ObjectiveThe aim of this study was to evaluate whether intraoperative histopathological examination could predict the risk of relapse of infection in periprosthetic joint infections (PJI). MethodsThe study included 25 patients (14 women and 11 men, with a mean age of 67.0 years (range, 37–83 years)), who had two-staged revision surgery for a PJI. Following prosthetic removal in the first stage, all patient underwent an intraoperative histopathological examination during the second stage. The patients were divided into PMNs-positive group (≥five PMNs per high-powered field) or -negative group (<five PMNs). A relapse was defined as the occurrence of PJI. Median follow-up was 51 months (range, 32–80 months) following second-stage revision surgery. ResultsIntraoperative histopathological revealed that 8.0% of cases were PMNs-positive. Postoperative histopathological examination revealed that 28.0% of cases were PMNs-positive. 28.0% of cases showed discrepancy between the PMNs-positivity. Intraclass correlation coefficient indicates poor reproducibility. Infection relapse after revision surgery occurred in two cases (8.0%); both relapse cases were from the PMNs-negative group. There was no statistical relationship between the presence of PMNs in periprosthetic tissue by intraoperative or postoperative histopathological examination and relapse of infection. ConclusionsOur findings showed that intraoperative histopathological examination could not predict the relapse of infection. Intraoperative histopathological examination promotes overdiagnosis of the requirement for re-implantation of antibiotic-impregnated cement and prolonged treatment periods. Level of evidenceLevel III, diagnostic study
Read full abstract