Exchange Arthroplasty Research Articles

Do Serum C-Reactive Protein Trends Predict Treatment Outcome in Patients with Knee Periprosthetic Joint Infection Undergoing Two-Stage Exchange Arthroplasty?

Two-stage exchange arthroplasty is the standard treatment for knee periprosthetic joint infection (PJI). This study aimed to determine whether serial changes in C-reactive protein (CRP) values can predict the prognosis in patients with knee PJI. We retrospectively enrolled 101 patients with knee PJI treated with two-stage exchange arthroplasty at our institution from 2010 to 2016. We excluded patients with spacer complications and confounding factors affecting CRP levels. We tested the association between treatment outcomes and qualitative CRP patterns or quantitative CRP levels. Of the 101 patients, 24 (23.8%) had recurrent PJI and received surgical intervention after two-stage reimplantation. Patients with a fluctuating CRP pattern were more likely to receive antibiotics for a longer period (p < 0.001). There was greater risk of treatment failure if the CRP levels were higher when antibiotics were switched from an intravenous to oral form (p = 0.023). The patients who received antibiotics for longer than six weeks (p = 0.017) were at greater risk of treatment failure after two-stage arthroplasty. Although CRP patterns cannot predict treatment outcomes, CRP fluctuation in the interim period was associated with longer antibiotic duration, which was related to a higher treatment failure rate.

Two-stage strategy in end-stage hip periprosthetic joint infection: utility of industrially prefabricated custom-made antibiotic spacers.

Use of prefabricated mobile spacers in end-stage cases of hip periprosthetic joint infection (HPJI) is hindered when large bone defects exist. In such cases, prefabricated custom-made antibiotic spacers (P-CMAS) offer an alternative. Such spacers are individually designed according to the size and anatomical characteristics of the bone defect. The purpose of this study is to describe and evaluate the use of such patient-specific spacers in a two-stage strategy to treat end-stage HPJI cases, and to report on clinical outcomes. A retrospective study identified all patients with end-stage HPJIs from January 2015 through December 2019, treated using a P-CMAS. Primary outcome: infection eradication rate. Secondary outcomes: spacer-related complications and patient satisfaction. Minimum follow-up: 12 months after the second-stage surgery. A total of 7 end-stage cases (mean of 6.7 previous surgical procedures) were included. Mean bone defect size was 191.57 (range 47-304) mm. Polymicrobial infection was detected in 42.86% of these cases. During the spacer stage there were no periprosthetic fractures, spacer dislocations or breakages, nor spacer-drug-related complications. All patients proceeded with the second stage uneventfully, with an average time between stages of 178 (range 119-326) days. In 5 cases a total femur arthroplasty was the reconstructive procedure performed. After a mean follow-up of 27.29 (range 14-49) months the infection was clinically eradicated in all patients, despite their difficult-to-treat scenarios. Industrially custom-made spacers offer an effective and safe option in performing 2-stage exchange arthroplasty in cases of end-stage HPJI with extensive bone defects.

Application of structural allogenous bone graft in two-stage exchange arthroplasty for knee periprosthetic joint infection: a case control study

BackgroundKnee prosthetic joint infection (PJI) is a common but devastating complication after knee arthroplasty. The revision surgeries for knee PJI may become more challenging when it is associated with large bone defects. The application of structural bone allograft in knee revision surgeries with large bone defects is not a new technique. However, there is a lack of literature reporting its efficacy in PJI cases. This study aimed to investigate the outcome of structural fresh frozen allogenous bone grafts in treating patients in knee PJI with large bone defects.MethodsWe performed a retrospective cohort analysis of knee PJI cases treated with two-stage exchange arthroplasty at our institution from 2010 to 2016. 12 patients with structural allogenous bone graft reconstructions were identified as the study group. 24 patients without structural allograft reconstructions matched with the study group by age, gender, and Charlson comorbidity index were enrolled as the control group. The functional outcome of the study group was evaluated with the Knee Society Score (KSS). Treatment success was assessed according to the Delphi-based consensus definition. The infection relapse rate and implant survivorship were compared between groups.ResultsRevision knees with structural allograft presented excellent improvement in the KSS (33.1 to 75.4). There was no significant difference between infection relapse-free survival rate and prosthesis survival rate in the two groups. The 8-year prosthesis survival rate was 90.9% in the study group and 91% in the control group (p = 0.913). The 8-year infection relapse-free survival rate was 80 and 83.3% in the study group and control group, respectively (p = 0.377).ConclusionThe structural fresh frozen allogenous bone graft provided an effective way for bone defect reconstruction in knee PJI with an accountable survival rate. Meanwhile, using structural allografts did not increase the relapse rate of infection.

The Use of Rifampin in Total Joint Arthroplasty: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Comparative Studies

BackgroundPeriprosthetic joint infection (PJI) is a devastating complication of total joint arthroplasty (TJA). Rifampin is an antibiotic with the ability to penetrate bacterial biofilms, and thus has been considered as a potentially important adjunct in the prevention and treatment of PJI. The aim of this systematic review is to evaluate and summarize the use of rifampin in TJA, particularly in the context of PJI. MethodsA literature search of all relevant electronic databases was performed. All comparative studies assessing the use of rifampin in the context of TJA were included. Descriptive data are reported, and a meta-analysis was performed using all studies which compared the addition of rifampin to standard care in treating PJI. ResultsA total of 33 studies met inclusion criteria. A meta-analysis of 22 studies comparing the addition of rifampin to standard care for treating PJI found a significant reduction in failure rates (26.0% vs 35.9%; odds ratio 0.61, 95% confidence interval 0.43-0.86). The protective effect of rifampin was maintained in studies which included exchange arthroplasty as a treatment strategy, but not in studies only using an implant retention strategy. Among studies reporting adverse events of rifampin, there was a 20.5% adverse event rate. ConclusionOverall, rifampin appears to confer a protective effect against treatment failure following PJI. This treatment effect is particularly pronounced in the context of exchange arthroplasty. Further high-level evidence is needed to clarify the exact indications and doses of rifampin which can most effectively act as an adjunct in the treatment of PJI. Level of evidenceLevel III, Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Level I-III Studies.

The presence of a draining sinus is associated with failure of re-implantation during two-stage exchange arthroplasty.

Background: Reinfection rates after two-stage exchange arthroplasty for prosthetic joint infection (PJI) have been reported as high as 33 % in the literature. Understanding risk factors for treatment failure will help to preoperatively counsel patients on the likelihood of successful treatment and possibly influence the surgeon's treatment algorithm. This study aimed to delineate whether the presence of a draining sinus tract is associated with risk of failure of two-stage exchange arthroplasty. Methods: We performed a single institution, multi-center retrospective chart review of outcomes of patients treated for PJI with two-stage exchange arthroplasty between June 2006 and May 2016. For patients treated prior to 2011, PJI was defined based on the preoperative work-up and intraoperative findings as determined by the attending surgeon. After 2011, PJI was defined using MSIS consensus criteria. All patients had a minimum of follow-up of 2 years or treatment failure prior to 2 years. Treatment failure was defined as reinfection or failure to complete two-stage exchange secondary to persistent infection or other host factors. Operative reports and clinical notes were reviewed to assess for presence of a draining sinus tract. Results: 240 patients were treated for PJI with intended two-stage exchange arthroplasty. The overall rate of treatment failure was 29.6 % (), while the overall rate of reinfection was 13.3 % (). A total of 39 patients did not complete second stage revision; final treatment for these patients was amputation, fusion, or chronic antibiotic suppression. A total of 52 of 240 patients (21.7 %) had a draining sinus tract at presentation. Patients with a sinus tract were significantly less likely to be replanted compared to those without a sinus tract at presentation (13.3 % vs. 26.9 %, ). However, when accounting for all mechanisms of treatment failure, including reinfection following replantation, there was no statistically significant difference detected between the sinus and no-sinus groups (27.7 % vs. 36.5 %, ). Discussion: A draining sinus tract represents a chronic, deep infectious process with ultimate compromise of overlying soft tissues. Thus we hypothesized it would be associated with failure in a two-stage exchange arthroplasty. These data demonstrate that patients with a draining sinus are significantly less likely to undergo re-implantation. This provides evidence to the paucity of data surrounding draining sinuses and two-stage PJI treatment.

Long Term Results of Two-Stage Revision for Chronic Periprosthetic Hip Infection: A Multicenter Study.

Background: Two-stage exchange arthroplasty remains the gold standard in the United States for treatment of chronic periprosthetic joint infection (PJI). Long-term reinfection rates and clinical outcomes with sufficient subject numbers remain limited. The purpose was to evaluate the long-term outcomes following two-stage exchange following hip arthroplasty. Methods: Retrospective review of 221 patients who underwent two-stage exchange hip arthroplasty for chronic PJI at three large tertiary referral institutions from 1990–2015. Outcomes including reinfection, mortality, and all-cause revision were calculated. Cumulative incidence of reinfection with death as competing factor was also calculated. Risk factors for reinfection were determined using Cox multivariate regression analysis. Results: Rate of infection eradication and all-cause revision was 88.24% and 22.6%, respectively. Overall mortality rate was 40.72%. Patients with minimum five-year follow-up (n = 129) had a success rate of 91.47% with mortality rate of 41.1%. Major risk factors for reinfection included polymicrobial infection (HR = 2.36, 95% CI: 1.08–5.14) and antibiotic resistant organism (HR = 2.36, 95% CI: 1.10–5.04). Conclusion: This is the largest series with greater than 5-year follow-up evaluating outcomes of two-stage exchange hip arthroplasty. This technique resulted in a relatively high infection eradication, however, the mortality rate is alarmingly high. Antibiotic resistant organisms appear to be highest risk factor for failure.

The Clinical Outcome of Different Total Knee Arthroplasty Designs in One-Stage Revision for Periprosthetic Infection.

Despite the growing number of studies reporting on the best surgical treatment in the management of periprosthetic joint infection, there are no robust data regarding the type of infected prosthesis before any kind of exchange arthroplasty. To overcome these shortcomings, we asked the following questions: (1) What is the survivorship of nonhinged and hinged knee implants after one-stage exchange arthroplasty and (2) what is the functional outcome after one-stage exchange procedure focusing on knee prostheses and the type of prior infected knee implant. In a secondary radiographic analysis, we also investigated if (3) the type of femoral bone morphology measured by the inner femoral diameter influences the rate of aseptic failures also in patients with periprosthetic joint infection. Between January 2011 and December 2017, we performed a retrospective designed study including 211 patients with infected knee prostheses. After all, seventy-six percent (161 of 211 patients) were available for final data analysis. These patients were divided into four groups as per the performed implant revision: (1) bicondylar total knee arthroplasty to rotating hinge implant, (2) rotating hinge to rotating hinge implant, (3) rotating hinge to full hinge implant, and (4) full hinge to full hinge implant. The mean follow-up (FU) was six years (range 3 to 9; standard deviation= 1.9), whereas a minimum FU of three years was required for inclusion. Survivorship and group analysis were performed, and the functional outcome was assessed using postoperative Oxford Knee Scores at the latest FU (60-point scale with lower scores representing less pain and greater function). Furthermore, in all cases, femoral bone morphology was determined as per the Citak classification system. At the final FU, the overall surgical revision rate was 23% (37/161 patients) with nine percent (15/161 patients) suffering a periprosthetic joint infection relapse. Group 1 consisted of 51, group 2 consisted of 67, group 3 consisted of 24, and group 4 consisted of 19 patients. The lowest overall revision rate was found in group 2 (16%, n= 11), compared with 28% (n= 14) in group 1, 29% (n= 7) in group 3, and 26% (n= 5) in group 4; however, no significant differences were found (P= .902). The functional outcome (Oxford Knee Score) was clinically constant in all groups, with 32 points in group 1, 37 points in group 2, 33 points in group 3, and 35 points in group 4 (P= .107). Concerning the number of patients with aseptic loosening as per bone morphology, 74% (14/19) of all aseptic loosening cases appeared in femoral bone type C morphologies according to Citak (75% in group 1, 56% in group 2, 100% in group 3, and 100% in group 4). The results obtained suggest a generally high overall revision rate (25%) with a good infection control rate (91%). Although we were unable to work out a specific group of patients with a statistically significant differing outcome, it is interesting to see that hinged implants can reach more or less the same functional outcome and revision rates as nonhinged implants, when it comes to revision surgeries. In this study, a relatively high number of aseptic failures contributed to a high overall revision rate. In this context, the bone morphology, measured as per the Citak classification system, could be confirmed as a risk factor for aseptic failures also in septic patients. Therefore, further research might focus on revision knee implant design.

Hospital Costs for Unsuccessful Two-Stage Revisions for Periprosthetic Joint Infection.

Although 2-stage exchange arthroplasty is the preferred surgical treatment for periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) in the United States, little is known about the risk of complications between stages, mortality, and the economic burden of unsuccessful 2-stage procedures. The 2015-2019 Medicare 100% inpatient sample was used to identify 2-stage PJI revisions in total hip and knee arthroplasty patients using procedural codes. We used the Fine and Gray sub-distribution adaptation of the conventional Kaplan-Meier method to estimate the probability of completing the second stage of the 2-stage PJI infection treatment, accounting for death as a competing risk. Hospital costs were estimated from the hospital charges using "cost-to-charge" ratios from Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services. A total of 5094 total hip arthroplasty and 13,062 total knee arthroplasty patients had an index revision for PJI during the study period. In the first 12 months following the first-stage explantation, the likelihood of completing a second-stage PJI revision was 43.1% (95% confidence interval [CI] 41.7-44.5) for hips and 47.9% (95% CI 47.0-48.8) for knees. Following explantation, 1-year patient survival rates for hip and knee patients were 87.4% (95% CI 85.8-88.9) and 91.4% (95% CI 90.6-92.2), respectively. The median additional cost for hospitalizations between stages was $23,582 and $20,965 per patient for hips and knees, respectively. Hospital volume, Northeast or Midwest region, and younger age were associated with reduced PJI costs (P < .05). Although viewed as the most preferred, the 2-stage revision strategy for PJI had less than a 50% chance of successful completion within the first year, and was associated with high mortality rates and substantial costs for treatment failure.

Repeat two-stage exchange arthroplasty for recurrent periprosthetic hip or knee infection: what are the chances for success?

IntroductionTwo-stage revision is a frequently chosen approach to treat chronic periprosthetic joint infection (PJI). However, management of recurrent infection after a two-stage exchange remains debated and the outcome of a repeat two-stage procedure is unclear. This study investigates the success rates of repeat two-stage exchange arthroplasty and analyzes possible risk factors for failure.Materials and methodsWe retrospectively identified 55 patients (23 hips, 32 knees) who were treated with repeat resection arthroplasty and planned delayed reimplantation for recurrent periprosthetic joint infection between 2010 and 2019 after a prior two-stage revision at the same institution. The minimum follow-up was 12 months with a median follow-up time of 34 months (IQR 22–51). The infection-free survival, associated revision surgeries, and potential risk factors for further revision were analyzed using Kaplan–Meier survival curves and comparative non-parametric testing.Results78% (43/55) underwent reimplantation after a repeat implant removal. Of those who completed the second-stage surgery, 37% (16/43) underwent additional revision for infection and 14% (6/55) underwent amputation. The reinfection-free implant survivorship amounted to 77% (95% CI 64–89%) after 1 year and 38% (95% CI 18–57%) after 5 years. Patients with a higher comorbidity score were less likely to undergo second-stage reimplantation (median 5 vs. 3, p = 0.034). Furthermore, obese patients (p = 0.026, Fisher’s exact test) and diabetics (p < 0.001, log-rank test) had a higher risk for further infection. Most commonly cultures yielded polymicrobial growth at the repeat two-stage exchange (27%, 15/55) and at re-reinfection (32%, 9/28). Pathogen persistence was observed in 21% (6/28) of re-reinfected patients.ConclusionThe success rates after repeat two-stage exchange arthroplasty are low. Patients must be counseled accordingly and different modes of treatment should be considered.

New Primary Total Knee Arthroplasty Components Versus Other Contemporary Types of Spacers for the Treatment of Chronic Periprosthetic Knee Infection With a Two-Stage Protocol.

The optimal type of antibiotic spacer for the treatment of a knee periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) remains a topic of debate. Although the ultimate goal of an antibiotic spacer is infection control, contemporary spacer iterations, such as the use of a new femoral component (NFC), may offer unique advantages. The primary goal of this study was to compare rates of infection control and functional outcomes between contemporary spacer types. We retrospectively reviewed 96 patients who underwent removal of a total knee arthroplasty with insertion of an antibiotic spacer for knee PJI over a 14-year period at a single institution with a minimum 1-year follow-up. Three patient cohorts were defined based on spacer type: NFC (n=30), cement-on-cement (n=19), and static (n=47). There was no association between spacer type and the odds of infection clearance (P=.60). The NFC spacers resulted in increased knee range of motion before replantation and improved ambulatory status at 8 weeks postre-plantation, although no difference was seen at final follow-up. The use of NFC spacers may provide functional advantages over their contemporary counterparts, and the potential of NFC spacers to be used in single-stage exchange arthroplasty remains an appealing area of investigation. Future high-powered, prospective, noninferiority studies between contemporary spacer types are needed. [Orthopedics. 2022;45(2):109-115.].

A guide to debridement, antibiotics, and implant retention.

Debridement, antibiotics, and implant retention (DAIR) is an alternative management strategy for the treatment of periprosthetic joint infection (PJI). While infection eradication rates are lower with DAIR, the benefits including decreased morbidity, improved functional outcomes, and decreased cost may justify the risks when considering this form of treatment compared to traditional one or two stage exchange arthroplasty. Implant longevity in the setting of a successful DAIR is similar to matched patients who have not experienced a PJI. An experienced arthroplasty surgeon well versed in extensile exposure should perform the DAIR. This procedure should not be viewed as a simple "washout." While PJI may be considered a surgical urgency, DAIR can be performed on a planned list if it allows for appropriate staffing and implants for the procedure. Arthroscopic irrigation may be performed for a patient in extremis but it should not be viewed as a definitive procedure to address PJI. Keys to a successful DAIR include accurate tissue sampling to determine the infective organism, meticulous, radical debridement, and exchange of modular components if possible. A multidisciplinary team (MDT) including an infectious disease specialist should be involved prior to surgery in order to guide appropriate antimicrobial therapy throughout the patient's course of treatment. In the article below we present our indications, considerations, and technique for performing a DAIR for PJI for hip and knee arthroplasty.

Successive new-pathogen prosthetic joint reinfections: Observational cohort study on 61 patients.

Prosthetic joint infection (PJI) treatment failure may be due to relapsing infection (same microorganism) or new-pathogen reinfection (npPJI). The aim was to describe npPJI epidemiological, clinical and microbiological characteristics, their treatments and outcomes, and identify their risk factors. This observational, single-center, cohort study was conducted in a French Referral Center for Bone-and-Joint Infections between September 2004 and December 2015. Patients treated for at least two successive hip or knee PJIs in the same joint with a different pathogen were identified in the prospective database. We compared each patient's first PJI and subsequent npPJI(s) to analyze the type and microbiological characteristics of npPJIs. To search for npPJI risk factors, we compared those cases to a random selection of 122 "unique-episode" PJIs treated during the study period. Among 990 PJIs, 79 (8%) npPJIs occurring in 61 patients were included. New-pathogen prosthetic joint infections (npPJIs) developed more frequently in knee (14%) than hip prostheses (5%). Median interval from the first PJI to the npPJI was 26 months. New-pathogen prosthetic joint reinfections (npPJIs) more frequently spread hematogenously (60% vs 33%) and were predominantly caused by Staphylococcus (36%) or Streptococcus (33%) species. Multivariate analysis identified two risk factors: chronic dermatitis (odds ratio: 6.23; P<0.05) and cardiovascular diseases (odds ratio: 2.71; P<0.01). A curative strategy was applied to 70%: DAIR (29%), one-stage (28%), two-stage exchange arthroplasty (7%) or other strategies (7%). The others received prolonged suppressive antibiotic therapy (30%). New-pathogen prosthetic joint infections (npPJIs) are complex infections requiring management by multidisciplinary teams that should be adapted to each clinical situation.

One-Stage Hip Revision Arthroplasty Using Megaprosthesis in Severe Bone Loss of The Proximal Femur Due to Radiological Diffuse Osteomyelitis

Managing substantial proximal and/or distal femoral bone defects is one of the biggest challenges in chronic hip periprosthetic joint infection. Most authors use two-stage arthroplasty with a temporary antibiotic-loaded cement spacer for the management of these patients. In this study, we show our experience with one-stage exchange arthroplasty in managing severe bone defects due to radiological-extensive proximal femoral osteomyelitis. Two patients were included in the study. They showed radiological-extensive proximal femoral osteomyelitis, and they were treated with one-stage exchange arthroplasty using megaprosthesis. Diffuse osteomyelitis was confirmed in both cases; in one case, the histology was compatible with osteomyelitis, and the other case had a positive culture identified in a bone sample. At a minimum of a four-year follow-up, the patients did not reveal any clinical, radiological or laboratory signs of infection. In conclusion, one-stage exchange arthroplasty and megaprosthesis is an option for the treatment of chronic hip periprosthetic joint infection associated with radiological-diffuse proximal femoral osteomyelitis.

Trend of serum C-reactive protein is associated with treatment outcome of hip Periprosthetic joint infection undergoing two-stage exchange arthroplasty: a case control study

BackgroundSerum C-reactive protein (CRP) trends are critical for monitoring patients’ treatment response following a two-stage exchange arthroplasty for periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) of the hip. However, CRP trends are poorly described in the literature. The primary aim of this study was to identify the relationships between PJI treatment outcomes and our proposed CRP trend definitions, parameters, and microbiological data. The secondary aim was to investigate CRP trends after the occurrence of spacer-related complications.MethodsWe conducted a retrospective review of 74 patients treated with a two-stage exchange protocol for PJI in a tertiary referral joint center between 2014 and 2016. Patients with factors that may affect CRP levels (inflammatory arthritis, concomitant infections, liver and kidney diseases, and intensive care admissions) were excluded. CRP trends were categorized into five types and PJI treatment outcome was defined as “success” or “failure” according to the Delphi criteria.ResultsTreatment was successful in 67 patients and failed in 7 patients. Multivariate logistic regression analysis showed that type 5 CRP, defined as serum CRP fluctuation without normalization after first stage surgery (odds ratio [OR]: 17.4; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 2.3–129.7; p = 0.005), and methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA; OR: 14.5; 95% CI: 1.6–131.7; p = 0.018) were associated with treatment failure. Spacer-related complications occurred in 18 patients. Of these, 12 had elevated CRP levels at later follow-up, while six had no elevation in CRP levels.ConclusionsWe found that MRSA infection and type 5 CRP were associated with PJI treatment failure.

Intra-wound vancomycin powder for the eradication of periprosthetic joint infection after debridement and implant exchange: experimental study in a rat model

BackgroundIntra-wound vancomycin powder (VP) has been used in clinical practice to prevent periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) after primary knee/hip arthroplasty. The role of intra-wound VP in the setting of debridement and implant exchange after PJI remains undefined. This study aimed to explore the efficacy and safety of intra-wound VP in the control of methicillin-resistant S. aureus (MRSA) infection after debridement and implant exchange.MethodsPJI modeling by knee prosthesis implantation and MRSA inoculation, debridement and implant exchange were performed in Wistar rats successively to mimic the one-stage exchange arthroplasty of PJI patients. Two weeks of systemic vancomycin (SV) or/and intraoperative intra-wound VP of single dosage were applied after revision surgery.ResultsNo post-surgery deaths, incision complications and signs of drug toxicity were observed. The microbial counts of SV or intra-wound VP group were significantly reduced compared with the control group, while bacteria were still detected on the bone, soft-tissue and prosthesis. The elimination of bacterial counts, along with improvement of tissue inflammation and serum inflammatory markers, were observed in the rats with SV plus intra-wound VP. Serum levels of vancomycin in all groups were lower than that of causing nephrotoxicity, while no statistic difference was observed in the serum biochemical marker among the groups.ConclusionsIntra-wound VP is effective after debridement and implant exchange in our current rat PJI model. Neither SV nor intra-wound VP alone could eradicate the bacteria within a two-weeks treatment course, while SV plus intra-wound VP could eliminate the MRSA infection, without notable hepatic or renal toxicity and any incision complications.

Cement Loaded With High-Dose Gentamicin and Clindamycin Reduces the Risk of Subsequent Infection After One-Stage Hip or Knee Arthroplasty Exchange for Periprosthetic Infection: A Preliminary Study.

The use of antibiotic-loaded acrylic cement for treating periprosthetic joint infections remains controversial. We hypothesized that the raw rate of surgical site infection (SSI) is lower after using cement loaded with high-dose gentamicin and clindamycin than after using cement loaded with standard-dose gentamicin for implant fixation during 1-stage hip and knee revision arthroplasty for infection. One hundred seventy-one continuous patients operated by 2 experienced surgeons during a 2-year period were included in the study. All patients were followed for 24 months. The primary endpoint was the raw rate of SSI after 2 years of follow-up time. The raw rate of SSI after 2 years of follow-up time was significantly lower in the study group (13%) than in the control group (26%) (P= .03) with an odds ratio of 0.42 (P= .03). These SSIs were new infections rather than a recurrence/persistence of the initial infection. The cement used in the study group significantly reduced the risk of SSI relative to the cement used in the control group. Routine use of this high-dose dual antibiotic-loaded cement can be considered during 1-stage knee or hip revision arthroplasty for infection.

The reasons for and mortality of patients unable to receive reimplantation after resection arthroplasty for chronic hip periprosthetic infection.

Two-stage exchange arthroplasty is a feasible treatment for chronic PJI (periprosthetic joint infection) of total hip arthroplasty (THA). However, there are large numbers of patients who are unable to ultimately receive reimplantation after resection arthroplasty owing to uncontrolled infection and multiple comorbidities. The purpose of the current study was to identify patient-related risk factors and reasons for being unable to undergo revision THA. Individuals undergoing resection arthroplasty for chronic PJI treatment from 2013 to 2020 at our institution were retrospectively reviewed. A variety of patient comorbidities, laboratory data, isolated pathogens, and follow-up status were collected for analysis. A total of 84 patients (46 men and 38 women) with a 2.7 ± 2.1-year follow-up were analyzed. Thirty-eight (45.2%) patients eventually underwent revision THA, while the other 46 (54.8%) did not receive reimplantation during follow-up. The patients without receiving reimplantation had higher Charlson comorbidity index (CCI) score (3.1 ± 2.9 versus 1.2 ± 1.5; p = 0.001). Lower cumulative incidence of receiving reimplantation was observed in patients with chronic kidney disease (log-rank test, p = 0.019), anemia (p = 0.011), presence of initial fever (p = 0.030), and oxacillin-resistant strain infection (p = 0.030). The most common reasons for not receiving reimplantation were uncontrolled infection, unstable medical conditions, and death. The patients without reimplantation had a relatively higher mortality rate (log-rank test, p = 0.002). Chronic hip PJI with poor medical conditions or oxacillin-resistant strain infection decreased the chance of undergoing revision surgery. These patients had unfavourable outcomes and a higher mortality rate after resection arthroplasty.

Two-Stage Exchange Arthroplasty for Periprosthetic Shoulder Infection Is Associated with High Rate of Failure to Reimplant and Mortality.

Background: Patients with a periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) of the shoulder, who fail to undergo reimplantation in an attempted two-stage exchange seem to be neglected in the current literature. The aim of this study was to assess the clinical course of patients after the first stage in the process of an attempted two-stage exchange for shoulder PJI. Methods: After a retrospective review of our institutional database between 2008 and 2018, 49 patients, who were treated with an intended two-stage exchange for shoulder PJI, were identified. Patients’ demographics, laboratory and health status parameters, along with records of clinical outcome were collected. The primary outcome measurements analyzed were infection eradication, successful reimplantation, and patient survival. Results: Reimplantation was completed in only 35 (71%) of 49 cases and eradication of infection was achieved in 85.7% of patients with successful reimplantation after a mean follow-up duration of 5.1 years (1.1 to 10.2 years). Reasons for failure to reimplant were premature death in 36%, high general morbidity in 29%, satisfaction with the current status in 21%, or severe infection with poor bone and soft tissues in 14% of the patients. Of the 14 cases without reimplantation, eradication rate of infection was 57% after a mean follow-up of 5 years (2.6 to 11 years). The overall mortality rate of the entire cohort was 25% at the latest follow-up and 10% within ninety days after implant removal. Patients who deceased or did not undergo reimplantation during the follow-up were significantly older and had a significantly higher Charlson comorbidity index (CCI). Conclusions: While the two-stage exchange arthroplasty can lead to high rates of infection eradication, a considerable subset of patients never undergoes the second stage for a variety of reasons. Shoulder PJI and its treatment are associated with a high risk of mortality, especially in patients with older age and higher CCI.

Reconstruction following periprosthetic joint infection: cemented or uncemented

: Cemented and cementless reconstruction techniques have been widely adopted in primary and aseptic revision total joint arthroplasty (TJA). Many variables influence a surgeon’s decision to adopt a particular fixation strategy, and there is no clear consensus on the optimal approach. The literature on periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) has clearly shown the importance of utilizing cement in the first stage of a two-stage exchange arthroplasty in the form of an antibiotic delivery device or temporary spacer. However, very little has been established regarding the importance of fixation method (cemented versus cementless) at the time of definitive replantation and whether this plays a role in the successful eradication of PJI. For the hip, cementless fixation at reimplantation is still the standard of care given modern modular, fluted tapered stems that have high success in the setting of severe bone defects. Hybrid fixation, or cemented femoral components used with uncemented acetabular components, can also be performed when treating PJI especially when performing one-stage exchange arthroplasty, since the antibiotic cement can be used as a delivery device. For knee reimplantation, components are either inserted fully cemented or in a hybrid fashion, where cement is applied to the articular and metaphyseal portions of the bone that is supported by long diaphyseal engaging stems. Cemented stems enable the stress imparted by bone loss to be distributed along the entire length of the construct and can also support reconstructions that may require higher levels of constraint. The objectives of this review are to discuss fixation strategies available to surgeons at the time of the second stage procedure, and to discuss their implications in the success or failure of infection management.

Complications in the treatment of periprosthetic joint infection of the hip: when do they occur?

Prosthetic joint infection (PJI) is a devastating complication after total hip arthroplasty (THA). The common treatment in the USA is a two-stage exchange which can be associated with significant morbidity and mortality. The purpose of this study was to analyze complications in the treatment course of patients undergoing two-stage exchange for PJI THA and determine when they occur. Methods: We analyzed all patients that underwent two-stage exchange arthroplasty for treatment of PJI after THA from January 2005 to January 2018 at a single institution. Complications were categorized as medical or surgical and divided into interstage and post-reimplantation. Minimum follow-up was 1 year. Success was based on the MusculoSkeletal Infection Society (MSIS) definition. Results: 205 hips (203 patients) underwent first stage of planned two-stage exchange. The median age was 68 (interquartile range (IQR) 18). There were 97 males and 106 females. Overall, 73/205 (38 %) patients had at least one complication during treatment: 13.5 % (25/185) of patients experienced a medical complication and 28.1 % (52/185) a surgical complication; 2.4 % died within 1 year of surgery, and 4.9 % (15/203) had mortality at a median of 2.5 years (IQR 4.9); 27 % of patients had complications during the interstage period, most commonly being recurrence of infection requiring additional surgery (63 %); and 14 % of patients experienced a complication following reimplantation, most commonly persistence or recurrence of infection (59 %). While 92 % of patients that initiated treatment were ultimately reimplanted, only 69 % were infection free at 1 year and required no additional treatment. Conclusions: While two-stage exchanges for PJI in THA have been reported as successful, there are few reports of the complications during the process. In our series, significant numbers of patients experienced complications, often during the interstage period, highlighting the morbidity of this method of treatment.