]). Early revision for pain was associated with higher odds of re-revision than early revisions performed for other all other reasons (44% [20 of 45] versus 29% [100 of 344]; odds ratio 2.0 [95% CI 1.0 to 3.7]; p = 0.04).

CONCLUSION

Acute early aseptic revision TKA carries a high risk of re-revision at 2 years and a high risk of subsequent periprosthetic joint infection. Patients who undergo an early revision should be carefully counseled regarding the very high risk of repeat revision and discouraged from having early revision unless the indications are absolutely clear and compelling. Early aseptic revision for pain alone carries an unacceptably high risk of repeat revision and should not be performed. Adjunctive measures for infection prophylaxis should be strongly considered. Specific interventions to reduce surgical complications in this subset of patients have not been adequately studied; additional investigation of strategies to minimize the risk of reoperation or infection is warranted.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level III, therapeutic study.

Septic Failure After One-Stage Exchange for Prosthetic Joint Infection of the Hip: Microbiological Implications

BACKGROUND

The microbiological implications of septic failure after 1-stage exchange for prosthetic joint infection (PJI) of the hip remain unclear.

METHODS

Information was gathered on comorbidities, previous procedures, preoperative and postoperative microbiology results, methods of detection, and antibiotic resistance patterns, for all patients, who developed septic failure after 1-stage exchange for PJI of the hip performed at our institution during 2001-2017.

RESULTS

Seventy-seven patients were identified. Septic failure was diagnosed a mean of 1.7 (standard deviation 2.3, range 0-11.8) years later. Although the spectrum of microorganisms was similar to preoperative, in the majority of patients (55%), the initial microorganism(s) was (were) replaced by (a) totally different microorganism(s). Overall, there was a decrease in the number of polymicrobial PJIs. The number of patients with high virulent microorganisms decreased significantly from 52 to 36 (P = .034). The number of PJIs due to gram-negative pathogens remained similar (11 vs 14, P = .491). The number of rifampicin-resistant staphylococci, fluoroquinolone-resistant streptococci, enterococci, and fungi changed from 8 to 15, 0 to 2, 7 to 3, and 1 to 2, respectively, but these changes did not reach statistical significance.

CONCLUSION

The majority of reinfections is caused by different infecting bacteria, hence it is essential to perform a new diagnostic workup and not base treatment decisions (solely) on historical cultures. We were furthermore unable to irrefutably prove that, from a microbiological point of view, septic failure after 1-stage exchange comes with increased challenges. Given the time interval to failure, we propose that a longer follow-up of these patients is needed, than previously suggested.

Rifampicin induced fever during treatment against Staphylococcal biofilm in a patient with periprosthetic joint infection

Periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) after total knee arthroplasty remains a challenging complication. The treatment options for PJI include different procedures; however, regardless of the strategy, antibiotics are required. The combination of different antibiotics increased the rates of PJI eradication. For almost three decades, rifampicin has been used as part of antibiotic therapy for PJI. Drug fever, a febrile response that coincides with the onset of drug administration and disappears after drug discontinuation in the absence of other underlying conditions that could cause fever, is frequently misdiagnosed. Case presentation: We present the case of a 72-year-old man with PJI six months after total knee arthroplasty. Two-stage revision surgery was followed by culture-directed antibiotic treatment (ciprofloxacin and rifampicin) against Staphylococcus aureus isolated from the periprosthetic tissue. On the fifth day of antibiotic treatment, the patient became febrile, and in the next five days, he had an intermittent fever of up to 40 °C, although he showed clinical improvement. The patient was normotensive without a maculopapular rash, urticaria, or clotting abnormalities. A drug fever was suspected, and rifampicin was discontinued. A re-challenge test was performed, and the fever recurred. Antibiotic treatment with ciprofloxacin was continued, and after 12 months of follow-up, the patient was doing well. Conclusion: Clinicians should be aware that fever could be a clinical presentation of drug fever. If it occurs during an infection, drug fever could necessitate additional diagnostic procedures for further evaluation, inadequate antibiotic therapy, and prolonged hospitalisation.

What is the rate of reinfection with different and difficult-to-treat bacteria after failed one-stage septic knee exchange?

PURPOSE

Re-operation after septic failure of a one-stage exchange for prosthetic joint infection (PJI) of the knee is a highly challenging procedure with concerns over residual bone stock, soft tissues, and stability. The associated changes in microbiology in cases of reinfection are still largely unknown.

METHODS

A comprehensive analysis was performed of all patients treated at our tertiary institution between 2001 and 2017 who developed reinfection after a one-stage exchange for PJI of the knee. Prerequisites for inclusion were a certain diagnosis of PJI according to the ICM criteria and a minimum follow-up of three years. Data on comorbidities, previous surgical interventions, microbiological findings at the time of the initial one-stage exchange and at the time of reinfection, detection methods, and antibiotic resistance patterns were retrospectively studied.

RESULTS

Sixty-six patients were identified that met the inclusion criteria. Reinfection occurred after a mean time interval of 27.7 months (SD ± 33.9, range 1-165). Ten types of bacteria were found that were not present before the one-stage exchange. The causative pathogen remained identical in 22 patients (33%) and additional microorganisms were detected in ten patients (15%). Half of the reinfections were however due to (a) completely different microorganism(s). A significant increase in the number of PJIs on the basis of high-virulent (23 vs 30, p = 0.017) and difficult-to-treat bacteria (13 vs 24, p = 0.035) was found.

CONCLUSION

The present study provides a novel insight into the microbiological changes following septic failure after one-stage exchange for PJI of the knee. A higher prevalence of more difficult-to-treat bacteria might increase the complexity of subsequent procedures. Also, a longer follow-up of these patients than previously suggested seems in order.

A Retrospective Observational Cohort Study of Periprosthetic Hip Infection Treated by one-stage Method Including Cases With Bone Graft Reconstruction

Purpose:

Prosthetic joint infection (PJI) is a devastating complication that can affect hip arthroplasty. Its treatment is extremely difficult, and issues regarding the optimal treatment remain unanswered. This study intended to show the effectiveness of the one-stage treatment of PJI.

Materials and Methods:

A retrospective observational cohort study performed from July 2014- August 2018. All patients with suspected PJI were included. Major and minor criteria developed by the International Consensus on Periprosthetic Joint Infection (ICPJI) was used to define infection. Laboratory tests and image exams were performed, and all patients were followed for at least 2 years.

Outcomes:

Success rate (2018 ICPJI definition to success) in treatment of PJI using one-stage revision method. Clinical and functional outcomes defined by Harris Hip Score (HHS).

Results:

Thirty-one patients were screened and 18 analyzed. 69.85 ± 9.76 years was the mean age. Mean follow-up time was 63.84 ± 18.55 months. Ten patients had acetabular defects and required bone graft reconstruction. Sixteen patients were classified as Tier 1, 1 as Tier 3D, and as 1 Tier 3E. Almost 90% of patients submitted to one-stage revision with acetabulum graft reconstruction were free of infection. The overall infection survival rate was 78.31±6.34 months. Candida albicans and sinus tract were statistically significant in univariate Cox’s analysis. The predictor of one-stage revision surgery failure that remained final Cox’s regression model was C. albicans (hazard ratio [HR]: 4.47).

Conclusion:

Treatment through one-stage revision surgery associated with 6 months of antimicrobial is a viable option with acceptable results even when bone graft reconstruction is necessary. C. albicans was a strong predictor of failure in this cohort.

What is the appropriate extended duration of antibiotic prophylaxis after two-stage revision for chronic PJI?

Aims

To explore the effect of different durations of antibiotics after stage II reimplantation on the prognosis of two-stage revision for chronic periprosthetic joint infection (PJI).

Methods

This study involved a retrospective collection of patients who underwent two-stage revision for chronic PJI and continued to use extended antibiotic prophylaxis in two regional medical centres from January 2010 to June 2018. The patients were divided into a short (≤ one month) or a long (> one month) course of treatment based on the duration of antibiotics following stage II reimplantation. The difference in the infection control rate between the two groups was compared, and prognostic factors for recurrence were analyzed.

Results

A total of 105 patients with chronic PJI were enrolled: 64 patients in the short course group and 41 patients in the long course group. For 99 of the patients, the infection was under control during a follow-up period of at least 24 months after two-stage revision. For the short course group, the mean duration of antibiotic prophylaxis after stage II reimplantation was 20.17 days (SD 5.30) and the infection control rate was 95.3%; for the long course group these were 45.02 days (SD 15.03) and 92.7%, respectively. There was no significant difference in infection control rates between the two groups (p = 0.676). Cox regression analysis found that methicillin-resistant staphylococcus infection (p = 0.015) was an independent prognostic factor for recurrence.

Conclusion

After stage II reimplantation surgery of two-stage revision for chronic PJI, extended antibiotic prophylaxis for less than one month can achieve good infection control rate.

Cite this article: Bone Joint Res 2021;10(12):790–796.