One-Stage Exchange Arthroplasty for Fistulizing Periprosthetic Joint Infection of the Hip: An Effective Strategy

Mid-term Results of 1-stage Revision Total Knee Arthroplasty for Periprosthetic Joint Infection With a Sinus Tract

Background

Patients presenting with a sinus tract over total knee arthroplasty (TKA) are challenging cases of periprosthetic joint infection (PJI). A 2-stage revision TKA has long been considered the gold standard for the management of PJI. At our institution, approximately 85% of patients with PJI, including patients with a sinus tract, undergo 1-stage revision TKA.

Purpose

We sought to evaluate rates of reinfection and reoperation and predictors of failure of 1-stage revision TKA in patients with a concomitant sinus tract.

Methods

We retrospectively reviewed patients with PJI and a sinus tract overlying TKA who underwent 1-stage revision TKA following a well-defined surgical protocol at our institution between January 2001 and December 2018. Of 170 patients included, 69 patients (40.6%) had a sinus tract overlying TKA; 101 patients without a sinus were the propensity-matched control group.

Result

The success rate of controlling reinfection with 1-stage revision TKA with a concomitant sinus was 78.3% with a mean follow-up of 4.8 years. The most common intraoperatively isolated organisms in patients with a sinus tract were coagulase-negative Staphylococcus in 28 patients (40.6%), Staphylococcus aureus in 12 patients (17.2%), and polymicrobial infection in 14 patients (20.3%). A sinus tract in line with the surgical wound was associated with a higher risk of reoperation than a sinus tract away from the wound.

Conclusion

Our retrospective study suggests that 1-stage revision TKA may be a viable treatment option for patients presenting with a sinus tract. A sinus in line with the former incision was associated with a higher rate of revision. Surgeons should take into consideration this risk for revision before performing a 1-stage exchange surgery.

Outcomes of the Subsequent Periprosthetic Joint Infection Revisions after a Failed Debridement, Antibiotics and Implant Retention: A Multicentric Study of 197 Patients

Background: The impact of prior unsuccessful debridement, antibiotics, and implant retention (DAIR) procedures on subsequent revisions is uncertain, with conflicting evidence. Despite 85% consensus against the second DAIR procedure following the 2018 International Consensus Meeting, a 2020 study reported high success rates for the aforementioned second DAIR procedure. Methods: We conducted a multicenter observational study reviewing data from patients with failed DAIR procedures between 2005 and 2021. Patients diagnosed with acute periprosthetic joint infection of the hip or knee were included, following ICM criteria. Failure was defined as uncontrolled infection leading to additional surgeries, prosthesis removal, infection-related mortality, or suppressive antibiotic therapy. Demographic, surgical, and microbiological variables were recorded. Results: Among 197 patients from 10 institutions with failed DAIR procedures were included: 88 (44.7%) received a second DAIR, 21 (10.7%) underwent one-stage revision, and 77 (39.1%) underwent two-stage revision. One-stage revision success rate was 76.2%, with no identified predictors of failure. Two-stage revision success rate was 79.3%; factors associated with failure included polymicrobial infections (p = 0.025) and revision procedures (p = 0.049). Second DAIR success rate was 54.5%; factors associated with failure included non-specialized surgical teams in the first DAIR (p = 0.034), non-exchange of mobile components (p = 0.0038), polymicrobial infections (p = 0.043), and antibiotic resistance (p = 0.035). Excluding patients with these risk factors increased the success rate to 83.3%. Conclusions: Second DAIR's overall success rate was 54.5%, significantly increasing to 83.3% when excluding patients with identified risk factors. These findings suggest considering second DAIR in carefully selected patients without these risk factors. Our study found success rates of 76.2% and 79.3% for one- and two-stage revisions, respectively, aligning closely with published data.

What Is the Role of Local Antimicrobial Protection for One-Stage Revision for Peri-Prosthetic Hip Infection?

The aim of this review is to investigate the effective role of local antimicrobial protection for one-stage cemented and cementless hip revision surgery. Twelve studies reporting the results of cemented single-stage procedures with a minimum two-year follow-up were reviewed. When pooling together the data, no infection recurrence was observed on average in 83.3% of the patients (a range of 75.0% to 100%). Only two papers included patients treated without the use of antibiotic-loaded bone cement, with an average infection control of 95.9% in a total of 195 patients. This figure appears to be better than the 80.7% infection control obtained by pooling together all the remaining studies. Concerning cementless one-stage revision, a total of 17 studies, reporting on 521 patients, showed an average of 90.0% (range 56.8% to 100%) no infection recurrence at a minimum two-year follow-up. No comparative study investigated cementless revision with or without local antibacterial protection. The pooled data showed an average infection control of 86.7%, without the application of local antibacterials, compared to 90.1% to 100% with local antimicrobial protection, depending on the technology used. No statistical difference could be found, either considering local antibacterial strategies alone or pooled together. No side effects had been reported by any local antibacterial technique. Local antibacterial protection for one-stage hip revision surgery, although safe and largely performed in the clinical setting, appears to still rely mainly on experts' opinions with no prospective or comparative trial, hence no definitive conclusion can be drawn concerning its effective role in one-stage hip revision surgery.

Changing the definition of treatment success alters treatment outcomes in periprosthetic joint infection: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Background: Variability in the definition of treatment success poses difficulty when assessing the reported efficacy of treatments for hip and knee periprosthetic joint infection (PJI). To address this problem, we determined how definitions of PJI treatment success have changed over time and how this has affected published rates of success after one-stage and two-stage treatments for hip and knee PJI. Methods: A systematic review following Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines was conducted to identify one-stage and two-stage revision hip and knee PJI publications in major databases (2006-2021). Definition of treatment success, based on Musculoskeletal Infection Society tier criteria, was identified for each study. Publication year, number of patients, minimum follow-up, and study quality were also recorded. The association of success definitions and treatment success rate was measured using multi-variable meta-regression. Results: Study quality remained unchanged in the 245 publications included. Over time, no antibiotics (tier 1) and no further surgery (tier 3) (40.7 % and 54.5 %, respectively) became the two dominant criteria. After controlling for type of surgery, study quality, study design, follow-up, and year of publication, studies with less strict success definitions (tier 3) reported slightly higher odds ratios of 1.05 [1.01, 1.10] ( p = 0.009 ) in terms of treatment success rates compared to tier 1. Conclusions: PJI researchers have gravitated towards tier-1 and tier-3 definitions of treatment success. While studies with stricter definitions had lower PJI treatment success, the clinical significance of this is unclear. Study quality, reflected in the methodological index for non-randomized studies (MINORS) score, did not improve. We advocate for improving PJI study quality, including clarification of the definition of treatment success.

One-stage revision for infected shoulder arthroplasty: prospective, observational study of 37 patients

Background

Periprosthetic joint infection is a severe complication of joint replacement surgery. Thus two-stage exchange remains the gold standard, one-stage exchange is now widely recommended. We hypothesized that, for patients with chronic periprosthetic shoulder infection (PSI), treatment with a one-stage exchange would be an effective approach to eradicate infection, relieve pain, and restore function to the involved shoulder.

Materials and methods

This monocenter cohort study in a Bone and Joint Infection Referral Center (11/2003-05/2020) included all patients with confirmed PSI treated by one-stage revision. Data were extracted from the prospective database, including demographics, infection characteristics, and functional evaluations (range of motion and Constant Score at admission and last follow-up). The primary outcome was the 2-year reinfection-free rate.

Results

We included 37 patients. The refection-free rate was 5%. The most commonly isolated pathogen was Cutibacterium acnes (68%), isolated alone (15 patients, 41%) or as polymicrobial infections (10 patients, 27%). The Constant Score increased significantly from 24 to 53 (P = .001). Range of motion (forward elevation, abduction) was also significantly improved after surgery. Mean active forward elevation increased significantly by 45° from 60° to 105° postoperatively (P < .001), mean abduction increased by 42° from 55° to 97° (P < .001).

Discussion

Results from our prospective cohort-extracted series suggest that one-stage revision is a reliable treatment with a low infection recurrence rate. Improved functional outcomes can be achieved with one-stage exchange. Our patients' overall functional results were similar to those previously reported for one-stage revision and better than those reported after two-stage exchange. Patients with multiple previous surgeries seem to have worse functional outcomes than the subgroup without surgery before the index arthroplasty.

Conclusions

Our results and literature search findings suggest that one-stage revisions effectively eradicate PSIs, with good functional outcomes.

Comment on Lunz et al. Impact and Modification of the New PJI-TNM Classification for Periprosthetic Joint Infections. J. Clin. Med. 2023, 12, 1262

We read with great interest the article by Lunz et al. [...].

Comparable clinical outcomes of culture-negative and culture-positive periprosthetic joint infections: a systematic review and meta-analysis

PURPOSE

The aim of this study was to compare the clinical outcomes of culture-negative periprosthetic joint infection (CN PJI) with those of culture-positive periprosthetic joint infection (CP PJI).

METHODS

Data were obtained from Embase, Web of Science and EBSCO for all available studies comparing the clinical outcomes of CN PJI with those of CP PJI. The quality of the studies was scored using the Newcastle-Ottawa scale (NOS). Pooled odds ratios (ORs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were used to assess clinical outcomes. Subgroup analyses were performed to explain heterogeneity among the included studies. Publication bias was estimated using Begg's funnel plot. Sensitivity analysis was performed to test the stability of pooled results.

RESULTS

Thirty studies with 1630 (38.7%) CN PJI and 2577 (61.3%) CP PJI were included in this meta-analysis. The pooled results of the included studies showed that overall failure rate in CN PJI group (19.0%, 309/1630) was significantly lower than that in CP PJI group (23.4%, 604/2577) (OR 0.63, 95% CI 0.47-0.84, P = 0.002). We performed the subgroup analysis based on the surgical strategies, the pooled results of nine studies for patients undergoing debridement, antibiotics and implant retention (DAIR) revealed that failure rate in CN PJI group (22.2%, 53/239) was significantly lower than that in CP PJI group (29.3%, 227/775) (OR 0.62, 95% CI 0.43-0.90, P = 0.01), the pooled results of four studies for patients undergoing one-stage revision revealed that failure rate between CN PJI group (11.5%, 11/96) and CP PJI group (7.6%, 27/355) had no significant difference (OR 1.57, 95% CI 0.75-3.26, P = 0.23), and the pooled results of 19 studies for patients undergoing two-stage revision revealed that failure rate in CN PJI group (16.1%, 171/1062) was significantly lower than that in CP PJI group (20.4%, 206/1010) (OR 0.52, 95% CI 0.34-0.79, P = 0.002).

CONCLUSIONS

CN PJI group had similar or better survival rate when compared with CP PJI group for patients who underwent DAIR, one-stage or two-stage revision. Negative culture was not a worse prognostic factor for PJI.

Antibiotic Stewardship in Treatment of Osteoarticular Infections Based on Local Epidemiology and Bacterial Growth Times

Incubation for 14 days is recommended for the culture of microorganisms from osteoarticular infections (OAI), but there are no recommendations for postoperative antibiotic stewardship concerning empirical antimicrobial therapy (EAT), while prolonging broad-spectrum EAT results in adverse effects. The aim of this study was to describe the local OAI epidemiology with consideration of bacterial growth times to determine which antibiotic stewardship intervention should be implemented in cases of negative culture after 2 days of incubation. We performed a 1-year, single-center, noninterventional cohort study at the Pitié-Salpêtrière hospital OAI reference center. Samples were taken as part of the local standard of care protocol for adult patients who underwent surgery for OAI (native or device related) and received EAT (i.e., piperacillin-tazobactam plus daptomycin [PTD]) following surgery. The time to culture positivity was monitored daily. Overall, 147 patients were recruited, accounting for 151 episodes of OAI, including 112 device-related infections. Microbiological cultures were positive in 144 cases, including 42% polymicrobial infections. Overall, a definitive microbiological result was obtained within 48 h in 118 cases (78%) and within 5 days in 130 cases (86%). After 5 days, only Gram-positive bacteria were recovered, especially Cutibacterium acnes, Staphylococcus spp., and Streptococcus spp. Overall, 90% of culture-positive OAI were correctly treated with the locally established EAT. EAT guidance for OAI was in agreement with our local epidemiology. Our results supported antibiotic stewardship intervention consisting of stopping piperacillin-tazobactam treatment at day 5 in cases of negative culture. IMPORTANCE Osteoarticular infections (OAI) remain challenging to diagnose and to treat. One of the issues concerns postoperative empirical antimicrobial therapy (EAT), which is usually a combination of broad-spectrum antibiotics. This EAT is maintained up to 2 weeks, until the availability of the microbiological results (identification and drug susceptibility testing of the microorganisms responsible for the OAI). Our results provide new data that will help to improve OAI management, especially EAT. Indeed, we have shown that antibiotic stewardship intervention consisting of stopping the antibiotic targeting Gram-negative bacteria included in the EAT could be implemented in cases where culture is negative after 5 days of incubation. The benefits of such an antibiotic stewardship plan include improved patient outcomes, reduced adverse events (including Clostridioides difficile infection), improvement in rates of susceptibilities to targeted antibiotics, and optimization of resource utilization across the continuum of care.

Micromonas micros Infection of a Prosthetic Hip Joint: A Case Report and Review of the Literature

Micromonas micros is an oral anaerobic Gram-positive coccus and is a commensal of the mouth, and it is rarely isolated in prosthetic joint infections (PJIs) and even less frequently related to a preceding dental procedure with eventual hematogenous seeding of the prosthetic joint. Here, we present a case of a 56-year-old male with a prosthetic hip joint who developed Micromonas micros prosthetic hip joint infection with symptoms starting a few days after a dental procedure and not having received periprocedural antibiotic prophylaxis. He recovered well with surgical intervention and antimicrobial therapy. We conducted a literature review of prosthetic hip joint infections caused by Micromonas micros as well as briefly discuss current guidelines on antibiotic prophylaxis in patients with prosthetic joints undergoing dental procedures and some knowledge gaps.

Novel Approaches to Combat Medical Device-Associated BioFilms

Biofilms are aggregates formed as a protective survival state by microorganisms to adapt to the environment and can be resistant to antimicrobial agents and host immune responses due to chemical or physical diffusion barriers, modified nutrient environments, suppression of the growth rate within biofilms, and the genetic adaptation of cells within biofilms. With the widespread use of medical devices, medical device-associated biofilms continue to pose a serious threat to human health, and these biofilms have become the most important source of nosocomial infections. However, traditional antimicrobial agents cannot completely eliminate medical device-associated biofilms. New strategies for the treatment of these biofilms and targeting biofilm infections are urgently required. Several novel approaches have been developed and identified as effective and promising treatments. In this review, we briefly summarize the challenges associated with the treatment of medical device-associated biofilm infections and highlight the latest promising approaches aimed at preventing or eradicating these biofilms.