Two-stage Arthroplasty Research Articles

Does Body Mass Index Affect the Success of Two-Stage Management of Periprosthetic Joint Infection?

IntroductionObesity is associated with increased infection risk after primary total joint arthroplasty. In this retrospective cohort analysis, we sought to assess the association between body mass index (BMI) and infection recurrence after two-stage revision total joint arthroplasty (TJA) for periprosthetic joint infection (PJI). MethodsPatients were grouped by BMI (< 30, 30 to 40, and ≥ 40) as non-obese, obese, and morbidly obese, and assessed for associations and timing of PJI reinfection as well as readmissions and complications. ResultsFollowing the two-stage revision, PJI reinfections increased from 11.5% in non-obese to 19.0% in obese and 25.9% in morbidly obese patients (P = 0.011). As BMI increased across the three groups, 90-day readmission rates following two-stage PJI revision significantly increased (8.6, 19.7, and 16.7%, respectively (P = 0.042)). The average time to reinfection decreased with obesity tercile (restricted-mean times of 4.5, 4.2, and 3.8 years with non-obese, obese, and morbidly obese, respectively (P = 0.023)). DiscussionThe success of PJI management with two-stage arthroplasty is significantly impacted by patient BMI, with morbidly obese subjects having the worst outcomes. Attempts to modify BMI before completion of two-stage PJI treatment should be considered in the morbidly obese given high rates of recurrence.

Systematisation of the causes that required revision hip replacement, methods of their solution, treatment results in Ukraine

BackgroundThe objective of this study is to organise data on complications following total hip replacement (THA) over a span of 10 years, specifically focussing on cases that necessitated revision endoprosthetic surgeries. The objective is to create a recommendation for an All-Ukrainian registry of initial and repeated hip arthroplasty (HA) and standardise the terminology used to define “revision of total hip replacement surgery”.MethodsThe retrospective analysis examined 236 instances of revision hip arthroplasty (rTHA) performed at the Institute of Traumatology and Orthopaedics Centre between January 2005 and December 2021. The primary factors for revision were identified through an analysis of the patient’s medical records, laboratory results, visual inspection, and the state of the previously implanted prosthesis. Demographic information, primary and revision HA dates, diagnoses, and causes of complications were recorded. The statistical analysis was conducted using the Statistica package (StatSoft), version 12.6 (2015), with a significance level of p < 0.05.ResultsOut of the 364 patients who were diagnosed with complications, 236 of them (55.17%) needed a procedure called 1rTHA. Among these cases, 152 (41.76%) were specifically diagnosed with aseptic component instability. Significant factors for mechanical loosening were a high body mass index (BMI ≥ 30) and older age, with respective t-values of 2.08 (p = 0.004) and 2.59 (p = 0.045). Osteoporosis significantly contributed to aseptic loosening and fractures around the implant. The occurrence of infectious complications was frequently linked to chronic infectious diseases (t = 3.37, p = 0.001). The overall percentage of need for 2rTHA was 27.22% (43 cases), with one case of infectious lesion following the revision.ConclusionsThe study emphasises the urgent requirement for standardised terminology and a comprehensive registry for hip arthroplasty procedures. Primary results indicate that cement-free fixation is more effective than cement-based fixation for revision in patients with aseptic instability and that two-stage arthroplasty is effective for treating infectious inflammation. Furthermore, the most effective treatment for femoral fractures with periprosthetic involvement was determined to be open repositioning and osteosynthesis with metal retainers. The aforementioned observations emphasise the need to create a comprehensive registry across Ukraine to support patient care, enable evidence-based practices, and enhance the overall effectiveness of hip arthroplasty operations.Clinical trial numberNot applicable.

Do one-stage indications predict success following two-stage arthroplasty for chronic periprosthetic joint infection?

Introduction: The 2018 International Consensus Meeting (ICM) proposed criteria for one-stage exchange arthroplasty in treating periprosthetic joint infection (PJI). Our study aimed to determine what proportion of PJI patients met the 2018 ICM criteria and how this affected infection-free survivorship for patients. Methods: All chronic PJI patients treated with two-stage exchange within our institution between 2017-2020 were retrospectively reviewed. Included cases met 2011 Musculoskeletal Infection Society (MSIS) criteria for PJI and had a 2-year minimum follow-up. Treatment success was defined as Tier 1A in the 2019 MSIS working group definition. ICM one-stage criteria included non-immunocompromised host, absence of sepsis, adequate soft tissue for closure, known preoperative pathogen, and susceptibility. Immunocompromised host was analyzed as two separate definitions. Kaplan-Meier survivorship, Cox regression, and univariate analyses were performed. Results: A total of 293 chronic PJI patients were included. Overall, treatment failure occurred in (21.8 %) patients. Only 13 % () met ICM criteria definition no.1 for one-stage exchange; 12 % () met definition no.2. In both definitions, infection-free survivorship at 2years did not differ between patients who met and did not meet criteria (). Cox proportional hazard regression analyses demonstrated that the only variable predicting treatment failure was knee joint involvement (). Conclusions: We found that a very limited number of chronic PJI patients were suitable for a one-stage exchange. Furthermore, the supposition that healthier hosts with known pathogens (the basis of the ICM criteria) yield better PJI treatment outcomes was not observed. These results justify the ongoing multicenter randomized control trial comparing one-stage versus two-stage treatment for chronic PJI.

Outcomes of single- vs two-stage primary joint arthroplasty for septic arthritis: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Septic arthritis (SA) is an intra-articular infection caused by purulent bacteria and the only effective method is surgical intervention. Two-stage arthroplasty is considered the gold standard treatment for SA, but recent studies have found that single-stage arthroplasty can achieve the same efficacy as two-stage arthroplasty. This study aimed to compare the efficacy of single- vs two-stage arthroplasty in the treatment of (acute or quiescent) SA. The review process was conducted according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines. We searched the PubMed, EMBASE, Medline, and Cochrane Library databases to identify all literature on the treatment of SA using single- and two-stage arthroplasty from the date of database inception to November 10, 2022. Data on reinfection rates were expressed as odds ratios and 95% CIs. Seven retrospective studies with a total of 413 patients were included. Pooled analysis showed no difference in the reinfection rate between single- and two-stage arthroplasty. Subgroup analysis found no difference between the single- and two-stage arthroplasty groups in the incidence of purulent infection of the hip and knee. Cumulative meta-analysis showed gradual stabilization of outcomes. Based on our meta-analysis of available retrospective studies, we found no significant difference in reinfection rates between single- and two-stage arthroplasty for SA. Further prospective cohort studies are needed to confirm our results, although our meta-analysis provides important insights into the current literature on this topic.

Sequential repeated tibial tubercle osteotomy in a two-stage exchange strategy: a superior approach to treating a chronically infected knee arthroplasty?

PurposeSurgical approach can impact the reliability of the debridement after a chronic total knee periprosthetic joint infection (PJI), a factor of utmost importance to eradicate the infection. The most adequate knee surgical approach in cases of PJI is a matter of debate. The purpose of this study was to determine the influence of performing a tibial tubercle osteotomy (TTO) in a two-stage exchange protocol for knee PJI treatment.MethodsRetrospective cohort study examining patients managed with two-stage arthroplasty due to chronic knee PJI (2010–2019). Performance and timing of the TTO were collected. Primary end-point was infection control with a minimum FU of 12 months and according to internationally accepted criteria. Correlation between TTO timing and reinfection rate was reviewed.ResultsFifty-two cases were finally included. Overall success (average follow-up: 46.2 months) was 90.4%. Treatment success was significantly higher among cases addressed using TTO during the second stage (97.1% vs. 76.5%, pvalue 0.03). Only 4.8% of the patients relapsed after performing a sequential repeated TTO, that is, during both first and second stages, compared to 23.1% cases in which TTO was not done (p value 0.28). No complications were observed among patients in the TTO group with a significant decrease in soft tissue necrosis (p: 0.052).ConclusionSequential repeated tibial tubercle osteotomy during a two-stage strategy is a reasonable option and offers high rates of infection control in complex cases of knee PJI with a low rate of complications.

Surgical Management for Chronic Destructive Septic Hip Arthritis: Debridement, Antibiotics, and Single-Stage Replacement is as Effective as Two-Stage Arthroplasty.

ObjectiveTo compare the surgical outcomes of debridement, antibiotics, and single‐stage total hip replacement (DASR) vs two‐stage arthroplasty (two‐stage arthroplasty) for chronic destructive septic hip arthritis (SHA).MethodsCases of chronic destructive SHA treated by DASR or two‐stage arthroplasty in our department from January 2008 to October 2021 were retrospectively reviewed. Patient demographic information, perioperative inflammation markers, intraoperative blood loss, microbial culture, and metagenomic new generation sequencing results were recorded. The perioperative complications, hospital stay, hospitalization cost, infection recurrence rate, and Harris Hip Score (HHS) at the last follow‐up were compared between the two groups.ResultsA total of 28 patients were included in the study, including 11 patients who received DASR and 17 patients who received two‐stage arthroplasty. There was no significant difference in demographic information, preoperative serum inflammatory markers, synovial fluid white blood cell count, or percentage of polymorphonuclear leukocytes between the two groups. The DASR group demonstrated significantly lower intraoperative blood loss [(368.2 ± 253.3) mL vs (638.2 ± 170.0) mL, p = 0.002], hospital stay [(22.6 ± 8.1) days vs (43.5 ± 13.2) days, p < 0.0001], and hospitalization expenses [(81,269 ± 11,496) RMB vs (137,524 ± 25,516) RMB, p < 0.0001] than the two‐stage arthroplasty group. In the DASR group, one patient had dislocation as a complication. There were no cases with recurrence of infection. In the two‐stage arthroplasty group, there was one case complicated with spacer fracture, one case with spacer dislocation, and one case with deep vein thrombosis of the lower limbs. There were no cases with recurrence of infection. There were no significant differences in the readmission rate, complication rate, or HHS at the last follow‐up between the two groups.ConclusionsBoth DASR and two‐stage arthroplasty achieved a satisfactory infection cure rate and functional recovery for chronic destructive SHA, and DASR demonstrated significantly lower intraoperative blood loss, hospital stay, and hospitalization costs than two‐stage arthroplasty. For appropriately indicated patients, if microbial data are available and a standardized debridement protocol is strictly followed, DASR can be a treatment option.

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.

Arthroplasty after septic arthritis of the native hip and knee: retrospective analysis of 49 joints.

Background: Arthroplasty after septic arthritis (SA) treatment raises diagnostic and therapeutic questions. The main objective was to evaluate infection-free survival of patients undergoing total knee arthroplasty (TKA) or total hip arthroplasty (THA) post-SA. Other objectives were to describe the population's characteristics, surgical strategies, results of preoperative examinations and cultures of intraoperative samples taken at implantation, and postoperative antibiotic therapy. Methods: This is a retrospective, observational, monocenter study, from January 2005 to May 2019, including all patients undergoing TKA or THA with prior or ongoing SA in the same joint. Infection–free survival was analyzed and reported. Results: Forty-seven patients, 29 men, 49 joints operated on (30 knees, 19 hips), were included. Median SA-to-arthroplasty interval was 32 [1–216] weeks. It was years for 43 joints and months for 19 joints. Six patients underwent arthroplasty while still on SA treatment. One-stage arthroplasty was done for 43 joints and two-stage arthroplasty for 6 joints. Eight (16 %) cultures of intraoperative specimens were positive. Median durations of postoperative antibiotic therapy were 10 d for sterile cultures and 82 d for those that were positive. At 2 years, infection-free survival rate was 95.9 % (). After a median follow-up of 47 [18–142] months, no SA relapse was observed, but five patients developed new periprosthetic joint infections (PJIs) with a different microorganism. Conclusion: Arthroplasty may be a post-SA option, even within a short period of time. One-stage arthroplasty can be done if synovectomy is thorough, intraoperative samples are taken and antibiotics are administered until those culture results become available. We observed no SA relapse, but new PJIs occurred.

Outcome and Predictors of Septic Failure Following Total Joint Arthroplasty for Prior Septic Arthritis of Hip and Knee Joint

BackgroundArthroplasty patients with prior septic arthritis are at a high risk of developing periprosthetic joint infection (PJI). The aims of this study are to investigate the outcome and predictors of septic failure following total joint arthroplasty (TJA) for prior septic arthritis. In addition, the optimal timing of TJA is also discussed. MethodsA retrospective review of 105 TJA patients with prior septic arthritis between January 2000 and December 2019 was performed. Patient-specific and surgery-related factors, organism profiles, and other relevant variables were recorded. ResultsAt a mean follow-up of 10.3 years, the PJI rate was 16.2%. The adjusted Cox proportional hazards model showed that male gender (HR, 9.95; P < .01), end-stage renal disease (HR, 37.34; P < .01), debridement surgery ≥3 times (HR,4.75; P = .04) and polymicrobial infection in primary septic arthritis (HR, 10.02; P = .02) were independent risk factors for PJI. Neither the types of initial debridement, nor one-stage vs two-stage arthroplasty was related to the risk of PJI. While delaying the timing of TJA did not correlate with a reduction of PJI rate, there was a higher risk of PJI re-infection by the same microorganisms isolated in prior septic arthritis if TJA was performed within 6 months after septic arthritis. ConclusionsOur study demonstrated that male gender, end-stage renal disease (ESRD), multiple debridement surgeries and polymicrobial septic arthritis predisposed septic failure of TJA following prior septic arthritis. Surgeons should counsel patients with the potential complications, and be cognizant about the risk factors pertaining to septic failure when considering TJA.

Spacer exchange in persistent periprosthetic joint infection: microbiological evaluation and survivorship analysis.

The purposes of this study were to determine demographics and characteristics of patients who underwent spacer exchange for persistent infection in the setting of two-stage arthroplasty for periprosthetic joint infection, to describe the microbiology of pathogens involved, to analyze survivorship free from infection in these patients. The institutional prospectively collected database was reviewed to enroll patients with minimum 2 years follow-up. Patients who underwent two-stage procedure for septic arthritis were excluded, as were patients who had spacer fracture or dislocation. A total of 34 patients (41 procedures) were included. Mean age was 65.0 ± 12.8years. Mean follow-up was 53.4 ± 24.8months. Mean number of previous procedures was 3.6 ± 1.2. A total of 27 (79.4%) patients underwent final reimplantation. The most frequently isolated pathogen in spacer exchange was Staphylococcus epidermidis (10 cases, 28.6%). Polymicrobial cultures were obtained from 9 (25.71%) patients, 10 (28.6%) presented culture-negative infections. A total of 11 (32.4%) resistant pathogens were isolated, and 16 (47.0%) difficult to treat pathogens were detected. Eradication rate was 78.8%. Overall survivorship of implants after final reimplantation was 72.8% at 51.8months. Surgeons should be aware that subjects necessitating spacer exchange often present multiple comorbidities, previous staged revision failures, soft-tissue impairment and difficult to treat infection. In these patients, spacer exchange provides good clinical results and infection eradication, preventing arthrodesis or amputation.

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.

The change of coagulation profile in two-staged arthroplasty for periprosthetic joint infection patients: a retrospective cohort study

AimsPeriprosthetic joint infection (PJI) is a serious complication of total joint arthroplasty. We performed a retrospective cohort study to evaluate (1) the change of coagulation profile in two-staged arthroplasty patients and (2) the relationship between coagulation profile and the outcomes of reimplantation.MethodBetween January 2011 and December 2018, a total of 202 PJI patients who were operated on with two-staged arthroplasty were included in this study initially. This study continued for 2 years and the corresponding medical records were scrutinized to establish the diagnosis of PJI based on the 2014 MSIS criteria. The coagulation profile was recorded at two designed points, (1) preresection and (2) preimplantation. The difference of coagulation profile between preresection and preimplantation was evaluated. Receiver operating characteristic curves (ROC) were used to evaluate the diagnostic efficiency of the coagulation profile and change of coagulation profile for predicting persistent infection before reimplantation.ResultsThe levels of APTT, INR, platelet count, PT, TT, and plasma fibrinogen before spacer implantation were significantly higher than before reimplantation. No significant difference was detected in the levels of D-dimer, ACT, and AT3 between the two groups. The AUC of the combined coagulation profile and the change of combined coagulation profile for predicting persistent infection before reimplantation was 0.667 (95% CI 0.511, 0.823) and 0.667 (95% CI 0.526, 0.808), respectively.ConclusionThe coagulation profile before preresection is different from before preimplantation in two-staged arthroplasty and the coagulation markers may play a role in predicting infection eradication before reimplantation when two-stage arthroplasty is performed.Level of evidenceLevel III, diagnostic study.

Clinical outcomes and survivorship of two-stage total hip or knee arthroplasty in septic arthritis: a retrospective analysis with a minimum five-year follow-up

PurposeSeptic arthritis of the native joint is challenging for orthopedic surgeons because it may lead to wide bone defects and severe impairment of joint function. This study aimed to analyze clinical functional outcomes, the rate of infection eradication, and survival of implants of patients who underwent two-stage arthroplasty for septic arthritis of the hip and knee.MethodsA retrospective single-centre analysis was conducted of patients treated for septic arthritis of the hip and knee joints through a two-stage surgery between 2012 and 2015. Clinical and radiological records were gathered from the prospectively collected Institutional Arthroplasty Registry. Patients’ pre-operative Harris hip scores and Knee Society scores were compared with those obtained at the latest follow-up. Kaplan–Meier curves were generated to assess survival of implants.ResultsForty-seven patients were included. The mean follow-up was 85.2 ± 15.4 months. The Harris hip score improved from 39.4 ± 9.9 to 84.5 ± 10.8 points (p < 0.001). The Knee Society score improved from 40.7 ± 8.4 to 86.0 ± 7.8 points (p < 0.001). Knee Society score-function increased from 25.7 ± 14.2 to 85.4 ± 23.4 points (p < 0.001). The infection eradication rates were 92.0% and 90.9% in patients who underwent hip and knee operation, respectively (p = 0.891). Overall survivorship of implants after the second stage was 93.6%.ConclusionsTwo-stage arthroplasty provides good to excellent clinical outcomes in cases of active septic arthritis of the hip and the knee, high rates of infection control, and implant survival.

Debridement, antibiotics and implant retention (DAIR) for the management of knee prosthetic joint infection

BackgroundWhile two-stage revision arthroplasty is viewed as the gold standard for the treatment of knee periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) in terms of infection eradication, it is associated with significant cost along with patient morbidity and mortality. Debridement, antibiotics, and implant retention (DAIR) is an attractive option as it has demonstrated better patient outcomes, comparable implant longevity to primary arthroplasty, and significantly reduced cost when successful. Given the heterogeneity of what is defined as a DAIR the literature is highly variable in terms of its efficacy from the perspective of infection eradication. MethodsIn the setting of a previously well-functioning, well-fixed arthroplasty with an acceptable soft tissue envelope and a treatable organism we report our methods for proceeding with a DAIR procedure, both unicompartmental and total knee. ResultsWith the above methods we have demonstrated improved patient outcomes when compared to one- or two-stage arthroplasty with lower patient morbidity. Implant longevity in the setting of a successful DAIR is equivalent to those of a primary arthroplasty. ConclusionsWith appropriate indications and good surgical technique as described we believe DAIR is an excellent option in the treatment of periprosthetic joint infection. We hope that with a well-defined protocol as outlined we can gain a better understanding of the efficacy of DAIR procedure with more homogeneity to the procedure to better define when they are most successful while improving patient outcomes and reducing cost.

Advanced septic arthritis of the shoulder treated by a two-stage arthroplasty.

BACKGROUNDThe usual treatment of septic shoulder arthritis consists of arthroscopic or open lavage and debridement. However, in patients with advanced osteoarthritic changes and/or massive rotator cuff tendon tears, infection eradication can be challenging to achieve and the functional outcome is often not satisfying even after successful infection eradication. In such cases a two-stage approach with initial resection of the native infected articular surfaces, implantation of a cement spacer before final treatment with a total shoulder arthroplasty in a second stage is gaining popularity in recent years with the data in literature however being still limited.AIMTo evaluate the results of a short interval two-stage arthroplasty approach for septic arthritis with concomitant advanced degenerative changes of the shoulder joint.METHODSWe retrospectively included five consecutive patients over a five-year period and evaluated the therapeutic management and the clinical outcome assessed by disability of the arm, shoulder and hand (DASH) score and subjective shoulder value (SSV). All procedures were performed through a deltopectoral approach and consisted in a debridement and synovectomy, articular surface resection and insertion of a custom made antibiotic enriched cement spacer. Shoulder arthroplasty was performed in a second stage.RESULTSMean age was 61 years (range, 47-70 years). Four patients had previous surgeries ahead of the septic arthritis. All patients had a surgical debridement ahead of the index procedure. Mean follow-up was 13 mo (range, 6-24 mo). Persistent microbiological infection was confirmed in all five cases at the time of the first stage of the procedure. The shoulder arthroplasties were performed 6 to 12 wk after insertion of the antibiotic-loaded spacer. There were two hemi and three reverse shoulder arthroplasties. Infection was successfully eradicated in all patients. The clinical outcome was satisfactory with a mean DASH score and SSV of 18.4 points and 70% respectively.CONCLUSIONShort interval two-stage approach for septic shoulder arthritis is an effective treatment option. It should nonetheless be reserved for selected patients with advanced disease in which lavage and debridement have failed.

One-staged combined hip and knee arthroplasty: retrospective comparative study at mid-term follow-up

BackgroundTo date, few knowledge is available about safety and effectiveness of one-staged combined hip and knee arthroplasty. The aim of our study was to evaluate, in a comparative fashion, complications and outcomes in patients who underwent one-staged hip and knee arthroplasty.MethodsForty-two patients were enrolled and allocated into two groups of 21 patients each: one-staged hip and knee arthroplasty (group A) and two-staged hip and knee arthroplasty (group B). The follow-up averaged 50.2 months. Postoperative complications and implant survivorship were assessed prospectively. Outcomes were evaluated with Harris Hip score (HSS), Western Ontario Mc-Ministry score for the hip (h-WOMAC), Knee Society score (KSS), and Western Ontario Mc-Ministry knee score (k-WOMAC). Hip and knee range of motion (ROM) were measured both preoperatively and at the last follow-up.ResultsTwo (9.5%) patients in group A and three (14.3%) patients in group B developed complications (P = 0.8). Although a significant decrease in postoperative haemoglobin (Hgb) values was found in group A patients during the hospital stay, no differences in blood transfusions were found (P = 0.8). No significant differences were found comparing clinical-functional outcomes between the two groups, while a significant reduction of hospital length of stay was shown in group A patients.ConclusionsOne-staged combined hip and knee arthroplasty could be considered in patients with co-existing severe hip and knee osteoarthritis, providing similar complications and mid-term outcomes of two-staged procedures. However, the reproducibility safety and reliability of these procedures should be confirmed in prospective comparative randomised trials with more numerous patients.Trial registrationRetrospectively registered

Advances in management of periprosthetic joint infections: an historical prospective study.

The purpose of our study is to assess the incidence of prosthetic joint infection (PJI) after total Knee arthroplasty (TKA), total Hip arthroplasty (THA) and total Shoulder arthroplasty (TSA), to identify risk factors, determine the microbial spectrum and management's outcome. A case-control, retrospective observational study was performed analyzing patients who developed a PJI after TKA, THA, and TSA from 2000 to 2017 at our hospital. The patient's risk profile was defined extracting from clinical records the following data: sex, age, BMI, type of implant, comorbidity, year of surgery, year of infection, previous intra-articular injection, microbial isolation, medical and surgical management outcome. We include in the "control group" for each "case" at least 3 patients who didn't have a PJI after TJA. 28 patients met all inclusion and exclusion criteria. Comparing the "cases" with "controls" demographics parameters, medical comorbidities and previous intra-articular injection were not associated with an increased risk of PJI. Comparing the "early/delayed group" with "late group", BMI was associated with an increased risk of early/delayed PJI, while demographics parameters, medical comorbidities, and previous intra-articular injection did not significantly increase the risk of PJI. Logistic regression showed that for each BMI unit there was a 20-fold increased risk of early prosthetic infection (OR 1.19, IC 1.03-1.38, p=0.01). Staphylococci were isolated most frequently from pre-operative and intra-operative cultures. Two-stage arthroplasty exchange and surgical debridement resulted in the most performed surgical treatment with a success rate of 88 and 87%. Obesity is a risk factor for "early/delayed infection" of TJA. Two-stage arthroplasty exchange, debridement, antibiotics, and implant retention in patients are treatments with a high rate of success in terms of reinfection.

311. Low Rate of Microbiologic Relapse in Two-Stage Exchange for Knee Prosthetic Joint Infections

BackgroundProsthetic joint infection (PJI) is a grave complication of total knee arthroplasty (TKA). Historically, two-stage arthroplasty exchange has been considered to be the definitive approach to eradicating infection and preserving joint function. However, patients are increasingly presenting with higher rates of comorbidities traditionally associated with poorer orthopedic surgical outcome, including advanced age, obesity and diabetes. We investigated whether two-stage exchange remains effective for TKA PJI in this population, and evaluated the microbiology of repeat infections.MethodsA retrospective cohort of TKA PJI treated with two-stage exchange was identified by query of hospital coding records from 2009 to 2014, with subsequent chart review. The primary endpoint was defined as prosthesis retention for 2 years from reimplantation. Microbiologic relapse was defined as a recurrence of a previously treated organism. Descriptive statistics were completed using the Fisher’s exact test for categorical variables and the Mann–Whitney U test for continuous variables.ResultsOne hundred fifty-nine patients who underwent two-stage exchange for a TKA PJI meeting Musculoskeletal Infection Society International Consensus criteria were identified. The average age was 66 years, and 37% were female. One hundred forty-one underwent reimplantation; 24 of these (17%) had recurrent infection. Of the 24 patients who developed infection after reimplantation, only four relapsed with the same microbe; the other 20 (83%) were diagnosed with new, microbiologically distinct organisms. Thee of these four recurrences were due to Staphylococcus aureus infection. The likelihood of microbiologic relapse was low among reimplanted patients (3%). In univariate analysis, no associations were found between outcome and age, comorbidities, or BMI.ConclusionTwo-stage exchange arthroplasty for TKA infection is associated with a very low rate of microbiologic relapse. However, those patients able to undergo reimplantation remain at risk of subsequent infections with new microbes. It remains important to continue to modify risk factors in patients who have undergone a two-stage exchange for PJI.Disclosures All authors: No reported disclosures.

CORR Insights®: Does Change in ESR and CRP Guide the Timing of Two-stage Arthroplasty Reimplantation?

CORR Insights®: Does Change in ESR and CRP Guide the Timing of Two-stage Arthroplasty Reimplantation?

Does Change in ESR and CRP Guide the Timing of Two-stage Arthroplasty Reimplantation?

Two-stage reimplantation arthroplasty is a commonly used approach for treating chronic periprosthetic joint infections. A prereimplantation threshold value of erythrocyte sedimentation rate (ESR) and C-reactive protein (CRP) to determine infection eradication and the proper timing of reimplantation remains ill defined. We theorized that rather than a specific numeric threshold, a percentage of improvement in these serology markers might improve diagnostic accuracy in determining the timing of reimplantation. We investigated if (1) the percent, or delta, change in ESR and CRP values from preresection to prereimplantation ([INCREMENT]ESR, [INCREMENT]CRP) is a useful marker of infection eradication and (2) whether the initial PJI causative organism (resistant, nonresistant, or culture-negative) is associated with serum ESR and CRP values before and after treatment with an antibiotic spacer and parenteral antibiotic therapy. We retrospectively reviewed 300 patients, nine of whom were lost to followup, treated with a two-stage revision THA or TKA protocol between 2005 and 2014 from two separate institutional arthroplasty registries. Serum ESR and CRP values were recorded at two designated points: (1) preresection and (2) after 6 weeks of intravenous antibiotic therapy with a drug-eluting spacer and completion of an organism-specific intravenous antibiotic regimen. Patient records were reviewed electronically for causative species of infection, revision surgeries, and recurrent/persistent infection based on Musculoskeletal Infection Society criteria for a minimum of 2 years. Forty-eight of 291 patients (16%) underwent a revision procedure for recurrent or persistent infection, whereas 31 patients (10%) were revised for noninfectious reasons. The [INCREMENT]ESR, [INCREMENT]CRP, culture results, and patient demographics were recorded and analyzed with receiver operator curves controlling for American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) class. Receiver operator characteristic area under the curves (AUC) demonstrated that both the [INCREMENT]ESR (AUC = 0.581) and [INCREMENT]CRP (AUC = 0.539) percentages were poor markers of recurrent or persistent infection. When comparing preresection with prereimplantation values, the median percent [INCREMENT]ESR was 50% (interquartile range [IQR], 17%-77%) for those patients who remained infection-free versus 59% (IQR, 29%-78%) for those who developed reinfection (p = 0.540). The median percent [INCREMENT]CRP was 77% (IQR, 47%-92%) for those patients who remained infection-free versus 79% (IQR, 46%-95%) for those who experienced reinfection (p = 0.634). Although no significant differences were found between organism type and CRP values at the two time points, the preresection ESR level was higher in patients infected with resistant bacteria (median, 69; IQR, 60%-85%) compared with nonresistant organisms (median, 55; IQR, 33%-83%; p = 0.020). The percent change in serum ESR and CRP inflammatory markers before and after two-stage reimplantation for PJI was not associated with reinfection risk when controlling for ASA class. Although a return to normal serology infrequently occurs before reimplantation, [INCREMENT]ESR and [INCREMENT]CRP provide no additional diagnostic accuracy to determine the timing of reimplantation. Furthermore, the pre- and postresection serology values have no meaningful relationship to resistant or nonresistant pathogens. Decisions for reimplantation must take into account multiple variables rather than a specific threshold change in serum inflammatory markers. Level III, diagnostic study.