Outcomes of revision total hip replacement for infection after grading according to a standard protocol

Current Status and Perspectives of Diagnosis and Treatment of Periprosthetic Joint Infection

Periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) is a catastrophic complication following joint replacement surgery, posing significant challenges to orthopedic surgeons. Due to the lack of a definitive diagnostic gold standard, timely treatment initiation is problematic, resulting in substantial economic burdens on patients and society. In this review, we thoroughly analyze the complexities of PJI and emphasize the importance of accurate diagnosis and effective treatment. The article specifically focuses on the advancements in diagnostic techniques, ranging from traditional pathogen culture to advanced molecular diagnostics, and discusses their role in enhancing diagnostic accuracy. Additionally, we review the latest surgical management strategies, including everything from debridement to revision surgeries. Our summary aims to provide practical information for the diagnosis and treatment of PJI and encourages further research to improve diagnostic accuracy and treatment outcomes.

Survivorship and Outcomes of Two-Stage Revision for Infected Total Hip Arthroplasty at a Mean of 7 Year Follow-Up

PURPOSE

Periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) continues to be one of the leading causes of failure following total hip arthroplasty (THA). The objectives of the study were to: 1) determine the minimum 2-year infection-free survivorship of two-stage revision THA; 2) determine the causative organisms for repeat two-stage revision THA; and 3) characterize the results of failed two-stage revisions and evaluate patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs).

METHODS

A retrospective chart review was completed for patients who underwent two-stage revision THA for PJI. Prospective data was collected on each patient, including demographics, causative organisms, complications, and type of reoperation. The PROMs, including Harris Hip Score (HHS), 12-item Short-Form Health Survey (SF-12), and Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC) scores were obtained prior to two-stage revision THA surgery and annually as part of standard clinical and radiographic follow-up.

RESULTS

A total of 328 patients who underwent a two-stage revision THA for a PJI were included in the study (mean age 67 years (range, 28 to 90), mean BMI of 30.6 (range, 15 to 57). The overall infection-free survivorship for two-stage revision THA was 73.8% at a minimum of 2 years (range, 2 to 20). Overall, 194 (59.1%) patients who had successful infection eradication underwent a two-revision THA only. The most common single organisms infected were Staphylococcus aureus (12.5%) and Staphylococcus epidermidis (11%). Higher reoperation rates were found in cases with MRSA and polymicrobial infections. All PROMs showed statistical improvement from pre-operatively to the latest follow-up appointment.

CONCLUSIONS

Two-stage revision THA is associated with a good success rate in the treatment of PJIs at mid- to long-term follow-up. Polymicrobial and MRSA infections are poor prognostic factors, making the eradication of infection more difficult. The management of periprosthetic joint infections continues to be one of the most important orthopaedic challenges to treat.

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.

Debridement, antibiotics, and implant retention (DAIR) for the early prosthetic joint infection of total knee and hip arthroplasties: a systematic review

PURPOSE

Early periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) represents one of the most fearsome complications of joint replacement. No international consensus has been reached regarding the best approach for early prosthetic knee and hip infections. The aim of this updated systematic review is to assess whether debridement, antibiotics, and implant retention (DAIR) is an effective choice of treatment in early postoperative and acute hematogenous PJI.

METHODS

This systematic review was performed using the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. The diagnostic criteria defining a PJI, the most present pathogen, and the days between the index procedure and the onset of the PJI were extracted from the selected articles. Additionally, the mean follow-up, antibiotic regimen, and success rate of the treatment were also reported.

RESULTS

The articles included provided a cohort of 970 patients. Ten studies specified the joint of their cohort in PJIs regarding either hip prostheses or knee prostheses, resulting in 454 total knees and 460 total hips. The age of the patients ranged from 18 to 92 years old. Success rates for the DAIR treatments in the following cohort ranged from 55.5% up to a maximum of 90% (mean value of 71%).

CONCLUSION

Even though the DAIR procedure is quite limited, it is still considered an effective option for patients developing an early post-operative or acute hematogenous PJI. However, there is a lack of studies, in particular randomized control trials (RCTs), comparing DAIR with one-stage and two-stage revision protocols in the setting of early PJIs, reflecting the necessity to conduct further high-quality studies to face the burden of early PJI.

An international consensus based on the Delphi method to define failure of medical treatment in pyogenic spinal infections

BACKGROUND CONTEXT

Pyogenic spinal infections (PSIs) are severe conditions with high morbidity and mortality. If medical treatment fails, patients may require surgery, but there is no consensus regarding the definition of medical treatment failure.

PURPOSE

To determine criteria for defining failure of medical treatment in PSI through an international consensus of experts.

STUDY DESIGN

A two-round basic Delphi method study.

SAMPLE

One hundred and fifty experts from 22 countries (authors or co-authors of clinical guidelines or indexed publications on the topic) were invited to participate; 33 answered both rounds defining the criteria.

OUTCOME MEASURES

A scale of 1 to 9 (1: no relevance; 9: highly relevant) applied to each criterion.

METHODS

We created an online survey with 10 criteria reported in the literature to define the failure of medical treatment in PSIs. We sent this survey via email to the experts. Agreement among the participants on relevant criteria (score ≥7) was determined. One month later, the second round of evaluations was sent. An extra criterion suggested by six responders in the first round was incorporated. The final version was reached with the criteria considered relevant and with high agreement.

RESULTS

The consensus definition is: (1) There is an uncontrolled sepsis despite broad spectrum antibiotic treatment, and (2) There is an infection relapse, following a six-week period of antibiotics with clinical and laboratory improvement.

CONCLUSIONS

Our definition of failure following nonsurgical treatment of PSI can offer a standardized approach to guide clinical decision-making. Furthermore, it has the potential to enhance scientific reporting within this field.

Symptom duration is associated with failure of periprosthetic joint infection treated with debridement, antibiotics and implant retention

Background

Debridement, antibiotics, and implant retention (DAIR) is an alternative treatment strategy for periprosthetic joint infection (PJI). However, no consensus exists regarding which patient population(s) may be most suitable for DAIR. This study aims to investigate the overall infection control rate and explore the prognostic factors associated with acute, hematogenous, and chronic PJIs treated with DAIR.

Methods

We retrospectively reviewed the included patients who were diagnosed with PJI and underwent DAIR at two institutions from 2009 to 2018 (n = 104). We collected the clinical data, including demographics, preoperative laboratory tests, Charlson Comorbidity Index, surgical information, and culture organism results. Treatment success was defined according to the criteria reported by Diaz-Ledezma. All patients were followed for at least one year unless failure preceded that time point. A multivariable analysis was utilized to identify prognostic factors associated with treatment, and a Kaplan-Meier survival analysis was used to depict the infection control rate.

Results

The overall treatment success rate in the current cohort of patients was 67.3% at a median 38.6 (interquartile range: 23.5, 90.7) months follow-up. Patients with a duration of infectious symptoms of more than ten days were more likely to fail (P = 0.035, hazard ratio 8.492, 95% confidence interval 1.159–62.212). There was no difference among acute, hematogenous, and chronic infections in terms of failure rate (P = 0.161).

Conclusions

DAIR is a reasonable treatment option for PJI, and its use in the setting of chronic infection does not appear to be a contraindication. Performing DAIR within ten days of the presentation of symptoms had a higher rate of treatment success.

Treatment of Infected Nonunions With Bone Defects Using Autologous Bone Graft and Absorbable Antibiotic-Loaded Calcium Sulfate-Hydroxyapatite Paste

BACKGROUND

Revision surgery in the presence of infection carries high risks. We describe our results using a new technique to treat these challenging problems. We treated infected nonunions with cavitary voids with adjuvant antibiotic loaded calcium sulfate-hydroxyapatite paste composite and autologous bone graft (ABG) layer technique coupled with stable fixation.

METHODS

Thirty consecutive patients who underwent revision foot and ankle surgery for an infected nonunion were prospectively studied. Following multidisciplinary team workup, surgical debridement and biopsies were undertaken. Bone voids were measured and classified according to containment and size. ABG was mixed and layered with an adjuvant antibiotic-loaded calcium sulfate-hydroxyapatite paste followed by surgical reconstruction including arthrodesis and fixation. Empirical and pathogen-specific antibiotics were instituted until intraoperative sample-specific antibiotics were identified and used. Patients were prospectively followed up for a minimum of 1 year.

RESULTS

The male-female ratio was 16:14, mean age was 51.3 years, and 23.3% smoked at definitive surgery. Void volume was <1 cm³ (n=9), 1-2 cm³ (n = 13), and >2 cm³ (n=8). No patients either were lost to follow-up or had a further infective episode at a mean of 38.3 months; 86.7% united with fusion on imaging. Four patients had radiographic evidence of nonunion; 3 were asymptomatic and 1 required revision surgery (void >2 cm³). Independent ambulation was achieved at an average of 12 weeks, at 1 year mean American Orthopaedic Foot & Ankle Society score was 77.7 (SD 9.59), and the Manchester-Oxford Foot Questionnaire reached an effect size >0.5 in all domains at 1 year following surgery. The union rate was independent of smoking status and vitamin D deficiency (P = .94).

CONCLUSION

Layered autologous bone grafting with adjuvant antibiotic-loaded calcium sulfate-hydroxyapatite paste has been shown to be effective and safe in revision arthrodesis, with low comorbidities in void gaps without infection recurrence.

Current treatments for biofilm-associated periprosthetic joint infection and new potential strategies

Periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) remains a devastating complication after total joint arthroplasty. Bacteria involved in these infections are notorious for adhering to foreign implanted surfaces and generating a biofilm matrix. These biofilms protect the bacteria from antibiotic treatment and the immune system making eradication difficult. Current treatment strategies including debridement, antibiotics, and implant retention, and one- and two-stage revisions still present a relatively high overall failure rate. One of the main shortcomings that has been associated with this high failure rate is the lack of a robust approach to treating bacterial biofilm. Therefore, in this review, we will highlight new strategies that have the potential to combat PJI by targeting biofilm integrity, therefore giving antibiotics and the immune system access to the internal network of the biofilm structure. This combination antibiofilm/antibiotic therapy may be a new strategy for PJI treatment while promoting implant retention.

Survival and Outcomes of 1.5-Stage vs 2-Stage Exchange Total Knee Arthroplasty Following Prosthetic Joint Infection

BACKGROUND

Traditional management of prosthetic joint infection following total knee arthroplasty (TKA) consists of a 2-stage approach. However, 1.5-stage exchange has seen preliminary success, whereby metal femoral and all-polyethylene tibia components are placed without intention for subsequent second stage. We sought to examine all patients who underwent a 1.5-stage exchange TKA at a single institution compared to historical 2-stage controls. We assessed the following: (1) infection-free survivorship and risk factors for reinfection; (2) 1-year surgical/medical outcomes; (3) patient-reported outcomes (ie, Knee Injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score for Joint Replacement [KOOS JR]); and (4) radiographic outcomes.

METHODS

We reviewed all patients undergoing a 1.5-stage (between 2015 and 2019) and 2-stage exchange TKA (between 2011 and 2016) at a single institution. A total of 162 knees were included (1.5-stage: 114; 2-stage: 48) with mean clinical follow-up of 2.6 years. KOOS JR scores and radiographic outcomes were evaluated at last clinical follow-up.

RESULTS

The 1.5-stage exchange TKA resulted in a 10.1% difference in infection-free survival (85.1% vs 75.0%, P = .158), compared to 2-stage exchange. Prior prosthetic joint infection was found to be an independent risk factor for reinfection (P = .030). Overall, postoperative complications were lower among 1.5-stage exchanges (8.8% vs 31.3%, P < .001). KOOS JR scores improved more from baseline among 1.5-staged (Δ24.7 vs Δ16.6, P < .001). Radiographic review did not demonstrate any progressive radiolucent lines, subsidences, or failures in either group.

CONCLUSION

A 1.5-stage exchange TKA is an effective alternative to the traditional 2-stage protocols with noninferior infection eradication and absence of radiographic complications at over 2 years of mean follow-up.

Candida periprosthetic infection of the knee: a systematic review of surgical treatments and clinical outcomes

BACKGROUND

Candida periprosthetic joint infections (PJIs) are a rare cause of prosthesis revision with severe consequences and challenging treatment. This study aims to produce a systematic analysis of types of treatment and outcome of knee Candida PJIs and their correlation with specific pathogen species.

METHODS

During April 2021, a literature search was performed according to PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Item for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) guideline. Reviewers used the Oxford Level of Evidence (LoE) and Methodological index for non-randomized studies (MINORS) score. Modal value of surgical, pharmacological treatment and outcome along with the correlation between types of treatment and outcome was calculated through Chi-square or Fisher exact test.

RESULTS

In total, 115 cases were collected through 51 articles, identifying 116 pathogens. Candida albicans was the most frequent pathogen. Analysis of LoE reveals 40 LoE 5 and 11 LoE 4. Thirteen patients underwent one-stage revision, 46 patients two-stage revision, 6 patients resection arthroplasty and arthrodesis, 4 patients long-term antifungal therapy, and 3 patients debridement with prosthesis retention. Global rate of success was 85.14%. Modal distribution revealed a preference for two-stage revision and Fluconazole in medical therapy. No difference in terms of fungal eradication was found among Candida species (p = 0.503) and for treatments except for two-stage revision and resection arthroplasty (p  = 0.0125) or debridement with implant retention (p  = 0.0498), and the rest of procedures and resection arthroplasty (0.0192). MINORS score was poor.

CONCLUSIONS

Analysis of the literature did not highlight any difference between types of surgical treatment and pathogens in terms of relapse or infection eradication. However, two-stage replacement may be preferred, allowing healing of infection in most cases.

Local antibiotic treatment with calcium sulfate as carrier material improves the outcome of debridement, antibiotics, and implant retention procedures for periprosthetic joint infections after hip arthroplasty – a retrospective study

Abstract. Purpose: Debridement, antibiotics, and implant retention (DAIR) is an established treatment modality in periprosthetic joint infections (PJIs), but success rates vary. This study compared the success of DAIR for PJIs after a total hip arthroplasty (THA), with or without local antibiotic delivery with CaSO4 as the carrier material. Methods: A retrospective review of DAIR for PJIs after THA performed between 2010 and 2018, including 41 patients is conducted. A total of 27 patients were treated by DAIR with local antibiotics with CaSO4 as the carrier material, and 14 patients were treated by a standard DAIR. The endpoints were treatment failure, defined as the need for a reoperation, either a second DAIR or a prosthesis removal or exchange due to persistent or recurrent infection, the initiation of a long-term suppressive antibiotic treatment, or death related to infection. Results: Considering any reoperation as an outcome, 11 of 14 cases treated without AB-CaSO4 (79 %) and 4 of the 27 cases treated with AB-CaSO4 failed (15 %). Considering revision as an outcome, 9 out of 14 cases treated without AB-CaSO4 (64 %) and 4 of the 27 cases treated with AB-CaSO4 (15 %) failed. A Kaplan–Meier survival analysis showed that local antibiotic delivery with CaSO4 as the carrier material led to a significantly longer infection-free survival, considering any surgical revision (p<0.0001; hazard ratio 8.9 (95 % CI 2.8–28.2)) or revision with component exchange (p=0.0015; hazard ratio 5.6 (95 % CI 1.7–18.2)) as the endpoint. Conclusion: The addition of local antibiotics with CaSO4 as the carrier material to DAIR for PJIs after THA significantly increases success rates, such as infection-free survival, any reoperation, and revision with component exchange in particular.

Antibiotic Therapy in 2-Stage Revision for Periprosthetic Joint Infection: A Systematic Review

BACKGROUND

Patients undergoing total joint arthroplasty (TJA) are at risk for developing periprosthetic joint infection (PJI). To treat PJI, orthopaedic surgeons can perform 1-stage or 2-stage revision arthroplasty. Although 2-stage revision yields superior long-term outcomes, the optimal antibiotic therapy duration and route of administration between stages remain uncertain. In this systematic review, we aimed to identify if variations in antibiotic therapy, duration, and administration during 2-stage hip or knee revision arthroplasty affect PJI eradication rates and surgical outcome measures.

METHODS

A literature search was performed using the PubMed and Google Scholar databases to identify all original reports from January 2000 to June 2021 involving 2-stage revision arthroplasty to treat PJI. Studies were included if they specified antibiotic duration, an intravenous (IV) route of antibiotic administration, type of antibiotic, and 2-stage revision PJI eradication rate and had a mean or median follow-up of at least 2 years after the second-stage operation. Included studies were classified into 3 groups based on the length of IV antibiotic therapy after prosthesis explantation: prolonged IV antibiotic therapy of 4 to 6 weeks, shortened IV antibiotic therapy of ≤2 weeks, and shortened course of IV antibiotic therapy followed by 6 to 12 weeks of oral antibiotics.

RESULTS

Nine studies were included. Three studies utilizing a prolonged IV antibiotic therapy had PJI eradication rates of 79% to 96%. Four studies using a shortened IV antibiotic therapy showed PJI eradication rates of 88% to 100%. Finally, 2 studies utilizing a shortened course of IV antibiotic therapy with oral antibiotics had PJI eradication rates of 95% and 97%. There was no significant difference in eradication rates across IV antibiotic duration strategies, despite a diverse array of cultured microorganisms across the studies.

CONCLUSIONS

Although the numbers are small, this systematic review suggests that prolonged IV antibiotic duration, shortened IV antibiotic duration, and shortened IV antibiotic duration supplemented with oral antibiotics confer similar PJI eradication rates after hip or knee arthroplasty.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

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

Management strategies for prosthetic joint infection: long-term infection control rates, overall survival rates, functional and quality of life outcomes

DAIR (debridement, antibiotics, and implant retention), one-stage and two-stage revision surgery are the most common management strategies for prosthetic joint infection (PJI) management. Our knowledge concerning their efficacy is based on short to medium-term low-quality studies.

Most studies report infection recurrence rates or infection-free time intervals. However, long-term survival rates of the infection-free joints, functional and quality of life outcome data are of paramount importance.

DAIR, one-stage and two-stage revision strategies are not unique surgical techniques, presenting several variables. Infection control rates for the above strategies vary from 75% to 90%, but comparisons are difficult because different indications and patient selection criteria are used in each strategy.

Recent outcome data show that DAIR and one-stage revision in selected patients (based on host, bacteriological, soft tissue and type of infection criteria) may present improved functional and quality of life outcomes and reduced costs for health systems as compared to those of two-stage revision.

It is expected that health system administrators and providers will apply pressure on surgeons and departments towards the wider use of DAIR and one-stage revision strategies. It is the orthopaedic surgeon’s responsibility to conduct quality studies in order to fully clarify the indications and outcomes of the different revision strategies.

Cite this article: EFORT Open Rev 2021;6:727-734. DOI: 10.1302/2058-5241.6.210008

Comparison of patient reported outcome measures after single versus two-stage revision for chronic infection of total hip arthroplasty: a retrospective propensity score matched cohort study

INTRODUCTION

Two-stage revision is the current gold standard treatment for infected total hip arthroplasties (THA) with good clinical outcomes. Single-stage revision THA offers the advantage of only a single surgical intervention, potentially leading to improved functional outcomes. This study aimed to compare the differences in patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) and complications between single and two-stage revision THA for chronic periprosthetic joint infection (PJI).

METHODS

A total of 159 consecutive revision THA patients for chronic PJI with complete pre-and post-operative patient-reported outcome measures (PROM) was investigated. A total of 46 patients with single-stage revision THA was matched to 92 patients following two-stage revision THA using propensity score matching, yielding a total of 136 propensity score-matched patients for analysis.

RESULTS

Single and two-stage revision THA improved PROM scores post-operatively, with significantly higher PROMs for single-stage revision THA (HOOS-PS: 50.7 vs 46.4, p = 0.04; Physical SF 10A: 42.1 vs 36.6, p < 0.001; PROMIS SF Physical: 41.4 vs 37.4, p < 0.001; PROMIS SF Mental: 52.8 vs 47.6, p < 0.001). There was no significant difference between both cohorts for reinfection rates (p = 0.81) and 90-day mortality rates (p = 1.0).

CONCLUSION

This study found a demonstrable functional benefit of single-stage revision compared to two-stage revision for THA with chronic periprosthetic joint infection, suggesting that single-stage revision THA may provide an effective alternative to two-stage revision in selected patients with chronic PJI.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level III, case-control retrospective analysis.

What is the optimal duration of intravenous antibiotics following single-stage revision total hip arthroplasty for prosthetic joint infection? A systematic review

Prosthetic joint infection (PJI) is 1 of the most challenging potential complications following total joint arthroplasty. Several surgical treatment strategies have been proposed for management of this diagnosis. The single-stage approach has been gaining popularity in contemporary literature. 1 fundamental aspect in the management of hip PJI is the administration of antibiotics, usually intravenously immediately after surgery, followed by a period of oral antibiotics. The optimal duration of the period of antibiotic therapy is undecided. The aim of this paper is to examine the trend in intravenous antibiotic use over the last 18 years and examine the influence this has had on the results of single-stage revision over that time period.

Restoration of the hip geometry after two-stage exchange with intermediate resection arthroplasty for periprosthetic joint infection

Two-stage exchange with intermediate resection arthroplasty (RA) is a well-established surgical procedure in the treatment of chronic periprosthetic joint infection (PJI), whereby a higher failure rate of final hip geometry restoration due to tissue contraction is controversially discussed. The aim was to evaluate radiographic changes of hip geometry parameters during PJI treatment and to determine the impact of the intermediate RA on the final joint restoration after reimplantation of a total hip arthroplasty (reTHA). Radiographic parameters (leg length (LL), femoral offset (FO), horizontal/vertical acetabular center of rotation distance (h/vCORD)) of 47 patients (mean age: 64.1 years) were measured on standard radiographs of the pelvis and compared between four different stages during PJI treatment (pre-replacement status (preTHA), primary total hip arthroplasty (pTHA), RA and reTHA). The RA duration (mean: 10.9 months) and the number of reoperations during this period (mean: n = 2.0) as well as their impact on hip geometry restoration were evaluated. Between preTHA and pTHA/reTHA an equivalent restoration was measured regarding the FO (p < 0.001/p < 0.001) and hCORD (p = 0.016/p < 0.001), but not regarding the LL and vCORD. In contrast, analysis revealed no influence of RA and an equivalent reconstruction of LL (p = 0.003), FO (p < 0.001), v/hCORD (p = 0.039/p = 0.035) at reTHA compared to pTHA. Furthermore, RA duration (p = 0.053) and the number of reoperations after RA (p = 0.134) had no impact on radiographic hip geometry restoration. The two-stage exchange with intermediate RA does not alter the preexisting hip joint parameters, whereby a good restoration of the final hip geometry, independent of the duration or the number of reoperations, can be achieved.

One-stage revision is as effective as two-stage revision for chronic culture-negative periprosthetic joint infection after total hip and knee arthroplasty

AIMS

Removal of infected components and culture-directed antibiotics are important for the successful treatment of chronic periprosthetic joint infection (PJI). However, as many as 27% of chronic PJI patients yield negative culture results. Although culture negativity has been thought of as a contraindication to one-stage revision, data supporting this assertion are limited. The aim of our study was to report on the clinical outcomes for one-stage and two-stage exchange arthroplasty performed in patients with chronic culture-negative PJI.

METHODS

A total of 105 consecutive patients who underwent revision arthroplasty for chronic culture-negative PJI were retrospectively evaluated. One-stage revision arthroplasty was performed in 30 patients, while 75 patients underwent two-stage exchange, with a minimum of one year's follow-up. Reinfection, re-revision for septic and aseptic reasons, amputation, readmission, mortality, and length of stay were compared between the two treatment strategies.

RESULTS

The patient demographic characteristics did not differ significantly between the groups. At a mean follow-up of 4.2 years, the treatment failure for reinfection for one-stage and two-stage revision was five (16.7%) and 15 patients (20.0%) (p = 0.691), and for septic re-revision was four (13.3%) and 11 patients (14.7%) (p = 0.863), respectively. No significant differences were observed between one-stage and two-stage revision for 30- 60- and 90-day readmissions (10.0% vs 8.0%; p = 0.714; 16.7% vs 9.3%; p = 0.325; and 26.7% vs 10.7%; p = 0.074), one-year mortality (3.3% vs 4.0%; p > 0.999), and amputation (3.3% vs 1.3%; p = 0.496).

CONCLUSION

In this non-randomized study, one-stage revision arthroplasty demonstrated similar outcomes including reinfection, re-revision, and readmission rates for the treatment of chronic culture-negative PJI after TKA and THA compared to two-stage revision. This suggests culture negativity may not be a contraindication to one-stage revision arthroplasty for chronic culture-negative PJI in selected patients. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2021;103-B(3):515-521.

Single-Stage Revision of the Infected Total Knee Arthroplasty Is Associated With Improved Functional Outcomes: A Propensity Score-Matched Cohort Study

BACKGROUND

Single-stage revision is an alternative to the standard 2-stage revision, potentially minimizing morbidities and improving functional outcomes. This study aimed at comparing single-stage and 2-stage revision total knee arthroplasty (TKA) for chronic periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) with regard to patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) and complication rates.

METHODS

A total of 185 consecutive revision TKA patients for chronic PJI with complete preoperative and postoperative PROMs were investigated. A total of 44 patients with single-stage revision TKA were matched to 88 patients following 2-stage revision TKA using propensity score matching, yielding a total of 132 propensity score-matched patients for analysis. Patient demographics and clinical information including reinfection and readmission rates were evaluated.

RESULTS

There was no significant difference in preoperative PROMs between propensity score-matched single-stage and 2-stage revision TKA cohorts. Postoperatively, significantly higher PROMs for single-stage revision TKA were observed for Knee disability and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score physical function (62.2 vs 51.9, P < .01), physical function short form 10A (42.8 vs 38.1, P < .01), PROMIS SF Physical (44.8 vs 41.0, P = .01), and PROMIS SF Mental (50.5 vs 47.1, P = .02). There was no difference between propensity score-matched single-stage and 2-stage revision TKA cohorts for clinical outcomes including reinfection rates (25.0% vs 27.2%, P = .78) and 90-day readmission rates (22.7% vs 25.0%, P = .77).

CONCLUSION

This study illustrated that single-stage revision TKA for chronic PJI may be associated with superior patient-reported outcomes compared to 2-stage revision for the infected TKA using a variety of PROMs. Improved PROMs were not accompanied by differences in complication rates between both cohorts, suggesting that single-stage revision TKA may provide an effective alternative to 2-stage revision in patients with chronic TKA PJI.

Treatment options in PJI - is two-stage still gold standard?

Total knee arthroplasty (TKA) is a successful treatment for osteoarthritis with good clinical outcomes 1,2. Periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) in TKA has a low incidence between 0.5 and 3% but it is nevertheless one of the most dreadful complications 3-6. Two-staged revisions are considered to be the gold standard for revision in chronic PJI with infection eradication rates of over 90% 7. Recently, similar infection eradication rates after one-staged revision arthroplasty have been reported 8-10, raising the question whether the two-staged approach can still be considered the gold standard. We therefore performed a literature review to analyse the correlation of one-staged and two-staged TKA revisions with recurrent infection rates and functional outcomes. Studies concerning PJI treated by one- or two-staged revision published between 2000 and 2020 were retrieved by searching the databases PubMed/Medline and the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews. 29 studies were included in this qualitative synthesis. Mean follow-up was at 4.9 ± 2.6 years. The mean infection eradication rate after one-staged revision vs. two-staged revision in TKA was 87 ± 8.8% vs. 83 ± 11.7%. The functional outcome measured by the mean Knee Society Score (KSS) of one-staged revision vs. two-staged revision in TKA was 80 ± 5.9 vs. 80 ± 3.9 points. One-staged revision arthroplasty in TKA appears to have similar infection eradication rates and functional outcomes compared to two-staged revision arthroplasty. However, these results should be interpreted with caution, since selection bias may have played a significant role. Several criteria to guide the surgeon in selecting the appropriate procedure have been described, but the current recommendations are based on poor evidence as randomized controlled trials are lacking 11,12. Two-staged revision remains a successful treatment option which is rightly the gold standard. However, there is a variety of cases in which one-staged revision is a viable alternative, where similar success rates and functional outcome can be expected 7,13.

Systematic review of single stage revision for prosthetic joint infection

While advanced technology, increased medical knowledge and improved surgical technique has improved patient outcomes in total joint arthroplasty, prosthetic joint infection still remains one of the leading causes of increased healthcare costs, medical resources and societal burdens in orthopaedic care. Two stage arthroplasty revision remains the gold standard for treatment of prosthetic joint infection. Proponents of single stage revision arthroplasty for infection argue that it results in lower healthcare costs while improving patient reported functional outcomes and with equivalent success rates. Here we review the history of single stage revision arthroplasty, discuss the key principles, highlight the indications and contraindications, and review the reported outcomes with a focus on future developments of single stage revision arthroplasty for hip and knee periprosthetic joint infections.

Do Prosthetic Joint Infections Worsen the Functional Ambulatory Outcome of Patients with Joint Replacements? A Retrospective Matched Cohort Study

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effect on the functional ambulatory outcome of postoperative joint infection (PJI) cured at the first treatment attempt versus not developing PJI in patients with hip and knee prostheses.

METHODS

In a single-hospital retrospectively matched cohort study, each patient with PJI between 2007 and 2016 was matched on age, sex, type of prosthesis and year of implantation with two other patients with uninfected arthroplasties. The definition of a PJI cure included infection eradication, no further surgical procedures, no PJI-related mortality and no suppressive antibiotics. Functional ambulatory status evaluated one year after the last surgery was classified into four simple categories: able to walk without assistance, able to walk with one crutch, able to walk with two crutches, and unable to walk. Patients with total hip arthroplasties (THA), total knee arthroplasties (TKA) and partial hip arthroplasty (PHA) were analysed separately.

RESULTS

A total of 109 PJI patients (38 TKA, 41 THA, 30 PHA) and 218 non-PJI patients were included. In a model adjusted for clinically relevant variables, PJI was associated with a higher risk of needing an assistive device for ambulation (vs. walking without aid) among THA (adjusted odds ratio (OR) 3.10, 95% confidence interval (95% CI) 1.26-7.57; p = 0.014) and TKA patients (OR 5.40, 95% CI 2.12-13.67; p < 0.001), and with requiring two crutches to walk or being unable to walk (vs. walking unaided or with one crutch) among PHA patients (OR 3.05, 95% CI 1.01-9.20; p = 0.047).

CONCLUSIONS

Ambulatory outcome in patients with hip and knee prostheses with postoperative PJI is worse than in patients who do not have PJI.

Explantation, Followed by Serial Debridement Without Antibiotic Spacers and Subsequent Revision With Cementless Components, Is Associated With High Remission Rates and Low Mortality in Periprosthetic Hip Joint Infections

BACKGROUND

In difficult-to-treat cases, it is necessary to add debridement steps in prosthesis-free interval of 2-stage exchange. We aimed to analyze the functional and clinical outcome of patients treated with a multistage exchange of total hip arthroplasty without the use of spacers, rather only cementless implants.

METHODS

Between 2009 and 2018, 84 patients (mean age: 67.3 [39-90] years) suffering chronic late-onset periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) were treated using a multistage prosthesis exchange without spacers. The mean follow-up was 70 ± 45.3 [14-210] months. The treatment included prosthesis exchange and at least 1 additional revision step before a reimplantation, owing to ongoing acute infection in the prosthesis-free interval. High-efficiency antimicrobial therapy was administered in between, which was discontinued after cementless revision implantation.

RESULTS

The mean number of revisions between explantation and implantation was 2.6 (1-9). The most common microorganism was Staphylococcus epidermidis (53.6%) followed by Staphylococcus aureus (16.7%) and Cutibacterium acnes (11.9%). The bacterial load was more than one bacterium per patient in 38% of cases. All patients could be treated using a cementless implant. PJI remission was achieved in 92% of cases. Overall, 9 prostheses (11%) were replaced because of an ongoing PJI or fracture. The mean modified Harrison Hip Score was 63.4 (22-88) points. No patient died.

CONCLUSION

Multistage total hip arthroplasty exchange showed high remission rates and low mortality in difficult-to-treat cases. Spacer-free and multistage treatment had no negative effect on the success rate or functional outcome, consistent with the results of published 2-stage exchange studies. Implantation of an uncemented press-fit prosthesis was possible in all patients with no elevated periprosthetic fracture rate.

Evaluation of the standard procedure for the treatment of periprosthetic joint infections (PJI) in Germany - results of a survey within the EndoCert initiative

BACKGROUND

The periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) is a severe complication in the field of arthroplasty. Despite the rising number of primary joint replacements, no unified therapeutic standard has been established for the treatment of PJI yet.

METHODS

A survey on the principles of treatment of PJI in Germany was conducted. A total of 515 EndoProthetikZentren (EPZ) were included, resulting in a response rate of 100%.

RESULTS

For early infections 97.6% of the centers use prosthesis-preserving procedures (DAIR). A one-stage exchange was implemented by less than 50% of the centers. If implemented, this treatment entails a prior selection of patients for a successful treatment. The two-stage exchange is performed in all centers, and most centers proceed with the implantation of a cemented spacer between stages. 75% of the centers proceed with a center-based concept for the treatment of PJI.

CONCLUSION

The aim of a uniform PJI standard at the centers has not yet been fully achieved. Further improvements within the certification were initiated. The most relevant treatment options in Germany are displayed. The two-stage revision with a cemented spacer is the most widely implemented treatment. This exposition of principles could help for the further development of standardized treatment guidelines and definitions.

The use of augmented antibiotic-loaded cement spacer in periprosthetic joint infection patients with acetabular bone defect

Background

Spacer complications may affect final clinical outcome of the two-stage approach in periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) patients. This study aimed to investigate clinical outcomes and complications of augmented antibiotic-loaded cement spacer in PJI patients with acetabular bone defect.

Methods

Data on PJI patients with acetabular bone defect receiving two-stage revision from January 2009 to December 2016, in our hospital were retrospectively reviewed. Screw-cement-shell was used to improve the stability of the hip with acetabular wall defect. Handmade acetabular spacer could prevent femoral spacer entering into pelvis in patients with acetabular internal wall defect. A total of 26 patients (11 males and 15 females) were included in the current study. Their mean age was 46.7 ± 15.4 years old. Clinical outcomes and complications were measured.

Results

Twenty-one of total 26 hips (21/26, 80.8%) showed positive cultures and 15/26 (57.7%) samples were cultured with staphylococcus. Of enrolled patients, 5/26 (19.2%) developed mixed infection. There was one patient (3.8%) with spacer dislocation and two (7.7%) with spacer fracture. One patient developed acute PJI 5 years after the second-stage revision, so overall success rate among these patients was 96.2%. Differences in Paprosky classifications before the first and second stage did not reach significant level (p > 0.05). Hip Harris score was raised from 40.9 ± 14.0 to 81.2 ± 11.2 (p < 0.05).

Conclusions

Augmented antibiotic-loaded cement spacer could achieve satisfactory clinical outcomes in PJI patients with acetabular bone defect. It provided joint mobility, increased additional joint stability, and decreased iatrogenic bone defect caused by acetabular wear.

Contemporary 2-Stage Treatment of Periprosthetic Hip Infection with Evidence-Based Standardized Protocols Yields Excellent Results: Caveats and Recommendations

BACKGROUND

This study quantified the effectiveness of contemporary and evidence-based standardized 2-stage treatment for periprosthetic hip infection. Findings illustrate potential limitations of criticisms of 2-stage protocols and potential consequences of adopting single-stage protocols before definitive data are available.

METHODS

Fifty-four consecutive hips treated with 2-stage resection and reimplantation were retrospectively reviewed. Standardized protocols were adhered to including implant resection, meticulous surgical debridement, antibiotic spacer, 6-week intravenous antibiotics, a 2-week drug holiday, and laboratory assessment of infection eradication before reimplantation. After reimplantation, patients were placed on prophylactic intravenous antibiotics until discharge and discharged on oral antibiotics for a minimum of 7 days until intraoperative cultures were final. Successful treatment was defined per Delphi-based International Multidisciplinary Consensus.

RESULTS

The overall treatment success rate was 95.7% (44 of 46 cases) with mean infection-free survivorship of 67.2 (range, 23.8-106.4) months. Success rates were 100% for early and acute hematogenous infections regardless of host type and 100% for chronic infections in uncompromised hosts. 95% (19/20) of chronic infections in compromised hosts and 83.3% (5/6) of chronic infections in significantly compromised hosts were successfully treated. About 4% of primary hips and 20% of revision hips required repeat debridement and spacer exchange after initial resection. No patients died because of treatment.

CONCLUSION

Details from this consecutive series of patients undergoing 2-stage treatment for hip infection suggest that some criticisms of 2-stage treatment as well as some arguments in support of single-stage treatment may be overstated. Promotion and uncritical adoption of single-stage treatment protocols are discouraged until further and more definitive data exist.

A Low Percentage of Patients Satisfy Typical Indications for Single-stage Exchange Arthroplasty for Chronic Periprosthetic Joint Infection

BACKGROUND

Periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) is a leading cause of revision arthroplasty. Considerable controversy still exists whether single- or two-stage exchange is the better approach for patients with chronic PJI. Historically, single-stage exchange arthroplasty was thought to have an unacceptably high risk of reinfection compared with two-stage exchange but recent studies have demonstrated that this may not be the case. To be considered for single-stage exchange, patients should meet certain criteria including a preoperatively identified nonvirulent pathogen in an immunocompetent host with an uncompromised soft tissue envelope. It is unclear what proportion of patients with chronic PJI actually meet these criteria. Additionally, patients who meet the criteria for single-stage exchange are selected because, in principle, they may be more likely to be able to overcome the infection, but it is unknown what the reinfection risk is in patients undergoing two-stage exchange who might have met selection criteria for single-stage exchange.

QUESTIONS/PURPOSES

(1) What percentage of patients with chronic PJI treated at our institution met the International Consensus Meeting criteria for single-stage exchange arthroplasty? (2) Is the risk of persistent or recurrent infection lower for patients treated with two-stage exchange who met International Consensus Meeting criteria for single-stage exchange than it is among those who did not meet those inclusion criteria?

METHODS

Between 2012 and 2016, one referral center treated 120 patients with chronic PJI as determined by Musculoskeletal Infection Society (MSIS) criteria. During this time, we used single-stage exchange only rarely in patients with chronic PJI (3%; four of 120), and only in oncologic patients with mega-prosthesis implants; 7% (eight of 120) underwent other procedures (resection arthroplasty or arthrodesis). Of the remaining 108, 16% (17) were lost to follow-up; the remaining 91 were evaluated in this retrospective study. To answer our first question, we applied the International Consensus Meeting indications for single-stage exchange, which were a known nonvirulent preoperative organism, an immunocompetent host, and a healthy soft-tissue envelope without a sinus tract; we then calculated the percentage of patients who would have met those criteria. To answer our second question, we compared those who would and would not have met those criteria in terms of the proportion who were determined to be infection-free at 2 years using the MSIS criteria.

RESULTS

Only 19% (20 of 108) of patients met the International Consensus Meeting criteria for single-stage exchange. With the numbers available, there was no difference between those who met and did not meet those criteria in terms of the proportion of patients who had persistent or recurrent infection 2 years after treatment (three of 15 versus 32% [24 of 76]; p = 0.38).

CONCLUSIONS

We found that only a small proportion of patients who presented with chronic PJI to a referral center would have been suitable for single-stage direct exchange; with the numbers available, we found no difference in the reinfection risk after two-stage revision in those patients compared with those who would not have met those criteria. Consequently, it is possible that a small proportion of patients may benefit from single-stage exchange, but our small sample size may have missed important differences in reinfection risk, and so our findings on that question must be considered preliminary. Larger studies randomizing patients who meet single-stage criteria to either single- or two-stage exchange will better elucidate the true reinfection risk in this patient population.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level III, therapeutic study.

One-Stage Arthroplasty or Revision for Seronegative Infections in Hip and Knee

Objective

To assess the safety and effectiveness of one‐stage total joint arthroplasty (TJA) or revision for seronegative infections after total hip arthroplasty (THA) and total knee arthroplasty (TKA).

Methods

This retrospective study included a total of 495 patients who had undergone one‐stage total joint (hip or knee) arthroplasty or revision with a diagnosis of osteoarthritis secondary to sepsis, osteoarthritis or osteonecrosis of the femoral head (ONFH) secondary to internal fixation surgery of the hip joint, and one‐stage revision for prosthesis loosening after THA or TKA from January 2012 to December 2016. Bacterial cultures were taken from all patients (from joint fluid or articular cavity fluid and four to six different parts of soft tissues) during the operation. If the cultures were positive, patients received antibiotic treatment. Microbiology results from surgical samples, clinical evaluations, SF‐12 score (physical component summary [PCS] and mental component summary [MCS]), Harris hip score (HHS) or Hospital for Special Surgery (HSS) score, and patients' satisfaction was recorded at every follow‐up session.

Results

A total of 24 patients had a positive result for bacterial culture (4.85%). The bacterial culture results showed that there were 19 cases (79.16%) of gram‐positive cocci (Staphylococcus aureus), 4 cases (16.67%) of gram‐negative bacilli, and 1 case (4.17%) of fungi. For at least 24 months (mean 35 months) follow‐up, no reinfection was discovered. The mean HHS or HSS score improved significantly from 36.29 points preoperatively to 84.21 points postoperatively (P < 0.001). The mean PCS score improved from 10.15 preoperatively to 20.34 postoperatively, and the mean MCS from 13.22 preoperatively to 21.76 postoperatively, with significant differences. Most of the patients were satisfied.

Conclusion

One‐stage arthroplasty or revision with exhaustive debridement, adequate dosage, and duration of sensitive antibiotics is safe and effective for patients who have seronegative infection of hip or knee joints.

A sophisticated antibiotic-loading protocol in articulating cement spacers for the treatment of prosthetic joint infection

Objectives

The optimal protocol for antibiotic loading in the articulating cement spacers for the treatment of prosthetic joint infection (PJI) remains controversial. The objective of the present study was to investigate the effectiveness of articulating cement spacers loaded with a new combination of antibiotics.

Methods

A retrospective cohort study involving 114 PJI cases treated with implantation of an articulating cement spacer between 2005 and 2016 was performed. The treatment outcomes of the conventional protocol (i.e. gentamicin and vancomycin (GV protocol)) were compared with those reported using the sophisticated antibiotic-loading protocol (i.e. vancomycin, meropenem, and amphotericin (VMA protocol)).

Results

There were 62 and 52 PJI cases treated with the GV and VMA protocols, respectively. Antimicrobial susceptibility testing revealed that 22/78 of all isolates (28.2%) in this series were resistant to gentamicin, whereas there were no vancomycin-, meropenem-, or amphotericin-resistant strains. The overall infection recurrence rates were 17.7% (11/62) and 1.9% (1/52), respectively (p = 0.006). In patients with a negative preoperative culture, there was no infection recurrence reported in the VMA cohort (0/45 (0%) vs 10/54 (18.5%) in the GV cohort; p = 0.002). Multivariate analysis indicated that the VMA protocol correlated with a decreased risk of infection recurrence compared with the GV protocol (p = 0.025).

Conclusion

The sophisticated VMA protocol for the loading of antibiotics in articulating cement spacers, as part of a two-stage exchange, was associated with a reduced rate of infection recurrence. This proposed protocol appears to be safe and effective, especially in patients with negative culture results prior to the first-stage operation. Cite this article: Bone Joint Res 2019;8:526–534.

A sophisticated antibiotic-loading protocol in articulating cement spacers for the treatment of prosthetic joint infection: A retrospective cohort study

OBJECTIVES

The optimal protocol for antibiotic loading in the articulating cement spacers for the treatment of prosthetic joint infection (PJI) remains controversial. The objective of the present study was to investigate the effectiveness of articulating cement spacers loaded with a new combination of antibiotics.

METHODS

A retrospective cohort study involving 114 PJI cases treated with implantation of an articulating cement spacer between 2005 and 2016 was performed. The treatment outcomes of the conventional protocol (i.e. gentamicin and vancomycin (GV protocol)) were compared with those reported using the sophisticated antibiotic-loading protocol (i.e. vancomycin, meropenem, and amphotericin (VMA protocol)).

RESULTS

There were 62 and 52 PJI cases treated with the GV and VMA protocols, respectively. Antimicrobial susceptibility testing revealed that 22/78 of all isolates (28.2%) in this series were resistant to gentamicin, whereas there were no vancomycin-, meropenem-, or amphotericin-resistant strains. The overall infection recurrence rates were 17.7% (11/62) and 1.9% (1/52), respectively (p = 0.006). In patients with a negative preoperative culture, there was no infection recurrence reported in the VMA cohort (0/45 (0%) vs 10/54 (18.5%) in the GV cohort; p = 0.002). Multivariate analysis indicated that the VMA protocol correlated with a decreased risk of infection recurrence compared with the GV protocol (p = 0.025).

CONCLUSION

The sophisticated VMA protocol for the loading of antibiotics in articulating cement spacers, as part of a two-stage exchange, was associated with a reduced rate of infection recurrence. This proposed protocol appears to be safe and effective, especially in patients with negative culture results prior to the first-stage operation.Cite this article: Bone Joint Res 2019;8:526-534.

Treatment of periprosthetic hip infection with retention of a well-fixed stem: six to 13-year outcomes

Background

Treatment of periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) is challenging, generally requiring complete implant removal. However, recently reported treatments involve partial retention of implants because of the severe local and systemic burden on the patients and difficulties in functional preservation. Long-term results should be evaluated because of the risk of residual biofilm on the retained implant and late infection recurrence. We evaluated 6 to 13-year clinical outcomes of two-stage treatment of chronic PJI retaining well-fixed cementless stems.

Methods

Among 36 surgeries for deep infection following hip arthroplasty performed from 2004 to 2011, six hips had a well-fixed and well-functioning cementless stem. These six hips were all chronic PJI and were treated without stem removal. The first-stage surgery involved acetabular cup removal and reconstruction by filling the acetabular defect with antibiotic-loaded acrylic cement, creating a socket-like hemispherical dent, and reducing the retained femoral head to this dent. After confirming infection eradication the second-stage acetabular reconstruction was performed. One patient died of an unrelated noninfective cause 1 year after the operation. Clinical outcomes of the remaining five patients were followed for 6 to 13 years.

Results

Between the two surgeries (range; 2–5 months), patients underwent active range-of-motion and ambulation exercises. No dislocation was found during the interval. No recurrence of infection was found and good functional outcomes and radiographic findings were observed during the average follow-up of 109 months in all five patients.

Conclusions

Two-stage treatment with retention of a well-fixed stem may minimize local and systemic burden of the patient and enhance functional preservation while obtaining long-term infection control. Although further study could establish the effectiveness and indications for this treatment option, currently used indications should be carefully evaluated considering factors including local and systemic conditions of the patient, implant fixation status, and type of bacteria.

Enhancing biology and providing structural support for acetabular reconstruction in single-stage revision for infection

Background

Reconstruction of combined segmental and cavitary defects of the acetabulum is a challenge to the hip surgeon. One question regards the efficacy of reconstruction of acetabular defects using a combination of tantalum metal augments (TMAs) and impaction graft in single-stage revision for periprosthetic infection.

Materials and methods

In the period between July 2009 and August 2014, 24 patients with combined segmental and cavitary acetabular defects and Paprosky classification grade IIB, IIC, and IIIA had hips reconstructed using the combination of TMAs and antibiotic-loaded impaction grafting. A similar group of 30 patients who received single-stage revision without metal augments were identified and taken as control. All patients received a polyethylene cemented cup and long cementless (Wagner SL) stem. Patients were prospectively evaluated using the modified Harris Hip Score (HHS) in addition to radiological evaluation at 3, 6, and 12 months then annually thereafter.

Results

At an average follow-up period of 4 years (range 2–7 years), all but one patient in the study group were free of infection, indicating a 96% success rate. This rate of eradicating infection was comparable to the 97% success rate in the control group. All metal augments were stable, and good incorporation of the impacted bone graft was observed. The HHS improved significantly from 27 preoperatively to 83 postoperatively (P < 0.001).

Conclusion

Metal augments can convert massive acetabular defects to a more contained defect suitable for grafting. The combination of tantalum augments that provide strong structural support and antibiotic-loaded allograft is successful in the mid-term in single-stage revisions for infection.

Level of evidence

Level IV (prospective case series).

Ten-Year Results Following One-Stage Septic Hip Exchange in the Management of Periprosthetic Joint Infection

BACKGROUND

Although 2-stage revision is still considered the gold standard for surgical management of periprosthetic joint infection (PJI), 1-stage revision has been reported to be as effective. Long-term reports for 1-stage revision in hip PJIs are lacking.

METHODS

We reviewed our 10-11 years of results of 85 patients who underwent 1-stage exchange of the hip with an antibiotic-loaded bone cemented prosthesis due to PJI to determine the following: (1) What is the infection-free survival? (2) What is the overall survival? and (3) What are the long-term clinical outcomes? All 1-stage revision total hip arthroplasties (THAs) for infection between January 2006 and December 2007, with a minimum 10-year follow-up (range 10-11), were included in this retrospective cohort. Patients from another country or patients who were unable to participate were excluded. Eighty-five patients with a hip PJI were available at the last follow-up. Thirty-seven patients died during the 10-year study. Harris Hip Scores were recorded before the surgery and at last follow-up. Failures are reported as infection-related or aseptic.

RESULTS

The 10-year infection-free survival was 94% and the surgery-free survival was 75.9%. The Harris Hip Scores improved from 43 (range 3-91) to 75 (range 10-91) (P < .001). The main indication for re-revision after 1-stage exchange was instability (10/20 patients).

CONCLUSION

One-stage exchange of the hip for PJI is a reliable treatment option with high rate of infection control and long-lasting favorable outcomes.

Single-stage treatment of chronically infected total hip arthroplasty with cementless reconstruction: results in 126 patients with broad inclusion criteria

AIMS

Single-stage revision is not widely pursued due to restrictive inclusion criteria. In this study, we evaluated the results of single-stage revision of chronically infected total hip arthroplasty (THA) using broad inclusion criteria and cementless implants.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Between 2010 and 2016, 126 patients underwent routine single-stage revision with cementless reconstruction with powdered vancomycin or imipenem poured into the medullary cavity and re-implantation of cementless components. For patients with a culture-negative hip, fungal infections, and multidrug-resistant organisms, a direct intra-articular infusion of pathogen-sensitive antibiotics was performed postoperatively. Recurrence of infection and clinical outcomes were evaluated. Three patients died and 12 patients (none with known recurrent infection) were lost to follow-up. There were 111 remaining patients (60 male, 51 female) with a mean age of 58.7 (sd 12.7; 20 to 79).

RESULTS

Of these 111 patients, 99 (89.2%) were free of infection at a mean follow-up time of 58 months (24 to 107). A recurrent infection was observed in four of the 23 patients (17.4%) with culture-negative infected hip. The success rate in patients with multidrug-resistant organisms was 84.2% (16/19). The mean postoperative Harris hip score was 79.6 points (63 to 92) at the most recent assessment.

CONCLUSION

Routine single-stage revision with cementless reconstruction can be a viable option for the treatment of chronically infected THA. The results of this study will add to the growing body of evidence supporting routine use of single-stage revision for the treatment of chronically infected THA. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2019;101-B:396-402.

High cure rate of periprosthetic hip joint infection with multidisciplinary team approach using standardized two-stage exchange

Background

Two-stage exchange arthroplasty is still the preferred treatment choice for chronic PJI. However, the results remain unpredictable. We analyzed the treatment success of patients with an infected hip prosthesis, who were treated according to a standardized algorithm with a multidisciplinary team approach and evaluated with a strict definition of failure.

Methods

In this single-center prospective cohort study, all hip PJI episodes from March 2013 to May 2015 were included. Treatment failure was assessed according to the Delphi-based consensus definition. The Kaplan-Meier survival method was used to estimate the probability of infection-free survival. Patients were dichotomized into two groups depending on the number of previous septic revisions, duration of prosthesis-free interval, positive culture with difficult-to-treat microorganisms, microbiology at explantation, and microbiology at reimplantation.

Results

Eighty-four patients with hip PJI were the subject of this study. The most common isolated microorganisms were coagulase-negative staphylococci (CNS) followed by Staphylococcus aureus and Propionibacterium. Almost half of the study cohort (46%) had at least one previous septic revision before admission. The Kaplan-Meier estimated infection-free survival after 3 years was 89.3% (95% CI, 80% to 94%) with 30 patients at risk. The mean follow-up was 33.1 months (range, 24–48 months) with successful treatment of PJI. There were no statistical differences in infect eradication rate among the dichotomized groups.

Conclusions

High infect eradication rates were achieved in a challenging cohort using a standardized two-stage exchange supported by a multidisciplinary approach.

Periprosthetic joint infections after total hip replacement: an algorithmic approach

An algorithm for managing periprosthetic joint infections (PJIs) after total hip replacement (THR) surgery using a multidisciplinary approach and a clearly defined protocol may improve infection eradication rates. In this article, we present an algorithm for the management of different types of PJIs including the acutely infected cemented and cementless THRs where the components are well-fixed postoperatively and when the infection is secondary to haematogenous spread in previously well-functioning and well-fixed implants. For chronic PJIs where the components are often loose, the standard treatment includes a two-stage revision procedure. However, in a highly selected subset of patients, a single-stage approach has been utilised with high rates of eradicating infections.

Two-Stage Revision of Total Hip Arthroplasty for Infection Is Associated with a High Rate of Dislocation

BACKGROUND

Two-stage exchange is the most common form of treatment of chronic infection following total hip arthroplasty (THA). We examined the prevalence of, and risk factors associated with, hip instability following 2-stage exchange as well as the fate of reimplanted hip prostheses that dislocated.

METHODS

Data on 515 2-stage exchange THAs performed between 2000 and 2014 at a single institution were retrospectively reviewed. Risk factors for instability as well as postoperative reoperations and revisions were analyzed. The impact of dislocation on these outcomes was evaluated as well. The mean age at the time of reimplantation was 65 years, and the mean duration of follow-up was 5 years (range, 2 to 15 years).

RESULTS

Dislocation occurred in 52 hips following reimplantation (cumulative probability = 8.9% at 1 year). There was a higher risk of instability in women (hazard ratio [HR] = 1.8, p = 0.038) and in those who had a history of dislocation prior to the 2-stage revision (HR = 5.1, p < 0.001). Younger age, body mass index, number of previous operations, spacer type, surgical approach, use of a constrained liner, femoral head diameter, and persistent or recurrent infection were not found to be significant risk factors. Patients with an absent or ununited greater trochanter or abductor deficiency also had a higher rate of dislocation (HR = 30, p < 0.001), as did patients who underwent reimplantation with a megaprosthesis (HR = 6.0, p < 0.001). The risk of additional reoperations (HR = 121, p < 0.001) and revision surgery (HR = 13, p < 0.001) was significantly higher in patients who experienced a dislocation after the 2-stage exchange.

CONCLUSIONS

Dislocation after 2-stage exchange THA continues to be a major concern, with the 1-year cumulative probability found to be 9% in the present study. Female sex, a history of dislocation, an absent or ununited greater trochanter or abductor deficiency, and reimplantation with a megaprosthesis were identified as risk factors for dislocation. There is a remarkable 121-fold increase in the rate of reoperations and a 13-fold increase in the rate of revisions in hips that dislocated after 2-stage exchange THA.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

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

Reconsidering Strategies for Managing Chronic Periprosthetic Joint Infection in Total Knee Arthroplasty: Using Decision Analytics to Find the Optimal Strategy Between One-Stage and Two-Stage Total Knee Revision

BACKGROUND

Periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) following total knee arthroplasty is a growing concern, as the demand for total knee arthroplasty (TKA) expands annually. Although 2-stage revision is considered the gold standard in management, there is substantial morbidity and mortality associated with this strategy. One-stage revision is associated with lower mortality rates and better quality of life, and there has been increased interest in utilizing the 1-stage strategy. However, surgeons are faced with a difficult decision regarding which strategy to use to treat these infections, considering uncertainty with respect to eradication of infection, quality of life, and societal costs with each strategy. The purpose of the current study was to use decision analysis to determine the optimal decision for the management of PJI following TKA.

METHODS

An expected-value decision tree was constructed to estimate the quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) and costs associated with 1-stage and 2-stage revision. Two decision trees were created: Decision Tree 1 was constructed for all pathogens, and Decision Tree 2 was constructed solely for difficult-to-treat infections, including methicillin-resistant infections. Values for parameters in the decision model, such as mortality rate, reinfection rate, and need for additional surgeries, were derived from the literature. Medical costs were derived from Medicare data. Sensitivity analysis determined which parameters in the decision model had the most influence on the optimal strategy.

RESULTS

In both decision trees, the 1-stage strategy produced greater health utility while also being more cost-effective. In the Monte Carlo simulation for Decision Trees 1 and 2, 1-stage was the dominant strategy in about 85% and 69% of the trials, respectively. Sensitivity analysis showed that the reinfection and 1-year mortality rates were the most sensitive parameters influencing the optimal decision.

CONCLUSIONS

Despite 2-stage revision being considered the current gold standard for infection eradication in patients with PJI following TKA, the optimal decision that produced the highest quality of life was 1-stage revision. These results should be considered in shared decision-making with patients who experience PJI following TKA.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Economic and Decision Analysis Level IV. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

Indications for a single-stage exchange arthroplasty for chronic prosthetic joint infection

Aims

Prosthetic joint infections (PJIs) of the hip and knee are associated with significant morbidity and socioeconomic burden. We undertook a systematic review of the current literature with the aim of proposing criteria for the selection of patients for a single-stage exchange arthroplasty in the management of a PJI.

Material and Methods

A comprehensive review of the current literature was performed using the OVID-MEDLINE, EMBASE, and Cochrane Library databases and the search terms: infection and knee arthroplasty OR knee revision OR hip arthroplasty OR hip revision, and one stage OR single stage OR direct exchange. All studies involving fewer than ten patients and follow-up of less than two years in the study group were excluded as also were systematic reviews, surgical techniques, and expert opinions.

Results

The initial search revealed 875 potential articles of which 22 fulfilled the inclusion and exclusion criteria. There were 16 case series and six comparative studies; five were prospective and 14 were retrospective. The studies included 962 patients who underwent single stage revision arthroplasty of an infected hip or knee joint. The rate of recurrent infection ranged from 0% to 18%, at a minimum of two years’ follow-up. The rate was lower in patients who were selected on the basis of factors relating to the patient and the local soft-tissue and bony conditions.

Conclusion

We conclude that single-stage revision is an acceptable form of surgical treatment for the management of a PJI in selected patients. The indications for this approach include the absence of severe immunocompromise and significant soft-tissue or bony compromise and concurrent acute sepsis. We suggest that a two-stage approach should be used in patients with multidrug resistant or atypical organisms such as fungus.

An often-unrecognized entity as cause of recurrent infection after successfully treated two-stage exchange arthroplasty: hematogenous infection

INTRODUCTION

Reinfection after two-stage exchange arthroplasty is a difficult clinical scenario with limited data on adequate treatment algorithms. Beside the possibility of treatment failure and a new intraoperative infection at the time of reimplantation, hematogenous seeding could play an up to date underestimated crucial role as another cause of an infection after two-stage exchange. The aim of this study was to evaluate its incidence and treatment possibilities in a prospectively followed case series.

METHODS

All consecutive hip and knee periprosthetic joint infection cases (93 hips and 89 knees) treated according to a standardized diagnostic and therapeutic algorithm at our institution with a two-stage exchange arthroplasty from 2013 to 2015 were included and followed prospectively to identify recurrent infections due to hematogenous seeding.

RESULTS

Six percent from our septic revision hip and knee arthroplasties (11 of 182, including 5 hips and 6 knees) were identified with a hematogenous reinfection after a mean follow-up of 31.8 months (range 14-48 months). The mean time to reinfection after reimplantation was 12.2 months (range 3.1-35.1). In all but two cases was the causative microorganism different than isolated at the time of initial two-stage exchange. In 5 of 11 patients, the primary focus of infection was identified.

CONCLUSION

Hematogenous infection after a successful two-stage exchange arthroplasty is a rare but very important cause of a reinfection. With our work, we aim at raising the awareness for this entity and recommend consideration of irrigation and debridement with implant retention in these cases, as well as possibly the identification of a primary infection source.

The Role of One-Stage Exchange for Prosthetic Joint Infection

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

In an era of increasing numbers of hip and knee replacements, strategies to manage prosthetic joint infection (PJI) that are effective at infection control with good patient-reported outcomes and cost containment for health systems are needed. Interest in single-stage exchange for PJI is rising and we assess evidence from the last 5 years related to this treatment strategy.

RECENT FINDINGS

Only five series for total knee replacement and ten series for total hip replacement have been reported in the last five years. More review articles and opinion pieces have been written. Reinfection rates in these recent studies range from 0 to 65%, but a meta-analysis and systematic review of all studies showed a reinfection rate of 7.6% (95% CI 3.4-13.1) and 8.8% (95% CI 7.2-10.6) for single-stage and two-stage revisions respectively. There is emerging evidence to support single-stage revision in the setting of significant bony deficiency and atypical PJIs such as fungal infections. Prospective randomised studies are recruiting and are necessary to guide the direction of single-stage revision selection criteria. The onus of surgical excellence in mechanical removal of implants, necrotic tissue, and biofilms lies with the arthroplasty surgeon and must remain the cornerstone of treatment. Single-stage revision may be considered the first-line treatment for all PJIs unless the organism is unknown, the patient is systemically septic, or there is a poor tissue envelope.

What Is the Role of Diagnostic and Therapeutic Sonication in Periprosthetic Joint Infections?

BACKGROUND

Periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) is one of the most dreaded complications in joint replacement surgery. Diagnosis and treatment can be difficult and biofilms are of major concern due to their low susceptibility toward antibiotics.

METHODS

This review focuses on the use of sonication as an evolving diagnostic and adjunct treatment modality in the context of PJI. Therapeutic application of sonication is discussed separately for its (i) direct action on bacteria, (ii) synergistic effects with antibiotics, and (iii) effects on release of antibiotics from bone cement.

RESULTS

Used as a diagnostic tool, sonication shows promising results with respect to sensitivity and specificity when compared to conventional methods, notably after previous administration of antibiotics. As an adjunct treatment modality, the chemical, physical, and mechanical effects of sonication are primarily driven by cavitation and recognized as the main cause for bactericidal effects but the exact underlying mechanisms have not been identified yet. Sonication alone does not have the ability to completely eradicate biofilms but synergistic effects when used in conjunction with antibiotics have been reported. There is also evidence for enhanced antibiotic release from bone cement.

CONCLUSION

Sonication is as an evolving modality in the context of PJIs. As a diagnostic tool, it has not been introduced in routine clinical practice and sonication as a treatment modality in PJIs is still in an experimental stage. Factors such as frequency, pressure, chemical activity, intensity, and exposure time need to be evaluated for optimal application of sonication and may also improve study comparison.

Results and Patient Reported Outcome Measures (PROMs) after One-Stage Revision for Periprosthetic Joint Infection of the Hip: A Single-centre Retrospective Study

Background: Little is known about functional outcome and quality of life (QoL) after one-stage revision for periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) of the hip. Methods: a cohort of 30 subjects treated with one-stage revision between 2011 and 2015 was identified, and questionnaires on functional outcome and QoL were distributed. Results: 28 subjects were successfully treated (93%). Most subjects were referred from other hospitals. Coagulase-negative Staphylococcus was found in 50% of the cases, and 40% of all cultured bacteria were multidrug-resistant. 25% had subsequent revision surgery, unrelated to PJI. Functional outcome was good and QoL scores were high, comparable to prosthetic joint revision surgery in general. Conclusion: Although the cohort was small and statistical analysis was not performed, this study showed that excellent results can be obtained with one-stage revision for hip PJI. Functional outcome and QoL was comparable to prosthetic joint revision surgery in general.

Preoperative Anemia Is Associated With Failure of Open Debridement Polyethylene Exchange in Acute and Acute Hematogenous Prosthetic Joint Infection

BACKGROUND

Acute and acute hematogenous prosthetic joint infections (PJIs) are often treated with open debridement and polyethylene exchange (ODPE) in an effort to save the prosthesis, decrease morbidity, and reduce costs. However, failure of ODPE may compromise a subsequent 2-stage treatment. The purpose of this study is to identify patient factors that impact the success of ODPE for acute and acute hematogenous PJIs.

METHODS

A retrospective review examined comorbidities, preoperative laboratory values, and patient history for patients with successful and failed ODPE treatment for acute perioperative or acute hematogenous periprosthetic hip or knee joint infections. Successful treatment was defined as retaining a well-fixed implant without the need for additional surgery for a minimum of 6-month follow-up with or without lifelong oral maintenance antibiotics.

RESULTS

Fifty-three of 72 patients (73.6%) underwent successful ODPE. Of the 19 failures, 14 completed 2-stage revision with one subsequent known failure for recurrent infection. Patients with a Staphylococcus aureus infection were more likely to fail ODPE (48.3% vs 11.6%, P = .0012, odds ratio 7.1, 95% confidence interval 2.3-25.3). Patients with a preoperative hematocrit ≤32.1 were also more likely to fail ODPE (55% vs 16%, P = .0013, odds ratio 6.7, 95% confidence interval 2.2-22.4). When neither risk factor was present, 97.1% of PJIs were successfully treated with ODPE.

CONCLUSION

S aureus infection and preoperative hematocrit ≤32.1 are independent risk factors for ODPE failure. ODPE is a safe alternative to 2-stage revision in patients without preoperative anemia and without S aureus infection. Two-thirds of patients with a failed ODPE were successfully treated with a 2-stage reimplantation.

Outcome of hip and knee periprosthetic joint infections caused by pathogens resistant to biofilm-active antibiotics: results from a prospective cohort study

BACKGROUND

Periprosthetic joint infections (PJI) caused by pathogens, for which no biofilm-active antibiotics are available, are often referred to as difficult-to-treat (DTT). However, it is unclear whether the outcome of DTT PJI is worse than those of non-DTT PJI. We evaluated the outcome of DTT and non-DTT PJI in a prospective cohort treated with a two-stage exchange according to a standardized algorithm.

METHODS

Patients with hip and knee PJI from 2013 to 2015 were prospectively included and followed up for ≥ 2 years. DTT PJI was defined as growth of microorganism(s) resistant to all available biofilm-active antibiotics. The Kaplan-Meier survival analysis was used to compare the probability of infection-free survival between DTT and non-DTT PJI and the 95% confidence interval (95% CI) was calculated.

RESULTS

Among 163 PJI, 30 (18.4%) were classified as DTT and 133 (81.6%) as non-DTT. At a mean follow-up of 33 months (range 24-48 months), the overall treatment success was 82.8%. The infection-free survival rate at 2 years was 80% (95% CI 61-90%) for DTT PJI and 84% (95% CI 76-89%) for non-DTT PJI (p = 0.61). The following mean values were longer in DTT PJI than in non-DTT PJI: hospital stay (45 vs. 28 days; p < 0.001), prosthesis-free interval (89 vs. 58 days; p < 0.001) and duration of antimicrobial treatment (151 vs. 117 days; p = 0.003).

CONCLUSIONS

The outcome of DTT and non-DTT PJI was similar (80-84%), however, at the cost of longer hospital stay, longer prosthesis-free interval and longer antimicrobial treatment. It remains unclear whether patients undergoing two-stage exchange with a long interval need biofilm-active antibiotics. Further studies need to evaluate the outcome in patients treated with biofilm-active antibiotics undergoing short vs. long interval.

Two-stage revision for the culture-negative infected total hip arthroplasty : A comparative study

Aims

Periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) remains a challenging complication following total hip arthroplasty (THA). It is associated with high levels of morbidity, mortality and expense. Guidelines and protocols exist for the management of culture-positive patients. Managing culture-negative patients with a PJI poses a greater challenge to surgeons and the wider multidisciplinary team as clear guidance is lacking.

Patients and Methods

We aimed to compare the outcomes of treatment for 50 consecutive culture-negative and 50 consecutive culture-positive patients who underwent two-stage revision THA for chronic infection with a minimum follow-up of five years.

Results

There was no significant difference in the outcomes between the two groups of patients, with a similar rate of re-infection of 6%, five years post-operatively. Culture-negative PJIs were associated with older age, smoking, referral from elsewhere and pre-operative antibiotic treatment. The samples in the culture-negative patients were negative before the first stage (aspiration), during the first-stage (implant removal) and second-stage procedures (re-implantation).

Conclusion

Adherence to strict protocols for selecting and treating culture-negative patients with a PJI using the same two-stage revision approach that we employ for complex culture-positive PJIs is important in order to achieve control of the infection in this difficult group of patients.

Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2018;(1 Supple A)100-B:3–8.

A positive bacterial culture during re-implantation is associated with a poor outcome in two-stage exchange arthroplasty for deep infection

Aims

The aim of this study was to identify the incidence of positive cultures during the second stage of a two-stage revision arthroplasty and to analyse the association between positive cultures and an infection-free outcome.

Patients and Methods

This single-centre retrospective review of prospectively collected data included patients with a periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) of either the hip or the knee between 2013 and 2015, who were treated using a standardised diagnostic and therapeutic algorithm with two-stage exchange. Failure of treatment was assessed according to a definition determined by a Delphi-based consensus. Logistic regression analysis was performed to assess the predictors of positive culture and risk factors for failure. The mean follow-up was 33 months (24 to 48).

Results

A total of 163 two-stage revision arthroplasties involving 84 total hip arthroplasties (THAs) and 79 total knee arthroplasties (TKAs) were reviewed. In 27 patients (16.6%), ≥ 1 positive culture was identified at re-implantation and eight (29.6%) of these subsequently failed compared with 20 (14.7%) patients who were culture-negative. The same initially infecting organism was isolated at re-implantation in nine of 27 patients (33.3%). The organism causing re-infection in none of the patients was the same as that isolated at re-implantation. The risk of the failure of treatment was significantly higher in patients with a positive culture (odds ratio (OR) 1.7; 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.0 to 3.0; p = 0.049) and in patients with a higher Charlson Comorbidity Index (OR 1.5; 95% CI 1.6 to 1.8; p = 0.001).

Conclusion

Positive culture at re-implantation was independently associated with subsequent failure. Surgeons need to be aware of this association and should consider the medical optimisation of patients with severe comorbidities both before and during treatment. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2017;99-B:1490–5.

Prosthetic Joint Infections and Cost Analysis?

Prosthetic joint infection is a devastating complication of arthroplasty surgery that can lead to debilitating morbidity for the patient and significant expense for the healthcare system. With the continual rise of arthroplasty cases worldwide every year, the revision load for infection is becoming a greater financial burden on healthcare budgets. Prevention of infection has to be the key to reducing this burden. For treatment, it is critical for us to collect quality data that can guide future management strategies to minimise healthcare costs and morbidity / mortality for patients. There has been a management shift in many countries to a less expensive 1-stage strategy and in selective cases to the use of debridement, antibiotics and implant retention. These appear very attractive options on many levels, not least cost. However, with a consensus on the definition of joint infection only clarified in 2011, there is still the need for high quality cost analysis data to be collected on how the use of these different methods could impact the healthcare expenditure of countries around the world. With a projected spend on revision for infection at US$1.62 billion in the US alone, this data is vital and urgently needed.