2-stage Exchange Research Articles

254. Excellent Outcomes with Oral Versus Intravenous Antibiotics for Bone and Joint Infections: A Single-Center Experience

Abstract Background The OVIVA trial, published in 2019, demonstrated equivalent efficacy of oral (PO) versus intravenous (IV) antibiotics for bone and joint infections. We report our group’s one-year outcomes in a cohort of such patients who received PO or IV antibiotics. Methods Our orthopedic surgery and orthopedic infectious diseases (ID) groups agreed to employ early switch to PO in patients with a first episode of non-vertebral osteomyelitis (OM), native or prosthetic joint infection (NJA or PJI), or hardware infections when a pathogen susceptible to highly bioavailable antibiotics had been identified and the patient was perceived to be at low risk for medication non-adherence. We reviewed patients 19+ years old seen in the Ortho ID clinic for one of these conditions from July 1st through December 31st, 2019. Data recorded included patient demographics and comorbidities, infection type and site, microbiology, and surgical and antibiotic management. Primary outcome was treatment failure at 1 year, defined as death, unplanned surgery at same site, or chronic antibiotic suppression. Results Forty patients (all IV antibiotics, n=17; initial or switch to PO, n=23) were included. Median IV duration was 15 days. PJI was the most common diagnosis (n=22), followed by other hardware infection and OM (n=7 each). Of the PJIs, 13/22 were managed with 2-stage exchange and 11/13 of these received all-IV therapy. Of the hardware infections, 4/7 underwent debridement and retention or single-stage exchange and all of these received initial or switch to PO therapy. Staphylococci (n=14 S. aureus and n=7 coagulase-negative) and streptococci (n=12) were the most common pathogens. Amoxicillin (n=8), trimethoprim-sulfa (n=6), and levofloxacin (n=3) were the most-used PO antibiotics. The PO group received longer treatment (mean 67 vs 48 days). No treatment failures occurred in the patients who started or switch to PO antibiotics, whereas 35% of patients who received all-IV therapy experienced failure. Conclusion Adopting known risk factors for poor outcome in bone and joint infection such as prior treatment failure and no identified pathogen as exclusion criteria for early switch to PO antibiotic therapy led to excellent one-year treatment outcomes across a range of musculoskeletal infections. Disclosures Angela Hewlett, MD, MS, Mapp Biopharmaceutical (Scientific Research Study Investigator) Angela Hewlett, MD, MS, Mapp Biopharmaceutical, Inc (Individual(s) Involved: Self): Scientific Research Study Investigator Nicolas W. Cortes-Penfield, MD, Nothing to disclose

235. Outcomes Associated with Extended Oral Antibiotic Prophylaxis After 2-Stage Exchange Surgery to Prevent Recurrent Prosthetic Joint Infection

Background2-stage exchange (2SE) surgery is often used to treat chronic prosthetic joint infections (PJI). IDSA guidelines do not recommend oral antibiotic suppression after 2SE. However, a recent randomized trial suggested that oral antibiotics for 3 months after arthroplasty reimplantation may prevent recurrent PJI. Objective: To compare rates of treatment failure (i.e., recurrent PJI) and adverse reactions (ARs) among patients who received < 1 month of antibiotics directly after reimplantation to those who received 1-3 months of antibiotics following reimplantation (extended antibiotics). MethodsThis retrospective cohort study included patients with hip, knee, or shoulder PJI who underwent 2SE at 83 VA hospitals between the years 2003-2017. PJI was defined using administrative codes and microbiology data. Patients were followed for 5 years to assess treatment failure (TF) and ARs. TF was defined as recurrent PJI, debridement, or reoperation. ARs included Clostridioides difficile infections (CDI), or antibiotic associated diarrhea (AAD) during or 72 hours after antibiotics. Chi-square tests were used to compare outcomes. Cumulative incidence function curves were created to compare TF rates between those who did and did not receive extended antibiotic treatment, incorporating the competing risks of TF and death.ResultsOf the 433 patients, most (97%) received < 1 month of oral antibiotics and 3% received extended antibiotics. The 15 patients who received extended antibiotics had similar rates of TF and ARs compared with patients who received < 1 month of oral antibiotics (Table). However, there was a trend toward higher rates of CDI (6.7% vs. 3.8%) and AAD (13.3% vs. 9.6%) among those who received extended antibiotics. There was no difference in TF comparing extended antibiotics with < 1 month of antibiotics, accounting for death (Figure). Table: Treatment Failure and Adverse Reactions Among Those Who Did and Did Not Receive Extended Antibiotics ConclusionFew patients received extended oral antibiotics in the study period. There were no statistically significant differences in TF or ARs between the 2 groups. Yet, there was a trend toward higher rates of ARs among the extended antibiotic group. Future prospective studies should assess both the potential benefits and ARs associated with extended antibiotics among patients undergoing 2SE surgery.Disclosures Marin L. Schweizer, PhD, 3M (Grant/Research Support)PDI (Grant/Research Support) Bruce Alexander, PharmD, Bruce Alexander Consulting (Independent Contractor) Daniel Suh, MS MPH, General Electric (Shareholder)Merck (Shareholder)Moderna (Shareholder)Smile Direct Club (Shareholder) Aaron J. Tande, MD, UpToDate.com (Other Financial or Material Support, Honoraria for medical writing) Andrew Pugely, MD, MBA, Globus Medical (Research Grant or Support)Medtronic (Consultant)United Healthcare (Consultant)

Economic Study of 2-Stage Exchange in Patients With Knee or Hip Prosthetic Joint Infection Managed in a Referral Center in France: Time to Use Innovative(s) Intervention(s) at the Time of Reimplantation to Reduce the Risk of Superinfection.

Objective: Chronic prosthetic joint infections (PJI) are serious complications in arthroplasty leading to prosthesis exchange and potential significant costs for health systems, especially if a subsequent new infection occurs. This study assessed the cost of chronic PJI managed with 2-stage exchange at the Lyon University Hospital, CRIOAc Lyon reference center, France. A threshold analysis was then undertaken to determine the reimbursement tariff of a hypothetical preventive device usable at the time of reimplantation, which possibly enables health insurance to save money according to the risk reduction of subsequent new infection. This analysis was also performed for a potential innovative device already available on the market, a dual antibiotic loaded bone cement used to fix cemented prosthesis that releases high concentrations of gentamicin and vancomycin locally (G+V cement).Method: Patients >18 years, admitted for a hip or knee chronic PJI managed with 2-stage exchange, between January 1, 2013, and December 31, 2015, were retrospectively identified. Following, resource consumption in relation to inpatient hospital stay, hospitalization at home, rehabilitation care, outpatient antibiotic treatments, imaging, laboratory analysis, and consultations were identified and collected from patient records and taken into account in the evaluation. Costs were assessed from the French health insurance perspective over the 2 years following prosthesis reimplantation.Results: The study included 116 patients (median age 67 y; 47% hip prosthesis). Mean cost of chronic PJI was estimated over the 2 years following prosthesis reimplantation at €21,324 for all patients, and at €51,697 and €15,745 for patients with (n = 18) and without (n = 98) a subsequent new infection after reimplantation, respectively. According to the threshold analysis the reimbursement tariff (i) should not exceed €2,820 for a device which can reduce the risk of a new infection by 50% and (ii) was between €2,988 and €3,984 if the G + V cement can reduce the risk of a new infection by 80% (this reduction risk is speculative and has to be confirmed by clinical trials).Conclusion: This study revealed that chronic PJI requiring a 2-stage revision is costly, with significant costs in relation to the reimplantation procedure (about 15 k€). However, following reimplantation the rate of subsequent new infection remained high, and the cost of reimplantation following a new infection is considerable, reaching 50k€ per patient. These first cost estimates of managing chronic PJI with 2-stage exchange in France underline the economic interest of preventing new infections.

Management of periprosthetic infection after reverse shoulder arthroplasty.

Periprosthetic shoulder infection (PSI) remains a devastating complication after reverse shoulder arthroplasty (RSA). Currently, scientific data related to the management of PSI are limited, and the optimal strategy and related clinical outcomes remain unclear. Guidelines from the Infectious Diseases Society of America for the management of periprosthetic joint infection are mainly based on data from patients after hip and knee arthroplasty. The aim of this study was to evaluate whether these guidelines are also valid for patients with PSI after RSA. In addition, the functional outcome according to the surgical intervention was assessed. An RSA database was retrospectively reviewed to identify infections after primary and revision RSAs, diagnosed between 2004 and 2018. Data collected included age, sex, indication for RSA, causative pathogen, surgical and antimicrobial treatment, functional outcome, and recurrence. Thirty-six patients with a PSI were identified. Surgical treatment was subdivided into débridement and implant retention (DAIR) (n = 6, 17%); 1-stage revision (n = 1, 3%); 2-stage revision (n = 16, 44%); multiple-stage revision (>2 stages) (n = 7, 19%); definitive spacer implantation (n = 2, 6%); and resection arthroplasty (n = 4, 11%). The most common causative pathogens were Staphylococcus epidermidis (n = 11, 31%) and Cutibacterium acnes (n = 9, 25%). Recurrence was diagnosed in 4 patients (11%), all of whom were initially treated with a DAIR approach. The median follow-up period was 36 months (range, 24-132 months). PSI is typically caused by low-virulence pathogens, which often are diagnosed with a delay, resulting in chronic infection at the time of surgery. Our results indicate that treatment of patients with chronic PSI with DAIR has a high recurrence rate. In addition, implant exchange (ie, 1- and 2-stage exchange) does not compromise the functional result as compared with implant retention. Thus, patients with chronic PSI should be treated with implant exchange. Future research should further clarify which surgical strategy (ie, 1-stage vs. 2-stage exchange) has a better outcome overall.

Acute Kidney Injury When Treating Periprosthetic Joint Infections After Total Knee Arthroplasties with Antibiotic-Loaded Spacers: Incidence, Risks, and Outcomes.

Two-stage exchange arthroplasty with a high-dose antibiotic-loaded bone cement (ALBC) spacer and intravenous or oral antibiotics is the most common method of managing a periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) after a total knee arthroplasty (TKA). However, little is known about the contemporary incidence, the risk factors, and the outcomes of acute kidney injuries (AKIs) in this cohort. We identified 424 patients who had been treated with 455 ALBC spacers after resection of a PJI following a primary TKA from 2000 to 2017. The mean age at resection was 67 years, the mean body mass index (BMI) was 33 kg/m2, 47% of the patients were women, and 15% had preexisting chronic kidney disease (CKD). The spacers (87% nonarticulating) contained a mean of 8 g of vancomycin and 9 g of an aminoglycoside per construct (in situ for a mean of 11 weeks). Eighty-six spacers also had amphotericin B (mean, 412 mg). All of the patients were concomitantly treated with systemic antibiotics for a mean of 6 weeks. An AKI was defined as a creatinine level of ≥1.5 times the baseline or an increase of ≥0.3 mg/dL within any 48-hour period. The mean follow-up was 6 years (range, 2 to 17 years). Fifty-four AKIs occurred in 52 (14%) of the 359 patients without preexisting CKD versus 32 AKIs in 29 (45%) of the 65 patients with CKD (odds ratio [OR], 5; p = 0.0001); none required acute dialysis. Overall, when the vancomycin concentration or aminoglycoside concentration was >3.6 g/batch of cement, the risk of AKI increased (OR, 1.9 and 1.8, respectively; p = 0.02 for both). Hypertension (β = 0.17; p = 0.002), perioperative hypovolemia (β = 0.28; p = 0.0001), and acute atrial fibrillation (β = 0.13; p = 0.009) were independent predictors for AKI in patients without preexisting CKD. At the last follow-up, 8 patients who had sustained an AKI had progressed to CKD, 4 of whom received dialysis. In our study, the largest series to date that we are aware of regarding this issue, AKI occurred in 14% of patients with normal renal function at baseline, and 2% developed CKD after undergoing a 2-stage exchange arthroplasty for a PJI after TKA. However, the risk of AKI was fivefold greater in those with preexisting CKD. The causes of acute renal blood flow impairment were independent predictors for AKI. Therapeutic Level IV. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

Is systematic 1-stage exchange a valid attitude in chronic infection of total elbow arthroplasty?

IntroductionSurgical treatment for chronic infection of total elbow arthroplasty (TEA) generally involves 2-stage exchange. In the lower limb, 1-stage strategies are increasingly implemented, but few cases have been reported for the elbow. We present results in a preliminary series, with the aim of: (1) assessing control of infection in systematic 1-stage exchange for chronic TEA infection, (2) detailing clinical and radiological results, and (3) analyzing intra- and post-operative complications. HypothesisSystematic 1-stage exchange for chronic TEA prosthetic joint infection provides satisfactory control of infection. Material and MethodsSeven non-selected patients were operated on by 1-stage exchange for chronic infection of TEA during the study period. Two died before the minimum 2 years’ follow-up, from causes unrelated to the infection. Thus 5 patients (4 women, 1 man; mean age at surgery, 61 years [range: 48–69 years]) were included for analysis. At a minimum 2 years’ follow-up, all underwent clinical examination and elbow X-ray. Infection was monomicrobial in 4 cases and polymicrobial in 1. Isolates comprised Staphylococcus aureus in 40% of cases (2/5), Staphylococcus epidermidis in 60% (3/5) and Staphylococcus Warneri in 20% (1/5). Three patients showed fistula. Three were under immunosuppression/immunomodulation treatment. ResultsAt a mean 40 months’ follow-up (range: 24–60 months), 4 patients (80%) were free of infection and 1 showed signs of persistent infection. Mean range of flexion-extension was 81° (range: 60–95°) and pronation-supination 128° (range: 80–160°). Mean Mayo Elbow Performance Score was 75 points (range: 65–90). There were 2 intraoperative fractures and 1 neurologic deficit with partial regression. ConclusionOne-stage exchange provided control of infection in 80% of cases, despite cutaneous fistulae or immunosuppression treatment. Clinical results and complications rate were similar to those reported for 2-stage exchange. Level of evidenceIV; retrospective study without control group.

Increasing Reoperations and Failures With Increasing BMI in Patients Undergoing 2-Stage Exchange for Infected Total Hip Arthroplasty

BackgroundWhile morbid obesity is associated with increased infection after total hip arthroplasty, little is known on the outcomes after 2-stage reimplantation for prosthetic joint infection (PJI) in this population. The purpose of this study is to evaluate the impact of morbid obesity (body mass index>40 kg/m2) on reinfection, postoperative complications, readmissions, and reoperations. MethodsWe conducted a retrospective review of 107 patients undergoing first time 2-stage reimplantation for PJI from 2013 to 2019. 18 patients (50% women) with body mass index>40 kg/m2 were identified. To minimize confounders, three propensity score matched cohorts were created, yielding 16 nonobese (<30 kg/m2), 16 obese (30-39.9 kg/m2), and 18 morbidly obese (>40 kg/m2) patients. Outcomes were compared using chi-square or Fisher’s exact tests. All patients had minimum 12-month follow-up, with mean follow-up of 36.3, 30.1, and 40.0 months in the nonobese, obese, and morbidly obese cohorts, respectively. ResultsCompared with nonobese patients, morbidly obese patients had a higher rate of reinfection (0% vs 33%, P = .020 and higher likelihood of length of stay>4 days (19% vs 61%, P = .012). In addition, compared with nonobese and obese patients, morbidly obese patients had higher rate of return to the operating room for any reason (13% vs 19% vs 50%, respectively, P = .020). No differences between cohorts were found regarding complications, death, or revision surgery. ConclusionMorbidly obese patients have significantly increased risk of reinfection and reoperation after 2-stage reimplantation for PJI when compared with obese and nonobese patients. These data can be used to counsel morbidly obese patients contemplating total hip arthroplasty and supports the notion of deferring arthroplasty in this population pending optimization.

High re-revision rate following one-stage exchange for streptococcal periprosthetic joint infection of the hip

This study was undertaken to analyse the outcome of 1-stage exchange in the management of streptococcal periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) of the hip at a single hospital. We identified 30 patients with a streptococcal PJI of the hip who had been treated by 1-stage exchange at our hospital between 2002 and 2017. Postoperative complications and the need for any subsequent re-revision for infection or other reasons were analysed. The Harris Hip Score (HHS) was evaluated at final follow-up. The mean follow-up was 8.2 years (SD 4.1). The overall re-revision rate for any reason was 53% (16/30) at a mean 5.3 years (SD 0.68 years). Re-revision for infection was 20% (6/30) at a mean 1.8 years (SD 0.74 years). All re-revisions for PJI (6/6; 100%) were for relapse of the streptococcal infection. At final follow-up, the mean HHS was 68 points (SD 20). The rate of re-revision after 1-stage exchange for streptococcal PJI is high. Eradication of a streptococcal PJI of the hip remains challenging. Further extensive and comparative studies between 1-and 2-stage exchange are encouraged.

Randomized Trial of Static and Articulating Spacers for Treatment of the Infected Total Hip Arthroplasty

BackgroundThe purpose of this randomized clinical trial is to compare perioperative and postoperative variables between static and articulating spacers for the treatment of chronic periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) complicating total hip arthroplasty (THA). MethodsFifty-two patients undergoing resection arthroplasty as part of a 2-stage exchange for PJI at 3 centers were randomized to either a static (n = 23) or articulating spacer (n = 29). The primary endpoint was operative time of the second-stage reimplantation and power analysis determined that 22 patients per cohort were necessary to detect a 20-minute difference. Seven patients were lost to follow-up, 4 were never reimplanted, and one died before discharge after reimplantation. Forty patients were followed for a mean 3.2 years (range 2.0-7.1). ResultsThere were no differences in operative time at second-stage reimplantation (143 minutes static vs 145 minutes articulating, P = .499). Length of hospital stay was longer in the static cohort after stage 1 (8.6 vs 5.4 days, P = .006) and stage 2 (6.3 vs 3.6 days, P < .001). Although it did not reach statistical significance with the numbers available for study, nearly twice as many patients in the static cohort were discharged to an extended care facility after stage 1 (65% vs 30%, P = .056). ConclusionThis randomized trial demonstrated that the outcomes of static and articulating spacers are similar in the treatment of THA PJI undergoing 2-stage exchange arthroplasty. The significantly longer length of hospital stay associated with the use of static spacers may have important economic implications for the health care system.

A Cost-effective 3D Printed Antibiotic Spacer for Management of Periprosthetic Joint Infection of the Knee: A Case Report

Introduction: The 3-dimensional (D) printed customized bone cement spacer molds provide a single solution to various difficulties faced during the first stage of 2-stage exchange revision knee arthroplasty in periprosthetic joint infection. Materials and Methods: A 60-year-old lady presented with periprosthetic joint infection of the knee. The spacer molds were designed using computer-aided-design (CAD) software and intraoperatively antibiotic spacer was formed after assessing the bone gaps at a very low price ($100). Results: The infection was eradicated for over 3 months. The spacer was designed perfectly to the bone gaps and bone defects leading to proper gap balancing and wound closure. Conclusions: The CAD-articulating spacer helps to reduce the complexity of the surgical procedure. 3D printing provides a cost-effective measure to tackle such complex surgeries. The CAD-articulating spacer gives a futuristic guiding tool using 3D printing to make the surgery easier and more effective.

Static Spacer Construction Using Carbon Fiber Rods in 2-stage Revision for Periprosthetic Knee Infection: A Novel Technique and Indications

Background: Traditionally, 2-stage exchange arthroplasty is preferred to eradicate chronic periprosthetic joint infections after total knee arthroplasty. However, for cases with significant bone destruction and/or soft tissue damage, the risk of knee instability increases with this technique, leading to a number of complications such as tibiofemoral dislocation, wound healing complications, extensor mechanism rupture, or failure of extensor mechanism repair. Intramedullary fixator rods reinforcing static spacers have been utilized to provide improved stability, but persistent infections were still prevalent. Antibiotic static spacers with intramedullary fixator rods coated with antibiotic cement can lower these reinfection rates. Surgical Technique: The surgical sequence requires removal of the infected prosthesis and placement of a carbon fiber rod and nonarticulating antibiotic spacer. This remains in situ for ~6 to 12 weeks while the patient receives systemic antibiotic treatment. Following confirmation of successful treatment, the antibiotic spacer and carbon fiber rod are removed, and revision arthroplasty is performed in a standard manner. Results: After a minimum of 1-year follow-up, no recurrent infections were diagnosed, 1 patient suffered a complication requiring expedited antibiotic spacer removal, and 1 patient expired in this cohort. Conclusions: This technique represents an effective method of providing stability of the knee and delivering adequate antibiosis in patients with knee periprosthetic joint infections in the setting of extensor mechanism disruption and severe bone loss.

Customized intraoperatively molded articulating cement spacers for two-stage revisions TKA with major bone defects.

The use of articulating spacers, molded or prefabricated, becomes difficult in case of severe bone losses. Our idea was to customize the Molded Articulating Cement Spacers with cement stem extensions and if necessary metaphyseal cement augmentations in order to use them also in case of major bone defects. Fifty-four knees in fifty-three patients undergoing 2-stage exchange arthroplasty were divided in 4 groups, treated with 4 different types of spacers (Static, articulating molded, customized molded and metal on Poly) and evaluated in terms of Range of Motion (ROM), Knee Society Score (KSS), patients' related outcome measures (PROMs), rate of complication and ease of the surgical exposure at the time of reimplantation. At final follow-up, no statistical differences in terms of ROM and KSS were found between the articulating groups. Static Spacers showed statistically significant lower results both in terms of ROM and KSS comparing to the other 3 groups (P < 0.05). Considering PROMs, statistically better outcomes for all articulating spacers were found both when spacer was in place and at final follow-up comparing to the static spacers group (P < 0.05). No statistically significant difference was found between the 3 articulating spacers groups. Radiographic analysis did not show signs of loosening, migration or major bone loss. Customized Intraoperatively Molded Articulating Cement Spacers are a safe solution for two-stage revisions TKA with major bone defects and may provide a better quality of life for patients when in place comparing to static ones.

The Double DAIR: A 2-Stage Debridement with Prosthesis-Retention Protocol for Acute Periprosthetic Joint Infections.

Debridement and implant retention (DAIR) has variable success as a treatment for acute periprosthetic joint infection (PJI), with generally poor outcomes reported in the literature1. Because of the unacceptably high failure rate of DAIR, we implemented a 2-stage debridement protocol that includes the use of high-dose antibiotic beads between stages for the treatment of acute PJI. In 2 previous studies, with an average follow-up of 3.5 years in each study, we reported overall infection-control rates of 87% and 90%2,3. Following exposure of the joint, cultures are obtained, and all modular components are removed, scrubbed, and soaked in an antiseptic solution. A thorough irrigation and debridement with complete synovectomy is performed, followed by temporary reinsertion of the original modular parts. High-dose antibiotic cement beads are inserted into the joint, and the joint is closed. Approximately 5 to 6 days later, a second debridement is performed, the beads are removed, and the new modular, sterile components are implanted. The patient is placed on a course of intravenous and, later, oral antibiotics, in addition to a standard postoperative rehabilitation protocol. Long-term suppressive antibiotic therapy.One-stage DAIR.One-stage exchange arthroplasty.Two-stage exchange arthroplasty.Resection arthroplasty.Amputation. The treatment of acute PJI has historically consisted of a single irrigation and debridement, with exchange of modular parts and retention of the components, followed by intravenous antibiotic therapy. Despite having lower rates of patient morbidity compared with a 2-stage exchange arthroplasty, this more traditional procedure also has a higher rate of failure, with reported rates as high as 60% to 84%4-12. The utility of component retention continues to be a topic of debate13. Alternatives to component retention include both 1- and 2-stage exchange procedures. Although these modalities offer potentially higher rates of infection control, they are associated with substantial patient morbidity, particularly in patients with well-fixed implants14-16. Furthermore, exchange procedures may result in substantial iatrogenic bone loss, which can be problematic in revision total joint arthroplasty procedures, in which bone stock may already be limited. The double-DAIR protocol offers infection-control rates that are comparable with those of component-exchange procedures, but with the lower patient morbidity associated with component-retention procedures. Furthermore, the double-DAIR procedure provides the added benefit of retaining important bone stock. The success rate for the double-DAIR procedure has been reproducible, with infection-control rates of 87% and 90% reported in 2 studies from a single cohort at our institution2,3. These rates represent a substantial improvement compared with a single irrigation and debridement1, and are on par with those reported for 2-stage exchange arthroplasty procedures17-21. The infection-control rates of the double-DAIR procedure did not significantly vary depending on whether infection occurred following a total knee or total hip arthroplasty. However, not surprisingly, patients who underwent debridement following a revision procedure had a lower rate of success (77.1% successful infection control) compared with patients debrided following a primary procedure (93.8% successful infection control). We could not demonstrate an association with organism and success or failure of treatment.Although not significant, there was a trend toward an association between the time from symptom onset to initial treatment and infection control (p = 0.07)2. Patients with successful infection control underwent the initial debridement an average of 6.2 days after symptom onset, compared with 10.7 days in patients in whom treatment had failed. Several other studies have demonstrated that successful infection control is associated with earlier initial irrigation and debridement22-27. We strongly support that, in the setting of confirmed acute PJI, prompt initiation of treatment optimizes the chances for successful infection control. Thorough debridement is key to successful infection control of infection.Antibiotic-loaded bone cement has repeatedly been demonstrated to be safe, and we recommend its use28-31.Extended oral antibiotics following debridement with component retention can increase infection-free survivorship32.

The Fate of Periprosthetic Joint Infection Following Megaprosthesis Reconstruction.

Background:A megaprosthesis may be used for reconstruction in patients with massive bone loss or a periprosthetic fracture. Periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) may occur after a megaprosthesis reconstruction and may pose a major challenge. The outcomes of managing PJI in patients with a megaprosthesis is relatively unclear. The aim of this study was to investigate the clinical course and outcomes of PJI in patients with a megaprosthesis in place.Methods:From a total of 219 patients who underwent megaprosthesis replacement for non-oncologic conditions, 38 (17.4%) developed subsequent PJI. A retrospective review of the medical record was performed to ascertain the course of the PJI and treatment outcomes. Kaplan-Meier analysis was performed to evaluate the survival function, and the log-rank test was used to assess differences in outcome measures.Results:The surgical management of 33 patients with PJI included debridement, antibiotics, and implant retention (DAIR) (82%), consisting of DAIR with modular component exchange (19 patients) and DAIR without component exchange (8 patients); 2-stage exchange arthroplasty (9%); resection arthroplasty (6%); and a single-stage revision arthroplasty (3%). The Kaplan-Meier survivorship analysis demonstrated that the overall survival rate was 65.1% at 2 years. The mortality rate was 15%, with many patients undergoing salvage procedures including amputation (18%), arthrodesis (6%), and resection arthroplasty (6%).Conclusions:The rate of PJI after megaprosthesis reconstruction, 17% in this study, appears to be very high. The management of PJI in these patients is challenging, with 1 of 3 patients undergoing failed treatment. Despite the limited options available, DAIR seems to be an appropriate treatment strategy for some of these patients. Further data on a larger cohort are needed to assess the success of various surgical procedures and predictors of failure in this challenging patient population.Level of Evidence:Therapeutic Level IV. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

The Impact of Surgical Strategy and Rifampin on Treatment Outcome in Cutibacterium Periprosthetic Joint Infections.

Cutibacterium species are common pathogens in periprosthetic joint infections (PJI). These infections are often treated with β-lactams or clindamycin as monotherapy, or in combination with rifampin. Clinical evidence supporting the value of adding rifampin for treatment of Cutibacterium PJI is lacking. In this multicenter retrospective study, we evaluated patients with Cutibacterium PJI and a minimal follow-up of 12 months. The primary endpoint was clinical success, defined by the absence of infection relapse or new infection. We used Fisher's exact tests and Cox proportional hazards models to analyze the effect of rifampin and other factors on clinical success after PJI. We included 187 patients (72.2% male, median age 67 years) with a median follow-up of 36 months. The surgical intervention was a 2-stage exchange in 95 (50.8%), 1-stage exchange in 51 (27.3%), debridement and implant retention (DAIR) in 34 (18.2%), and explantation without reimplantation in 7 (3.7%) patients. Rifampin was included in the antibiotic regimen in 81 (43.3%) cases. Infection relapse occurred in 28 (15.0%), and new infection in 13 (7.0%) cases. In the time-to-event analysis, DAIR (adjusted hazard ratio [HR] = 2.15, P = .03) and antibiotic treatment over 6 weeks (adjusted HR = 0.29, P = .0002) significantly influenced treatment failure. We observed a tentative evidence for a beneficial effect of adding rifampin to the antibiotic treatment-though not statistically significant for treatment failure (adjusted HR = 0.5, P = .07) and not for relapses (adjusted HR = 0.5, P = .10). We conclude that a rifampin combination is not markedly superior in Cutibacterium PJI, but a dedicated prospective multicenter study is needed.

Pseudomonas aeruginosa Implant-Associated Bone and Joint Infections: Experience in a Regional Reference Center in France.

Background: P. aeruginosa implant-associated bone and joint infections (BJI) is considered to be one of the most difficult to treat BJI. The data focusing specifically on this pathogen are sparse, and it seems difficult to extrapolate the results obtained with Enterobacteriaceae.Methods: We performed a retrospective observation study of all P. aeruginosa implant-associated BJI diagnosed at our institution from 2011 to 2018. We defined failure as any type of relapse, including persistence of the same P. aeruginosa, superinfection by another organism(s) or any other cause of relapse such as the need for a subsequent surgery. Nonparametric statistical methods were used to compare the study groups and Kaplan-Meier curves and multivariate Cox analysis and were used to detect determinants associated with treatment failure.Results: A total of 90 patients (62% men, median age 60 years IQR 47–72) including 30 (33%) prosthetic-joint infections and 60 (66%) other implant-associated BJIs were studied. Most of them were acute (62%). During the prolonged follow-up, (median 20 months; IQR 9–37), 23 patients (26%) experienced treatment failure. Optimal surgical treatment (DAIR for acute forms, explantation, 1-stage or 2-stage exchange for others) was significantly associated with a higher success rate in the univariate analysis (p = 0.003). Sixty-four (71%) patients received effective initial treatment against P. aeruginosa administered and 81 of them (90%) did for at least 3 weeks: both these parameters correlated with a higher success rate. In the multivariate Cox-analysis optimal surgical treatment, IV effective treatment of at least 3 weeks and treatment with ciprofloxacin for at least 3 months proved to be independently associated to a better outcome in patients with P. aeruginosa implant-associated BJI.Conclusion: P. aeruginosa implant-associated BJI is one of the most difficult-to-treat BJI, with a strong impact on the prognosis of the surgical strategy. An effective initial IV antibiotic treatment for at least 3 weeks seems to be required, followed by oral ciprofloxacin for a total duration of 3 months.

Irrigation and Debridement with Chronic Antibiotic Suppression Is as Effective as 2-Stage Exchange in Revision Total Knee Arthroplasty with Extensive Instrumentation

Extraction of implants because of periprosthetic infection (PJI) following complex revision total knee arthroplasty (rTKA) with extensive instrumentation is a daunting undertaking for surgeon and patient alike. The purpose of the present study was to evaluate whether infections following complex rTKA are better treated with 2-stage exchange or irrigation and debridement (I&D) with modular component exchange and antibiotic suppression in terms of infection control, reoperation, and function. We reviewed rTKAs that had been performed for the treatment of PJI from 2005 to 2016. Extensive instrumentation was defined as the presence ≥1 of the following: metaphyseal cones/sleeves, distal femoral replacement, periprosthetic fracture instrumentation, or fully cemented stems measuring >75 mm. Cases were categorized according to the initial treatment (I&D with antibiotic suppression or initiation of 2-stage exchange). Eighty-seven patients with PJI and extensive instrumentation were identified: 56 patients who were managed with I&D with suppression and 31 who were managed with the initiation of 2-stage exchange. The rate of success (defined as no reoperation for infection) was similar for the 2 groups (62.5% the I&D group compared with 67.7% for the 2-stage group; p = 0.62). The rate of mortality was also similar (39.3% for the I&D group compared with 38.7% for the 2-stage group; p = 0.96). Of the 31 patients in the 2-stage group, 18 (58.1%) underwent reimplantation with a revision replacement. Of those 18 patients, 13 were still infection-free at the time of the most recent follow-up; however, when the analysis was expanded to all 31 patients in the 2-stage group, only 13 (41.9%) both had a successful reimplantation and did not require additional surgery for infection. Nine (29.0%) of the 31 patients in the 2-stage group never underwent the second stage, and 4 (12.9%) of the 31 required arthrodesis at the second stage. In contrast, 35 (62.5%) of the 56 patients in the I&D group were successfully managed, without additional surgery for the treatment of infection. At the time of the latest follow-up (mean, 3.2 years; range, 2 to 13 years), more patients in the I&D group were ambulatory (76.8% in the I&D group compared with 54.8% in the 2-stage group; p = 0.05) and maintained a functional bending knee joint (85.7% in the I&D group compared with 45.2% in the 2-stage group; p < 0.001). In the treatment of periprosthetic infection of rTKA with extensive instrumentation, I&D with chronic antibiotic suppression was as effective as 2-stage exchange in terms of preventing reoperation for infection and was more effective in terms of maintaining function. These data apply to rTKA with extensive periarticular instrumentation and should not be extrapolated to primary or simple revision implants. Therapeutic Level III. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

Acute Renal Failure After the First Stage of a 2-Stage Exchange for Periprosthetic Joint Infection

BackgroundTwo-stage exchange using antibiotic-loaded spacers is a common approach in treating periprosthetic joint infections. Acute kidney injury (AKIN) can be a systemic complication of this procedure. This study investigates the prevalence of AKIN and identifies potential risk factors. MethodsThis is a single-center retrospective analysis of patients undergoing 2-stage exchange using a spacer in 285 patients treated between 2010 and 2017. Risk factors were evaluated using parametric and nonparametric analyses and a multivariate, binary logistic regression model. ResultsThirty-three percent of patients (95/285) developed an AKIN postoperatively. Twenty-four percent (23/95) of these patients had an acute on chronic kidney failure with a previously impaired renal function.In multivariate analysis, a higher age (hazard ratio [HR], 1.034; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1-1.068; P = .046) and a higher baseline creatinine level (HR, 1.94; 95% CI, 1.237-3.052; P = .004) were risk factors for AKIN. Treatment with vancomycin in the spacer or systemically was not associated with AKIN while a high vancomycin blood level (HR, 1.91; 95% CI, 0.913-3.992; P = .086) and fungal infections were (HR, 3.482; 95% CI, 0.968-12.521; P = .056).Furthermore, in univariate analysis, a higher median Charlson comorbidity index (4 vs 3, P = .007), a lower preoperative hemoglobin (10.9 vs 11.7 g/dL, P = .008), and a higher number of blood transfusions (1 vs 0, P = .004) were associated with AKIN. ConclusionAKIN is common in patients undergoing 2-stage exchange. Associated patient factors, particularly in patients with chronic renal dysfunction, should be optimized. The general use of glycopeptide antibiotics was no risk factor for AKIN.

High Rate of Reinfection With New Bacteria Following One-Stage Exchange for Enterococcal Periprosthetic Infection of the Knee: A Single-Center Study

BackgroundA wide range of success rates following the surgical management of enterococcal periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) with a tendency toward worse outcomes have been reported. However, the role of 1-stage exchange remains under-investigated. Therefore, we aimed to evaluate our results after the 1-stage knee exchange for enterococcal PJI. MethodsForty patients were retrospectively included between 2002 and 2017 with a mean follow-up of survivors of 80 months (range 22-172; standard deviation [SD] = 5). Polymicrobial infections occurred in 45% (18/40) of patients. Patients’ characteristics, joint-related data, and antibiotic therapy were recorded. Rates of enterococcal infection relapse, reinfection with new microorganisms, and re-revision for any reason were determined. Bivariate analysis was conducted to identify risk factors of infection recurrence. ResultsRevision surgery was required in 22 cases (55%) with a mean time to revision surgery of 27 months (range 1-78; SD = 25). Indications for aseptic revisions (18%) included aseptic loosening (10%), periprosthetic fracture (5%), and patellar instability (3%). The most common cause of re-revision was a subsequent PJI (15/22; 68%) after a mean time of 22 months (range 1-77; SD = 24). Overall infection recurrence rate was 37.5% (15/40), substantially due to entirely non-enterococcal infections (9/15; 60%). Infection relapse with Enterococci occurred in 4 cases (10%) within 16 months postoperatively. Older patients (P = .05) and male gender (P = .05) were associated with a higher risk of infection recurrence. ConclusionOvercoming the Enterococci using the 1-stage exchange for knee PJI is achievable but the rate of reinfection due to new microorganisms is high . However, the overall infection recurrence rate is comparable to other treatment approaches.

The 2018 New Definition of Periprosthetic Joint Infection is Valuable for Diagnosis of Persistent Infection at Reimplantation in Patients without Synovial Fluid

BackgroundDiagnosis of persistent infection at reimplantation of 2-stage exchange revision is a challenging problem. The aim of our study is to evaluate the performance of the 2018 new definition and Musculoskeletal Infection Society (MSIS) criteria in determining the persistent infection at reimplantation in patients without synovial fluid. MethodsWe retrospectively reviewed 150 patients who underwent 2-stage exchange revision from 2014 to 2018. Two models were used to define persistent infection—model 1: identical major criteria of the MSIS criteria and new definition and model 2: identical major criteria of 2 criteria and/or subsequent infection after reimplantation. The predictive accuracy of the new definition and MSIS criteria was compared by using receiver operating characteristic curves. ResultsThe receiver operating characteristic curves showed that the new definition had good performance in determining the persistent infection, with the area under the curve (AUC) of 0.871 in model 1 and 0.835 in model 2. The optimal threshold for aggregate scores in new definition was 4. The MSIS criteria had limited diagnostic value in both model 1 (AUC = 0.708) and model 2 (AUC = 0.664). In model 1, the sensitivity and specificity were 86.96% and 84.25% in new definition, and 47.83% and 93.70% in MSIS criteria in patients without synovial fluid. In model 2, the sensitivity and specificity were 78.57% and 85.25% in new definition, and 39.29% and 93.44% in MSIS criteria. ConclusionThe 2018 new definition of PJI is valuable in the diagnosis of persistent infection, which can improve diagnostic accuracy compared with the MSIS criteria in patients without synovial fluid.