Two-stage Revision Total Hip Arthroplasty Research Articles

Intraoperative calprotectin lateral flow immunoassay can assist decision-making between one- and two-stage revision total hip arthroplasty for patients with suspected periprosthetic joint infection.

Accurate diagnosis of chronic periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) presents a significant challenge for hip surgeons. Preoperative diagnosis is not always easy to establish, making the intraoperative decision-making process crucial in deciding between one- and two-stage revision total hip arthroplasty (THA). Calprotectin is a promising point-of-care novel biomarker that has displayed high accuracy in detecting PJI. We aimed to evaluate the utility of intraoperative calprotectin lateral flow immunoassay (LFI) in THA patients with suspected chronic PJI. The study included 48 THAs in 48 patients with a clinical suspicion of PJI, but who did not meet European Bone and Joint Infection Society (EBJIS) PJI criteria preoperatively, out of 105 patients undergoing revision THA at our institution for possible PJI between November 2020 and December 2022. Intraoperatively, synovial fluid calprotectin was measured with LFI. Cases with calprotectin levels ≥ 50 mg/l were considered infected and treated with two-stage revision THA; in negative cases, one-stage revision was performed. At least five tissue cultures were obtained; the implants removed were sent for sonication. Calprotectin was positive (≥ 50 mg/l) in 27 cases; out of these, 25 had positive tissue cultures and/or sonication. Calprotectin was negative in 21 cases. There was one false negative case, which had positive tissue cultures. Calprotectin showed an area under the curve of 0.917, sensitivity of 96.2%, specificity of 90.9%, positive predictive value of 92.6%, negative predictive value of 95.2%, positive likelihood ratio of 10.6, and negative likelihood ratio of 0.04. Overall, 45/48 patients were correctly diagnosed and treated by our algorithm, which included intraoperative calprotectin measurement. This yielded a 93.8% concordance with postoperatively assessed EBJIS criteria. Calprotectin can be a valuable tool in facilitating the intraoperative decision-making process for cases in which chronic PJI is suspected and diagnosis cannot be established preoperatively.

THE DIAGNOSTIC ACCURACY OF INTRAOPERATIVE SYNOVIAL FLUID CALPROTECTIN IN SUSPECTED LOW-GRADE PERIPROSTHETIC HIP JOINT INFECTIONS

Pre-operative definitive diagnosis of infection in painful total hip arthroplasty (THA) is not always easy to be established, making the intra-operative decision-making process crucial in management of revision hip surgery. Calprotectin is a promising point-of-care novel biomarker that has displayed high accuracy in detecting PJIs.From November 2020 to December 2022, 105 patients with painful primary THA were treated with revision THA in 3 orthopaedic departments. Pre-operatively, 23 were considered infected and treated with two-stage revision THA. The remaining 82 were likely infected according to the 2019 EBJIS criteria. The suspicion of low-grade infection was based on clinical (rest and/or night pain), laboratory (CRP, ESR, WBC – normal or slightly elevated) and radiological evaluation (loosening). Hip aspiration under CT imaging was performed in these cases and 34 of them yielded positive culture and were treated with two-stage revision. Aspiration was ineffective in the remaining 48 cases (33 negative, 15 unsuccessful attempts). Intra-operatively, calprotectin was measured with lateral flow immunoassay test in these patients. Cases with calprotectin levels ≥ 50 mg/L were treated with 2-stage revision THA; otherwise, they were considered not-infected and one-stage revision was performed. Synovial fluid and tissue samples were collected for analysis. Implants were sent for sonication fluid cultures.Calprotectin was positive (≥ 50 mg/L) in 27 cases and negative in 21 cases. There was 1 false negative case with positive tissue cultures. Out of the 27 positive cases, 25 had positive tissue cultures and sonication. However, 2 cases with high calprotectin levels (>200 mg/L) were not infected. The false positive result was attributed to severe metallosis. Calprotectin sensitivity was 96.2%, specificity 90.9%, PPV 92.6%, NPV 95.2%, AUC 0.935.The results of this ongoing study indicate that calprotectin seems to be a valuable tool in facilitating the intra-operative decision-making process in cases that low-grade infection is suspected and diagnosis cannot be established pre-operatively.

Systemic antibiotics are not required for successful two-stage revision hip arthroplasty.

The duration of systemic antibiotic treatment following first-stage revision surgery for periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) after total hip arthroplasty (THA) is contentious. Our philosophy is to perform an aggressive debridement, and to use a high local concentration of targeted antibiotics in cement beads and systemic prophylactic antibiotics alone. The aim of this study was to assess the success of this philosophy in the management of PJI of the hip using our two-stage protocol. The study involved a retrospective review of our prospectively collected database from which we identified all patients who underwent an intended two-stage revision for PJI of the hip. All patients had a diagnosis of PJI according to the major criteria of the Musculoskeletal Infection Society (MSIS) 2013, a minimum five-year follow-up, and were assessed using the MSIS working group outcome-reporting tool. The outcomes were grouped into 'successful' or 'unsuccessful'. A total of 299 two-stage revision THAs in 289 patients met the inclusion criteria, of whom 258 (86%) proceeded to second-stage surgery. Their mean age was 68.1 years (28 to 92). The median follow-up was 10.7 years (interquartile range (IQR) 6.3 to 15.0). A 91% success rate was seen in those patients who underwent reimplantation, decreasing to 86% when including those who did not proceed to reimplantation. The median duration of postoperative systemic antibiotics following the first stage was five days (IQR 5 to 9). There was no significant difference in outcome between those patients who were treated with antibiotics for ≤ 48 hours (p = 0.961) or ≤ five days (p = 0.376) compared with those who were treated with longer courses. Greater success rates were seen for Gram-positive PJIs (87%) than for Gram-negative (84%) and mixed-Gram PJIs (72%; p = 0.098). Aggressive surgical debridement with a high local concentration of targeted antibiotics at the time of first-stage revision surgery for PJI of the hip, without prolonged systemic antibiotics, provides a high rate of success, responsible antibiotic stewardship, and reduced hospital costs.

Two-stage revision for periprosthetic joint infection in cemented total hip arthroplasty: an increased risk for failure?

BackgroundThe impact of the prior fixation mode on the treatment outcome of chronic periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) of the hip is unclear. Removal of cemented total hip arthroplasty (THA) is particularly challenging and residual cement might be associated with reinfection. This study seeks to compare the results of two-stage revision for PJI in cemented and cementless THA.MethodsWe reviewed 143 consecutive patients undergoing two-stage revision THA for PJI between 2013 and 2018. Thirty-six patients with a fully cemented (n = 6), hybrid femur (n = 26) or hybrid acetabulum (n = 4) THA (cemented group) were matched 1:2 with a cohort of 72 patients who underwent removal of a cementless THA (cementless group). Groups were matched by sex, age, number of prior surgeries and history of infection treatment. Outcomes included microbiological results, interim re-debridement, reinfection, all-cause revision, and modified Harris hip scores (mHHS). Minimum follow-up was 2 years.ResultsCompared with PJI in cementless THA, patients undergoing removal of cemented THA had increasingly severe femoral bone loss (p = 0.004). Patients in the cemented group had an increased risk for positive cultures during second-stage reimplantation (22% compared to 8%, p = 0.043), higher rates of reinfection (22% compared to 7%, p = 0.021) and all-cause revision (31% compared to 14%, p = 0.039) compared to patients undergoing two-stage revision of cementless THA. Periprosthetic femoral fractures were more frequent in the group of patients with prior cementation (p = .004). Mean mHHS had been 37.5 in the cemented group and 39.1 in the cementless group, and these scores improved significantly in both groups (p < 0.01).ConclusionThis study shows that chronic infection in cemented THA might be associated with increased bone loss, higher rates of reinfection and all-cause revision following two-stage revision. This should be useful to clinicians counselling patients with hip PJI and can guide treatment and estimated outcomes.

Outcome of Two-Stage Revision Total Hip and Knee Arthroplasty as a Salvage Procedure for Deep Infection of Peri-Articular Fracture Fixation: Propensity Score-Matched Study.

Failed open reduction internal fixation (ORIF) of peri-articular fractures due to deep infection is associated with decreased functional outcomes and increased mortality rates. Two-stage revision total joint arthroplasty (TJA) is often needed as a salvage procedure. The aim of this study was to evaluate the outcome of two-stage revision total hip and knee arthroplasty as a salvage procedure for the treatment of deep infection of peri-articular fracture fixation. Using propensity score-matching, a total of 120 patients was evaluated: 1) 40 consecutive patients were treated with planned salvage two-stage revision for the treatment of deep peri-articular infection, and 2) a control group of 80 patients who underwent two-stage revision for periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) after non-IF TJA. An infection occurred after a fracture of the acetabulum (27.5%), femoral neck (22.5%), intertrochanteric femur (15.0%), subtrochanteric femur (5.0%), femoral shaft (7.5%), distal femur (5.0%), and tibia (15.0%). At an average follow up of 4.5 years (range, 1.0-25.8), the overall failure rate was 42.5% for the IF group compared to 21.3% for the non-ORIF group (P=0.03). There was a significantly higher reinfection rate for the IF group compared to the non-IF group (35.0% vs. 11.3%, p=0.005). Tissue cultures for the IF patients demonstrated significantly higher polymicrobial growth (30.0% vs. 11.3%, P=0.01) and methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (20.0% vs. 7.5%, P=0.04). Salvage two-stage revision arthroplasty for infected IF of peri-articular fractures was associated with poor outcome. The overall post-operative complications after salvage two-stage revision for infected IF of peri-articular fractures was high with 35% reinfection rates associated with the presence of mixed and resistant pathogens.

Failure analysis of articulating polymethyl methacrylate spacers in two-stage revision total hip arthroplasty.

AimsTwo-stage exchange revision total hip arthroplasty (THA) performed in case of periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) has been considered for many years as being the gold standard for the treatment of chronic infection. However, over the past decade, there have been concerns about its safety and its effectiveness. The purposes of our study were to investigate our practice, collecting the overall spacer complications, and then to analyze their risk factors.MethodsWe retrospectively included 125 patients with chronic hip PJI who underwent a staged THA revision performed between January 2013 and December 2019. All spacer complications were systematically collected, and risk factors were analyzed. Statistical evaluations were performed using the Student's t-test, Mann-Whitney U test, and Fisher's exact test.ResultsOur staged exchange practice shows poor results, which means a 42% mechanical spacer failure rate, and a 20% recurrent infection rate over the two years average follow-up period. Moreover, we found a high rate of spacer dislocation (23%) and a low rate of spacer fracture (8%) compared to the previous literature. Our findings stress that the majority of spacer complications and failures is reflecting a population with high comorbid burden, highlighted by the American Society of Anesthesiology grade, Charlson Comorbidity Index, and Lee score associations, as well as the cardiac, pulmonary, kidney, or hepatic chronic conditions.ConclusionOur experience of a two-stage hip exchange revision noted important complication rates associated with high failure rates of polymethylmethacrylate spacers. These findings must be interpreted in the light of the patient’s comorbidity profiles, as the elective population for staged exchange has an increasing comorbid burden leading to poor results. In order to provide better results for this specific population, our conclusion suggests that comparative strategy studies are required to improve our therapeutic indication.Cite this article: Bone Jt Open 2022;3(6):485–494.

Depression Is Transiently Increased in Patients Undergoing Two-Stage Revision Arthroplasty.

BackgroundThe implications of two-stage revision on mental health are poorly understood. The purpose of this study is to determine (1) whether patients undergoing two-stage revision total hip and knee arthroplasty for prosthetic joint infection were more likely to get Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS) Depression scores consistent with major depressive disorder (MDD) than those undergoing aseptic revision and (2) whether these symptoms resolved after the procedure.MethodsRecords of all 366 patients that underwent revision total hip or knee arthroplasty from January 1, 2015, – June 20, 2019, were reviewed. Forty-two patients were excluded for missing PROMIS Depression scores or incomplete treatment. Preoperative (<3 months), early postoperative (2-8 weeks), and final postoperative (6-18 months) Depression scores were collected. Patients crossing the PROMIS Depression threshold equivalent to a Patient Health Questionnaire-9 score ≥10, indicative of MDD, were evaluated.ResultsMore two-stage revision patients developed Depression scores indicative of MDD perioperatively than the aseptic cohort (20.0% vs 6.5%, P = .01). Two-stage revision patients had higher (worse) median Depression scores preoperatively (54.8 vs 51.3, P = .04) and at early follow-up (54.3 vs 49.9, P = .01), but not at final follow-up (50.4 vs 49.1, P = .39). Across all patients, Depression scores improved by 2.4 points at early follow-up (95% confidence interval:1.1–3.7; P < .001) and 3 points at final follow-up (95% confidence interval:1.5-4.5; P < .001; minimal clinically important difference 3.0).ConclusionsTwenty percent of two-stage revision arthroplasty patients, compared to <7% of aseptic revision patients, developed PROMIS Depression scores consistent with MDD during treatment. At final follow-up, a clinically significant improvement in Depression scores from baseline was evident in both cohorts.

Extended Trochanteric Osteotomy with Intermediate Resection Arthroplasty Is Safe for Use in Two-Stage Revision Total Hip Arthroplasty for Infection.

Background: This study sought to compare the results of two-stage revision total hip arthroplasty (THA) for periprosthetic infection (PJI) in patients with and without the use of an extended trochanteric osteotomy (ETO) for removal of a well-fixed femoral stem or cement. Methods: Thirty-two patients who had undergone an ETO as part of a two-stage revision without spacer placement were matched 1:2 with a cohort of sixty-four patients of the same sex and age who had stem removal without any osteotomy. Clinical outcomes including interim revision, reinfection and aseptic failure rates were evaluated. Modified Harris hip scores (mHHS) were calculated. Minimum follow-up was two years. Results: Patients undergoing ETO had a significantly lower rate of interim re-debridement compared to non-ETO patients (0% vs. 14.1%, p = 0.026). Reinfection following reimplantation was similar in both groups (12.5% in ETO patients vs. 9.4% in non-ETO patients, p = 0.365). Revision for aseptic reason was necessary in 12.5% in the ETO group and 14.1% in the non-ETO group (p = 0.833). Periprosthetic femoral fractures were seen in three patients (3.1%), of which all occurred in non-ETO patients. Dislocation was the most common complication, which was equally distributed in both groups (12.5%). The mean mHHS was 37.7 in the ETO group and 37.3 in the non-ETO group, and these scores improved significantly in both groups following reimplantation (p < 0.01). Conclusion: ETO without the use of spacer is a safe and effective method to manage patients with well-fixed femoral stems and for thorough cement removal in two-stage revision THA for PJI. While it might reduce the rate of repeated debridement in the interim period, the use of ETO appears to lead to similar reinfection rates following reimplantation.

Globulin, the albumin-to-globulin ratio, and fibrinogen perform well in the diagnosis of Periprosthetic joint infection

BackgroundAlthough periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) is a severe complication of total joint arthroplasty (TJA), the diagnosis of PJI remains challenging. Albumin (ALB), globulin (GLB), the albumin-to-globulin ratio (AGR), and fibrinogen could be indicators of the body’s inflammatory state. This study aimed to compare the diagnostic accuracy of these biomarkers with that of other inflammatory biomarkers in PJI patients.MethodsWe conducted a retrospective cohort study that included a consecutive series of patients undergoing debridement antibiotic irrigation and implant retention (DAIR), one-stage or the first stage of a two-stage revision total knee arthroplasty (TKA) or total hip arthroplasty (THA) for acute (n = 31) or chronic (n = 51) PJI, or revision TKA or THA for aseptic failures (n = 139) between January 2017 and December 2019 in our hospital. The 2013 criteria of the Musculoskeletal Infection Society (2013 MSIS) were used as the reference standard for the diagnosis of PJI. The preoperative ALB, GLB, AGR, fibrinogen, D-dimer, platelet count, fibrin degradation product (FDP), platelet-to-lymphocyte (PLR), platelet count to mean platelet volume ratio (PVR), neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio (NLR), erythrocyte sedimentation rate (ESR) and C-reactive protein (CRP) levels were assessed. The receiver operating characteristic curve (ROC), sensitivity, and specificity were utilized to compare different biomarkers.ResultsCompared with the aseptic patients, the GLB, D-dimer, fibrinogen, FDP, platelet count, PVR, PLR, NLR, ESR, and CRP levels of PJI patients were significantly higher (P < 0.01); however, the ALB and AGR levels were significantly lower (P < 0.01). The area under the curve (AUC), sensitivity and specificity were 0.774, 67.50, 77.54% for ALB; 0.820, 57.50, 89.86% for GLB; 0.845, 66.25, 93.48% for AGR; 0.832, 78.48, 78.95% for fibrinogen; 0.877, 81.48, 85.07% for ESR; 0.909, 83.95, 88.89% for CRP; 0.683, 55.22, 75.83% for D-dimer; 0.664, 38.81, 88.33% for FDP; 0.678, 52.44, 79.86% for platelet count; 0.707, 48.78, 86.33% for PVR; 0.700, 51.22, 80.58% for PLR; and 0.678, 52.44, 81.30% for NLR, respectively. In the clinic, GLB, AGR and fibrinogen could be used for diagnosis of patients suspected of having PJI.ConclusionOur study demonstrated that GLB, AGR, and fibrinogen were promising biomarkers in the diagnosis of PJI.

Two-Stage Revision Total Hip Arthroplasty Without Spacer Placement: A Viable Option to Manage Infection in Patients With Severe Bone Loss or Abductor Deficiency

BackgroundHigh rates of spacer-related complications in two-stage exchange total hip arthroplasty (THA) have been reported. Patients with advanced bone defects and abductor deficiency may benefit from a nonspacer two-stage revision. This study reports on the clinical course of a contemporary two-stage exchange for periprosthetic hip infection without spacer insertion. MethodsWe reviewed 141 infected THAs with extensive bone loss or abductor damage who underwent two-stage exchange without spacer placement. The mean duration from resection arthroplasty to reimplantation was 9 weeks (2-29). Clinical outcomes included interim revision, reinfection, and aseptic revision rates. Restoration of leg-length and offset was assessed radiographically. Modified Harris hip scores were calculated. Mean follow-up was 5 years (3-7). Treatment success was defined using the modified Delphi consensus criteria. ResultsThirty-four patients (24%) had treatment failure, including 13 reinfections, 16 interim redebridements for persistent infection, 2 antibiotic suppressive therapies, and 3 prosthetic joint infection–related deaths. Aseptic rerevision after reimplantation was necessary in 14 patients (10%). Dislocation accounted for most aseptic complications, with 20 dislocations occurring in 15 patients (11%). Leg-length and offset were restored to preoperative measures. Mean modified Harris hip scores significantly improved from 35 points to 67 points. ConclusionA nonspacer two-stage exchange is a viable option for managing chronically infected THA with severe bone loss or abductor deficiency, showing comparable rates of interim revision and recurrence of infection. Cementless reimplantation demonstrates good midterm survivorship with comparable functional outcomes and leg-length restoration. However, dislocation continues to be a major concern.

Patient-reported Outcome Measures of Revision Total Hip Arthroplasty for Prosthetic Joint Infection is not Inferior to Aseptic Revision Total Hip Arthroplasty.

Introduction:This study aims to investigate whether patients undergoing two-stage revision total hip arthroplasty (THA) for prosthetic joint infection (PJI) and one-stage revision THA for aseptic reasons have similar clinical outcomes and patient satisfaction during their post-operative follow-up. We hypothesise that the two-stage revision THA for PJI is associated with poorer outcomes as compared to aseptic revision THA.Materials and Methods:We reviewed prospectively collected data in our tertiary hospital arthroplasty registry and identified patients who underwent revision THA between 2001 and 2014, with a minimum of two years follow-up. The study group (two-stage revision THA for PJI) consists of 23 patients and the control group (one-stage revision THA for aseptic reasons) consists of 231 patients. Patient demographics, Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Arthritis Index (WOMAC), Oxford Hip Score (OHS), Short Form-36 (SF-36) scores and patient reported satisfaction were evaluated. Student’s t-test was used to compare continuous variables between the two groups. Statistical significance was defined as p <0.05.Results:The pre-operative demographics and clinical scores were relatively similar between the two groups of patients. At two years, patients who underwent revision THA for PJI reported a better WOMAC Pain Score and OHS as compared to aseptic revision THA. A similar proportion of patients were satisfied with their results of surgery in both groups (p=0.093).Conclusions:Although patients who underwent revision THA for PJI had poorer pre-operative functional scores (WOMAC function and SF-36 PF), at two years follow-up, these two groups of patients have comparable post-operative outcomes. Interestingly, patients who had revision THA for PJI reported a better clinical outcome in terms of OHS and WOMAC Pain score as compared to the aseptic group. We conclude that the revision THA for PJI is not inferior to aseptic revision THA in terms of patient satisfaction and clinical outcomes.

The results of screw augmentation of acetabular cement spacers for the treatment of periprosthetic hip joint infection

IntroductionProsthesis of antibiotic-loaded acrylic cement (PROSTALAC) is widely used in two-stage revision arthroplasty in periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) after total hip arthroplasty (THA). In our institution, we encountered several cases of acetabular cement spacer dislodgement. The aim of this study was to compare the results of two-stage revision arthroplasties with antibiotic-loaded cement spacers with or without screws on the acetabulum for PJI.Patients and methodsThis retrospective study included 44 patients who underwent a two-stage revision THA for PJI from June 2007 to May 2017. We divided the patients into two groups: group 1 consisted of 21 patients (21 hips) who underwent two-stage revision arthroplasty with screw augmentation, while group 2 consisted of 23 patients (23 hips) who underwent the same surgery without screw augmentation at the acetabular cement spacer. We compared the migration and dislodgement of the acetabular cement spacer between the two groups.ResultsBefore the second-stage surgery, there was less vertical migration of the cement spacer in group 1 compared to group 2 (1.2 mm vs 3.1 mm, p < 0.001). There was also less medial migration of the cement spacer in group 1 (0.6 mm vs 1.6 mm, p = 0.001). After the first stage, the mean Harris Hip score was significantly higher in group 1 than in group 2 (75 vs 65, p = 0.033). Cement spacer rotation or total movement out of the acetabular area occurred in six patients, all in group 2. After first stage reinfection occurred in two patients, one in each group.ConclusionsScrew augmentation to the acetabulum in the first-stage surgery provides better stability of acetabular antibiotic cement spacers without increasing reinfection rate.

Characterizing Femoral and Acetabular Bone Loss in Two-Stage Revision Total Hip Arthroplasty for Infection

BackgroundThe process of infection and multiple procedure-related factors in 2-stage exchange arthroplasty may lead to severe bone loss that can complicate subsequent reimplantation. The primary purpose of this study is to quantitatively characterize the extent of bone loss on the femoral and acetabular side prior to reimplantation during 2-stage revision hip arthroplasty for infection. MethodsThis retrospective case series includes 47 patients with planned 2-stage exchange arthroplasty for treatment of infected total hip replacement. Demographic, clinical, and surgical information, and complications during the 2-stage process were collected on all patients. The radiographs of all patients were reviewed prior to first-stage explantation and post-reimplantation or latest follow-up to characterize bone loss using the Paprosky classification systems. ResultsOf the 47 patients with planned 2-stage exchange, 10 patients (21%) were not reimplanted. Following explant and spacer placement, 32 patients (68%) experienced progressive femoral bone loss, and 20 (43%) experienced progressive acetabular bone loss. Patients who experienced progression of both femoral and acetabular bone (14, 30%) had a longer time between resection and reimplantation (164 ± 128 vs 88 ± 26 days, P = .03). A reimplantation time of greater than 90 days was associated with an increased risk of combined bone loss progression (15% vs 53%, P = .01). For patients who underwent reimplantation (79%), increased bone loss led to high rates of diaphyseal femoral fixation (97%) and revision acetabular components (38%). ConclusionIncreased time to reimplantation in 2-stage exchange arthroplasty for prosthetic hip infections is associated with a high rate of acetabular and femoral bone loss, and increased complexity of reimplantation.

The economic impact of periprosthetic infection in total hip arthroplasty

Periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) is the third leading cause of total hip arthroplasty (THA) failure. Although controversial, 2-stage revision remains the gold standard treatment for PJI in most situations. To date, there have been few studies describing the economic impact of PJI in today’s health care environment. The purpose of the current study was to obtain an accurate estimate of the institutional cost associated with the management of PJI in THA and to assess the economic burden of PJI compared with primary uncomplicated THA. We conducted a review of primary THA cases and 2-stage revision THA for PJI at our institution. Patients were matched for age and body mass index. All costs associated with each procedure were recorded. Descriptive statistics were used to summarize the collected data. Mean costs, length of stay, clinic visits and readmission rates associated with the 2 cohorts were compared. Fifty consecutive cases of revision THA were matched with 50 cases of uncomplicated primary THA between 2006 and 2014. Compared with the primary THA cohort, PJI was associated with a significant increase in mean length of hospital stay (26.5 v. 2.0 d, p < 0.001), mean number of clinic visits (9.2 v. 3.8, p < 0.001), number of readmissions (12 v. 1, p < 0.001) and average overall cost (Can$38 107 v. Can$6764, t = 8.3, p < 0.001). Treatment of PJI is a tremendous economic burden. Our data suggest a 5-fold increase in hospital expenditure in the management of PJI compared with primary uncomplicated THA.

Mechanical failure of articulating polymethylmethacrylate (PMMA) spacers in two-stage revision hip arthroplasty: the risk factors and the impact on interim function

BackgroundThis study aimed to investigate the risk factors for mechanical failure of cement spacers and the impact on hip function after two-stage exchange arthroplasty for periprosthetic joint infection (PJI).MethodsThirty-one patients (19 males and 12 females) with hip PJIs underwent resection arthroplasty and implantation of cement spacers from January 2014 to December 2015. Patients who encountered spacer-associated mechanical complications in the interim period (14 of 31) were compared with those without complications (17 of 31). Complications were defined as spacer dislocation, spacer fracture, spacer fracture with dislocation, and femoral fracture during or following spacer implantation. Hip functional outcome was assessed using the Harris hip score (HHS). Treatment success was defined according to the following criteria: (1) no symptoms or signs indicative of infection; (2) no PJI-related mortality; and (3) no subsequent surgical intervention for infection after reimplantation surgery. Multivariate logistic regression and Kaplan-Meier survival curves were used for analysis.ResultsFourteen patients (14/31 = 45%) suffered at least one spacer-related complication within the interim period. The development of spacer complications was associated with a younger age (odds ratio [OR] 0.91, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.83–1.00, p = 0.045) and chronic PJI (OR 14.7, 95% CI 1.19–182, p = 0.036). Patients with spacer complications also had a lower median HHS (37 vs. 60, p < 0.001) before reimplantation in comparison to those without spacer complications. After reimplantation, the two groups had a similar median HHS (90 vs. 89, p = 0.945). Two patients did not undergo reimplantation due to extensive comorbidities, and subsequently retained the antibiotic spacer for definitive treatment. The 2-year treatment success rate was 84.6% in the spacer-complication group and 87.5% in the non-spacer-complication group (p = 0.81).ConclusionThere was a high complication rate for articulating PMMA spacers during the interim period of two-stage revision total hip arthroplasty. A young age and chronic infection were the primary risk factors associated with mechanical complications. Patients at high risk of spacer-related mechanical complications should be advised accordingly by surgeons. Knowing the possible risk factors, surgeons should educate patients thoroughly to avoid spacer complications, thereby increasing patient satisfaction in the interim stage.Level of evidencePrognostic Level III.

The Use of Extended Trochanteric Osteotomy in 2-Stage Reconstruction of the Hip for Infection

BackgroundThe effect of extended trochanteric osteotomy (ETO) with immediate cerclage wire fixation on the scene of chronic periprosthetic joint infection on infection eradication and the osteotomy healing remains unclear. MethodsOne hundred seventeen patients who underwent two-stage revision total hip arthroplasty for chronic periprosthetic joint infection were enrolled in the study. The minimum follow-up was 2 years. Of these, 48 patients had underwent ETO and immediate cerclage wire fixation during the first-stage surgery, while 69 did not undergo ETO or any other osteotomy. In addition, 18 patients had underwent ETO in the second-stage reimplantation surgery. Repeated debridement, curative rate of infection, and complications were compared between the 2 groups. Meanwhile, osteotomy healing between the first and second osteotomy were also compared. ResultsThe repeated debridement rate and curative rate of infection were 2.1% and 95.8% in the ETO group, compared with 13.0% and 82.6% in the non-ETO group; there were significant difference between the 2 groups in these parameters (P = .037 and .030, respectively). Meanwhile, osteotomy healing rate was 93.8% in first-stage surgery with infection scene and 100% in second-stage surgery without infection; no significant difference was detected in osteotomy healing rate and time to healing (P = .278 and .803, respectively). The rate of complication was similar in both groups. ConclusionsETO combined with immediate cerclage wire fixation does not appear to reduce the rate of infection eradication. There was no harmful effect on complication rate and osteotomy healing.

Repeat two-stage exchange arthroplasty for prosthetic hip re-infection.

Recurrent infection following two-stage revision total hip arthroplasty (THA) for prosthetic joint infection (PJI) is a devastating complication. The purpose of this study was to report the survival of repeat two-stage revision hip arthroplasty, describe complications, and identify risk factors for failure. We retrospectively identified 19 hips (19 patients) that had undergone repeat two-stage revision THA for infection between 2000 to 2013. There were seven female patients (37%) and the mean age was 60 years (30 to 85). Survival free from revision was assessed via Kaplan-Meier analysis. The patients were classified according to the Musculoskeletal Infection Society (MSIS) system, and risk factors for failure were identified. Mean follow-up was four years (2 to 11). Gram-positive bacteria were responsible for 16/17 (94%) of the re-infections where microbes were identified. Following the repeat two-stage exchange arthroplasty, survival free from any revision was 74% (95% confidence interval (CI) 56% to 96%, 14 at risk) at two years and 45% (95% CI 25% to 75%, five at risk) at five years. Failure to control infection resulted in re-operation or revision in 42%A of patients (8/19). Survival free from revision was not dependent on host grade. Re-infection after two-stage exchange hip arthroplasty for PJI presents a challenging scenario. Repeat two-stage exchange arthroplasty has a low survival free from revision at five years (45%) and a high rate of re-infection (42%). Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2018;100-B:1157-61.

Two-Stage Revision Total Hip Arthroplasty With a Specific Articulating Antibiotic Spacer Design: Reliable Periprosthetic Joint Infection Eradication and Functional Improvement

BackgroundTwo-stage revision utilizing spacers loaded with high-dose antibiotic cement prior to reimplantation remains the gold standard for treatment of periprosthetic joint infections (PJI) in total hip arthroplasty (THA) in North America, but there is a paucity of data on mid-term outcomes. We sought to analyze the survivorship free of infection, clinical outcomes, and complications of a specific articulating spacer utilized during 2-stage revision. MethodsOne hundred thirty-five hips (131 patients) undergoing a 2-stage revision THA for PJI with a specific articulating antibiotic spacer design from 2005 to 2013 were retrospectively reviewed. Infections were classified according to the Musculoskeletal Infection Society criteria. Mean age at resection was 65 years and mean follow-up was 5 years (rang, 2-10). ResultsSurvivorship free of any infection after reimplantation was 92% and 88% at 2 and 5 years, respectively. Patients with a host-extremity grade of C3 compared to all patients with a host grade of A [hazard ratio (HR) 4.1, P = .05] were significant risk factors for poorer infection-free survivorship after reimplantation. Harris hip scores improved from a mean of 58 to a mean of 71 in the spacer phase (P = .002) and a mean of 81 post-reimplantation (P = .001). Fourteen (10%) patients dislocated after reimplantation, 9 (7%) of which required re-revision. Trochanteric deficiency (HR 19, P < .0001), dislocation of the articulating spacer prior to reimplantation [which occurred in 7 (5%) patients, 5 of whom subsequently dislocated the definitive implant] (HR 16, P < .0001), and female gender (HR 5, P = .002) were significant risk factors for post-reimplantation dislocation. ConclusionInsertion of an articulating antibiotic spacer during a 2-stage revision THA for PJI demonstrates reliable infection eradication and improvement in clinical function, including the spacer phase. Patients with trochanteric deficiency and an articulating spacer dislocation are at high risk of post-reimplantation dislocation; judicial use of a dual-mobility or constrained device should be considered in these patients.

A Strategic Protocol to Improve the Process and Outcomes of Two-stage Revision Total Hip Arthroplasty.

Two-stage revision total hip arthroplasty (THA) is the most commonly used treatment approach for deep prosthetic infection. However, in this approach the interval between the first and second stage tends to be prolonged. We devised a strategic protocol for improving the infection eradication rate and shortening the interval between the stages in two-stage revision THA. This study analyzed a series of 14 patients (14 hips) from 2008 to 2012, who were treated using an antibiotic-loaded acrylic cement (ALAC) spacer at the first stage and re-implantation at the second stage. The ALAC included vancomycin and amikacin for most of the cases. Patients with MRSA infection were additionally administered intravenous vancomycin in combination with either oral rifampicin or trimethoprim-sulfamethoxazole. The average interval between the stages was 54.2 days overall, and 58.7 days for cases with MRSA infection. Our infection eradication rate was 100%, with no reported recurrence of infection. The presence of MRSA tended to be associated with a longer interval between the two stages. Our protocol for two-stage revision THA was associated with a high eradication rate of infection and a shortened interval between the stages.

Economic analysis of two-stage septic revision after total hip arthroplasty: What are the relevant costs for the hospital's orthopedic department?

BackgroundThe number of septic total hip arthroplasty (THA) revisions is increasing continuously, placing a growing financial burden on hospitals. Orthopedic departments performing septic THA revisions have no basis for decision making regarding resource allocation as the costs of this procedure for the departments are unknown. It is widely assumed that septic THA procedures can only be performed at a loss for the department. Therefore, the purpose of this study was to investigate whether this assumption is true by performing a detailed analysis of the costs and revenues for two-stage septic THA revision.MethodsPatients who underwent revision THA for septic loosening in two sessions from January 2009 through March 2012 were included in this retrospective, consecutive cost study from the orthopedic department’s point of view. We analyzed variable and case-fixed costs for septic revision THA with special regard to implantation and explantation stay. By using marginal costing approach we neglected hospital-fixed costs. Outcome measures include reimbursement and daily contribution margins.ResultsThe average direct costs (reimbursement) incurred for septic two-stage revision THA was €10,828 (€24,201). The difference in cost and contribution margins per day was significant (p < .001 and p = 0.019) for ex- and implantation (€4147 vs. €6680 and €429 vs. €306) while length of stay and reimbursement were comparable.ConclusionsThis is the first detailed analysis of the hospital department’s cost for septic revision THA performed in two sessions. Disregarding hospital-fixed costs the included variable and case fixed-costs were covered by revenues. This study provides cost data, which will be guidance for health care decision makers.