Frontiers in the Management of Orthopaedic Periprosthetic Joint Infection.

What's New in Musculoskeletal Infection.

What's New in Musculoskeletal Infection.

BackgroundFibrinogen (FIB) has been found to be a promising marker in diagnosing periprosthetic joint infection (PJI), however, the value of FIB in predicting reinfection of PJI is unknown. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the value of FIB in predicting reinfection after debridement, antibiotics, and implant retention (DAIR) for PJI.MethodsWe retrospectively analyzed the clinical data of patients who were diagnosed with PJI and underwent DAIR from 2013 to 2019. The levels of the FIB, erythrocyte sedimentation rate (ESR), and C-reactive protein (CRP) were measured before DAIR. After DAIR, patients were followed and reinfections were identified. For both acute and chronic PJI, the predictive value of FIB was evaluated by calculating the sensitivity, specificity, and area under the curve (AUC) of the receiver operating characteristic curve (ROC), and was compared with traditional inflammatory markers including ESR and CRP.ResultsThe expression of FIB differed between patients reinfected and those not reinfected in both acute and chronic PJI (p < 0.05). In patients who underwent DAIR for acute PJI, the sensitivity and specificity of FIB were 81.82 and 83.33%, respectively, which were significantly higher than that of CRP (sensitivity, 72.73%; specificity, 50%; p < 0.05), while the specificity was higher than that of ESR (specificity, 41.67%; p < 0.05). In patients who underwent DAIR for chronic PJI, the sensitivity and specificity of FIB were 80.00 and 66.66%, respectively, which were significantly higher than that of CRP (sensitivity, 53.33%; specificity, 66.66%; p < 0.05) and ESR (sensitivity was 66.00%; specificity, 16.66%; p < 0.05). The ROC curves showed that FIB demonstrated the highest AUC among the biomarkers in both acute and chronic PJI.ConclusionFIB is a promising indicator in predicting reinfection after DAIR for both acute and chronic PJI, and it seems to perform better than ESR and CRP.

Oral Antibiotic Therapy

Periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) is a devastating complication that develops after total joint arthroplasty (TJA), whose incidence is expected to increase over the years. Traditionally, surgical treatment of PJI has been based on algorithms, where early infections are preferably treated with debridement, antibiotics, and implant retention (DAIR) and late infections with two-stage revision surgery. Two-stage revision is considered the "gold standard" for treatment of chronic prosthetic joint infection (PJI) as it enables local delivery of antibiotics, maintenance of limb-length and mobility, and easier reimplantation. Many studies have attempted to identify potential predicting factors for early diagnosis of PJI, but its management remains challenging. In this observational retrospective study, we investigated the potential role of inflammatory blood markers (neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio (NLR), monocyte-to-lymphocyte ratio (MLR), platelet-to-lymphocyte ratio (PLR), systemic inflammatory index (SII), systemic inflammatory response index (SIRI), and aggregate index of systemic inflammation (AISI)) as prognostic factors in two-stage exchange arthroplasty for PJI. A single-center retrospective analysis was conducted, collecting clinical data and laboratory parameters from patients submitted to prosthetic explantation (EP) for chronic PJI. Laboratory parameters (PCR, NLR, MLR, PLR, SIRI, SII, and AISI) were evaluated at the explantation time; at 4, 6, and 8 weeks after surgery; and at reimplantation time. The correlation between laboratory parameters and surgery success was evaluated and defined as infection absence/resolution at the last follow-up. A total of 57 patients with PJI were evaluated (62% males; average age 70 years, SD 12.14). Fifty-three patients with chronic PJI were included. Nine patients underwent DAIR revision surgery and chronic suppressive therapy; two patients died. Nineteen patients completed the two-stage revision process (prosthetic removal, spacer placement, and subsequent replanting). Among them, none showed signs of reinfection or persistence of infection at the last available follow-up. The other twenty-three patients did not replant due to persistent infection: among them, some (the most) underwent spacer retention; others (fewer in number) were submitted to resection arthroplasty and arthrodesis (Girdlestone technique) or chronic suppressive antibiotic therapy; the remaining were, over time, lost to follow-up. Of the patients who concluded the two-stage revision, the ones with high SIRI values (mean 3.08 SD 1.7 and p-value 0.04) and MLR values (mean 0.4 SD 0.2 and p-value 0.02) at the explantation time were associated with a higher probability of infection resolution. Moreover, higher variation in the SIRI and PCR, also defined, respectively, as delta-SIRI (mean -2.3 SD 1.8 and p-value 0.03) and delta-PCR (mean -46 SD 35.7 and p-value 0.03), were associated with favorable outcomes. The results of our study suggest that, in patients with PJI undergoing EP, the SIRI and MLR values and delta-SIRI and delta-PCR values could be predictive of a favorable outcome. The evaluation of these laboratory indices, especially their determination at 4 weeks after removal, could therefore help to determine which patients could be successfully replanted and to identify the best time to replant. More studies analyzing a wider cohort of patients with chronic PJI are needed to validate the promising results of this study.

Background Gram-negative bacteria (GNB) account for 5-23% of all periprosthetic joint infections (PJI), following total knee or hip arthroplasties (TKA, THA). Literature on the management of Gram-negative PJI is limited. This study aimed to describe our experience with the presentation, management, and outcomes of Gram-negative PJI.Table 1:Baseline characteristics (N = 126 cases)Data are N (%) unless otherwise specified. Abbreviations: BMT; Bone-marrow transplant, CCI; Charlson comorbidity index, CPPD; Calcium pyrophosphate crystal deposition, CRP; C-reactive protein, DMARDs; Disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs, ESR; Erythrocyte sedimentation rate, GERD; Gastroesophageal reflux disease, IQR; Inter-quartile range, PJI; prosthetic joint infection, SD; Standard deviation, TNF; Tumor necrotic factor, WBC; white blood cell Methods A retrospective review of our infected institutional total joint registry from 2012-2023 identified 125 patients with 126 GNB PJI (60 THA and 66 TKA) according to MSIS criteria for PJI. Seventy-two cases (57%) of GNB PJI in this series were classified as acute based on the duration of symptoms of less than 4 weeks. Treatment failure was defined as reoperation for any reason, persistent infection, or reinfection post-surgery. Baseline demographics, presenting symptoms, microbiological data, and treatment outcomes were reviewed.Table 2:Therapies (N = 126 joints)Data are N (%) unless otherwise specified. Abbreviations: DAIR; Debridement, antibiotics, and implant retention, IQR; Inter-quartile range Results For baseline demographics, see Table 1. Notably, 10% of patients included in the study were immunosuppressed. Fifty-five cases (43.6%) had a history of revision prior to the diagnosis of PJI, including 44 cases with history of prior PJI. Pseudomonas aeruginosa was the most commonly isolated pathogen (31.7%). Wound drainage was associated with polymicrobial growth (40.8%). Debridement, antibiotics, and implant retention (DAIR) was utilized in 42 cases with 9.8% failure rate. History of revision arthroplasty, chronic PJI and the presence of sinus tract were associated with higher odds of reoperation within 1 year. Eighty-four cases underwent resection arthroplasty (RA), 73 had antimicrobial spacer, of those, 60 patients completed two-stage revision (TSR). At the time of reimplantation, 45/60 (75%) of cases had negative cultures (Table 2). The overall failure rate in resection group failure rate was 45.2%. Wound drainage was associated with higher odds of reoperation in this group (Table 3). The Failure rate in this cohort was 33%. Fluoroquinolones had a 90% susceptibility rate but were used infrequently for chronic suppression (25%).Table 3:Predictor factors with reoperation for any reason within 1 yearData are N (%) unless otherwise specified.Abbreviations: DAIR; Debridement, antibiotics, and implant retention, PJI; Prosthetic joint infection Conclusion Pseudomonas aeruginosa was the predominant pathogen in GNB PJI, with a high failure rate observed in the resection group. History of revision arthroplasty, chronic PJI, sinus tracts and wound drainage were associated with increased risk of reoperation within 1 year.Figure 1:Distribution of failure events across the study Disclosures Nicholas Bedard, MD, Stryker: Advisor/Consultant

AimsPeriprosthetic 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).MethodsData 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.ResultsThere 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.ConclusionOur 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 for periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) in patients who have undergone segmental replacement of the distal femur or proximal tibia after tumor resection can be associated with considerable morbidity, pain, and risk of complications because the procedure often results in removal of long, well-fixed stems from the diaphysis. A less-aggressive surgical approach, such as debridement, antibiotics, and implant retention (DAIR), may be attractive to patients and surgeons because of less morbidity, but the likelihood of eradicating infection in comparison to the traditional two-stage revision is not well established for oncology patients. Furthermore, the relative risk of subsequent amputation for DAIR versus two-stage revision has not been defined for this population. (1) How does DAIR compare with two-stage revision in terms of infection control for patients with distal femoral or proximal tibial segmental modular endoprostheses? (2) Is DAIR as an initial procedure associated with an increased risk of amputation compared with two-stage revision for infection? From the longitudinally maintained orthopaedic oncology surgical database at our institution, we identified 69 patients who had been treated for a clinical diagnosis of PJI at the knee between 1993 and 2015. We excluded 32% (22) of patients who did not meet at least one of the major criteria of the Musculoskeletal Infection Society (MSIS) for PJI, 3% (2) of patients who underwent immediate amputation, 3% (2) of patients who had a follow-up time of < 24 months, and 7% (5) of patients who did not have a primary tumor of the distal femur or proximal tibia. The study consisted of 38 patients, of whom eight underwent two-stage revision, 26 underwent DAIR, and four underwent extended DAIR (removal of all segmental components but with retention of stems and components fixed in bone) for their initial surgical procedure. To be considered free of infection, patients had to meet MSIS standards, including no positive cultures, drainage, or surgical debridement for a minimum of 2 years from the last operation. Factors associated with time-dependent risk of infection relapse, clearance, amputation, and patient survival were analyzed using Kaplan-Meier survivorship curves and the log-rank test to compare factors. Association of demographic and treatment factors was assessed using chi-square and Fisher exact tests. Continuous infection-free survival at 5 years was 16% (95% CI 2% to 29%) for patients undergoing DAIR compared with 75% (95% CI 45% to 100%) for patients undergoing two-stage revision (p = 0.006). The median (range) number of total surgical procedures was 3 per patient (1 to 10) for DAIR and 2 (2 to 5) for two-stage revision. Twenty-nine percent (11 of 38) of patients eventually underwent amputation. Survival without amputation was 69% (95% CI 51% to 86%) for DAIR compared with 88% (95% CI 65% to 100%) for two-stage revision at 5 years (p = 0.34). The cumulative proportion of patients achieving infection-free status (> 2 years continuously after last treatment) and limb preservation was 58% (95% CI 36% to 80%) for patients initially treated with DAIR versus 87% (95% CI 65% to 100%) for patients first treated with two-stage revision (p = 0.001). Infection control was better with two-stage revision than DAIR. The chance of eventual clearance of infection with limb preservation was better when two-stage revision was chosen as the initial treatment. However, the loss to follow-up in the two-stage revision group would likely make the true proportion of infection control lower than our estimate. Our experience would suggest that the process of infection eradication is a complex and difficult one. Most patients undergo multiple operations. Nearly one-third of patients eventually underwent amputation, and this was a serious risk for both groups. While we cannot strongly recommend one approach over the other based on our data, we would still consider the use of DAIR in patients who present with acute short duration of symptoms (< 3 weeks), no radiographic signs of erosion around fixed implants, and organisms other than Staphylococcus aureus. We would advocate the extended DAIR procedure with removal of all segmental or modular components, and we would caution patients that there is a high likelihood of needing further surgery. A prospective trial with strict adherence to indications may be needed to evaluate the relative merits of an extended DAIR procedure versus a two-stage revision. Level III, therapeutic study.

Debridement, antibiotics, and implant retention (DAIR) is used to manage acute periprosthetic joint infections (PJIs) after total joint arthroplasty (TJA). Given the uncertain success of single or multiple DAIR attempts and possible long-term deleterious effects this treatment can create when trying to treat persistent infection, it is important to understand the frequency with which surgeons in the United States are attempting multiple debridements for PJI and whether those procedures are achieving the desired goal. In the context of the American Joint Replacement Registry (AJRR), we asked: (1) What proportion of patients who undergo DAIR have only one DAIR, and what percentage of those patients have more than one? (2) Of the patients who undergo one or more DAIR procedures, what is the proportion who progress to additional surgical procedures? (3) What is the cumulative incidence of medical or surgical endpoints related to infection on the affected leg (other than additional DAIR procedures)? DAIR procedures to treat PJI, defined by ICD-9/10 and CPT (Current Procedural Technology) codes, reported to the AJRR from 2012 to 2020 were merged with Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) data from 2012 to 2020 to determine the incidence of patients aged 65 and older who underwent additional PJI-related procedures on the same joint. Linking to CMS ensures no loss to follow-up or patient migration to a non-AJRR site. As of 2021, the AJRR captures roughly 35% of all arthroplasty procedures performed in the United States. Of the total 2.2 million procedures in the AJRR, only 0.2% of the procedures were eligible based on our inclusion criteria. Additionally, 61% of the total population is Medicare eligible, and thus, these patients are linked to CMS. Of the 5029 DAIR attempts after a TKA, 46% (2318) were performed in female patients. Similarly, there were a total of 798 DAIR attempts after a THA, and 50% (398) were performed in female patients. For the purposes of decreasing confounding factors, bilateral THAs and TKAs were excluded from the study population. When querying for eligible procedures from 2012 to 2020, the patient population was limited to those 65 years and older, and a subsequent reoperation for infection had to be reported after a primary TJA. This limited the patient population as most infections reported to AJRR resulted in a revision, and we were searching for DAIRs. Although 5827 TJAs were identified as a primary TJA with a subsequent infectious event, more than 65% (3788) of that population did not have a reported event. The following conditions were queried as secondary outcomes after the first DAIR: sepsis, cellulitis, postoperative infection, endocarditis, amputation, knee fusion, resection, drainage, arthrotomy, and debridement. To answer our first and second study questions, we used frequency testing from the available AJRR data. Because of competing risks and issues with incomplete data, we used the cumulative incidence function to evaluate the outcomes specific to study question 3. Of the patients who underwent DAIR, 93% (5406 of 5827) had one DAIR and 8% (421 of 5827) had more than one. Among the DAIR population, at least 35% of TKAs and 38% of THAs were identified as having experienced an additional PJI-related event (an additional surgical procedure on the same joint, sustained an infectious endpoint in the linked CMS-AJRR dataset, or they had died). The cumulative incidence of developing a further medical or surgical condition related to the joint that had the initial DAIR were as follows: 48% (95% CI 42% to 54%) at 8 years after a DAIR following a TKA and 42% (95% CI 37% to 46%) at 4 years after a DAIR following a THA. The timepoints for TKA and THA are different because there are more longitudinal procedure data available for TKAs regarding DAIR procedures than for THAs. In this study, we used data from the AJRR to assess the incidences of single and multiple DAIR attempts and additional surgical- and infection-related sequalae. Continued investigation is required to determine the fate of infected joints that undergo DAIR with regard to ultimate patient outcome. Future cross-sectional studies using large datasets are necessary to assess functional outcomes and determine the risk of persistent infection after DAIR more precisely. Level III, therapeutic study.

Introduction: In periprosthetic joint infection (PJI), there is a paucity of prospective data comparing debridement, antibiotics and implant retention (DAIR) with two-stage revision while also accounting for time since the initial arthroplasty. Additionally, comparisons often lack patient-centred measures. A desirability of outcome ranking for PJI (DOOR-PJI) unifies joint function, infection cure and mortality into one outcome. We aimed to describe the DOOR-PJI distribution in a large patient cohort and use it to compare DAIR and two-stage revision. Methods: Adults with a newly diagnosed hip or knee PJI from the prospective Prosthetic joint Infection in Australia and New Zealand Observational (PIANO) study were analysed. Patients from 27 hospitals were included. PJI was classified as "early" or "late". The primary outcome was the novel DOOR-PJI at the 2-year follow-up. Results were expressed using win ratio (WR) values. A WR 1.0 indicates that two-stage revision was superior to DAIR. Results: A DOOR was available for 533 patients. The most common treatments were DAIR (297 patients, 56 %) and two-stage revision (139 patients, 26 %). In early PJI, DAIR was superior to two-stage revision (WR 0.51, 95 % confidence interval (CI) [0.30-0.86], 0.012). In late PJI, two-stage revision was superior to DAIR (WR 1.61, 95 % CI [1.11-2.33], 0.012). These findings persisted following stratification by comorbidities, affected joint, symptom duration and a sensitivity analysis applying the initial (rather than the main) surgical strategy at day 90. Conclusions: In the first application of a DOOR in orthopaedics, DAIR was superior to two-stage revision for early PJI. Conversely, two-stage revision was superior compared with DAIR for late PJI. These findings were independent of comorbidities and symptom duration.

Periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) can lead to a severe systemic inflammatory response and may result in systemic sepsis. However, little is known about how often systemic sepsis may occur in patients with PJI, and whether sepsis is associated with a greater likelihood of persistent or recurrent PJI. (1) Among patients who present with acute or acute hematogenous PJI and who were treated with debridement, antibiotics, and implant retention (DAIR), what proportion have sepsis and what factors are associated with a presentation with sepsis? (2) For patients presenting with sepsis, what factors are associated with persistent or recurrent PJI? In all, 320 patients who underwent DAIR for the treatment of acute postoperative or acute hematogenous PJI between January 2000 and December 2019 were included in this study. Exclusion criteria were patients with other known sources of infection, such as pneumonia or urinary tract infections, which could contribute to systemic sepsis (6% [18 of 320]), patients with chronic PJI, and those with less than 6 months of follow-up (21% [66 of 320]). Our final cohort consisted of 236 patients presenting with an acute postoperative or acute hematogenous PJI who underwent an irrigation and debridement procedure. Sepsis was defined by the criteria for systemic inflammatory response syndrome (SIRS) or bacteria-positive blood culture results. Inclusion of patients with positive blood culture by organisms that caused their joint infection was important as all patients presented with fulminant acute infection of a prosthetic joint. Data, including vital signs, surgical variables, and treatment outcomes, were collected retrospectively through a chart review of an electronic medical record system. The statistical analysis comparing patients with sepsis versus patients without sepsis consisted of logistic regression to identify factors associated with sepsis. After confirming its ability to identify patients with a higher association with the development of sepsis through area under the curve models, a nomogram was generated to standardize our results from the regression, which was supported by the area under the curve model, to help readers better identify patients who are more likely to develop sepsis. A total of 44% (103 of 236) of patients had infections that met the criteria for sepsis. After controlling for confounding variables, including congestive heart failure, anemia, serum C-reactive protein (CRP), and the male sex, it was revealed that serum CRP (odds ratio 1.07 [95% confidence interval 1.04 to 1.11]; p < 0.001) and male sex (OR 1.96 [95% CI 1.03 to 3.81]; p = 0.04) were associated with the development of systemic sepsis. For patients presenting with sepsis, persistent or recurrent PJI were associated with an increased CRP level (OR 1.06 [95% CI 1.02 to 1.11]; p = 0.01) and number of prior surgical procedures on the joint (OR 2.30 [95% CI 1.21 to 4.89]; p = 0.02). Overall, our findings support that patients with systematic sepsis may benefit from two-stage revision rather than DAIR to decrease the bioburden more effectively, especially in those with methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus and polymicrobial infections. High serum CRP levels and a history of prior surgical procedures on the involved joint should trigger prompt, aggressive surgical treatment if the patient's overall clinical status can tolerate such an intervention. Level III, therapeutic study.

Acceptable Success Rate in Patients With Periprosthetic Knee Joint Infection Treated With Debridement, Antibiotics, and Implant Retention

Periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) is a devastating complication after total joint arthroplasty, occurring in approximately 1%-2% of all cases. With growing populations and increasing age, PJI will have a growing effect on health care costs. Many risk factors have been identified that increase the risk of developing PJI, including obesity, immune system deficiencies, malignancy, previous surgery of the same joint and longer operating time. Acute PJI occurs either postoperatively (4 wk to 3 mo after initial arthroplasty, depending on the classification system), or via hematogenous spreading after a period in which the prosthesis had functioned properly. Diagnosis and the choice of treatment are the cornerstones to success. Although different definitions for PJI have been used in the past, most are more or less similar and include the presence of a sinus tract, blood infection values, synovial white blood cell count, signs of infection on histopathological analysis and one or more positive culture results. Debridement, antibiotics and implant retention (DAIR) is the primary treatment for acute PJI, and should be performed as soon as possible after the development of symptoms. Success rates differ, but most studies report success rates of around 60%-80%. Whether single or multiple debridement procedures are more successful remains unclear. The use of local antibiotics in addition to the administration of systemic antibiotic agents is also subject to debate, and its pro's and con's should be carefully considered. Systemic treatment, based on culture results, is of importance for all PJI treatments. Additionally, rifampin should be given in Staphylococcal PJIs, unless all foreign material is removed. The most important factors contributing to treatment failure are longer duration of symptoms, a longer time after initial arthroplasty, the need for more debridement procedures, the retention of exchangeable components, and PJI caused by Staphylococcus (aureus or coagulase negative). If DAIR treatment is unsuccessful, the following treatment option should be based on the patient health status and his or her expectations. For the best functional outcome, one- or two-stage revision should be performed after DAIR failure. In conclusion, DAIR is the obvious choice for treatment of acute PJI, with good success rates in selected patients.

Periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) is a complication of peri-implant biofilm-based treatments and confers resistance to antimicrobial therapy. Integrating continuous local antibiotic perfusion (CLAP) with conventional surgery for PJI facilitates the local delivery of low-flow, high-concentration antimicrobials. This study aimed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of CLAP for treating PJI. This study included patients diagnosed with hip PJI who underwent debridement, antibiotics, and implant retention (DAIR) augmented by CLAP. Gentamicin was administered at a high concentration (1.2mg/mL) and low flow rate (2.0 mL/h for 24h). We evaluated implant survival and complication rates associated with adding CLAP to conventional DAIR surgery. Of the 22 patients, including 11 with chronic infection, DAIR surgery supplemented with CLAP resulted in implant survival in 20 patients (90.9%). In contrast, among 10 patients treated with DAIR without CLAP (non-CLAP group), implant survival was 70%.The mean follow-up period was 42.6 ± 31.5 (range, 12-161) months in the CLAP group and56.8 ± 28.8 (range, 28-114) months in the non-CLAP group. During CLAP treatment, renal function worsened in two patients; however, it improved rapidly after CLAP completion and device removal. No major complications were observed. CLAP demonstrated promising results in treating acute and chronic PJI. However, monitoring and regulating blood antimicrobial levels is crucial to avoiding renal dysfunction. CLAP is a treatment option for PJI that can destroy bacterial biofilms.

Debridement, antibiotics and implant retention (DAIR) is a viable treatment option in early postoperative and acute haematogenous periprosthetic joint infections (PJIs) with a stable implant. Despite lower success rates compared to one- and two-stage revisions, DAIR maintains satisfactory outcomes in selected patient groups and, if successful, has similar functional outcomes to primary arthroplasty. DAIR remains an attractive treatment option, providing satisfactory outcomes with decreased healthcare costs, reduced surgical burden on the patient and shorter hospital stays. With success rates of 37-90%, various factors need to be considered when deciding on DAIR as the appropriate treatment option for PJI. The risk of DAIR failure needs to be weighed against the potential benefits of DAIR success. Factors that increase success rates include an open DAIR procedure performed for a low-virulence, antibiotic-sensitive organism, within a short duration between symptom onset and/or index surgery and DAIR. The procedure involves intraoperative exchange of mobile components and copious wound irrigation, followed by an appropriate antibiotic regimen for a minimum of six weeks that can be administered either intravenously or orally in a well-optimised host, without significant soft tissue defects or contraindications to surgery. Factors increasing the risk for DAIR failure include chronic/late PJIs with resistant organisms, especially methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) in poor hosts with significant comorbidities, such as chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), liver cirrhosis, rheumatoid arthritis, advanced age &gt; 80 years, patients with fracture indications for arthroplasty and those who cannot tolerate rifampicin- and fluoroquinolone-based antibiotic regimens. Unfortunately, there is no definitive factor to serve as an indication of whether DAIR will be successful, but with recent data showing that a failed DAIR procedure does not lower success in future staged revisions, then even in the face of a 50% success rate, DAIR can maintain its role as an initial treatment option in the management of PJIs