Efficacy of Single-stage Revision with Aggressive Debridement Using Intra-articular Antibiotics in the Treatment of Infected Joint Prosthesis

Local antibiotic delivery via intra-articular catheter infusion for the treatment of periprosthetic joint infection: a systematic review

INTRODUCTION

There is an increasing interest in the use of intra-articular (IA) antibiotic infusion as a stand-alone or adjuvant therapy to standard revision surgery for periprosthetic joint infection (PJI). The objective of this systematic review is to evaluate the evidence with respect to this up-and-coming treatment modality.

METHODS

A systematic review of studies published until April 2023 was conducted using PubMed, Embase, MEDLINE and Cochrane databases. Quality assessment was performed with the National Institute of Health quality assessment tool. Inclusion criteria were adult patients (≥ 18 years) with a mean follow-up of ≥ 11 months and a score ≥ 6 on the National Institute of Health quality assessment tool. Primary outcome was eradication of infection.

RESULTS

15 articles, encompassing 631 PJIs in 626 patients, were included in the final analysis, all level IV case series. The majority was treated with single-stage revision with adjuvant IA antibiotic infusion (79.1%). The remaining PJIs were treated with stand-alone IA antibiotic infusion (12.2%), DAIR (debridement, antibiotics and implant retention) with adjuvant IA antibiotic infusion (5.7%) or two-stage revision with adjuvant IA antibiotic infusion (3.0%). Mean duration of IA antibiotic infusion was 19 days (range 3-50). An overall failure rate of approximately 11% was found. In total 117 complications occurred, 71 were non-catheter-related and 46 were catheter-related. The most common catheter-related complications were premature loss of the catheter (18/46) and elevated blood urea nitrogen (BUN) and creatinine levels (12/46).

CONCLUSIONS

Due to the lack of comparative studies the (added) benefit of IA antibiotic infusion in the treatment of PJI remains uncertain. Based on the current evidence, we would advise against using it as a stand-alone treatment. A prospective randomized controlled trial using a well-described infusion protocol is needed to see if the potential benefits justify the increased costs and potential complications of this treatment modality.

Two-dimensional liquid chromatography measurement of meropenem concentration in synovial fluid of patients with periprosthetic joint infection

Periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) is a catastrophic complication following joint replacement surgery. One potential treatment approach for PJI could be the combination of one-stage revision and intra-articular infusion of antibiotics. Meropenem is one of the commonly used intra-articular antibiotics in our institution. Determining the concentration of meropenem in the joint cavity could be crucial for optimizing its local application, effectively eradicating biofilm infection, and improving PJI treatment outcomes. In this study, we developed a simple, precise, and accurate method of two-dimensional liquid chromatography (2D-LC) for determining the concentration of meropenem in human synovial fluid. The method was then validated based on the guidelines of the Food and Drug Administration and the Chinese Pharmacopoeia. Meropenem showed good linearity in the range of 0.31-25.01 μg/mL (r ≥ .999). Selectivity, intra-day and inter-day precision and accuracy, extraction recovery, and stability validation results were all within the acceptance range. This method has been successfully applied to the determination of synovial fluid samples from PJI patients, providing a useful detection method for meropenem therapeutic drug monitoring (TDM) in PJI patients.

One-stage revision using intra-articular carbapenem infusion effectively treats chronic periprosthetic joint infection caused by Gram-negative organisms

Gram-negative periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) has been poorly studied despite its rapidly increasing incidence. Treatment with one-stage revision using intra-articular (IA) infusion of antibiotics may offer a reasonable alternative with a distinct advantage of providing a means of delivering the drug in high concentrations. Carbapenems are regarded as the last line of defense against severe Gram-negative or polymicrobial infection. This study presents the results of one-stage revision using intra-articular carbapenem infusion for treating Gram-negative PJI, and analyzes the characteristics of bacteria distribution and drug sensitivity. We retrospectively reviewed 32 patients (22 hips and 11 knees) who underwent single-stage revision combined with IA carbapenem infusion between November 2013 and March 2020. The IA and intravenous (IV) carbapenem infusions were administered for a single Gram-negative infection, and IV vancomycin combined with IA carbapenems and vancomycin was applied for polymicrobial infection including Gram-negative bacteria. The bacterial community distribution, drug sensitivity, infection control rate, functional recovery, and complications were evaluated. Reinfection or death caused by PJI was regarded as a treatment failure. Gram-negative PJI was mainly caused by Escherichia coli (8/34), Enterobacter cloacae (7/34), and Klebsiella pneumoniae (5/34). Seven cases (7/32) involved polymicrobial PJIs. The resistance rates of penicillin, cephalosporin, quinolones, and sulfonamides were > 10%, and all penicillin and partial cephalosporins (first and second generation) were > 30%. Of 32 cases, treatment failed to eradicate infection in only three cases (9.4%), at a mean follow-up of 55.1 months (SD 25 to 90). The mean postoperative Harris Hip Score and Hospital for Special Surgery knee score at the most recent follow-up were 81 (62 to 91) and 79 (56 to 89), respectively. One patient developed a fistula, and another presented with a local rash on an infected joint. The use of IA carbapenem delivered alongside one-stage revision effectively controlled Gram-negative infection and obtained acceptable clinical outcomes with few complications. Notably, first- and second-generation cephalosporins and penicillin should be administrated with caution, due to a high incidence of resistance.

pH variation in medical implant biofilms: Causes, measurements, and its implications for antibiotic resistance

The advent of implanted medical devices has greatly improved the quality of life and increased longevity. However, infection remains a significant risk because bacteria can colonize device surfaces and form biofilms that are resistant to antibiotics and the host's immune system. Several factors contribute to this resistance, including heterogeneous biochemical and pH microenvironments that can affect bacterial growth and interfere with antibiotic biochemistry; dormant regions in the biofilm with low oxygen, pH, and metabolites; slow bacterial growth and division; and poor antibody penetration through the biofilm, which may also be regions with poor acid product clearance. Measuring pH in biofilms is thus key to understanding their biochemistry and offers potential routes to detect and treat latent infections. This review covers the causes of biofilm pH changes and simulations, general findings of metabolite-dependent pH gradients, methods for measuring pH in biofilms, effects of pH on biofilms, and pH-targeted antimicrobial-based approaches.

Direct Intra-articular Antibiotic Administration for Acute Prosthetic Joint Infection in Knee Arthroplasty

Prosthetic joint infection (PJI) remains a challenge to treat. We utilized intra-articular administration of antibiotics for the treatment of two infected total knee arthroplasties. The first patient developed an early post-operative infection with persistent wound drainage within a week after primary total knee arthroplasty (TKA). The second patient had an acute hematogenous infection, presenting with knee pain with a preceding history of leg cellulitis, one year after a primary TKA. Both patients were treated with surgical debridement, exchange of tibial insert with implant retention, and intra-articular administration of vancomycin for six weeks. Treatment was successful for both patients, with preservation of knee function and no recurrence of infection after one year. We reported two cases of PJI treated with direct intra-articular antibiotic administration following surgical debridement and implant retention.

Effective Treatment of Single-Stage Revision Using Intra-Articular Antibiotic Infusion for Polymicrobial Periprosthetic Joint Infection

BACKGROUND

The treatment of polymicrobial periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) confronted distinct challenges. No reports have assessed the efficacy of local antibiotic delivery combined with 1-stage exchange in polymicrobial PJI.

METHODS

Between January 2013 and December 2018, we retrospectively analyzed the data of 126 patients, including 19 polymicrobial PJIs and 107 monomicrobial PJIs, who underwent single-stage revision using intra-articular antibiotic infusion. The risk factors, microbiology, infection control rate, and clinical outcomes were compared between the 2 groups.

RESULTS

Higher body mass index, presence of a sinus tract, and prior revisions were the risk factors for polymicrobial PJI. Isolation of Staphylococcus epidermidis, Streptococcus, Enterococcus, and Gram-negative pathogens was highly associated with polymicrobial PJI. Of the 19 polymicrobial PJIs, only 2 patients occurred infection recurrence, which is similar with the result of 6 of 107 patients in the monomicrobial PJI (P = .225). The Harris Hip Score of the polymicrobial group showed no difference from that of the monomicrobial group (78 vs 80; P = .181). Nevertheless, the polymicrobial group exhibited inferior Hospital for Special Surgery knee score relative to the monomicrobial group (77 vs 79; P = .017).

CONCLUSION

With rational and targeted use of antibiotics, single-stage revision can effectively control polymicrobial infections, and achieve favorable outcomes similar to that in monomicrobial patients. However, this regimen is still needed to be further confirmed, especially in the infections with different microbial species simultaneously. Additionally, obese patients with a sinus tract and those who had prior revisions had a greater risk of polymicrobial PJI.

Comparative analysis of pathogen structure in patients with PJI after primary total hip and knee arthroplasty

BACKGROUND

Microbiological profile of pathogens causing periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) after primary total hip (THA) and knee (TKA) arthroplasty varies in different regions, clinics and even departments. The objective of this study was to analyze the pathogen structure in patients with PJI after primary THA and TKA and its influence on the effectiveness of the infection eradication after two-stage reimplantation.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We collected the retrospective data of 364 patients-161 with PJI after primary TKA (113 treated in two stages 48 with failure after spacer implantation) and 203 patients with infected THA (127 after successful two-stage reimplantation and 76 with PJI recurrence after the first stage) within the time period from January 2012 to December 2017, treated with two-stage protocol in the single center. A comparative analysis of pathogen structure was performed between cohorts of patients with hip and knee PJI. A subanalysis was made between the subsets comprised from patients with successful two-stage treatment and the subsets with failure to treat the infection.

RESULTS

Staphylococcus epidermidis was the most commonly identified pathogen in the full hip and knee cohorts: 30.1% and 32.5%, respectively. However, the percentage of methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus epidermidis (MRSE) among all S. epidermidis isolates was higher in the hip cohort-50% compared with 35% in the knee cohort (p = 0.073). Other coagulase-negative Staphylococci were more common to patients with PJI after primary TKA-10.3% compared with 5% (p < 0.02). Streptococcus sp. caused hip PJI in a larger percentage of cases than in knee PJI (p < 0.01)-7% and 2%, respectively (p < 0.01). Polymicrobial associations were significantly more common in hip PJI compared to knee PJI: 45.3% and 14% of cases, respectively (p < 0.001). The presence of polymicrobial infection significantly raised the risk of PJI recurrence [OR 2 (95% CI from 1.24 to 3.24)] in knee PJI patients and reduced the effectiveness of infection eradication from 73.9% to 47.8%.

CONCLUSION

Comparative analysis showed significant differences in the structure of PJI pathogens in the hip and knee. These findings are useful when choosing treatment strategies and empirical antibiotics regimens, in the management of patients with PJIs after primary hip and knee arthroplasty.

Serum and Synovial Vancomycin Concentrations in Patients with Prosthetic Joint Infection after Intra-articular Infusion

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

Vancomycin is one of the most commonly used antibiotics for intra-articular (IA) infusion in the treatment of prosthetic joint infection (PJI). This study aimed to preliminarily investigate the serum and synovial vancomycin concentrations in patients with PJI after IA infusion.

METHODS

In total, 16 patients who developed PJI were enrolled in this study; 14 of the patients were treated with IA infusion of vancomycin postoperatively, while the other 2 patients received intravenous (IV) infusion of vancomycin alone. Chemiluminescent immunoassay assay (CLIA) and high-performance liquid chromatography (HPLC) were used to determine the serum and synovial vancomycin concentrations, respectively.

RESULTS

Administration of vancomycin 0.5 g once daily (qd) IA maintained a high vancomycin trough concentration in synovial fluid before the next IA dose, regardless of whether it was given in combination with IV administration. The combination vancomycin 0.5 g qd IA + vancomycin 1 g every 12 h (q12h) IV yielded relatively good trough concentrations of vancomycin in both serum and synovial fluid. The mean trough serum vancomycin concentration of patients who used vancomycin 1 g q12h IV therapy was above 10 μg/mL; however, no vancomycin was detected in their synovial fluid.

CONCLUSIONS

The rational use of IA vancomycin infusion may help to achieve effective therapeutic concentrations of vancomycin in the serum and synovial fluid of patients with PJI.

Antibiotic Delivery via Hickman Catheter for the Treatment of Prosthetic Joint Infection

Infection rates for total joint arthroplasty range from 1% to 2%, and infection carries significant risk. The traditional course of treatment is irrigation and debridement, but historically, success rates have been variable. The goals of this study were to evaluate the safety and efficacy of Hickman catheterization in the treatment of prosthetic joint infection and to assess its value as an alternative to irrigation and debridement. The authors retrospectively analyzed 26 Hickman catheterizations in the treatment of acute early, acute late, and chronic late infections of primary and revision hip and knee arthroplasty. Initial arthroplasty procedures were performed between 2006 and 2018, with all cases followed for a minimum of 1 year postoperatively. The authors evaluated surgical data, clinical outcomes, and success rates, and they compared their success rates with reported values for cases treated with irrigation and debridement. The authors' success rate was 100% for acute early hip infection, 100% for chronic knee infection, and 80.0% for chronic hip infection. They reported a 75.0% success rate in the treatment of acute late infection for hip arthroplasty and a rate of 62.5% for knee arthroplasty. Postoperative clinical outcomes were significantly improved for both hips and knees for all infection types. The success rates for the treatment of acute early prosthetic joint infection and chronic late prosthetic knee infection were superior to available reported rates on irrigation and debridement. The authors also reported the highest success rate for the treatment of acute late infection. The current data suggest that Hickman catheterization is a promising safe and effective alternative to irrigation and debridement for the treatment of prosthetic joint infection. [Orthopedics. 2021;44(3):e395-e401.].

Effective treatment of single-stage revision using intra-articular antibiotic infusion for culture-negative prosthetic joint infection

AIMS

In the absence of an identified organism, single-stage revision is contraindicated in prosthetic joint infection (PJI). However, no studies have examined the use of intra-articular antibiotics in combination with single-stage revision in these cases. In this study, we present the results of single-stage revision using intra-articular antibiotic infusion for treating culture-negative (CN) PJI.

METHODS

A retrospective analysis between 2009 and 2016 included 51 patients with CN PJI who underwent single-stage revision using intra-articular antibiotic infusion; these were compared with 192 culture-positive (CP) patients. CN patients were treated according to a protocol including intravenous vancomycin and a direct intra-articular infusion of imipenem and vancomycin alternately used in the morning and afternoon. In the CP patients, pathogen-sensitive intravenous (IV) antibiotics were administered for a mean of 16 days (12 to 21), and for resistant cases, additional intra-articular antibiotics were used. The infection healing rate, Harris Hip Score (HHS), and Hospital for Special Surgery (HSS) knee score were compared between CN and CP groups.

RESULTS

Of 51 CN patients, 46 (90.2%) required no additional medical treatment for recurrent infection at a mean of 53.2 months (24 to 72) of follow-up. Impaired kidney function occurred in two patients, and one patient had a local skin rash. No significant difference in the infection control rate was observed between CN and CP PJIs (90.2% (46/51) versus 94.3% (181/192); p = 0.297). The HHS of the CN group showed no substantial difference from that of CP cases (79 versus 81; p = 0.359). However, the CN group showed a mean HSS inferior to that of the CP group (76 versus 80; p = 0.027).

CONCLUSION

Single-stage revision with direct intra-articular antibiotic infusion can be effective in treating CN PJI, and can achieve an infection control rate similar to that in CP patients. However, in view of systemic toxicity, local adverse reactions, and higher costs, additional strong evidence is needed to verify these treatment regimens. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2020;102-B(3):336-344.

Outcome of single-stage versus two-stage exchange for revision knee arthroplasty for chronic periprosthetic infection

The gold standard for treating chronic periprosthetic joint infection is still considered to be double-stage exchange revision. The purpose of this review is to analyse the difference in terms of eradication rates and functional outcome after single- and double-stage prosthetic exchange for chronic periprosthetic joint infection around the knee.

We reviewed full text articles written in English from 1992 to 2018 reporting the success rates and functional outcomes of either single-stage exchange or double-stage exchange for knee arthroplasty revision performed for chronic infection. In the case of double-stage exchange, particular attention was paid to the type of spacer: articulating or static.

In all, 32 articles were analysed: 14 articles for single-stage including 687 patients and 18 articles for double-stage including 1086 patients. The average eradication rate was 87.1% for the one-stage procedure and 84.8% for the two-stage procedure. The functional outcomes were similar in both groups: the average Knee Society Knee Score was 80.0 in the single-stage exchange group and 77.8 in the double-stage exchange. The average range of motion was 91.4° in the single-stage exchange group and 97.8° in the double-stage exchange group.

Single-stage exchange appears to be a viable alternative to two -stage exchange in cases of chronic periprosthetic joint infection around the knee, provided there are no contra-indications, producing similar results in terms of eradication rates and functional outcomes, and offering the advantage of a unique surgical procedure, lower morbidity and reduced costs.

Cite this article: EFORT Open Rev 2019;4:495-502. DOI: 10.1302/2058-5241.4.190003

The use of an intraarticular catheter on fast-track primary knee arthroplasty, is it a step forward?

OBJECTIVE

This study compares the efficacy in post-operative pain control of the intraarticular catheter compared to the epidural catheter after primary total knee arthroplasty.

MATERIAL AND METHOD

Randomised clinical trial consisting of two groups of patients. A control group with intradural anaesthesia and an intraoperative epidural catheter (ropivacaine) and an intervention group using the same anaesthetic technique and an intraarticular catheter with an elastomeric pump (ropivacaine+dexketoprofen). Data such as demographic, anaesthetic and surgical variables, pain intensity according to Verbal Rating Scale, opioid use and complications, joint balance, onset of walking and hospital stay were recorded.

RESULTS

A lower incidence and severity on Verbal Rating Scale and a better control of postoperative pain (p<.0014) were observed in the intervention group. Joint balance also presented significant results in flexion and 74% of these patients started walking before the first 36h and the control group had not yet done so. Regarding patient satisfaction, 54.1% of the patients were "very satisfied" with the use of the catheter (p>.001). Finally, the hospital stay decreased significantly, with 33.3% of intervention group patients discharged within the first 48h compared to none of the control group.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS

The use of the intraarticular catheter as postoperative analgesia is a useful and safe alternative. It reduces the possibility of side effects. It helps in early improvement of joint balance, onset of walking and control of pain. All of which increase patient satisfaction and result in a shorter period of hospitalisation.

Extended-Spectrum Beta-Lactamase Infections in Orthopedic-Related Devices and Prosthetic Joints

Extended-spectrum beta-lactamase-producing Enterobacteriaceae have increasingly become a public health issue in a variety of infections, including urinary tract infections and postoperative infections. The complications that occur due to these organisms in bone, joint, and prosthetic joints have not been well defined. This study reviewed the clinical characteristics, risk factors, and outcomes of patients with extended-spectrum beta-lactamase-producing Enterobacteriaceae infections of prosthetic joints or orthopedic-related hardware. Six infections met the inclusion criteria that resulted in a 100% failure rate when the hardware or prosthetic joint was not replaced initially. However, when the hardware or prosthetic joint was replaced, all of the patients did well. The use of carbapenems remains effective in these cases. [Orthopedics. 2016; 39(4):e668-e673.].

Orthopaedic device-related infection: current and future interventions for improved prevention and treatment

Orthopaedic and trauma device-related infection (ODRI) remains one of the major complications in modern trauma and orthopaedic surgery.Despite best practice in medical and surgical management, neither prophylaxis nor treatment of ODRI is effective in all cases, leading to infections that negatively impact clinical outcome and significantly increase healthcare expenditure.The following review summarises the microbiological profile of modern ODRI, the impact antibiotic resistance has on treatment outcomes, and some of the principles and weaknesses of the current systemic and local antibiotic delivery strategies.The emerging novel strategies aimed at preventing or treating ODRI will be reviewed. Particular attention will be paid to the potential for clinical impact in the coming decades, when such interventions are likely to be critically important.The review focuses on this problem from an interdisciplinary perspective, including basic science innovations and best practice in infectious disease. Cite this article: Moriarty TF, Kuehl R, Coenye T, et al. Orthopaedic device related infection: current and future interventions for improved prevention and treatment. EFORT Open Rev 2016;1:89-99. DOI: 10.1302/2058-5241.1.000037.