When Total Joint Arthroplasty After Septic Arthritis Can Be Safely Performed

Outcomes of single- vs two-stage primary joint arthroplasty for septic arthritis: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Purpose

Septic arthritis (SA) is an intra-articular infection caused by purulent bacteria and the only effective method is surgical intervention. Two-stage arthroplasty is considered the gold standard treatment for SA, but recent studies have found that single-stage arthroplasty can achieve the same efficacy as two-stage arthroplasty. This study aimed to compare the efficacy of single- vs two-stage arthroplasty in the treatment of (acute or quiescent) SA.

Methods

The review process was conducted according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines. We searched the PubMed, EMBASE, Medline, and Cochrane Library databases to identify all literature on the treatment of SA using single- and two-stage arthroplasty from the date of database inception to November 10, 2022. Data on reinfection rates were expressed as odds ratios and 95% CIs.

Results

Seven retrospective studies with a total of 413 patients were included. Pooled analysis showed no difference in the reinfection rate between single- and two-stage arthroplasty. Subgroup analysis found no difference between the single- and two-stage arthroplasty groups in the incidence of purulent infection of the hip and knee. Cumulative meta-analysis showed gradual stabilization of outcomes.

Conclusions

Based on our meta-analysis of available retrospective studies, we found no significant difference in reinfection rates between single- and two-stage arthroplasty for SA. Further prospective cohort studies are needed to confirm our results, although our meta-analysis provides important insights into the current literature on this topic.

Perception of Perioperative Risk for Arthroplasty Patients: A Poll of Indian Orthopedic Surgeons

BACKGROUND

A survey of the American Association of Hip and Knee Surgeons (AAHKS) reported that 95% of respondents attempted to modify risk factors prior to arthroplasty. This study investigated Indian arthroplasty surgeons' approach to patients who have modifiable risk factors.

METHODS

The AAHKS survey tool was adapted for Indian surgeons and distributed to the membership of the Indian Society of Hip and Knee Surgeons and Indian Arthroplasty Association via a Survey Monkey. A total of 92 survey responses were received, representing a response rate of 12%.

RESULTS

Overall, 87% of respondents restricted access to arthroplasty surgery for patients who have modifiable risk factors, but only 51% of respondents reported delays or restricted treatment because of risk factors. Respondents reported that financial implications were more likely to delay or restrict treatment in 97% and social/family reasons in 66%. Poor diabetic control (81%), previous infection (57%), and malnutrition/hypoalbuminemia (47%) were the most frequent modifiable risk factors. There were 82% of surgeons reporting that the patient's socioeconomic status influenced treatment including: 71% of patients who have low socioeconomic status, 57% who do not have insurance, and 45% who have limited social supports. Most surgeons (92%) reported that funding influenced the type of care provided and the choice of implants.

CONCLUSION

Over 97% of Indian arthroplasty surgeons thought socioeconomic factors impaired access to orthopaedic treatment. Only half the surgeons restricted access for comorbidities and these were more often related to infection risks and diabetes. These findings contrast dramatically to the practice patterns of American AAHKS members.

Less Than 1-Year Quiescent Period After Septic Arthritis of the Hip is Associated With High Risk of Periprosthetic Joint Infection Following Total Hip Arthroplasty

BACKGROUND

Approximately 20,000 patients are diagnosed with septic arthritis annually, with 15% specifically affecting the hip joint. These cases exacerbate arthritic changes, often warranting a total hip arthroplasty (THA). Given their prior history of infection, these patients are predisposed to subsequent periprosthetic joint infections (PJIs). Multiple studies suggest delaying THA after a native septic hip, but no study utilizing a large cohort examined the specific timing to mitigate post-THA PJI risk within a short (<1 year) quiescent period after septic arthritis. We sought to compare patients who were diagnosed with septic hip arthritis at time intervals (0-6, or 6-12 months) prior to an ipsilateral primary THA to a cohort of THA patients who never had a septic hip history. Specifically, we assessed: from 90 days to 2 years (1) revisions due to PJI and (2) associated risk factors for PJI at 2-years.

METHODS

A national, all-payer database was queried to identify all patients who underwent a primary THA between 2010 and 2021 and patients who had prior ipsilateral septic hip arthritis were characterized using International Classification of Disease and Current Practice Terminology codes (n = 1,052). A randomized sample of patients who never had a history of septic arthritis prior to undergoing THA was used as a nonseptic group comparison (n = 5,000). The incidences of PJI at 90 days through two years were then identified and compared using bivariate chi-square analyses. Risk factors for post-THA PJIs were then analyzed using multivariate regression models.

RESULTS

The septic arthritis cohorts were more likely to require revisions due to PJIs, as compared to the non-septic group at 90 days, 1 year, and 2 years (all P < .0001). Patients who were diagnosed with septic arthritis between 0 and 6 months prior to THA were at greater PJI risk at both one-year (odds ratio (OR) of 43.1 versus 29.6, P < .0001) and two years (OR of 38.3 versus 22.1, P < .0001) compared to patients who had diagnoses between 6 and 12 months. Diabetes mellitus, obesity, and tobacco use were associated risk factors for PJIs at 2 years in the septic hip cohort in comparison to the cohort without a septic hip history.

CONCLUSION

Less than a 1-year quiescent period after septic arthritis is associated with a 38 times increased risk and a 22 times risk for post-THA PJI, at 0 and 6 months and 6 and 12 months, respectively. Though patients who undergo THA greater than 6 months after their septic arthritis treatment have a decreased risk compared to those between 0 and 6 months the risks are still high. Orthopaedic surgeons should be aware of the increased risks of PJIs when considering performing a THA in patients with a history of septic arthritis.

Arthroplasty after septic arthritis of the native hip and knee: retrospective analysis of 49 joints

Abstract. Background: Arthroplasty after septic arthritis (SA) treatment raises diagnostic and therapeutic questions. The main objective was to evaluate infection-free survival of patients undergoing total knee arthroplasty (TKA) or total hip arthroplasty (THA) post-SA. Other objectives were to describe the population's characteristics, surgical strategies, results of preoperative examinations and cultures of intraoperative samples taken at implantation, and postoperative antibiotic therapy. Methods: This is a retrospective, observational, monocenter study, from January 2005 to May 2019, including all patients undergoing TKA or THA with prior or ongoing SA in the same joint. Infection–free survival was analyzed and reported. Results: Forty-seven patients, 29 men, 49 joints operated on (30 knees, 19 hips), were included. Median SA-to-arthroplasty interval was 32 [1–216] weeks. It was <2 years for 43 joints and <6 months for 19 joints. Six patients underwent arthroplasty while still on SA treatment. One-stage arthroplasty was done for 43 joints and two-stage arthroplasty for 6 joints. Eight (16 %) cultures of intraoperative specimens were positive. Median durations of postoperative antibiotic therapy were 10 d for sterile cultures and 82 d for those that were positive. At 2 years, infection-free survival rate was 95.9 % (±0.02). After a median follow-up of 47 [18–142] months, no SA relapse was observed, but five patients developed new periprosthetic joint infections (PJIs) with a different microorganism. Conclusion: Arthroplasty may be a post-SA option, even within a short period of time. One-stage arthroplasty can be done if synovectomy is thorough, intraoperative samples are taken and antibiotics are administered until those culture results become available. We observed no SA relapse, but new PJIs occurred.

Prevention of early complications following total hip replacement

Total hip arthroplasty (THA) has been quoted as "the operation of the century", owing to its efficacy and the substantial improvements evidenced with respect to functional patient outcomes and quality of life. However, early postoperative complications are often inevitable, hence it is imperative to take every step to prevent them and minimise morbidity and mortality. This manuscript focuses on the most common early complications following THA, namely venous thromboembolism (VTE), prosthetic joint infection, periprosthetic fracture, instability, and leg length inequality. It aims to outline effective risk stratification strategies and prevention measures that could apply to the wider Orthopaedic community.