Outcomes and Risk Factors Associated With 2-Stage Reimplantation Requiring an Interim Spacer Exchange for Periprosthetic Joint Infection

BackgroundPatients undergoing a 2-stage revision for periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) often require a repeat spacer in the interim due to persistent infection. This study aims to report outcomes for patients with repeat spacer exchange and to identify risk factors associated with interim spacer exchange in 2-stage revision arthroplasty.MethodsA total of 256 consecutive 2-stage revisions for chronic infection of total hip arthroplasty and total knee arthroplasty with reimplantation and minimum 2-year follow-up were investigated. An interim spacer exchange was performed in 49 patients (exchange cohort), and these patients were propensity score matched to 196 patients (nonexchange cohort). Multivariate analysis was performed to analyze risk factors for failure of interim spacer exchange.ResultsPatients in the propensity score–matched exchange cohort demonstrated a significantly increased reinfection risk compared to patients without interim spacer exchange (24% vs 15%, P = .03). Patients in the propensity score–matched exchange cohort showed significantly lower postoperative scores for 3 patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs): hip disability and osteoarthritis outcome score physical function (46.0 vs 54.9, P = .01); knee disability and osteoarthritis outcome score physical function (43.1 vs 51.7, P < .01); and patient-reported outcomes measurement information system physical function short form (41.6 vs 47.0, P = .03). Multivariate analysis demonstrated Charles Comorbidity Index (odds ratio, 1.56; P = .01) and the presence of Enterococcus species (odds ratio, 1.43; P = .03) as independent risk factors associated with 2-stage reimplantation requiring an interim spacer exchange for periprosthetic joint infection.ConclusionThis study demonstrates that patients with spacer exchange had a significantly higher risk of reinfection at 2 years of follow-up. Additionally, patients with spacer exchange demonstrated lower postoperative PROM scores and diminished improvement in multiple PROM scores after reimplantation, indicating that an interim spacer exchange in 2-stage revision is associated with worse patient outcomes.     

Risk Factors for Treatment Failure in Patients Who Have Knee Periprosthetic Joint Infection Treated With Two-Stage Exchange Arthroplasty as Well as Their Fate

BackgroundTwo-stage exchange arthroplasty is considered the gold standard treatment for chronic periprosthetic joint infection (PJI). However, there is a scarcity of research investigating the major risk factors for infection recurrence and the prognosis after infection recurrence.MethodsThis study included 203 patients who underwent 2-stage exchange arthroplasty between June 22, 2010 and January 24, 2017. The need of reoperation for infection-related or PJI-related mortality was considered treatment failure. Participant age, gender, body mass index, comorbidities, culture results, length of hospital stay, cause of treatment failure, operative procedure, and fate were analyzed.ResultsFifty-three patients experienced treatment failure (26.1%). Mean follow-up was 63 months (range, 26-103). Based on the multivariate analyses, risk factors for treatment failure included men and positive intraoperative culture during reimplantation. Recurrent infection was most commonly caused by Staphylococcus aureus (32.1%, 17/53), and new microorganisms caused recurrent infection in 34 of 53 (64.2%) patients. In 44 patients who had treatment failure, debridement, antibiotic therapy, irrigation, and retention of prosthesis (DAIR) performed within 6 months of reimplantation and at <3 weeks from symptom onset resulted in a significantly higher success rate than the use of other DAIR protocols (P = .031).ConclusionMen and positive intraoperative culture are major risk factors for 2-stage exchange arthroplasty failure in patients who have knee PJI. Recurrent infection in these patients is usually caused by new microorganisms. DAIR within 6 months of reimplantation and at <3 weeks from symptom onset results in good outcomes in these patients.     

Surgical Treatment of Chronic Periprosthetic Joint Infection: Fate of Spacer Exchanges

BackgroundPatients with periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) undergoing 2-stage exchange arthroplasty may undergo an interim spacer exchange for a variety of reasons including mechanical failure of spacer or persistence of infection. The objective of this study is to understand the risk factors and outcomes of patients who undergo spacer exchange during the course of a planned 2-stage exchange arthroplasty.MethodsOur institutional database was used to identify 533 patients who underwent a 2-stage exchange arthroplasty for PJI, including 90 patients with a spacer exchange, from 2000 to 2017. A retrospective review was performed to extract relevant clinical information. Treatment outcomes included (1) progression to reimplantation and (2) treatment success as defined by a Delphi-based criterion. Both univariate and multivariate Cox regression models were performed to investigate whether spacer exchange was associated with failure. Additionally, a propensity score analysis was performed based on a 1:2 match.ResultsA spacer exchange was required in 16.9%. Patients who underwent spacer exchanges had a higher body mass index (P < .001), rheumatoid arthritis (P = .018), and were more likely to have PJI caused by resistant (0.048) and polymicrobial organisms (P = .007). Patients undergoing a spacer exchange demonstrated lower survivorship and an increased risk of failure in the multivariate and propensity score matched analysis compared to patients who did not require a spacer exchange.DiscussionDespite an additional load of local antibiotics and repeat debridement, patients who underwent a spacer exchange demonstrated poor outcomes, including failure to undergo reimplantation and twice the failure rate. The findings of this study may need to be borne in mind when managing patients who require spacer exchange.     

Two-Stage Exchange Arthroplasty for Periprosthetic Joint Infection: The Rate and Reason for the Attrition After the First Stage

BackgroundTwo-stage exchange arthroplasty remains a popular surgical treatment for patients with chronic periprosthetic joint infection (PJI). Patients who do not receive reimplantation were largely overlooked in the current literature. We aimed at investigating the clinical outcomes of these patients.MethodsOur institutional PJI database was retrospectively reviewed to identify 616 patients (237 hips, 379 knees) who were treated with an intended 2-stage exchange. Of them, 111 (18%) did not receive reimplantation within a minimum follow-up of 1 year. Chart review and targeted interviews were performed to elucidate the cause of attrition. Patients were considered to have failed treatment in the absence of reimplantation if they remained medically unfit for reimplantation, underwent a salvage procedure, or died during the study period.ResultsOf the 111 patients without reimplantation, 29 (26.1%) did well with their retained spacer and were unwilling to proceed with reimplantation, 23 (20.7%) underwent salvage procedures, and the remaining 59 (53.2%) were considered medically unfit for reimplantation, with 34 of them dying within 1 year of initial spacer insertion. The overall success rate for 2-stage exchange cohort at 2 years was 65.7% when treatment failure without reimplantation was taken into account. Several factors associated with increased risk of treatment failure without reimplantation were identified using a multivariate regression model.ConclusionAlmost 1 in 5 patients may never receive the intended reimplantation. Among many reasons for attrition, mortality appears to be a relatively common event. The current definition of treatment success does not take into account the attrition group and thus inflates the relative success of 2-stage exchange arthroplasty.     

1.5-Stage Exchange Arthroplasty for Total Knee Arthroplasty Periprosthetic Joint Infections

BackgroundPeriprosthetic joint infection (PJI) in total knee arthroplasty (TKA) is a challenging problem. The purpose of this study was to outline a novel technique to treat TKA PJI. We define 1.5-stage exchange arthroplasty as placing an articulating spacer with the intent to last for a prolonged time.MethodsA retrospective review was performed from 2007 to 2019 to evaluate patients treated with 1.5-stage exchange arthroplasty for TKA PJI. Inclusion criteria included: articulating knee spacer(s) remaining in situ for 12 months and the patient deferring a second-stage reimplantation because the patient had acceptable function with the spacer (28 knees) or not being a surgical candidate (three knees). Thirty-one knees were included with a mean age of 63 years, mean BMI 34.4 kg/m², 12 were female, with a mean clinical follow-up of 2.7 years. Cobalt-chrome femoral and polyethylene tibial components were used. We evaluated progression to second-stage reimplantation, reinfection, and radiographic outcomes.ResultsAt a mean follow-up of 2.7 years, 25 initial spacers were in situ (81%). Five knees retained their spacer(s) for some time (mean 1.5 years) and then underwent a second-stage reimplantation; one of the five had progressive radiolucent lines but no evidence of component migration. Three knees (10%) had PJI reoccurrence. Four had progressive radiolucent lines, but there was no evidence of component migration in any knees.Conclusions1.5-stage exchange arthroplasty may be a reasonable method to treat TKA PJI. At a mean follow-up of 2.7 years, there was an acceptable rate of infection recurrence and implant durability.     

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

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

Treatment Outcomes and Attrition in Gram-Negative Periprosthetic Joint Infection

BackgroundWhile the prevailing belief is that periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) caused by Gram-negative (GN) organisms confers a poorer prognosis than Gram-positive (GP) cases, the current literature is sparse and inconsistent. The purpose of this study is to compare the treatment outcomes for GN PJI vs GP PJI and Gram-mixed (GM) PJI.MethodsA retrospective review of 1189 PJI cases between 2007 and 2017 was performed using our institutional PJI database. Treatment failure defined by international consensus criteria was compared between PJI caused by GN organisms (n = 45), GP organisms (n = 663), and GM (n = 28) cases. Multivariate regression was used to predict time to failure.ResultsGM status, but not GN, had significantly higher rates of treatment failure compared to GP PJI (67.9% vs 33.2% failure; hazards ratio [HR] = 2.243, P = .004) in the multivariate analysis. In a subanalysis of only the 2-stage exchange procedures, both GN and GM cases were significantly less likely to reach reimplantation than GP cases (HR = .344, P < .0001; HR = .404, P = .013).ConclusionAlthough there was no observed difference in the overall international consensus failure rates between GN (31.1% failure) and GP (33.2%) PJI cases, there was significant attrition in the 2-stage exchange GN cohort, and these patients were significantly less likely to reach reimplantation. Our findings corroborate the prevailing notion that GN PJI is associated with poorer overall outcomes vs GP PJI. These data add to the current body of literature, which may currently underestimate the overall failure rates of GN PJI treated via 2-stage exchange and fail to identify pre-reimplantation morbidity.     

Primary Total Knee Arthroplasty Implants as Functional Prosthetic Spacers for Definitive Management of Periprosthetic Joint Infection: A Multicenter Study

BackgroundThere are limited data on the utility of a standard primary total knee arthroplasty (TKA) femoral component with an all polyethylene tibia as a functional prosthetic spacer in place of a conventional all cement spacer for the management of periprosthetic joint infection (PJI). The aim of this multicenter study was to retrospectively review (1) ultimate treatment success; (2) reimplantation rates; (3) reoperation rates; and (4) change in knee range of motion in patients managed with functional prosthetic spacers following TKA PJI.MethodsA retrospective review was performed for patients at 2 tertiary care centers who underwent a functional prosthetic spacer implantation as part of a functional single-stage (n = 57) or all cement spacer conventional two-stage (n = 137) revision arthroplasty protocol over a 5-year period. Outcomes including reinfection, reimplantation, and reoperation rates, success rate as defined by the Delphi criteria, and final range of motion were compared between the 2 cohorts at a minimum of 2-year follow-up.ResultsThere was no significant difference in reinfection (14.0 vs 24.1%), reoperation (19.3 vs 27.7%), or success rates (78.9 vs 70.8%; P > .05 for all) between the one-stage and two-stage revision TKA cohorts. Mean final total arc of motion was also similar between the 2 groups (105.8 vs 101.8 degrees, respectively).ConclusionFunctional prosthetic spacers offer the advantage of a single procedure with decreased overall hospitalization and improved cost-effectiveness with analogous success rates (78.9%) compared with two-stage exchange (70.8%) at mid-term follow-up. Although long-term data are required to determine its longevity and efficacy, the outcomes in this study are encouraging.Level of Evidence3.     

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

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

Irrigation,Débridement,and Implant Retention for Recurrence of Periprosthetic Joint Infection Following Two-Stage Revision Total Knee Arthroplasty: A Matched Cohort Study

BackgroundWe investigated clinical/functional outcomes and implant survivorship in patients who underwent 2-stage revision total knee arthroplasty (TKA) after periprosthetic joint infection (PJI), experienced acute PJI recurrence, and underwent irrigation, débridement, and polyethylene exchange (IDPE) with retention of stable implant.MethodsTwenty-four patients (24 knees) were identified who underwent 2-stage revision TKA for PJI, experienced acute PJI recurrence, and then underwent IDPE between 2005 and 2016 (minimum 2-year follow-up). After IDPE, intravenous antibiotics (6 weeks) and oral suppression therapy (minimum 6 months) were administered. Data were compared with 1:2 matched control group that underwent 2-stage revision TKA for chronic PJI and did not receive IDPE.ResultsAverage IDPE group follow-up was 3.8 years (range, 2.4-7.2). Reinfection rate after IDPE was 29% (n = 7): 3 of 7 underwent second IDPE (2 of 3 had no infection recurrence) and 5 (one was patient who had recurrent infection after second IDPE) underwent another 2-stage revision TKA. Control group reinfection rate was 27% (n = 13) (P = .85). For IDPE group, mean time to reinfection after 2-stage revision TKA was 4.6 months (range, 1-8 months) (patients presented with acute symptoms less than 3 weeks duration). At latest follow-up, mean Knee Society Score was 70 (range, 35-85) in IDPE group and 75 (range, 30-85) in control group (P = .53).ConclusionIDPE for acute reinfection following 2-stage revision TKA with well-fixed implants had a 71% success rate. These patients had comparable functional outcome as patients with no IDPE after 2-stage revision TKA. IDPE followed by long-term suppression antibiotic therapy should be considered in patients with acute infection and stable components.     

Treatment and Outcome of Periprosthetic Joint Infection in Unicompartmental Knee Arthroplasty

BackgroundPeriprosthetic joint infection (PJI) after unicompartmental knee arthroplasty (UKA) is a devastating but poorly understood complication, with a paucity of published data regarding treatment and outcomes. This study analyzes the largest cohort of UKA PJIs to date comparing treatment outcome, septic and aseptic reoperation rates, and risk factors for treatment failure.MethodsTwenty-one UKAs in 21 patients treated for PJI, as defined by Musculoskeletal Infection Society criteria, were retrospectively reviewed. Minimum and mean follow-up was 1 and 3.5 years, respectively. Fourteen (67%) patients had acute postoperative PJIs. Surgical treatment included 16 debridement, antibiotics, and implant retentions (DAIRs) (76%), 4 two-stage revisions (19%), and 1 one-stage revision (5%). Twenty (95%) PJIs were culture positive with Staphylococcus species identified in 15 cases (71%).ResultsSurvivorship free from reoperation for infection at 1 year was 76% (95% confidence interval, 58%-93%). Overall survival from all-cause reoperation was 57% (95% confidence interval, 27%-87%) at 5 years. Two additional patients (10%) underwent aseptic revision total knee arthroplasty for lateral compartment degeneration 1 year after DAIR and tibial aseptic loosening 2.5 years after 2-stage revision. All patients who initially failed PJI UKA treatment presented with acute postoperative PJIs (5 of 14; 36%).ConclusionSurvivorship free from persistent PJI at 1 year is low at 76% but is consistent with similar reports of DAIRs for total knee arthroplasties. Furthermore, there is low survivorship free from all-cause reoperation of 71% and 57% at 2 and 5 years, respectively. Surgeons should be aware of these poorer outcomes and consider treating UKA PJI early and aggressively.     

Is Treatment of Periprosthetic Joint Infection Improving Over Time?

BackgroundIt is unknown whether the outcomes of treatment for periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) are improving with time. This study evaluated trends in PJI treatment outcomes in the hip and knee following 2-stage exchange arthroplasty and irrigation and debridement (I&D) over the last 17 years.MethodsWe reviewed 550 two-stage exchange arthroplasties and 194 I&Ds between 2000 and 2016 at our institution. Treatment success was defined according to the Delphi consensus criteria and Kaplan-Meier survivorship curves were generated. A multivariate Cox proportional hazards regression model was generated to determine time trends in the outcome of PJI treatment with the year of surgery included as both a continuous covariate (per 1-year increase) and a categorical covariate (2000-2010 or 2011-2016).ResultsThe survivorship of I&D, 2-stage revision, and the total combined cohort were comparable between 2000-2010 and 2011-2016 groups. Multivariate Cox regression analysis showed that the year of surgery was not associated with treatment failure following an I&D or 2-stage exchange arthroplasty, and neither did it increase the risk of non-reimplantation. When year of surgery was considered as a categorical variable, there remained no significant difference in treatment failure following an I&D or 2-stage exchange arthroplasty between the 2000-2010 cohort and 2011-2016 cohort.ConclusionDespite the increasing clinical focus, research advances, and growing literature relating to PJI, we were unable to detect any substantial improvement in the treatment success rates of PJI at our institution over the 17 years examined in this study. Novel treatments and techniques are certainly needed as current and prior strategies remain far from optimal.     

Time to Reimplantation: Waiting Longer Confers No Added Benefit

Background

While the preferred surgical treatment for chronic periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) in North America is a 2-stage exchange arthroplasty, the optimal time between first-stage and reimplantation surgery remains unknown. This study was conceived to examine the association between time to reimplantation and treatment failure.

Patients With Failed Prior Two-Stage Exchange Have Poor Outcomes After Further Surgical Intervention

Background

Failure of 2-stage exchange arthroplasty for the management of periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) poses a major clinical challenge. There is a paucity of information regarding the outcomes of further surgical intervention in these patients. Thus, we aim to report the clinical outcomes of subsequent surgery for a failed prior 2-stage exchange arthroplasty.

A Permanent Articulating Spacer Versus Two-Stage Exchange for Chronic Periprosthetic Joint Infection: A Propensity Score-Matched Study

BackgroundAlthough 2-stage revision has been proposed as gold standard for periprosthetic joint infection treatment, limited evidence exists for the role of articulating spacers as definitive management. The purpose of this study was to compare clinical outcomes and costs associated with articulating spacers (1.5-stage) and a matched 2-stage cohort.MethodsA retrospective review was performed for patients who had chronic periprosthetic joint infections after total knee arthroplasty defined by Musculoskeletal Infection Society criteria and were matched via propensity score matching using cumulative Musculoskeletal Infection Society scores and a comorbidity index. Patients who maintained an articulating spacer (cemented cobalt-chrome femoral component and all-poly tibia) were included in the 1.5-stage cohort. Patients who underwent a 2-stage reimplantation procedure were included in the 2-stage cohort. Outcomes included visual analog scale pain scores, 90-day emergency department visits, 90-day readmission, unplanned reoperation, reinfection, as well as cost at 1 and 2-year intervals. A total of 116 patients were included for analyses.ResultsThe 90-day pain scores were lower in the 1.5-stage cohort compared to the 2-stage cohort (2.9 versus 4.6, P = .0001). There were no significant differences between readmission and reoperation rates. Infection clearance was equivalent at 79.3% for both groups. Two-stage exchange demonstrated an increased cost difference of $26,346 compared to 1.5-stage through 2 years (P = .0001). Regression analyses found 2 culture-positive results with the same organism decreased the risk for reinfection [odds ratio: 0.2, 95% confidence interval 0.04-0.8, P = .03].ConclusionFor high-risk candidates, articulating spacers can preserve knee function, reduce morbidity from second-stage surgery, and lower the costs with similar rates of infection clearance as 2-stage exchange.Level of EvidenceLevel III, therapeutic study.     

Do Positive Cultures at Second Stage Re-Implantation Increase the Risk for Reinfection in Two-Stage Exchange for Periprosthetic Joint Infection?

BackgroundIntraoperative cultures are important in the diagnosis and targeted treatment of periprosthetic joint infection (PJI). Positive cultures at reimplantation during a two-stage exchange are discussed as a risk factor for reinfection. The aim of this study is the investigation of the incidence and risk factors for positive cultures during reimplantation.MethodsWe retrospectively identified 204 patients (111 knees, 93 hips) who were treated between 2012 and 2016 for PJI using a two-stage exchange protocol at a median follow-up of 42 months. PJI was diagnosed using the criteria of the musculoskeletal infection society (MSIS) of 2011. All cultural findings from first and second stage surgery were recorded. The primary endpoint was revision for infection. Risk factors for positive cultures and reinfection were analyzed.ResultsDuring reimplantation 25% (51/204) of patients had at least one positive culture, in 19.1% (39/204) only a single culture. Patients with culture-negative infections had a higher risk for positive cultures at reimplantation (HR 2.946 (95% CI 1.247-6.961), P = .014) and patients with infected total hip arthroplasty (THA) (HR 3.547 (95% CI 1.7-7.4), P = .001). Patients with positive cultures during reimplantation had a higher risk for reinfection (HR 2.27 (95% CI 1.181-4.363), P = .014) as well as patients with a single positive culture (HR 2.421 (95% CI 1.139-5.143), P = .021).ConclusionAs positive cultures are common and increase reinfection risk irrespective of their numbers, longer antibiotic therapy following reimplantation can be an option. Single positive cultures in reimplantation surgery should not be considered contamination.     

Is 2-Stage Septic Revision Worth the Money? A Cost-Utility Analysis of a 1-Stage Versus 2-Stage Septic Revision of Total Knee Arthroplasty

BackgroundTwo-stage exchange arthroplasty remains the gold standard for the management of prosthetic joint infection (PJI) of the knee, but several studies have demonstrated that 1-stage exchange is as effective as 2-stage exchange. This study aimed to support decision-making via an economic evaluation of 1-stage compared to 2-stage exchange for total knee arthroplasty septic revision in patients who did not have compelling indication PJI (ie, Methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus, multiorganism, systemic sepsis, comorbidities, culture negative, resistant organism, and immunocompromised) to undergo a 2-stage exchange.MethodsA cost-utility analysis was performed using a Markov cohort model from the health care provider perspective using Australia data. One-stage septic knee revisions were compared with 2-stage exchange procedures for chronic PJI using a patient-lifetime horizon. Health outcomes were expressed as quality-adjusted life-years (QALY), whereas costs were presented in 2020 Australian dollars. Sensitivity analyses, population expected values of perfect information, and the perfect information for parameters (EVPPI) were assessed to estimate the opportunity costs surrounding the decision made at a willingness-to-pay threshold of $50,000 per QALY.ResultsThe incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of 2-stage exchange compared with 1-stage exchange was $231,000 per QALY, with 98.5% of the probabilistic sensitivity simulations above the willingness-to-pay threshold. The population expected value of perfect information was $882,000, whereas the expected value of perfect information for parameters for the “cost parameters” was $207,000.ConclusionThe adoption of 1-stage septic knee revision is the optimal choice for patients who have a PJI and who do not have a compelling need for a 2-stage exchange arthroplasty. One-stage exchange for PJI should be advocated in patients who meet the eligibility criteria.     

Single-Stage Revision of the Infected Total Knee Arthroplasty Is Associated With Improved Functional Outcomes: A Propensity Score–Matched Cohort Study

BackgroundSingle-stage revision is an alternative to the standard 2-stage revision, potentially minimizing morbidities and improving functional outcomes. This study aimed at comparing single-stage and 2-stage revision total knee arthroplasty (TKA) for chronic periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) with regard to patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) and complication rates.Methods:A total of 185 consecutive revision TKA patients for chronic PJI with complete preoperative and postoperative PROMs were investigated. A total of 44 patients with single-stage revision TKA were matched to 88 patients following 2-stage revision TKA using propensity score matching, yielding a total of 132 propensity score–matched patients for analysis. Patient demographics and clinical information including reinfection and readmission rates were evaluated.Results:There was no significant difference in preoperative PROMs between propensity score–matched single-stage and 2-stage revision TKA cohorts. Postoperatively, significantly higher PROMs for single-stage revision TKA were observed for Knee disability and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score physical function (62.2 vs 51.9, P < .01), physical function short form 10A (42.8 vs 38.1, P < .01), PROMIS SF Physical (44.8 vs 41.0, P = .01), and PROMIS SF Mental (50.5 vs 47.1, P = .02). There was no difference between propensity score–matched single-stage and 2-stage revision TKA cohorts for clinical outcomes including reinfection rates (25.0% vs 27.2%, P = .78) and 90-day readmission rates (22.7% vs 25.0%, P = .77).ConclusionThis study illustrated that single-stage revision TKA for chronic PJI may be associated with superior patient-reported outcomes compared to 2-stage revision for the infected TKA using a variety of PROMs. Improved PROMs were not accompanied by differences in complication rates between both cohorts, suggesting that single-stage revision TKA may provide an effective alternative to 2-stage revision in patients with chronic TKA PJI.     

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

BackgroundAlthough 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.MethodsThe 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.ResultsA 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).ConclusionAlthough 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.     

Utility of Synovial White Blood Cell Count and Differential Before Reimplantation Surgery

BackgroundDetermining optimal timing of reimplantation during 2-stage exchange for periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) remains elusive. Joint aspiration for synovial white blood cell (WBC) count and neutrophil percentage (PMN%) before reimplantation is widely performed; yet, the implications are rarely understood. Therefore, this study investigates (1) the diagnostic yield of synovial WBC count and differential analysis and (2) the calculated thresholds for persistent infection.MethodsInstitutional PJI databases identified 129 patients undergoing 2-stage exchange arthroplasty who had joint aspiration before reimplantation between February 2005 and May 2014. Persistent infection was defined as a positive aspirate culture, positive intraoperative cultures, or persistent symptoms of PJI—including subsequent PJI-related surgery. Receiver-operating characteristic curve was used to calculate thresholds maximizing sensitivity and specificity.ResultsThirty-three cases (33 of 129; 25.6%) were classified with persistent PJI. Compared with infection-free patients, these patients had significantly elevated PMN% (62.2% vs 48.9%; P = .03) and WBC count (1804 vs 954 cells/μL; P = .04). The receiver-operating characteristic curve provided thresholds of 62% and 640 cells/μL for synovial PMN% and WBC count, respectively. These thresholds provided sensitivity of 63% and 54.5% and specificity of 62% and 60.0%, respectively. The risk of persistent PJI for patients with PMN% >90% was 46.7% (7 of 15).ConclusionSynovial fluid analysis before reimplantation has unclear utility. Although statistically significant elevations in synovial WBC count and PMN% are observed for patients with persistent PJI, this did not translate into useful thresholds with clinical importance. However, with little other guidance regarding the timing of reimplantation, severely elevated WBC count and differential analysis may be of use.