Long-Term Results of a 2-Stage Exchange Protocol for Periprosthetic Joint Infection Following Total Hip Arthroplasty in 164 Hips

Patient-Related Predictors of Treatment Failure After Two-Stage Total Hip Arthroplasty Revision for Periprosthetic Joint Infection: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

BACKGROUND

Periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) treatment has high failure rates even after 2-stage revision. Risk factors for treatment failure (TF) after staged revision for PJI are not well defined, nor is it well established how they correlate with the risks of developing an index PJI. Identifying modifiable risk factors may allow preoperative optimization, while identifying nonmodifiable risk factors can influence surgical options or advise against further surgery. We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis to better define predictors of TF in 2-stage revision for PJI.

METHODS

The PubMed, Embase, and Scopus databases were searched from their inception in December 1976 to April 15, 2023. Studies comparing patient-related variables between patients successfully treated who had 2-staged revision total hip arthroplasty (THA) and patients with persistent infections were included. Studies were screened, and 2 independent reviewers extracted data, while a third resolved discrepancies. Meta-analysis was performed on these data. There were 10,052 unique studies screened, and 21 studies met the inclusion criteria for data extraction.

RESULTS

There was good-quality evidence that obesity, liver cirrhosis, and previous failed revisions for PJI are nonmodifiable risk factors, while intravenous drug use (IVDU) and smoking are modifiable risk factors for TF after 2-stage revision for hip PJI. Reoperation between revision stages was also significantly associated with an increased risk of TF. Interestingly, other risk factors for an index PJI including male gender, American Society of Anesthesiology score, diabetes mellitus, and inflammatory arthropathy did not predict TF. Evidence on Charlson Comorbidity Index was limited.

CONCLUSIONS

Patients with a smoking history, obesity, IVDU, previous failed revision for PJI, reoperation between stages, and liver cirrhosis are more likely to experience TF after 2-stage revision THA for PJI. Modifiable risk factors include smoking and IVDU and these patients should be referred to services for cessation as early as possible before 2-stage revision THA.

Similar Efficacy and Lower Cost Associated With Ceftazidime Compared to Tobramycin Coupled With Vancomycin in Antibiotic Spacers in the Treatment of Periprosthetic Joint Infection

BACKGROUND

Vancomycin and tobramycin have traditionally been used in antibiotic spacers. In 2020, our institution replaced tobramycin with ceftazidime. We hypothesized that the use of ceftazidime/vancomycin (CV) in antibiotic spacers would not lead to an increase in treatment failure compared to tobramycin/vancomycin (TV).

METHODS

From 2014 to 2022, we identified 243 patients who underwent a stage I revision for periprosthetic joint infection. The primary outcome was a recurrent infection requiring antibiotic spacer exchange. We were adequately powered to detect a 10% difference in recurrent infection. Patients who had a prior failed stage I or two-stage revision for infection, acute kidney injury prior to surgery, or end-stage renal disease were excluded. Given no other changes to our spacer constructs, we estimated cost differences attributable to the antibiotic change. Chi-square and t-tests were used to compare the two groups. Multivariable logistic regressions were utilized for the outcomes.

RESULTS

The combination of TV was used in 127 patients; CV was used in 116 patients. Within one year of stage I, 9.8% of the TV group had a recurrence of infection versus 7.8% of the CV group (P = .60). By final follow-up, results were similar (12.6 versus 8.6%, respectively, P = .32). Adjusting for potential risk factors did not alter the results. Cost savings for ceftazidime versus tobramycin are estimated to be $68,550 per one hundred patients treated.

CONCLUSIONS

Replacing tobramycin with ceftazidime in antibiotic spacers yielded similar periprosthetic joint infection eradication success at a lower cost. While larger studies are warranted to confirm these efficacy and cost-saving results, our data justifies the continued investigation and use of ceftazidime as an alternative to tobramycin in antibiotic spacers.

Comparison of Five-Day vs. Fourteen-Day Incubation of Cultures for Diagnosis of Periprosthetic Joint Infection in Hip Arthroplasty

Background: Periprosthetic joint infections (PJI) are among the most morbid complications in total hip arthroplasty (THA). The ideal incubation time, however, for intraoperative cultures for PJI diagnosis remains unclear. As such, the aim of this study was to determine if any differences existed in culture-positive rates and organism detection between five-day and fourteen-day cultures. Methods: This retrospective cohort study consisted of THA cases diagnosed with PJI performed between May 2014 and May 2020 at a single tertiary-care institution. Analyses compared five-day and fourteen-day cultures and carried out a pre-specified subgroup analysis by organism and PJI type. Results: A total of 147 surgeries were performed in 101 patients (57.1% females), of which 65% (n = 98) obtained five-day cultures and 34% (n = 49) obtained fourteen-day cultures. The positive culture rate was 67.3% (n = 99) with Staphylococcus aureus being the most common pathogen identified (n = 41 specimens, 41.4%). The positive culture rate was not significantly different between groups (66.3% five-day, 69.4% fourteen-day, p = 0.852). Fourteen-day cultures had a significantly longer time-to-positive culture (5.0 days) than five-day cultures (3.0 days, p < 0.001), a higher rate of fungi (5.6% vs. 0%), and a lower rate of Gram-negatives (4.5% vs. 18.7%, p = 0.016). Conclusions: Fourteen-day cultures did not increase the positivity rate, had higher rates of slow-growth pathogens, and had a longer time-to-positivization than five-day cultures. Prolonged culture holds may provide more thorough organism detection for PJI without increasing the diagnostic culture yield.

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.

Re-revision and mortality rate following revision total hip arthroplasty for infection

Aims

This study compares the re-revision rate and mortality following septic and aseptic revision hip arthroplasty (rTHA) in registry data, and compares the outcomes to previously reported data.

Methods

This is an observational cohort study using data from the German Arthroplasty Registry (EPRD). A total of 17,842 rTHAs were included, and the rates and cumulative incidence of hip re-revision and mortality following septic and aseptic rTHA were analyzed with seven-year follow-up. The Kaplan-Meier estimates were used to determine the re-revision rate and cumulative probability of mortality following rTHA.

Results

The re-revision rate within one year after septic rTHA was 30%, and after seven years was 34%. The cumulative mortality within the first year after septic rTHA was 14%, and within seven years was 40%. After multiple previous hip revisions, the re-revision rate rose to over 40% in septic rTHA. The first six months were identified as the most critical period for the re-revision for septic rTHA.

Conclusion

The risk re-revision and reinfection after septic rTHA was almost four times higher, as recorded in the ERPD, when compared to previous meta-analysis. We conclude that it is currently not possible to assume the data from single studies and meta-analysis reflects the outcomes in the 'real world'. Data presented in meta-analyses and from specialist single-centre studies do not reflect the generality of outcomes as recorded in the ERPD. The highest re-revision rates and mortality are seen in the first six months postoperatively. The optimization of perioperative care through the development of a network of high-volume specialist hospitals is likely to lead to improved outcomes for patients undergoing rTHA, especially if associated with infection.

Mouldable Collagen-Tricalciumphosphate Is a Safe Carrier for Local Antibiotics-Short-Term Results in Revision Hip Arthroplasty

BACKGROUND

Improving local antibiotic delivery is a promising approach to improve infection control and potentially shorten systemic treatment in periprosthetic joint infection (PJI). This study investigates the use of an antibiotic-loaded, mouldable collagen-tricalciumphosphate composite in treatment of hip PJI.

METHODS

124 application cases in 79 patients were included from a referral centre; systemic adverse infects, local complications, and infection control were analysed.

RESULTS

In most cases, either vancomycin or meropenem were used. Pathogens were previously known in 82 (66%) cases with polymicrobial infection in 20 (25%) patients. There were no cases of hypercalcaemia. Acute kidney injure was present in 14 (11%) cases. Chronic kidney failure persisted in two cases. During a mean follow-up of 12 (SD 9.3; range 3-35) months, implant survival was achieved in 73 (92%) patients; revision due to PJI was performed in 19 cases.

CONCLUSION

Mouldable collagen-tricalciumphosphate composite bone substitute as a local antibiotic carrier in revision hip arthroplasty appears to be a valid option for local antibiotic delivery without systemic complications. Implant survival of 92% supports the hypothesis that local antibiotic therapy is an important component in the treatment of PJI.

Success Rate After 2-Stage Spacer-Free Total Hip Arthroplasty Exchange and Risk Factors for Reinfection: A Prospective Cohort Study of 187 Patients

BACKGROUND

Two-stage prosthesis exchange is the treatment of choice for chronic periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) of a total hip arthroplasty (THA), especially when the bone and surrounding soft tissues are compromised or difficult-to-treat pathogens are implicated. The aims of our study were as follows: (1) to determine the outcome of 2-stage prosthesis exchange for the treatment of PJI after THA and (2) to determine the risk factors for reinfection leading to subsequent revision surgeries after reimplantation.

METHODS

We prospectively enrolled 187 consecutive patients who underwent a 2-stage THA exchange with resection arthroplasty for PJI from 2013 to 2019. The mean (± SD) duration of follow-up was 54.2 ± 24.9 months (range, 36 to 96), and the mean interval until reimplantation was 9.8 ± 8.9 weeks (range, 2 to 38). All patients remained in a spacer-free girdlestone situation between the 2 stages of treatment. Patients who remained infection-free after their 2-stage treatment were considered to have achieved treatment success.

RESULTS

The overall success rate was 85.6%. The cumulative probability of reinfection was 11.5% after one year and 14% after 2 years after reimplantation. High virulence or difficult-to-treat pathogens were significant and independent risk factors for reinfection (HR [hazard ratio] = 3.71, 95% CI [confidence interval]: 1.47 to 9.36, P = .006 and HR = 3.85, 95% CI: 1.73 to 8.57, respectively, P = .001), as was previous 2-stage hip prosthesis exchange (HR = 3.58, 95% CI: 1.33 to 9.62, P = .01). Overall reoperation and revision rates were 26.2 and 16.6%, respectively. Re-infected patients had an 80% higher probability of reoperation than noninfected ones (P < .001, log-rank = 102.6), and they were 55% more likely to undergo revision surgery during their follow-up (P < .001, log-rank = 55.4).

CONCLUSIONS

Reinfection rates after 2-stage spacer-free THA revision for PJI still remain high but are comparable to those including cement spacers. Patients who have had prior failed 2-stage implant exchanges or are infected by high-grade or difficult-to-treat pathogens are at high risk for treatment failure.

Modular fluted tapered stems in two-stage reimplantation of previously infected total hip arthroplasties

Aims

Uncemented implants are now commonly used at reimplantation of a two-stage revision total hip arthoplasty (THA) following periprosthetic joint infection (PJI). However, there is a paucity of data on the performance of the most commonly used uncemented femoral implants - modular fluted tapered (MFT) femoral components - in this setting. This study evaluated implant survival, radiological results, and clinical outcomes in a large cohort of reimplantation THAs using MFT components.

Methods

We identified 236 reimplantation THAs from a single tertiary care academic institution from September 2000 to September 2020. Two designs of MFT femoral components were used as part of an established two-stage exchange protocol for the treatment of PJI. Mean age at reimplantation was 65 years (SD 11), mean BMI was 32 kg/m2 (SD 7), and 46% (n = 109) were female. Mean follow-up was seven years (SD 4). A competing risk model accounting for death was used.

Results

The 15-year cumulative incidence of any revision was 24%. There were 48 revisions, with the most common reasons being dislocation (n = 25) and infection (n = 16). The 15-year cumulative incidence of any reoperation was 28%. Only 13 revisions involved the fluted tapered component (FTC), for a 15-year cumulative incidence of any FTC revision of 8%. Only two FTCs were revised for aseptic loosening, resulting in a 15-year cumulative incidence of FTC revision for aseptic loosening of 1%. Stem subsidence ≥ 5 mm occurred in 2% of unrevised cases. All stems were radiologically stable at most recent follow-up. Mean Harris Hip Score was 69 (SD 20) at most recent follow-up.

Conclusion

This series demonstrated that MFT components were durable and reliable in the setting of two-stage reimplantation THA for infection. While the incidence of aseptic loosening was very low, the incidence of any revision was 24% at 15 years, primarily due to dislocation and recurrent PJI.

Two-stage revision for periprosthetic joint infection after hip and knee arthroplasty

Aims

Histology is widely used for diagnosis of persistent infection during reimplantation in two-stage revision hip and knee arthroplasty, although data on its utility remain scarce. Therefore, this study aims to assess the predictive value of permanent sections at reimplantation in relation to reinfection risk, and to compare results of permanent and frozen sections.

Methods

We retrospectively collected data from 226 patients (90 hips, 136 knees) with periprosthetic joint infection who underwent two-stage revision between August 2011 and September 2021, with a minimum follow-up of one year. Histology was assessed via the SLIM classification. First, we analyzed whether patients with positive permanent sections at reimplantation had higher reinfection rates than patients with negative histology. Further, we compared permanent and frozen section results, and assessed the influence of anatomical regions (knee versus hip), low- versus high-grade infections, as well as first revision versus multiple prior revisions on the histological result at reimplantation. Sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value (PPV), negative predictive value (NPV), chi-squared tests, and Kaplan-Meier estimates were calculated.

Results

Overall, the reinfection rate was 18%. A total of 14 out of 82 patients (17%) with positive permanent sections at reimplantation experienced reinfection, compared to 26 of 144 patients (18%) with negative results (p = 0.996). Neither permanent sections nor fresh frozen sections were significantly associated with reinfection, with a sensitivity of 0.35, specificity of 0.63, PPV of 0.17, NPV of 0.81, and accuracy of 58%. Histology was not significantly associated with reinfection or survival time for any of the analyzed sub-groups. Permanent and frozen section results were in agreement for 91% of cases.

Conclusion

Permanent and fresh frozen sections at reimplantation in two-stage revision do not serve as a reliable predictor for reinfection.

Surgical Management of Periprosthetic Joint Infections in Hip and Knee Megaprostheses

Periprosthetic joint infection is a feared complication after the megaprosthetic reconstruction of oncologic and non-oncologic bone defects of including the knee or hip joint. Due to the relative rarity of these procedures, however, optimal management is debatable. Considering the expanding use of megaprostheses in revision arthroplasty and the high revision burden in orthopedic oncology, the risk of PJI is likely to increase over the coming years. In this non-systematic review article, we present and discuss current management options and the associated results focusing on studies from the last 15 years and studies from dedicated centers or study groups. The indication, surgical details and results in controlling infection are presented for debridement, antibiotics, irrigation and retention (DAIR) procedure with an exchange of the modular components, single-stage implant exchange, two-stage exchanges and ablative procedures.

Efficacy and safety of two-stage revision for patients with culture-negative versus culture-positive periprosthetic joint infection: a single-center retrospective study

BACKGROUND

The safety and efficacy of two-stage revision for culture-negative PJI remain controversial. This study analyzed outcomes after two-stage revision in patients with culture-negative and culture-positive periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) during follow-up lasting at least two years.

METHODS

Data were retrospectively analysed patients who underwent hip or knee revision arthroplasty from January 2008 to October 2020 at our medical center. The primary outcome was the re-revision rate, while secondary outcomes were the rates of reinfection, readmission, and mortality. Patients with culture-negative or culture-positive PJI were compared in terms of these outcomes, as well as survival time without reinfection or revision surgery, based on Kaplan‒Meier analysis.

RESULTS

The final analysis included 87 patients who were followed up for a mean of 72.3 months (range, 24-123 months). The mean age was 58.1 years in the culture-negative group (n = 24) and 59.1 years in the culture-positive group (n = 63). The two groups (culture-negative versus culture-positive) did not differ significantly in rates of re-revision (0.0% vs. 3.2%, p > 0.05), reinfection (4.2% vs. 3.2%, p > 0.05), readmission (8.4% vs. 8.0%, p > 0.05), or mortality (8.3% vs. 7.9%, p > 0.05). They were also similar in survival rates without infection-related complications or revision surgery at 100 months (91.5% in the culture-negative group vs. 87.9% in the culture-positive group; Mantel‒Cox log-rank χ2 = 0.251, p = 0.616).

CONCLUSION

The two-stage revision proves to be a well-tolerated and effective procedure in both culture-negative and culture-positive PJI during mid to long-term follow-up.

The diagnosis and treatment of septic hip with osteonecrosis of the femoral head

This article aims to provide clinical doctors with references for the diagnosis and treatment of osteonecrosis of the femoral head (ONFH) accompanied with septic hip by summarizing and analyzing clinical data and postoperative follow-up information of patients treated with two-stage arthroplasty. We retrospectively analyzed ten patients who underwent two-stage arthroplasty in our hospital due to ONFH accompanied with septic hip. The diagnosis of septic hip includes erythrocyte sedimentation rate (ESR) > 30 mm/h, C-reactive protein (CRP) > 10 mg/L, pus-like synovial fluid, positive microbiological culture, and the findings of septic arthritis on magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) scan. Patient's information was evaluated based on the review of medical records, including gender, age, symptoms, risk factor of ONFH and septic arthritis, blood test, radiograph, MRI scan, microbiological culture, treatment, follow-up period and outcome. A total of ten patients were diagnosed with ONFH accompanied with septic hip. The average follow-up period was 43.5 months. None of the patients experienced failure during the follow-up period. The risk factor of ONFH was alcohol-related (60%), steroid-related (20%) and idiopathic (20%). Nine patients (90%) have no risk factor of septic arthritis and one patient (10%) has nephrotic syndrome. All patients did not experience any fever symptoms before surgery, but all showed worsening symptoms of pain. There were three patients (30%) with abnormal WBC count > 10 × 109/L. All patients had elevated ESR and/or CPR. Nine patients (90%) had positive MRI findings, and seven patients (70%) had positive microbiological culture. When patients with ONFH experience worsening hip joint pain accompanied by unexplained elevated CRP and/or ESR, it should be suspected whether ONFH is accompanied with septic hip. In these cases, MRI scans should be performed to exclude septic hip. Patients with ONFH accompanied with septic hip showed satisfactory results after two-stage arthroplasty.

What Is the Risk of Dislocation and Revision in Proximal Femoral Replacement with Dual-mobility Articulation After Two-stage Revision for Periprosthetic Hip Infection?

BACKGROUND

Dislocation is a major complication of revision THA after two-stage exchange for periprosthetic joint infection (PJI). The likelihood of dislocation can be particularly high if megaprosthetic proximal femoral replacement (PFR) has been performed during a second-stage reimplantation. Dual-mobility acetabular components are an established way of reducing the instability risk in revision THA; however, the likelihood of dislocation for dual-mobility reconstructions in the setting of a two-stage PFR has not been studied systematically, although patients with these reconstructions might be at an increased risk.

QUESTIONS/PURPOSES

(1) What is the risk of dislocation and revision for dislocation in patients who underwent PFR with a dual-mobility acetabular component as part of two-stage exchange for hip PJI? (2) What is the risk of all-cause implant revision and what other procedures were performed (apart from revision for a dislocation) in these patients? (3) What potential patient-related and procedure-related factors are associated with dislocation?

METHODS

This was a retrospective study from a single academic center including procedures performed between 2010 and 2017. During the study period, 220 patients underwent two-stage revision for chronic hip PJI. Two-stage revision was the approach of choice for chronic infections, and we did not perform single-stage revisions for this indication during the study period. Thirty-three percent (73 of 220) of patients underwent second-stage reconstruction with a single-design, modular, megaprosthetic PFR because of femoral bone loss, using a cemented stem. A cemented dual-mobility cup was the approach of choice for acetabular reconstruction in the presence of a PFR; however, 4% (three of 73) were reconstructed with a bipolar hemiarthroplasty to salvage an infected saddle prosthesis, leaving 70 patients with a dual-mobility acetabular component and a PFR (84% [59 of 70]) or total femoral replacement (16% [11 of 70]). We used two similar designs of an unconstrained cemented dual-mobility cup during the study period. The median (interquartile range) patient age was 73 years (63 to 79 years), and 60% (42 of 70) of patients were women. The mean follow-up period was 50 ± 25 months with a minimum follow-up of 24 months for patients who did not undergo revision surgery or died (during the study period, 10% [seven of 70] died before 2 years). We recorded patient-related and surgery-related details from the electronic patient records and investigated all revision procedures performed until December 2021. Patients who underwent closed reduction for dislocation were included. Radiographic measurements of cup positioning were performed using supine AP radiographs obtained within the first 2 weeks after surgery using an established digital method. We calculated the risk for revision and dislocation using a competing-risk analysis with death as a competing event, providing 95% confidence intervals. Differences in dislocation and revision risks were assessed with Fine and Gray models providing subhazard ratios. All p values were two sided and the p value for significance was set at 0.05.

RESULTS

The risk of dislocation (using a competing-risks survivorship estimator) was 17% (95% CI 9% to 32%) at 5 years, and the risk of revision for dislocation was 12% (95% CI 5% to 24%) at 5 years among patients treated with dual-mobility acetabular components as part of a two-stage revision for PJI of the hip. The risk of all-cause implant revision (using a competing-risk estimator, except for dislocation) was 20% (95% CI 12% to 33%) after 5 years. Twenty-three percent (16 of 70) of patients underwent revision surgery for reinfection and 3% (two of 70) of patients underwent stem exchange for a traumatic periprosthetic fracture. No patients underwent revision for aseptic loosening. We found no differences in patient-related and procedure-related factors or acetabular component positioning for patients with dislocation with the numbers available; however, patients with total femoral replacements had a higher likelihood of dislocation (subhazard ratio 3.9 [95% CI 1.1 to 13.3]; p = 0.03) and revision for a dislocation (subhazard ratio 4.4 [95% CI 1 to 18.5]; p = 0.04) than those who received PFR.

CONCLUSION

Although dual-mobility bearings might be an intuitive potential choice to reduce the dislocation risk in revision THA, there is a considerable dislocation risk for PFR after two-stage surgery for PJI, particularly in patients with total femoral replacements. Although the use of an additional constraint might appear tempting, published results vary tremendously, and future studies should compare the performance of tripolar constrained implants to that of unconstrained dual-mobility cups in patients with PFR to reduce the risk of instability.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level III, therapeutic study.

The Influence of Patient Sex on Outcomes Following One-Stage and Two-Stage Revision for Periprosthetic Joint Infection in Total Joint Arthroplasty

Although females have a higher rate of primary total joint arthroplasty (TJA), males have a higher rate of revision. The literature lacks studies examining the relationship between sex and outcomes following single and two-stage exchange for periprosthetic joint infection (PJI). The purpose of this study was to examine if differences exist in outcomes following revision for chronic PJI between sexes. A retrospective review was performed on all patients with an MSIS confirmed PJI who underwent a single or two-stage exchange at our institution from January 2010 to January 2021. Patient demographics, comorbidity characteristics, and outcomes were collected and compared between males and females. The primary outcome variable was disease-free survival at 1 year following definitive revision. Multivariable logistic regression analysis was performed to determine risk factors for failure. Of the 470 patients meeting final eligibility criteria, 250 were male and 226 were female (2 males and 4 females had a joint infection of either the contralateral side or a different joint and were treated as separate records). Of the patients in the cohort, 80% of the males (200/250) and 80% of the females (181/226) were found to be disease-free at 1-year follow-up (p > 0.99). Multivariable logistic regression analysis showed that nicotine use and diabetes, but not sex, were significant predictors of failure. Our study did not find a relationship between sex and outcome of revision for PJI. Further research is required to determine whether differences exist between males and females in the expression of PJI and outcomes following treatment.

Hypoalbuminemia Predicts Failure of Two-Stage Exchange for Chronic Periprosthetic Joint Infection of the Hip and Knee

BACKGROUND

Nutritionally compromized patients, with preoperative serum albumin (SAB) < 3.5g/dL, are at higher risk for periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) in total joint arthroplasty. The relationship between nutritional and PJI treatment success is unknown. The purpose of this study was to examine the relationship between preresection nutrition and success after first-stage resection in planned two-stage exchange for PJI.

METHODS

A retrospective review was performed on 418 patients who had first-stage resection of a planned two-stage exchange for chronic hip or knee PJI between 2014 and 2018. A total of 157 patients (58 hips and 99 knees) were included who completed first stage, had available preop SAB and had a 2-year follow-up. Failure was defined as persistent infection or repeat surgery for infection after resection. Demographic and surgical data were abstracted and analyzed.

RESULTS

Among knee patients with preop SAB >3.5 g/dL, the failure rate was 32% (15 of 47) versus a 48% (25 of 40) failure rate when SAB <3.5 g/dL (P = .10). Similarly, the failure rate among hip patients with preop SAB >3.5 g/dL versus 12.5% (3 of 24) versus 44% (15 of 34) for hip patients with SAB <3.5 g/dL (P = .01). Multivariable regression results indicated that patients with SAB< 3.5 g/dL (P = .0143) and Musculoskeletal Infection Society host type C (P = .0316) were at an increased risk of failure.

CONCLUSION

Low preoperative SAB and Musculoskeletal Infection Societyhost type-C are independent risk factors for failure following first-stage resection in planned two-stage exchange for PJI. Efforts to nutritionally optimize PJI patients, when possible, may improve the outcome of two-stage exchange.

Two-stage revision for periprosthetic joint infection in cemented total hip arthroplasty: an increased risk for failure?

BACKGROUND

The impact of the prior fixation mode on the treatment outcome of chronic periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) of the hip is unclear. Removal of cemented total hip arthroplasty (THA) is particularly challenging and residual cement might be associated with reinfection. This study seeks to compare the results of two-stage revision for PJI in cemented and cementless THA.

METHODS

We reviewed 143 consecutive patients undergoing two-stage revision THA for PJI between 2013 and 2018. Thirty-six patients with a fully cemented (n = 6), hybrid femur (n = 26) or hybrid acetabulum (n = 4) THA (cemented group) were matched 1:2 with a cohort of 72 patients who underwent removal of a cementless THA (cementless group). Groups were matched by sex, age, number of prior surgeries and history of infection treatment. Outcomes included microbiological results, interim re-debridement, reinfection, all-cause revision, and modified Harris hip scores (mHHS). Minimum follow-up was 2 years.

RESULTS

Compared with PJI in cementless THA, patients undergoing removal of cemented THA had increasingly severe femoral bone loss (p = 0.004). Patients in the cemented group had an increased risk for positive cultures during second-stage reimplantation (22% compared to 8%, p = 0.043), higher rates of reinfection (22% compared to 7%, p = 0.021) and all-cause revision (31% compared to 14%, p = 0.039) compared to patients undergoing two-stage revision of cementless THA. Periprosthetic femoral fractures were more frequent in the group of patients with prior cementation (p = .004). Mean mHHS had been 37.5 in the cemented group and 39.1 in the cementless group, and these scores improved significantly in both groups (p < 0.01).

CONCLUSION

This study shows that chronic infection in cemented THA might be associated with increased bone loss, higher rates of reinfection and all-cause revision following two-stage revision. This should be useful to clinicians counselling patients with hip PJI and can guide treatment and estimated outcomes.

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.

Cure rate of infections is not an argument for spacer in two-stage revision arthroplasty of the hip

INTRODUCTION

 A devastating complication after total hip arthroplasty (THA) is chronic periprosthetic joint infection (PJI). Most frequently spacers (Sp) with or without antibiotics are implanted in a two-stage procedure even though not always indicated due to unknown pathogen, femoral and acetabular defects or muscular insufficiency.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

 A retrospective analysis of a prospectively collected database was conducted, analyzing the treatment of 44 consecutive cases with chronic PJI undergoing two-stage revision using a Girdlestone situation (GS) in the interim period between 01/2015 and 12/2018. Diagnostics included intraoperative microbiological cultures, histological analysis, sonication of the initial implant, analysis of hip aspiration, as well as laboratory diagnostics and blood cultures. We analyzed the general and age-group-specific success rate of treatment using GS. Furthermore, we compared our data with the current literature on spacer implantation regarding common complications.

RESULTS

In total, 21 female and 23 male patients at a mean age of 59.3 ± 9.6 years were included. Age groups were divided into young, mid-age, and elderly. In most patients, microbiology revealed Staphylococcus epidermidis in 39.1% of cases, following Staphylococcus lugdunensis and Staphylococcus aureus in 10.9% after THA explantation. For histology, Krenn and Morawietz type 2 (infectious type) was diagnosed in 40.9%, type 3 (infectious and abrade-induced type) in 25.0%. With GS, the total cure rate was 84.1% compared to 90.1% (range 61-100%) using Sp as described in the literature. Among age-groups, cure rate varied between 77.8 and 100%. Other complications, which only occurred in the mid-age and elderly group, included the necessity of transfusion in 31.1%, and in total, one periprosthetic fracture was identified (2.3%).

CONCLUSION

GS shows an acceptable cure rate at a minimum of 2 years when compared to the cure rate reported in the literature for Sp without major complications. For patients with increased risks for treatment failure using spacer, GS seems to be an alternative for chronic PJI when looking at the success rate of treatment.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

III, Retrospective trial.

Dislocation After Debridement, Antibiotics, and Implant Retention for Periprosthetic Joint Infections of the Hip

BACKGROUND

Debridement, antibiotics, and implant retention (DAIR) is a common treatment option for hip periprosthetic joint infection (PJI). However, noninfectious outcomes of DAIR such as instability are not well reported. The purpose of this study was to evaluate risk factors for hip dislocation post-DAIR for PJI of both primary and revision total hip arthroplasty (THA).

METHODS

A retrospective chart review identified all patients who underwent DAIR of a primary or revision THA over a 20-year period with a minimum 1-year follow-up. A total of 151 patients met inclusion criteria, 19.9% of whom had a post-DAIR dislocation. Demographic and intraoperative variables were obtained. Patients who had modular components exchanged during DAIR to those with increased offset, increased "jump distance", or a more stable acetabular liner were defined as patients who had "components exchanged to increase stability." Predictors of hip dislocation post-DAIR were inserted into a multivariate linear regression.

RESULTS

Post-DAIR dislocation rates were 16.3% in primary THAs and 25.4% in revision THAs. In patients who had "components exchanged to increase stability" during hip DAIR, there was at least an 11-fold reduction (1/odds ratio (OR), 0.09) in dislocation risk compared to patients who had no components altered during modular component exchange during hip DAIR (OR, 0.09; 95% confidence interval, 0.02-0.44; P < .001), while a 13-fold increased dislocation risk was seen in patients with a history of neuromuscular disease (OR, 13.45; 95% confidence interval, 1.73-104.09; P = .01).

CONCLUSIONS

During DAIR of hip PJI, surgeons should consider prophylactically exchanging components to increase stability even if components appear stable intraoperatively.

Cost Drivers in Two-Stage Treatment of Hip Periprosthetic Joint Infection With an Antibiotic Coated Cement Hip Spacer

BACKGROUND

The current gold standard for treating chronic Periprosthetic Joint Infection (PJI) is a 2-stage revision arthroplasty. There has been little investigation into what specific patient and operative factors may be able to predict higher costs of this treatment.

METHODS

An institutional electronic health record database was retrospectively queried for patients who developed a PJI after a total hip arthroplasty, and underwent removal of the prosthesis and implantation of an antibiotic-impregnated articulating hip cement spacer. Patient demographics, surgical variables, hospital readmissions, emergency department visits, and post-operative complications were collected. Total costs were captured through an internal accounting database through 2 years post-operatively. Negative binomial regressions were utilized for multivariable analyses. A total of 55 hips with PJI were available for cost analyses.

RESULTS

A comorbidity index score was associated with a 70% increase (Odds Ratio (OR): 1.7 [1.18-2.5], P = .003) in total costs at 2-years. Illicit drug use was associated with a 70% increase in costs at 1-year post-operatively (OR 1.7 [1.18-2.5], P = .003). Metal-on-poly liners were associated with a 22% decrease in cost at 2-years post-operatively when compared to Cement-on-Bone articulating spacers, and Metal-on-poly -constrained liners accounted for 38% lower costs at 1-year (OR 0.62 [0.44-0.87], P = .004). Use of an intraoperative extended trochanteric osteotomy was associated with a 46 and 61% increase in cost at 1-year (OR 1.46 [1.14-1.89]) and 2-years (OR 1.61 [1.26-2.07], P < .001) post-operatively.

CONCLUSION

Age, comorbidity index score, drug use, and extended trochanteric osteotomy were associated with increased costs of PJI treatment. This may be used to improve reimbursement models and target areas of cost savings.

Diagnosis and treatment of periprosthetic infection after hip replacement (a review)

Introduction. The frequency of hip arthroplasty is steadily increasing throughout the world and, although this operation has become routine, the likelihood of postoperative complications reaches 4.3 % [1]. The most dangerous of them are infectious lesions in the area of the endoprosthesis and adjacent tissues. At the same time, in addition to the threat of generalization of the infectious process, there are functional disorders in the joint area and a general deterioration in the quality of life of the patient. Timely diagnosis and treatment of the infectious process and related disorders can minimize the adverse effects of infection.

Target. The purpose of this review is to analyze modern methods for diagnosing and treating periprosthetic infection resulting from hip replacement.

Materials and methods. The subject literature was searched using the PubMed and Google Sholar databases.

Results. The main methods for diagnosing periprosthetic infection include histological and bacteriological examination of the biopsy specimen, determination of sensitivity to antibiotics, blood, and synovial fluid analysis for the content of leukocytes, IL-6, CRP, PCR diagnostics of infectious agents. Treatment consists of re-intervention and/or antibiotic therapy.

Conclusion. The most optimal method for diagnosing periprosthetic infection is a bacteriological study of biopsy specimens taken intraoperatively. The preferred method of treatment is determined by the severity of the infection, the degree of involvement of tissues adjacent to the prosthesis, the comorbid background, the nature of the infectious agent, and includes repeated revision surgery.

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 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.

Predictors of Success With Chronic Antibiotic Suppression for Prosthetic Joint Infections

BACKGROUND

Management of recurrent prosthetic joint infection (PJI) after attempted surgical eradication remains a challenge. Chronic antibiotic suppression (CAS) is regarded as a reasonable treatment option for select patients with persistent infection or multiple comorbidities. The study seeks to compare cohorts who succeed and fail with CAS.

METHODS

This retrospective cohort study assesses patients who were treated with CAS for a PJI. Patients were included if they had a culture-proven PJI and received chronic suppressive antibiotics. Failure of suppression was defined as reoperation after initiating CAS or death occurring as result of infection. A Cox proportional hazards multivariate regression model was used to estimate risk of reoperation as a function of risk factors related to patient comorbidities, surgical history, affected joint, and infecting organism.

RESULTS

We identified 45 PJIs (31 knees, 14 hips) managed with CAS with a median follow-up of 50 (95% confidence interval [CI] 33.61-74.02) months. The overall success rate of managing PJI with CAS was 67% (30/45). Controlling for body mass index and Gram status of the organism, total hip arthroplasty patients were less likely than total knee arthroplasty patients to require reoperation (hazard ratio 0.18, 95% CI 0.01-0.96, P = .04). Patients with Gram-positive infections were less likely than those with a Gram-negative infections to require reoperation (hazard ratio 0.22, 95% CI 0.05-0.88, P = .03). Severe antibiotic side effects were rare. Patients who experienced multiple changes to their antibiotic regimen were more likely to fail with CAS.

CONCLUSION

CAS is a reasonable strategy in patients with PJI who lack or refuse further surgical treatment options. Most hips and Gram-positive infections treated with CAS successfully avoided reoperation in this cohort.

Predictors of Reinfection in Prosthetic Joint Infections Following Two-Stage Reimplantation

BACKGROUND

Two-stage reimplantation is an effective treatment for periprosthetic joint infection (PJI). Many factors are involved in the variable success of this procedure. The purpose of this study is to examine the relationship between patient risk factors, comorbidities, and the pathogen on reinfection rates following two-stage reimplantation.

METHODS

We evaluated 158 patients treated for PJI from 2008-2019. Only patients who had completed a two-stage exchange were included. Patient demographics, comorbidities, laboratory values, time-to-reimplantation, pathogen, antibiotic sensitivities, host status, and reinfection rates were assessed. Multivariate analysis was performed to identify correlation between risk factors and reinfection. A P-value < .05 was considered statistically significant.

RESULTS

31 patients experienced a reinfection (19.6%). There was a statistically significant association between infection with Methicillin Sensitive Staphylococcus Aureus (MSSA) and reinfection (P = .046). Patients with a reinfection also had a significantly greater median serum C-reactive protein (CRP) level (12.65 g/dL) at the time of diagnosis compared to patients without a reinfection (5.0 g/dL) (P = .010). Median Erythrocyte Sedimentation Rate (ESR) (56 in no re-infection and 69 in re-infection) and time-to-reimplantation (101 days in no reinfection and 141 days in reinfection) demonstrated a trend toward an association with re-infection but were not statistically significant (P = .055 and P = .054 respectively).

CONCLUSION

As the number of arthroplasties continue to rise, PJIs are increasing proportionately and represent a significant revision burden. Elevated C-reactive protein (CRP) levels and Methicillin Sensitive Staphylococcus aureus (MSSA) infection were strongly associated with failure of a two-stage reimplantation. While not statistically significant with our numbers, there were strong trends toward an association between elevated Erythrocyte Sedimentation Rate (ESR), longer time-to-reimplantation, and reinfection.

Long Term Results of Two-Stage Revision for Chronic Periprosthetic Hip Infection: A Multicenter Study

BACKGROUND

Two-stage exchange arthroplasty remains the gold standard in the United States for treatment of chronic periprosthetic joint infection (PJI). Long-term reinfection rates and clinical outcomes with sufficient subject numbers remain limited. The purpose was to evaluate the long-term outcomes following two-stage exchange following hip arthroplasty.

METHODS

Retrospective review of 221 patients who underwent two-stage exchange hip arthroplasty for chronic PJI at three large tertiary referral institutions from 1990-2015. Outcomes including reinfection, mortality, and all-cause revision were calculated. Cumulative incidence of reinfection with death as competing factor was also calculated. Risk factors for reinfection were determined using Cox multivariate regression analysis.

RESULTS

Rate of infection eradication and all-cause revision was 88.24% and 22.6%, respectively. Overall mortality rate was 40.72%. Patients with minimum five-year follow-up (n = 129) had a success rate of 91.47% with mortality rate of 41.1%. Major risk factors for reinfection included polymicrobial infection (HR = 2.36, 95% CI: 1.08-5.14) and antibiotic resistant organism (HR = 2.36, 95% CI: 1.10-5.04).

CONCLUSION

This is the largest series with greater than 5-year follow-up evaluating outcomes of two-stage exchange hip arthroplasty. This technique resulted in a relatively high infection eradication, however, the mortality rate is alarmingly high. Antibiotic resistant organisms appear to be highest risk factor for failure.

High revision rates following repeat septic revision after failed one-stage exchange for periprosthetic joint infection in total knee arthroplasty

AIMS

The outcome of repeat septic revision after a failed one-stage exchange for periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) in total knee arthroplasty (TKA) remains unknown. The aim of this study was to report the infection-free and all-cause revision-free survival of repeat septic revision after a failed one-stage exchange, and to determine whether the Musculoskeletal Infection Society (MSIS) stage is associated with subsequent infection-related failure.

METHODS

We retrospectively reviewed all repeat septic revision TKAs which were undertaken after a failed one-stage exchange between 2004 and 2017. A total of 33 repeat septic revisions (29 one-stage and four two-stage) met the inclusion criteria. The mean follow-up from repeat septic revision was 68.2 months (8.0 months to 16.1 years). The proportion of patients who had a subsequent infection-related failure and all-cause revision was reported and Kaplan-Meier survival for these endpoints was determined. Patients were categorized according to the MSIS staging system, and the association with subsequent infection was analyzed.

RESULTS

At the most recent follow-up, 17 repeat septic revisions (52%) had a subsequent infection-related failure and the five-year infection-free survival was 59% (95% confidence interval (CI) 39 to 74). A total of 19 underwent a subsequent all-cause revision (58%) and the five-year all-cause revision-free survival was 47% (95% CI 28 to 64). The most common indication for the first subsequent aseptic revision was loosening. The MSIS stage of the host status (p = 0.663) and limb status (p = 1.000) were not significantly associated with subsequent infection-related failure.

CONCLUSION

Repeat septic revision after a failed one-stage exchange TKA for PJI is associated with a high rate of subsequent infection-related failure and all-cause revision. Patients should be counselled appropriately to manage expectations. The host and limb status according to the MSIS staging system were not associated with subsequent infection-related failure. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2022;104-B(3):386-393.

Factors associated with infection recurrence after two-stage exchange for periprosthetic hip infection

PURPOSE

Two-stage exchange is the treatment of choice for periprosthetic joint infection (PJI). Factors and outcomes associated with infection recurrence for hip PJI are limited. The primary aim of this study was to determine factors associated with infection recurrence after two-stage exchange. Secondary aims were survival, mobility, and the EuroQol five-dimension scale (EQ-5D-5L) health state.

METHODS

We retrospectively investigated patients with two-stage exchange for hip PJI at our institution from 2006 to 2017. Follow-up was conducted for a minimum of four years after the reimplantation.

RESULTS

We included 135 patients with 139 hip PJIs. The mean age of the patients was 69.6 years (range 32-88). The infection recurrence rate was 14.4% (n = 20) after a mean follow-up of 8.0 years (range 4.0-13.1). Four factors for recurrence were identified at the time of the first stage: previous orthopaedic diagnoses (p < 0.001), type of explanted prosthesis (p = 0.004), cultured microorganisms (p = 0.033), and sinus tract (p = 0.035). A longer surgical reimplantation time (p = 0.015) was the only one factor found at the second stage. The estimated Kaplan-Meier survival for the total sample was 9.0 years (95% confidence interval 8.3-9.8), without significant difference for those with infection recurrence compared to recurrence-free patients (log-rank 0.931). At the time of follow-up, 89 patients were alive. For these patients, Parker mobility score (p = 0.102), EuroQol five-dimensional scale (p = 0.099), and EQ Visual Analogue Scale (EQ-VAS) (p = 0.027) were inferior in those with infection recurrence, but significance was found only for VAS.

CONCLUSION

In this study with mid- to long-term follow-up, five factors for infection recurrence were identified. Recurrence did not affect survival, but health-related quality of life was inferior compared to recurrence-free patients. The results suggest that the period of the first stage including previous orthopaedic diagnoses requires more consideration in the future.

Favourable outcomes of repeat one-stage exchange for periprosthetic joint infection of the hip

AIMS

One-stage exchange for periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) in total hip arthroplasty (THA) is gaining popularity. The outcome for a repeat one-stage revision THA after a failed one-stage exchange for infection remains unknown. The aim of this study was to report the infection-free and all-cause revision-free survival of repeat one-stage exchange, and to investigate the association between the Musculoskeletal Infection Society (MSIS) staging system and further infection-related failure.

METHODS

We retrospectively reviewed all repeat one-stage revision THAs performed after failed one-stage exchange THA for infection between January 2008 and December 2016. The final cohort included 32 patients. The mean follow-up after repeat one-stage exchange was 5.3 years (1.2 to 13.0). The patients with a further infection-related failure and/or all-cause revision were reported, and Kaplan-Meier survival for these endpoints determined. Patients were categorized according to the MSIS system, and its association with further infection was analyzed.

RESULTS

A total of eight repeat septic revisions (25%) developed a further infection-related failure, and the five-year infection-free survival was 81% (95% confidence interval (CI) 57 to 92). Nine (28%) underwent a further all-cause revision and the five-year all-cause revision-free survival was 74% (95% CI 52 to 88). Neither the MSIS classification of the host status (p = 0.423) nor the limb status (p = 0.366) was significantly associated with further infection-related failure.

CONCLUSION

Repeat one-stage exchange for PJI in THA is associated with a favourable five-year infection-free and all-cause revision-free survival. Notably, the rate of infection control is encouraging when compared with the reported rates after repeat two-stage exchange. The results can be used to counsel patients and help clinicians make informed decisions about treatment. With the available number of patients, further infection-related failure was not associated with the MSIS host or limb status. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2022;104-B(1):27-33.

Long-Term Outcomes of Staged Revision Surgery for Chronic Periprosthetic Joint Infection of Total Hip Arthroplasty

Periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) is a serious complication of total hip arthroplasty. Staged revision surgery is considered effective in eradicating PJI. We aimed to determine the rate of infection resolution after each stage of staged revision surgery (first stage, repeat first stage, second stage, excision arthroplasty, and reimplantation) and to assess functional outcomes and the mortality rate at ten years in a consecutive series of 30 chronic PJI of total hip arthroplasties. Infection resolution was defined as no clinical nor laboratory evidence of infection at 24 months after the last surgery and after a minimum of 12 months following cessation of antimicrobial treatment. Four patients died within 24 months of their final surgery. Nineteen patients, 73% (worst-case analysis (wca) 63%), were infection free after 1 surgery; 22 patients, 85% (wca 73%), were infection free after 2 surgeries; and 26 patients, 100% (wca 87%), were infection free after three and four surgeries. The median Harris Hip Score was 41 prior to first revision surgery and improved to 74 at twelve months and 76 at ten years after the final surgery. Thirteen patients died at a mean of 64 months from first revision, giving a mortality rate of 43% at ten years, which is approximately 25% higher than that of an age-matched general population. The results show that with repeated aggressive surgical treatment, most PJIs of the hip are curable. Ten years after successful treatment of PJI, functional outcomes and pain are improved and maintained compared to before initial surgery, but this must be balanced against the high 10-year mortality. Level of evidence: cohort studies.

Extended Trochanteric Osteotomy with Intermediate Resection Arthroplasty Is Safe for Use in Two-Stage Revision Total Hip Arthroplasty for Infection

Background: This study sought to compare the results of two-stage revision total hip arthroplasty (THA) for periprosthetic infection (PJI) in patients with and without the use of an extended trochanteric osteotomy (ETO) for removal of a well-fixed femoral stem or cement. Methods: Thirty-two patients who had undergone an ETO as part of a two-stage revision without spacer placement were matched 1:2 with a cohort of sixty-four patients of the same sex and age who had stem removal without any osteotomy. Clinical outcomes including interim revision, reinfection and aseptic failure rates were evaluated. Modified Harris hip scores (mHHS) were calculated. Minimum follow-up was two years. Results: Patients undergoing ETO had a significantly lower rate of interim re-debridement compared to non-ETO patients (0% vs. 14.1%, p = 0.026). Reinfection following reimplantation was similar in both groups (12.5% in ETO patients vs. 9.4% in non-ETO patients, p = 0.365). Revision for aseptic reason was necessary in 12.5% in the ETO group and 14.1% in the non-ETO group (p = 0.833). Periprosthetic femoral fractures were seen in three patients (3.1%), of which all occurred in non-ETO patients. Dislocation was the most common complication, which was equally distributed in both groups (12.5%). The mean mHHS was 37.7 in the ETO group and 37.3 in the non-ETO group, and these scores improved significantly in both groups following reimplantation (p < 0.01). Conclusion: ETO without the use of spacer is a safe and effective method to manage patients with well-fixed femoral stems and for thorough cement removal in two-stage revision THA for PJI. While it might reduce the rate of repeated debridement in the interim period, the use of ETO appears to lead to similar reinfection rates following reimplantation.

Intra-wound vancomycin powder for the eradication of periprosthetic joint infection after debridement and implant exchange: experimental study in a rat model

Background

Intra-wound vancomycin powder (VP) has been used in clinical practice to prevent periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) after primary knee/hip arthroplasty. The role of intra-wound VP in the setting of debridement and implant exchange after PJI remains undefined. This study aimed to explore the efficacy and safety of intra-wound VP in the control of methicillin-resistant S. aureus (MRSA) infection after debridement and implant exchange.

Methods

PJI modeling by knee prosthesis implantation and MRSA inoculation, debridement and implant exchange were performed in Wistar rats successively to mimic the one-stage exchange arthroplasty of PJI patients. Two weeks of systemic vancomycin (SV) or/and intraoperative intra-wound VP of single dosage were applied after revision surgery.

Results

No post-surgery deaths, incision complications and signs of drug toxicity were observed. The microbial counts of SV or intra-wound VP group were significantly reduced compared with the control group, while bacteria were still detected on the bone, soft-tissue and prosthesis. The elimination of bacterial counts, along with improvement of tissue inflammation and serum inflammatory markers, were observed in the rats with SV plus intra-wound VP. Serum levels of vancomycin in all groups were lower than that of causing nephrotoxicity, while no statistic difference was observed in the serum biochemical marker among the groups.

Conclusions

Intra-wound VP is effective after debridement and implant exchange in our current rat PJI model. Neither SV nor intra-wound VP alone could eradicate the bacteria within a two-weeks treatment course, while SV plus intra-wound VP could eliminate the MRSA infection, without notable hepatic or renal toxicity and any incision complications.

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

Use of PET-CT in diagnostic workup of periprosthetic infection of hip and knee joints: significance in detecting additional infectious focus

Introduction

The diagnosis and management of periprosthetic knee and hip infections as well as the identification and management of possible additional infectious foci is of great importance for successful therapy. This study analyses the importance of ¹⁸F deoxyglucose PET-CT (PET-CT) in the identification of additional infectious focus and subsequent impact on management of periprosthetic infection (PPI).

Material and methods

A retrospective analysis of the clinical data and findings in the period from January 2008 to December 2018 was carried out. One hundred and four patients with in-hospital treatment due to PPI of a hip or knee joint were identified and included in this study. All patients underwent a standardized clinical examination and further surgical and antibiotic therapy. The reevaluation of performed PET-CTs was specifically carried out with regard to the local PPI or detection of secondary foci.

Results

PET-CT successfully verified the PPI in 84.2% of the patients. A total of 78 possible additional foci were detected in PET-CT in 56 (53.8%) of the examined patients. Predilection sites for possible secondary foci were joints (42.3%), pulmonary (15.4%), ear-nose-throat (15.4%), spine (11.5%), and the musculocutaneous tissues (11.5%). Fifty-four positive PET-CT findings were confirmed clinically with need of additional adequate treatment.

Conclusion

PET-CT is a valuable diagnostic tool to confirm periprosthetic joint infection. At the same time, the whole-body PET/CT may detect additional foci of infection with impact on subsequent treatment strategy. PET was of special value in detecting infections at distant locations far from the primary infected joint in significant number. These distant infection locations can be potential cause of a re-infection. This clearly reflects the need of their diagnosis.

Outcomes of Primary Total Knee Arthroplasty Following Septic Arthritis of the Native Knee: A Case-Control Study

BACKGROUND

Septic arthritis of the native knee often results in irreversible joint damage leading to the need for total knee arthroplasty (TKA). The purpose of the present study was to examine the intermediate-term risk of periprosthetic joint infection (PJI), aseptic revision, and reoperation following primary TKA in patients with a history of septic arthritis of the native knee as compared with primary TKA performed for the treatment of osteoarthritis.

METHODS

We retrospectively identified 215 primary TKAs performed from 1971 to 2016 at a single institution in patients with a history of septic arthritis of the native knee. Each case was matched 1:1 based on age, sex, body mass index (BMI), and surgical year to a TKA for osteoarthritis. The mean age and BMI were 63 years and 30 kg/m2, respectively. The mean duration of follow-up was 9 years.

RESULTS

Survivorships free of PJI at 10 years were 90% and 99% for the septic arthritis and osteoarthritis groups, respectively (hazard ratio [HR] = 6.1; p < 0.01). Ten-year survivorships free of any aseptic revisions were 83% and 93% (HR = 2.5; p < 0.01), and survivorships free of any reoperation were 61% and 84% (HR = 2.9; p < 0.01) for the septic arthritis and osteoarthritis groups, respectively. In addition, as time from the diagnosis of native knee septic arthritis to TKA increased, the relative risk of subsequent infection decreased. Preoperative and 2-year postoperative Knee Society scores were similar between the groups (p = 0.16 and p = 0.19, respectively).

CONCLUSIONS

There was a 6.1-fold increased risk of PJI in patients undergoing TKA with a history of native knee septic arthritis when compared with controls undergoing TKA for the treatment of osteoarthritis, with a cumulative incidence of 9% at 10 years. Subgroup analysis of the septic arthritis cohort revealed a higher risk of any infection in patients who underwent TKA within the first 5 to 7 years after the diagnosis of septic arthritis as compared with those with a greater duration. Moreover, the 10-year rates of survival free of aseptic revision, any revision, and any reoperation were significantly worse in the native knee septic arthritis cohort.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

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

Local Application of Vancomycin in One-Stage Revision of Prosthetic Joint Infection Caused by Methicillin-Resistant Staphylococcus aureus

The rate of eradication of periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) caused by methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) is still not satisfactory with systemic vancomycin administration after one-stage revision arthroplasty. This study aimed to explore the effectiveness and safety of intraarticular (IA) injection of vancomycin in the control of MRSA PJI after one-stage revision surgery in a rat model. Two weeks of intraperitoneal (IP) and/or IA injection of vancomycin was used to control the infection after one-stage revision surgery. The MRSA PJI rats treated with IA injection of vancomycin showed better outcomes in skin temperature, bacterial counts, biofilm on the prosthesis, serum α₁-acid glycoprotein levels, residual bone volume, and inflammatory reaction in the joint tissue, compared with those treated with IP vancomycin, while the rats treated with IP and IA administration showed the best outcomes. However, only the IP and IA administration of vancomycin could eradicate MRSA. Minimal changes in renal pathology were observed in the IP and IP plus IA groups but not in the IA group, while no obvious changes were observed in the liver or in levels of serum markers, including creatinine, alanine aminotransferase, and aspartate aminotransferase. Therefore, IA use of vancomycin is effective and safe in the MRSA PJI rat model and is better than systemic administration, while IA and systemic vancomycin treatment could eradicate the infection with a 2-week treatment course.

Complications in the treatment of periprosthetic joint infection of the hip: when do they occur?

Prosthetic joint infection (PJI) is a devastating complication after total hip arthroplasty (THA). The common treatment in the USA is a two-stage exchange which can be associated with significant morbidity and mortality. The purpose of this study was to analyze complications in the treatment course of patients undergoing two-stage exchange for PJI THA and determine when they occur. Methods: We analyzed all patients that underwent two-stage exchange arthroplasty for treatment of PJI after THA from January 2005 to January 2018 at a single institution. Complications were categorized as medical or surgical and divided into interstage and post-reimplantation. Minimum follow-up was 1 year. Success was based on the MusculoSkeletal Infection Society (MSIS) definition. Results: 205 hips (203 patients) underwent first stage of planned two-stage exchange. The median age was 68 (interquartile range (IQR) 18). There were 97 males and 106 females. Overall, 73/205 (38 %) patients had at least one complication during treatment: 13.5 % (25/185) of patients experienced a medical complication and 28.1 % (52/185) a surgical complication; 2.4 % died within 1 year of surgery, and 4.9 % (15/203) had mortality at a median of 2.5 years (IQR 4.9); 27 % of patients had complications during the interstage period, most commonly being recurrence of infection requiring additional surgery (63 %); and 14 % of patients experienced a complication following reimplantation, most commonly persistence or recurrence of infection (59 %). While 92 % of patients that initiated treatment were ultimately reimplanted, only 69 % were infection free at 1 year and required no additional treatment. Conclusions: While two-stage exchanges for PJI in THA have been reported as successful, there are few reports of the complications during the process. In our series, significant numbers of patients experienced complications, often during the interstage period, highlighting the morbidity of this method of treatment.

One-stage exchange should be avoided in periprosthetic joint infection cases with massive femoral bone loss or with history of any failed revision to treat periprosthetic joint infection

AIMS

There is a paucity of long-term studies analyzing risk factors for failure after single-stage revision for periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) following total hip arthroplasty (THA). We report the mid- to long-term septic and non-septic failure rate of single-stage revision for PJI after THA.

METHODS

We retrospectively reviewed 88 cases which met the Musculoskeletal Infection Society (MSIS) criteria for PJI. Mean follow-up was seven years (1 to 14). Septic failure was diagnosed with a Delphi-based consensus definition. Any reoperation for mechanical causes in the absence of evidence of infection was considered as non-septic failure. A competing risk regression model was used to evaluate factors associated with septic and non-septic failures. A Kaplan-Meier estimate was used to analyze mortality.

RESULTS

The cumulative incidence of septic failure was 8% (95% confidence interval (CI) 3.5 to 15) at one year, 13.8% (95% CI 7.6 to 22) at two years, and 19.7% (95% CI 12 to 28.6) at five and ten years of follow-up. A femoral bone defect worse than Paprosky IIIA (hazard ratio (HR) 13.58 (95% CI 4.86 to 37.93); p < 0.001) and obesity (BMI ≥ 30 kg/m²; HR 3.88 (95% CI 1.49 to 10.09); p = 0.005) were significantly associated with septic failure. Instability and periprosthetic fracture were the most common reasons for mechanical failure (5.7% and 4.5%, respectively). The cumulative incidence of aseptic failure was 2% (95% CI 0.4 to 7) at two years, 9% (95% CI 4 to 17) at five years, and 12% (95% CI 5 to 22) at ten years. A previous revision to treat PJI was significantly associated with non-septic failure (HR 9.93 (95% CI 1.77 to 55.46); p = 0.009). At the five-year timepoint, 93% of the patients were alive (95% CI 84% to 96%), which fell to 86% (95% CI 75% to 92%) at ten-year follow-up.

CONCLUSION

Massive femoral bone loss was associated with greater chances of developing a further septic failure. All septic failures occurred within the first five years following the one-stage exchange. Surgeons should be aware of instability and periprosthetic fracture being potential causes of further aseptic revision surgery. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2021;103-B(7):1247-1253.

Two-Stage Reimplantation of a Prosthetic Hip Infection: Systematic Review of Long-Term Reinfection and Pathogen Outcomes

BACKGROUND

Although two-stage exchange for chronic periprosthetic hip infections remains an effective option for infection eradication, long-term outcome reporting remains scarce. Compiling outcomes data for this standard of care is necessary to characterize long-term reinfection risk and identify bacteria associated with reinfection. The purpose of our study was to perform a systematic review to determine the long-term risk of reinfection after two-stage reimplantation. The second purpose was to identify the proportion of reinfections caused by the same or different organism(s) relative to the index infection.

METHODS

We performed a systematic review of two-stage reimplantation randomized control trials, cohort studies, and case series for the treatment of periprosthetic joint infections, yielding 320 unique citations for abstract review, of which 138 were reviewed in full. We collected reinfection data including the timing of reinfection after successful reimplantation and the bacteria identified at reinfection. Meeting inclusion criteria were 28 studies with 2047 patients and 2055 hips that completed both reimplantation stages with just seven studies having greater than 24 month follow-up.

RESULTS

Studies with longer average follow-up reported significantly higher all-time reinfection rates (P = .042). Among studies with at least 5 years of follow-up, the risk of reinfection was 10.25% (8.21-12.47). Among studies with minimum follow-up of at least 24 months, the 24-month rate of reinfection was 4.58% (2.17-7.66), which increased to 7.34% (4.44-10.82) by final follow-up. Only 12 studies reported index and recurrent pathogen data. In those studies, 3.00% (1.19-5.38) of all hips which completed both reimplantation stages were reinfected by a new pathogen, and 1.70% (0.52-3.35) of patients became reinfected by recurrent pathogens.

CONCLUSION

While the majority of two stage reimplantation literature follows patients for two years, there is significant risk of reinfection into the long term. Further studies with detailed outcomes and long-term follow-up are needed to identify factors associated with late infections.

Accuracy of Predictive Algorithms in Total Hip and Knee Arthroplasty Acute Periprosthetic Joint Infections Treated With Debridement, Antibiotics, and Implant Retention (DAIR)

BACKGROUND

Debridement, antibiotics, and implant retention (DAIR) failure remains high for total hip and knee arthroplasty periprosthetic joint infection (PJI). We sought to determine the predictive value of the CRIME80 and KLIC for failure of DAIR in acute hematogenous (AH) and acute postoperative (AP) PJIs, respectively.

METHODS

We identified 134 patients who underwent DAIR for AH PJI with <4 weeks of symptoms after index arthroplasty and 122 patients who underwent DAIR for AP PJI <90 days from index. In the AH group, 15 patients (11%) failed at 90 days and overall, 33 (25%) had failed by 2 years. In the AP group, 39 (32%) failed at 90 days and overall, 52 (43%) failed by 2 years. Logistic regression models were used to determine the area under the curve (AUC) to establish thresholds using the Youden index.

RESULTS

For the AP cohort, AUCs were below 0.66 for KLIC, Charlson comorbidity index, Elixhauser comorbidity index, and McPherson host grade. For the AH cohort, 90-day AUCs were 0.70 for CRIME80 and below 0.66 for Charlson comorbidity index, Elixhauser comorbidity index, and McPherson host grade. In multivariate analysis controlling for age, sex, and body mass index, the CRIME80 AUC improved to 0.77 at 90 days.

CONCLUSION

To the authors' knowledge, this study represents the first external validation of the KLIC and CRIME80 for predicting DAIR failure in a North American population. The results indicate that alternative methods for predicting DAIR failure at 90 days and 2 years for acute PJI are needed.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Prognostic III.

Improving outcomes in acute and chronic periprosthetic hip and knee joint infection with a multidisciplinary approach

AIMS

Periprosthetic hip and knee infection remains one of the most severe complications following arthroplasty, with an incidence between 0.5% to 1%. This study compares the outcomes of revision surgery for periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) following hip and knee arthroplasty prior to and after implementation of a specialist PJI multidisciplinary team (MDT).

METHODS

Data was retrospectively analyzed from a single centre. In all, 29 consecutive joints prior to the implementation of an infection MDT in November 2016 were compared with 29 consecutive joints subsequent to the MDT conception. All individuals who underwent a debridement antibiotics and implant retention (DAIR) procedure, a one-stage revision, or a two-stage revision for an acute or chronic PJI in this time period were included. The definition of successfully treated PJI was based on the Delphi international multidisciplinary consensus.

RESULTS

There were no statistically significant differences in patient demographics or comorbidities between the groups. There was also no significant difference in length of overall hospital stay (p = 0.530). The time taken for formal microbiology advice was significantly shorter in the post MDT group (p = 0.0001). There was a significant difference in failure rates between the two groups (p = 0.001), with 12 individuals (41.38%) pre-MDT requiring further revision surgery compared with one individual (6.67%) post-MDT inception.

CONCLUSION

Our standardized multidisciplinary approach for periprosthetic knee and hip joint infection shows a significant reduction in failure rates following revision surgery. Following implementation of our MDT, our success rate in treating PJI is 96.55%, higher than what current literature suggests. We advocate the role of a specialist infection MDT in the management of patients with a PJI to allow an individualized patient-centred approach and care plan, thereby reducing postoperative complications and failure rates. Cite this article: Bone Jt Open 2021;2(7):509-514.

Two-Stage Revision Total Hip Arthroplasty Without Spacer Placement: A Viable Option to Manage Infection in Patients With Severe Bone Loss or Abductor Deficiency

BACKGROUND

High rates of spacer-related complications in two-stage exchange total hip arthroplasty (THA) have been reported. Patients with advanced bone defects and abductor deficiency may benefit from a nonspacer two-stage revision. This study reports on the clinical course of a contemporary two-stage exchange for periprosthetic hip infection without spacer insertion.

METHODS

We reviewed 141 infected THAs with extensive bone loss or abductor damage who underwent two-stage exchange without spacer placement. The mean duration from resection arthroplasty to reimplantation was 9 weeks (2-29). Clinical outcomes included interim revision, reinfection, and aseptic revision rates. Restoration of leg-length and offset was assessed radiographically. Modified Harris hip scores were calculated. Mean follow-up was 5 years (3-7). Treatment success was defined using the modified Delphi consensus criteria.

RESULTS

Thirty-four patients (24%) had treatment failure, including 13 reinfections, 16 interim redebridements for persistent infection, 2 antibiotic suppressive therapies, and 3 prosthetic joint infection-related deaths. Aseptic rerevision after reimplantation was necessary in 14 patients (10%). Dislocation accounted for most aseptic complications, with 20 dislocations occurring in 15 patients (11%). Leg-length and offset were restored to preoperative measures. Mean modified Harris hip scores significantly improved from 35 points to 67 points.

CONCLUSION

A nonspacer two-stage exchange is a viable option for managing chronically infected THA with severe bone loss or abductor deficiency, showing comparable rates of interim revision and recurrence of infection. Cementless reimplantation demonstrates good midterm survivorship with comparable functional outcomes and leg-length restoration. However, dislocation continues to be a major concern.

What is the Clinical Utility of Synovial Alpha Defensin Testing of Antibiotic Spacers Before Reimplantation?

BACKGROUND

The purpose of this study was to evaluate the diagnostic performance of standalone alpha defensin (AD) testing of antibiotic spacers during two stage exchange and to determine if the addition of AD testing to other commonly used laboratory tests improves the ability to detect persistent infection in an antibiotic spacer.

METHODS

Cases of two-stage exchange for periprosthetic joint infection from 2016 to 2019 at a single institution were retrospectively reviewed. Cases were classified as persistently infected or not infected in accordance with 2014 and 2018 Musculoskeletal Infection Society criteria to determine if AD provided any clinical utility beyond the other commonly used tests that make up both criteria. Delphi Consensus criteria at 1 year were used as the gold standard for determining recurrent periprosthetic joint infection.

RESULTS

Fifty-two spacers (25 hips and 27 knees) in 51 patients were included for analysis. Five spacers were persistently infected based on Musculoskeletal Infection Society criteria. One spacer underwent reresection and the remaining 4 underwent reimplantation with no subsequent infectious complications. All 48 patients who were categorized as not infected underwent reimplantation; at 1 year postoperatively, 7 (13%) had failed due to infection. Three spacers (6%) had a positive AD test. Two spacers with positive AD tests underwent reimplantation, neither had failed at 1 year postoperatively. Sensitivity of standalone AD testing was 0%, and specificity was 96%.

CONCLUSION

Standalone AD testing for the purpose of predicting repeat infection after two-stage exchange arthroplasty exhibits sensitivity of 0% and low predictive value. Addition of synovial AD testing did not increase the diagnostic performance of commonly used synovial and serologic markers of infection.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

IV-retrospective cohort study.

Analysis of Culture Positive First and Second Stage Procedures in Periprosthetic Knee and Hip Joint Infections

BACKGROUND

A positive microbiological result at reimplantation may lead to a failed 2-stage revision arthroplasty in the treatment of periprosthetic joint infections. Little is known about changes in microbiological spectrum and resistance pattern between culture positive first and second stage procedures in revision knee and hip arthroplasty.

METHODS

Between January 2011 and December 2019, we performed 327 two-stage revision arthroplasties on 312 patients. There were 37 of 312 (11.9%) patients (20 hips/17 knees) who had a positive microbiological culture during the first and second stage procedure. We analyzed the microbiological spectrum, antimicrobial resistance pattern, and clinical outcome of culture positive first and second stage procedures as well as subsequent re-revisions.

RESULTS

Re-revision was necessary in 40.5% (15/37) of patients with culture positive first and second stage procedure at a median follow-up of 3.5 years. We found microbiological changes in 83.8% (31/37) of patients between the first and second stage and in 88.9% (8/9) between the second stage and subsequent culture positive re-revision. Polymicrobial infections were found in 21.6% (8/37) of first and in 16.2% (6/37) of second stage procedures. In 27% (10/37) of patients, microorganisms persisted between the first and second stage procedure. The antimicrobial resistance pattern changed in 60% of persistent microorganisms between the first and second stage procedure.

CONCLUSION

Changes in microbiological spectrum and resistance pattern are common between culture positive first and second stage procedures as well as subsequent re-revisions. This has to be considered in the antimicrobial treatment of periprosthetic joint infections.

A spacer infection by Candida albicans secondary to a Staphylococcus capitis prosthetic joint infection: a case report

BACKGROUND

Prosthetic joint infection (PJI) is one of the most feared complications following total arthroplasty surgeries. Gram-positive bacteria are the most common microorganisms implicated in PJIs, while infections mediated by fungi only account for 1% of cases. When dealing with PJIs, a two-stage revision arthroplasty is widely used. Briefly, a spacer is introduced until re-implantation of the definitive prosthesis to provide skeleton stabilization while delivering antibiotics in the site of the infection. Sometimes, antimicrobial therapy may fail, but the isolation of a second microorganism from the spacer is uncommon and even less frequent that of a yeast.

CASE PRESENTATION

Here is described a case of a 75-year-old woman who underwent two-stage revision surgery of the left hip prosthesis secondary to a Staphylococcus capitis infection, whose spacer was found to be infected by Candida albicans at a later time. Briefly, the patient underwent revision surgery of the hip prosthesis for a suspected PJI. After the debridement of the infected tissue, an antibiotic-loaded spacer was implanted. The microbiological analysis of the periprosthetic tissues and the implant depicted a S. capitis infection that was treated according to the antimicrobial susceptibility profile of the clinical isolate. Three months later, the patient was admitted to the emergency room due to local inflammatory signs. Synovial fluid was sent to the laboratory for culture. No evidence of S. capitis was detected, however, a yeast was identified as Candida albicans. Fifteen days later, the patient was hospitalized for the removal of the infected spacer. Microbiological cultures confirmed the results of the synovial fluid analysis. According to the susceptibility profile, the patient was treated with fluconazole (400 mg/day) for 6 months. Seven months later, the patient underwent second-stage surgery. The microbiological tests on the spacer were all negative. After 12 months of follow-up, the patient has fully recovered and no radiological signs of infection have been detected.

CONCLUSIONS

Given the exceptionality of this complication, it is important to report these events to better understand the clinical outcomes after the selected therapeutic options to prevent and forestall the development of either bacterial or fungal spacer infections.

What Is the Dislocation and Revision Rate of Dual-mobility Cups Used in Complex Revision THAs?

BACKGROUND

Dual-mobility cups have been shown to reduce the dislocation risk after THA. Although dual-mobility cups can be a useful strategy to mitigate against recurrent dislocation after revision surgery, few clinical studies have focused on the results of complex revision THAs with extensive bone and soft-tissue loss or in patients who have undergone more than one previous surgical procedure.

QUESTIONS/PURPOSES

(1) What is the survival free from revision for dislocation of dual-mobility cups used in complex revision THAs? (2) What is the survival free from any dislocation?

METHODS

Between January 1, 2009 and December 31, 2013, 327 patients underwent a complex revision THA that included an acetabular revision, defined as preexisting massive bone loss in the acetabulum (at least Paprosky Type 2B) and/or proximal femur (at least Paprosky Type 3), substantial gluteal soft-tissue involvement, at least two previous surgical procedures or a one-stage septic revision, or history of dislocation. All 327 complex revision patients received a dual-mobility cup. Of those, 34% (111) were lost to follow-up before 5 years and were not known to have reached a study endpoint (revision for dislocation, and any dislocation) before then, leaving 216 patients for analysis. For patients with bilateral hip surgeries only the first operated hip was included for analysis. The median (range) follow-up duration was 69 months (60 to 110). The primary endpoint was dislocation or re-revision for dislocation. Fifty-six percent (120 of 216) of the patients were women and 44% (96 of 216) were men. The mean age of the patients was 69 ± 9 years. The patients underwent a median of four surgical procedures (1 to 4) before the index procedure (the revision evaluated in this study). A survival analysis was performed using the Kaplan-Meier method; any dislocation or revision for dislocation was determined as the endpoint.

RESULTS

The dislocation-free survival rates were 96% (95% confidence interval 92 to 98) at 5 years and 82% (95% CI 72 to 89) at 9 years. The overall dislocation rate was 11% (24 of 216 patients) at the final follow-up interval. Survival free of revision for dislocation was 99% (95% CI 96 to 100) at 5 years and 85% (95% CI 75 to 92) at 9 years.

CONCLUSIONS

Dual-mobility cups used in complex revision THA in this series had a higher rate of dislocation and revision than expected, based on earlier studies of dislocations of these components. Although we believe dual-mobility cups are still the first choice of implant if the patient has instability, these cups should be used cautiously if severe bone loss or soft-tissue involvement is present.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level III, therapeutic study.

Patients with no recurrence of infection five years after two-stage revision hip arthroplasty may be classified as periprosthetic infection 'in remission'

AIMS

We aimed to report the mid- to long-term rates of septic and aseptic failure after two-stage revision surgery for periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) following total hip arthroplasty (THA).

METHODS

We retrospectively reviewed 96 cases which met the Musculoskeletal Infection Society criteria for PJI. The mean follow-up was 90 months (SD 32). Septic failure was assessed using a Delphi-based consensus definition. Any further surgery undertaken for aseptic mechanical causes was considered as aseptic failure. The cumulative incidence with competing risk analysis was used to predict the risk of septic failure. A regression model was used to evaluate factors associated with septic failure. The cumulative incidence of aseptic failure was also analyzed.

RESULTS

There were 23 septic failures at final follow-up, with a cumulative incidence of 14% (95% confidence interval (CI) 8% to 22%) at one year, 18% (95% CI 11% to 27%) at two years, 22% (95% CI 14% to 31%) at five years, and 23% (95% CI 15% to 33%) at ten years. Having at least one positive culture (hazard ratio (HR) 2.38 (interquartile range (IQR) 1.19 to 4.74); p = 0.013), or a positive intraoperative frozen section (HR 2.55 (IQR 1.06 to 6.15); p = 0.037) was significantly associated with septic failure after reimplantation. With dislocation being the most common cause of aseptic revision (5.2%), the cumulative incidence of aseptic failure was 1% (95% CI 0% to 5%) at one year, 6% (95% CI 1% to 8%) at five years, and 8% (95%CI 3% to 17%) at ten years.

CONCLUSION

If there is no recurrent infection in the five years following reimplantation, the chances of further infection thereafter are remote. While the results of a frozen section may be a reliable guide to the timing of reimplantation, intraoperative culture has, currently, only prognostic value. Surgeons should be aware that instability remains a potential indication for further revision surgery. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2021;103-B(1):79-86.

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.

Trends in the treatment of infected knee arthroplasty

Essential treatment methods for infected knee arthroplasty involve DAIR (debridement, antibiotics, and implant retention), and one and two-stage exchange arthroplasty.Aggressive debridement with the removal of all avascular tissues and foreign materials that contain biofilm is mandatory for all surgical treatment modalities.DAIR is a viable option with an acceptable success rate and can be used as a first surgical procedure for patients who have a well-fixed, functioning prosthesis without a sinus tract for acute-early or late-hematogenous acute infections with no more than four weeks (most favourable being < seven days) of symptoms. Surgeons must focus on the isolation of the causative organism with sensitivities to bactericidal treatment as using one-stage exchange.One-stage exchange is indicated when the patients have:minimal bone loss/soft tissue defect allowing primary wound closure,easy to treat micro-organisms,absence of systemic sepsis andabsence of extensive comorbidities.There are no validated serum or synovial biomarkers to determine optimal timing of re-implantation for two-stage exchange.Antibiotic-free waiting intervals and joint aspiration before the second stage are no longer recommended. The decision to perform aspiration should be made based on the index of suspicion for persistent infection.Re-implantation can be performed when the treating medical team feels that the clinical signs of infection are under control and serological tests are trending downwards. Cite this article: EFORT Open Rev 2020;5:672-683. DOI: 10.1302/2058-5241.5.190069.