Synovial Fluid Calprotectin for the Preoperative Diagnosis of Chronic Periprosthetic Joint Infection

BackgroundThe diagnosis of periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) represents a challenge in clinical practice and the analysis of synovial fluid is a useful diagnostic tool. Calprotectin is an inflammatory biomarker widely used in the evaluation of chronic inflammatory diseases; however, little is known about its role in PJI. The purpose of this study is to determine the reliability of synovial calprotectin in the diagnosis of PJI.MethodsSeventy-six patients with painful knee arthroplasty were included in this prospective observational study. Synovial fluid was analyzed for cell count, percentage of polymorphonuclear neutrophils, microbiological culture, leukocyte esterase strip test, alpha-defensin rapid test, and calprotectin immunoassay dosage. The 2018 Consensus Statements criteria for PJI were used as standard reference to define the presence of infection. Sensitivity, specificity, positive and negative likelihood ratio, and receiver-operation characteristic curve were calculated for calprotectin immunoassay test.ResultsBy 2018 Consensus Statements criteria for PJI, 28 patients were considered infected, 44 patients were considered not infected, and 4 patients were classified as inconclusive. The calprotectin synovial fluid test resulted in 2 false-positive results and no false-negative results. The calprotectin synovial fluid test demonstrated a sensitivity of 100% (95% confidence interval [CI] 99.96-100) and specificity of 95% (95% CI 89.4-100) for the diagnosis of PJI. The positive likelihood ratio was 22 (95% CI 5.680-85.209) and the negative likelihood ratio was 0 (95% CI 0-0.292). The area under the receiver-operation characteristic curve was 0.996 (95% CI 94.3-100).ConclusionThe present study suggests that synovial calprotectin immunoassay test has a high sensitivity and specificity in the diagnosis of knee PJI. Moreover, it is easily applied, quick and valuable in clinical practice.     

Synovial Fluid d-Lactate—A Novel Pathogen-Specific Biomarker for the Diagnosis of Periprosthetic Joint Infection

BackgroundSynovial fluid d-lactate may be useful for diagnosing periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) as this biomarker is exclusively produced by bacteria. We evaluated the performance of synovial fluid d-lactate using 2 definition criteria and determined its optimal cutoff value for diagnosing PJI.MethodsConsecutive patients undergoing joint aspiration before prosthesis revision were prospectively included. Synovial fluid was collected for culture, leukocyte count, and d-lactate concentration (by spectrophotometry). Youden's J statistic was used for determining optimal d-lactate cutoff value on the receiver operating characteristic curve by maximizing sensitivity and specificity.ResultsA total of 224 patients were included. Using Musculoskeletal Infection Society criteria, 71 patients (32%) were diagnosed with PJI and 153 (68%) with aseptic failure (AF), whereas using institutional criteria, 92 patients (41%) were diagnosed with PJI and 132 (59%) with AF. The optimal cutoff of synovial fluid d-lactate to differentiate PJI from AF was 1.3 mmol/L, independent of the used definition criteria. Synovial fluid d-lactate had a sensitivity of 94.3% (95% confidence interval [95% CI], 86.2-98.4) and specificity of 78.4% (95% CI, 66.8-81.2) using Musculoskeletal Infection Society criteria, whereas its sensitivity was 92.4% (95% CI, 84.9-96.9) and specificity 88.6% (95% CI, 81.9-93.5) using institutional criteria. The concentration of d-lactate was higher in infections caused by Staphylococcus aureus (P < .001) and streptococci (P = .016) than by coagulase-negative staphylococci or in culture-negative PJI.ConclusionThe synovial fluid d-lactate showed high sensitivity (>90%) for diagnosis of PJI using both definition criteria and correlated with the pathogen virulence. The high sensitivity makes this biomarker useful as a point-of-care screening test for PJI.Level of EvidenceDiagnostic level I.     

Synovial Cell Count Before Reimplantation Can Predict the Outcome of Patients with Periprosthetic Knee Infections Undergoing Two-stage Exchange

BackgroundAlthough synovial fluid can be used to diagnose periprosthetic joint infections (PJI) effectively, only the cutoff values adopted at the time of PJI diagnosis have been standardized, and few data are currently available about effectiveness of synovial fluid examination before definitive reimplantation.Questions/purposesWe asked: (1) What are the most appropriate thresholds for synovial fluid leukocyte counts (WBC) and neutrophil percentage (PMN percentage) in a patient group undergoing definitive reimplantation after an uninterrupted course of antibiotic therapy for chronic PJI? (2) What is the predictive value of our synovial WBC and PMN percentage threshold compared with previously proposed thresholds?MethodsIn all, 101 patients with PJI were evaluated for inclusion from January 2016 to December 2018. Nineteen percent (19 of 101) of patients were excluded because of the presence of a chronic inflammatory disease, acute/late hematogenous infection, low amount of synovial fluid for laboratory investigations or infection persistence after spacer placement, and adequate antibiotic therapy. Finally, 81% (82 of 101) of patients with a median (range) age of 74 years (48 to 92) undergoing two-stage revision for chronic TKA infection, who were followed up at our institution for a period 96 weeks or more, were included in this study. The patients did not discontinue antibiotic treatment before reimplantation and were treated for 15 days after reimplantation if intraoperative cultures were negative. No patient remained on suppressive treatment after reimplantation. Synovial fluid was aspirated aseptically with a knee spacer in place to evaluate the cell counts before reimplantation. Thirteen percent (11 of 82) of patients had persistent or recurrent infection, defined as continually elevated erythrocyte sedimentation rate or C-reactive protein levels coupled with local signs and symptoms or positive cultures. The synovial fluid WBC counts and PMN percentage from the 11 patients with persistent or recurrent PJI were compared with the 71 patients who were believed to be free of PJI. Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve analyses assessed the predictive value of the parameters, and the areas under the curves (AUCs) were evaluated. The sensitivities, specificities, and positive and negative predictive values were determined for the WBC count and PMN percentage. Patients with persistent or recurrent infection had higher median WBC counts (471 cells/µL versus 1344 cells/µL; p < 0.001) and PMN percentage (36% versus 61%; p < 0.001) than did patients believed to be free of PJI.ResultsROC curve analysis identified the best threshold values to be a WBC count of 934 cells/µL or more (sensitivity 0.82 [95% CI 0.71 to 0.89], specificity 0.82 [95% CI 0.71 to 0.89]) as well as a PMN percentage of at least 52% (sensitivity 0.82 [95% CI 0.71 to 0.89] and specificity 0.78 [95% CI 0.67 to 0.86]. We found no difference between the AUCs for the WBC count and the PMN percentage (0.87 [95% CI 0.79 to 0.96] versus 0.84 [95% CI 0.73 to 0.95]. Comparing the sensitivities and specificities of the synovial fluid WBC count and PMN percentage proposed by other authors, we find that a PMN percentage more than 52% showed better predictive value than previously reported.ConclusionBased on our findings, we believe that patients with WBC counts of at least 934 and PMN percentage of 52% or more should not undergo reimplantation but rather a repeat debridement, as their risk of persistent or recurrent PJI appears prohibitively high. The accuracy of the proposed cutoffs is better than previously reported.Level of EvidenceLevel III, diagnostic study.     

Synovial C-Reactive Protein is a Useful Adjunct for Diagnosis of Periprosthetic Joint Infection

BackgroundThe diagnostic utility of synovial C-reactive protein (CRP) has been debated for a while. Existing studies are limited by small sample sizes and using outdated criteria for periprosthetic joint infection (PJI). Furthermore, the relationship between synovial and serum CRP has rarely been investigated in the setting of PJI. This study aimed to evaluate the diagnostic utility of synovial CRP and to assess its relationship with serum CRP and other common biomarkers.MethodsWe reviewed 621 patients who underwent evaluation for PJI prior to revision arthroplasty from 2014 to 2021. Biomarkers, including serum CRP and erythrocyte sedimentation rate, synovial CRP, polymorphonuclear leukocyte percentage, white blood cell count, and alpha-defensin, were evaluated using the 2018 International Consensus Meeting criteria.ResultsIn total, 194 patients had a PJI; 394 were considered aseptic failures and 33 were inconclusive. Synovial CRP showed an area under the curve (AUC) of 0.951 (95% CI, 0.932-0.970) with 74.2% sensitivity and 98.0% specificity, whereas, serum CRP had an AUC of 0.926 (95% CI, 0.903-0.949) with 83.5% sensitivity and 88.3% specificity. There was a good correlation between synovial and serum CRP (R = 0.703; 95% CI, 0.604-0.785). The combination of serum and synovial CRP yielded a significantly higher AUC than that obtained when using serum CRP alone (AUC 0.964 versus 0.926, P = .016).ConclusionSynovial CRP demonstrated excellent accuracy when used to determine the presence of PJI. There was a good correlation between serum and synovial CRP levels in revision arthroplasty patients and the combined use of serum and synovial CRP proved to be more accurate than the serum test alone. These findings support the use of synovial CRP as an adjunct in the workup of PJI.     

Trends of Prosthetic Joint Infection Organisms and Recurrence for a Single High-Volume Arthroplasty Surgeon Over 20 Years

BackgroundProsthetic joint infection (PJI) is a morbid complication following total joint arthroplasty (TJA). PJI diagnosis and treatment has changed over time, and patient co-management with a high-volume musculoskeletal infectious disease (MSK ID) specialist has been implemented at our institution in the last decade.MethodsWe retrospectively evaluated all consecutive TJA patients treated for PJI between 1995 and 2018 by a single high-volume revision TJA surgeon. Microbial identities, antibiotic resistance, prior PJI, and MSK ID consultation were investigated.ResultsIn total, 261 PJI patients (median age 66 years, interquartile range 57-75) were treated. One-year and 5-year reinfection rates were 15.8% (95% confidence interval [CI] 11.6-20.7) and 22.1% (95% CI 17.0-27.7), respectively. Microbial identities and antibiotic resistances did not change significantly over time. Despite seeing more prior PJI patients (53.3% vs 37.6%, P = .012), MSK ID-managed patients had similar infection rates as non-MSK ID-managed patients (hazard ratio [HR] 1.02, 95% CI 0.6-1.75, P = .93). Prior PJI was associated with higher reinfection risk (HR 2.39, 95% CI 1.39-4.12, P = .002) overall and in patients without MSK ID consultation, specifically (HR 2.78, 95% CI 1.37-5.65, P = .005). This risk was somewhat lower and did not reach significance in prior PJI patients with MSK ID consultation (HR 1.97, 95% CI 0.87-4.48, P = .106).ConclusionWe noted minimal differences in microbial/antibiotic resistances for PJI over 20 years in a single institution, suggesting current standards of PJI treatment remain encouragingly valid in most cases. MSK ID involvement was not associated with lower reinfection risk overall; however, in patients with prior PJI, the risk of reinfection appeared to be somewhat lower with MSK ID involvement.Level of EvidenceLevel IV–Case Series.     

Can a Novel Scoring System Improve on the Mirels Score in Predicting the Fracture Risk in Patients with Multiple Myeloma?

BackgroundStratification of the fracture risk is an important treatment component for patients with multiple myeloma, which is associated with up to an 80% risk of pathologic fracture. The Mirels score, which is commonly used to estimate the fracture risk for patients with osseous lesions, was evaluated in a cohort in which fewer than 15% of lesions were caused by multiple myeloma. The behavior of multiple myeloma lesions often differs from that of lesions caused by metastatic disease, and accurate risk stratification is critical for effective care. To our knowledge, the Mirels score has not been validated specifically for multiple myeloma.Questions/purposesOur purpose was: (1) To develop a novel scoring system for the prediction of pathologic fracture in patients with long-bone lesions from multiple myeloma; and (2) to compare the sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value (PPV), negative predictive value (NPV), and receiver operating characteristic (ROC) area under curve (AUC) between the novel scoring system and the Mirels system.MethodsBetween 2003 and 2017, 763 patients at one center with the diagnosis of multiple myeloma were reviewed, of whom 174 presented with long-bone disease involvement. Of those, 5% (nine of 174) were missing data or radiographs at a minimum of 1 year and had not reached an endpoint (fracture or surgery) before that time and were therefore excluded. Many patients have more than one lesion; consequently, we used the largest lesion in each patient, resulting in 163 lesions in as many patients. Ten percent (16 of 163) of these patients eventually developed a fracture and 4% (six of 163) underwent prophylactic stabilization (excluded from analysis because of outcome uncertainty). During the study period, prophylactic stabilization was performed at the discretion of the orthopaedic oncologist. Fifty-one percent (83 of 163) of patients were female, and the mean (± SD) age was 60 ± 10 years at radiographic lesion identification. All lesions were characterized before determining whether the patient underwent pathologic fracture. We identified variables associated with pathologic fracture on univariate analysis. Variables independently significant on logistic regression analysis were used to generate scoring algorithms at varying weights and scoring cutoffs for comparison via ROC curves. We then selected a novel score based on ROC performance, and compared the sensitivity, specificity, PPV, and NPV of that scoring system to that of Mirels score. ROC AUCs were compared after bootstrapping 100,000 iterations. Alpha was set at 0.05.ResultsAfter controlling for potential confounders, such as age, sex, and duration of myeloma diagnosis, we found the following factors were independently associated with the occurrence of pathologic fracture: larger lesion size (area, cm²) (log odds 0.17; p = 0.03), longer lesion latency (years from diagnosis to lesion identification) (log odds 0.25; p = 0.03), presence of pain (relative risk [RR] 2.9; p = 0.04), and metaphyseal location (RR 3.2, compared with epiphyseal or diaphyseal; p = 0.003). These variables were used to formulate a novel scoring system. Compared with the Mirels system, the novel system was more sensitive (69% [95% CI 61 to 76] versus 38% [95% CI 30 to 46]; p < 0.05) but not different in terms of specificity (87% [95% CI 80 to 91] versus 87% [95% CI 81 to 92]; p > 0.05), PPV (37% [95% CI 29 to 45] versus 25% [95% CI 19 to 33]; p > 0.05), NPV (96% [95% CI 91 to 99] versus 92% [95% CI 87 to 96]; p > 0.05), or AUC (0.85 [95% CI 0.74 to 0.92] versus 0.67 [95% CI 0.51 to 0.81]; p > 0.05).ConclusionThe novel scoring system was found to be more sensitive than the Mirels system for predicting pathologic fracture in our retrospective cohort of patients with multiple myeloma-related bone disease. Specificity, PPV, NPV, and ROC AUC were not different with the numbers available. Thus, the novel scoring system may serve as a more effective screening tool to determine which patients with multiple myeloma would benefit from further radiologic or orthopaedic evaluation based on a skeletal survey.Level of EvidenceLevel III, diagnostic study.     

Synovial Fluid Viscosity Test is Promising for the Diagnosis of Periprosthetic Joint Infection

BackgroundSo far there is no “gold standard” test for the diagnosis of periprosthetic joint infection (PJI), compelling clinicians to rely on several serological and synovial fluid tests with no 100% accuracy. Synovial fluid viscosity is one of the parameters defining the rheology properties of synovial fluid. We hypothesized that patients with PJI may have a different level of synovial fluid viscosity and aimed to investigate the sensitivity and specificity of synovial fluid viscosity in detecting PJI.MethodsThis prospective study was initiated to enroll patients undergoing primary and revision arthroplasty. Our cohort consisted of 45 patients undergoing revision for PJI (n = 15), revision for aseptic failure (n = 15), and primary arthroplasty (n = 15). PJI was defined using the Musculoskeletal Infection Society criteria. In all patients, synovial fluid viscosity, C-reactive protein (CRP), erythrocyte sedimentation rate (ESR), and plasma d-dimer levels were measured preoperatively.ResultsThe synovial fluid viscosity level was significantly lower (P = .0011) in patients with PJI (7.93 mPa·s, range 3.0-15.0) than in patients with aseptic failure (13.11 mPa·s, range 6.3-20.4). Using Youden’s index, 11.80 mPa·s was determined as the optimal threshold value for synovial fluid viscosity for the diagnosis of PJI. Synovial fluid viscosity outperformed CRP, ESR, and plasma d-dimer, with a sensitivity of 93.33% and a specificity of 66.67%.ConclusionSynovial fluid viscosity seems to be on the same level of accuracy with CRP, ESR, and d-dimer regarding PJI detection and to be a promising marker for the diagnosis of PJI.     

What Is the Optimal Timing for Reading the Leukocyte Esterase Strip for the Diagnosis of Periprosthetic Joint Infection?

BackgroundThe leucocyte esterase (LE) strip test often is used to diagnose periprosthetic joint infection (PJI). In accordance with the manufacturer’s directions, the LE strip test result is read 3 minutes after exposing it to joint fluid, but this has not been supported by robust research. Moreover, we have noted that the results of the LE strip test might change over time, and our previous studies have found that centrifugation causes the results of the LE strip test to degrade. Still, there is no evidence-based recommendation as to when to read the LE strip test to maximize diagnostic accuracy, in general, and the best reading times for the LE strip test before and after centrifugation need to be determined separately, in particular.Questions/purposes(1) What is the optimal timing for reading LE strip test results before centrifugation to diagnose PJI? (2) What is the optimal timing for reading LE strip test results after centrifugation to diagnose PJI?MethodsThis study was a prospective diagnostic trial. In all, 120 patients who were scheduled for revision arthroplasty and had signs of infection underwent joint aspiration in the outpatient operating room between July 2018 and July 2019 and were enrolled in this single-center study. For inclusion, patients must have had a diagnosis of PJI or nonPJI, valid synovial fluid samples, and must not have received antibiotics within 2 weeks before arthrocentesis. As such, 36 patients were excluded; 84 patients were included for analysis, and all 84 patients agreed to participate. The 2018 International Consensus Meeting Criteria (ICM 2018) was used for the classification of 49 patients with PJI (score ≥ 6) and 35 without PJI (score ≤ 2). The classification was used as the standard against which the different timings for reading LE strips were compared. All patients without PJI were followed for more than 1 year, during which they did not report the occurrence of PJI. All patients were graded against the diagnostic criteria regardless of their LE strip test results. In 83 patients, one drop of synovial fluid (50 μL) was applied to LE strips before and after centrifugation, and in one patient (without PJI), the sample was not centrifuged because the sample volume was less than 1.5 mL. The results of the strip test were read on an automated colorimeter. Starting from 1 minute after centrifugation, these strips were automatically read once every minute, 15 times (over a period of 16 minutes), and the results were independently recorded by two observers. Results were rated as negative, ±, 1+, and 2+ upon the machine reading. Grade 2+ (dark purple) was used as the threshold for a positive result. An investigator who was blinded to the study performed the statistics. Optimal timing for reading the LE strip before and after centrifugation was determined by using receiver operative characteristic (ROC) analysis. The specificity, sensitivity, and positive predictive and negative predictive values were calculated for key timepoints.ResultsBefore centrifugation, the area under the curve was the highest when the results were read at 5 minutes (0.90 [95% CI 0.83 to 0.98]; sensitivity 0.88 [95% CI 0.75 to 0.95]; specificity 0.89 [95% CI 0.72 to 0.96]). After centrifugation, the area under the curve was the highest when the results were read at 10 minutes (0.92 [95% CI 0.86 to 0.98]; sensitivity 0.65 [95% CI 0.50 to 0.78]; specificity 0.97 [95% CI 0.83 to 1.00]).ConclusionThe LE strip test results are affected by time and centrifugation. For samples without centrifugation, we found that 5 minutes after application was the best time to read LE strips. We cannot deny the use of centrifuges because this is an effective way to solve the sample-mingling problem at present. We recommend 10 minutes postapplication as the most appropriate time to read LE strips after centrifugation. Multicenter and large–sample size studies are warranted to further verify our conclusion.Level of EvidenceLevel II, diagnostic study.     

Preoperative Opioid Use Is Associated With Higher Revision Rates in Total Joint Arthroplasty: A Systematic Review

BackgroundAlthough preoperative opioid use has been associated with poor postoperative patient-reported outcome measures and delayed return to work in patients undergoing total joint arthroplasty, direct surgery-related complications in patients on chronic opioids are still not clear. Thus, we sought to perform a systematic review of the literature to evaluate the influence of preoperative opioid use on postoperative complications and revision following primary total joint arthroplasty.MethodsFollowing the guidelines of the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses statement, we queried PubMed, EMBASE, the Cochrane Library, and the ISI Web of Science for studies investigating the influence of preoperative opioid use on postoperative complications following total hip arthroplasty and total knee arthroplasty up to May 2020.ResultsAfter applying exclusion criteria, 10 studies were included in the analysis which represented 87,165 opioid users (OU) and 5,214,010 nonopioid users (NOU). The overall revision rate in the OU group was 4.79% (3846 of 80,303 patients) compared to 1.21% in the NOU group (43,719 of 3,613,211 patients). There was a higher risk of aseptic loosening (odds ratio [OR] 1.30, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.11-1.53, P = .002), periprosthetic fractures (OR 1.89, 95% CI 1.53-2.34, P < .00001), and dislocations (OR 1.26, 95% CI 1.14-1.39, P < .00001) in the OU group compared to the NOU group. Overall, 5 of 6 studies reporting on periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) rates showed statistically significant correlation between preoperative opioid use and higher PJI rates.ConclusionThere is strong evidence that preoperative opioid use is associated with a higher overall revision rate for aseptic loosening, periprosthetic fractures, and dislocation, and an increased risk for PJI.Level of EvidenceLevel III, systematic review.     

Effect of spinal versus general anesthesia on thirty-day outcomes following total hip arthroplasty: A matched-pair cohort analysis

Study objectiveIt has not yet been established whether total hip arthroplasty complications are associated with anesthetic technique (spinal versus general). This study assessed the effect of spinal versus general anesthesia on health care resource utilization and secondary endpoints following total hip arthroplasty.DesignPropensity-matched cohort analysis.SettingAmerican College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program participating hospitals from 2015 to 2021.PatientsPatients undergoing elective total hip arthroplasty (n = 223,060).InterventionsNone.MeasurementsThe a priori study duration was 2015 to 2018 (n = 109,830). The primary endpoint was 30-day unplanned resource utilization, namely readmission and reoperation. Secondary endpoints included 30-day wound complications, systemic complications, bleeding events, and mortality. The impact of anesthetic technique was investigated with univariate analyses, multivariable analyses, and survival analyses.Main resultsThe 1:1 propensity-matched cohort included 96,880 total patients (48,440 in each anesthesia group) from 2015 to 2018. On univariate analysis, spinal anesthesia was associated with a lower incidence of unplanned resource utilization (3.1% [1486/48440] vs 3.7% [1770/48440]; odds ratio [OR], 0.83 [95% CI, 0.78 to 0.90]; P < .001), systemic complications (1.1% [520/48440] vs 1.5% [723/48440]; OR, 0.72 [95% CI, 0.64 to 0.80]; P < .001), and bleeding events requiring transfusion (2.3% [1120/48440] vs 4.9% [2390/48440]; OR, 0.46 [95% CI, 0.42 to 0.49]; P < .001). On multivariable analysis, spinal anesthesia remained an independent predictor of unplanned resource utilization (adjusted odds ratio [AOR], 0.84 [95% CI, 0.78 to 0.90]; c = 0.646), systemic complications (AOR, 0.72 [95% CI, 0.64 to 0.81]; c = 0.676), and bleeding events (AOR, 0.46 [95% CI, 0.42 to 0.49]; c = 0.686). Hospital length of stay was also shorter in the spinal anesthesia cohort (2.15 vs 2.24 days; mean difference, −0.09 [95% CI, −0.12 to −0.07]; P < .001). Similar findings were observed in the cohort from 2019 to 2021.ConclusionsTotal hip arthroplasty patients receiving spinal anesthesia experience favorable outcomes compared to propensity-matched general anesthesia patients.     

Positive Blood Cultures Decrease the Treatment Success in Acute Hematogenous Periprosthetic Joint Infection Treated With Debridement,Antibiotics, and Implant Retention

BackgroundThe influence of positive blood cultures on surgical outcome of acute hematogenous periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) treated by debridement, antibiotics, and implant retention (DAIR) remains unknown. This study evaluated the influence of positive blood cultures on the treatment success of DAIR in patients with acute hematogenous PJI.MethodsA retrospective chart review on 49 patients with blood culture data for acute hematogenous PJI was performed from 2005 to 2016 at a single institution. All patients were treated by DAIR and had a minimum follow-up of 1 year. Treatment success was defined by the Delphi criteria. Multivariate logistic regression analysis was performed to identify variables associated with positive blood culture and treatment success. Kaplan-Meier survivorship curves and log-rank tests were used for analysis.ResultsOverall, 44.9% (22/49) of blood cultures obtained yielded positive growth. Elevated Elixhauser comorbidity index was a significant risk factor associated with positive blood (adjusted odds ratio [OR], 1.65; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.13-2.40; P = .049). A positive blood culture was the only significant factor predicting treatment failure in acute hematogenous PJI (OR, 3.94; 95% CI, 1.18-13.1; P = .026) after adjusting for confounding variables. Kaplan-Meier survivorship for infection-free implant survivorship was 53.1% (95% CI, 38.3%-65.8%) at 1 year for all patients, 66.7% (95% CI, 45.7%-81.1%) for patients with negative blood cultures, and 36.4% (95% CI, 17.2%-55.7%) for patients with positive blood cultures (P = .037).ConclusionThe presence of positive blood cultures is associated with decreased treatment success of DAIR for acute hematogenous PJI. Patients with more comorbidities may need to be treated more aggressively for a favorable outcome.     

Sonication of Arthroplasty Implants Improves Accuracy of Periprosthetic Joint Infection Cultures

Background

There is evidence that sonication of explanted prosthetic hip and knee arthroplasty components with culture of the sonication fluid may enhance diagnostic sensitivity. Previous studies on the use of implant sonicate cultures have evaluated diagnostic thresholds but did not elaborate on the clinical importance of positive implant sonicate cultures in the setting of presumed aseptic revisions and did not utilize consensus statements on periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) diagnosis when defining their gold standard for infection.

Questions/purposes

(1) How do implant sonicate cultures compare with preoperative synovial fluid cultures and intraoperative tissue cultures in the diagnosis of PJI in both THA and TKA when compared against Musculoskeletal Infection Society (MSIS) criteria for PJI? (2) Utilizing implant sonicate cultures, what is the relative prevalence of bacterial species identified in PJIs? (3) What is the incidence of positive implant sonicate cultures in the setting of presumed aseptic revision hip and knee arthroplasty procedures, and what treatments did they receive?

Methods

Between 2012 and 2016 we performed implant sonicate fluid cultures on surgically removed implants from 565 revision THAs and TKAs. Exclusion criteria including insufficient data to determine Musculoskeletal Infection Society (MSIS) classification, fungal-only cultures, and absence of reported colony-forming units decreased the number of procedures to 503. Procedures represented each instance of revision surgery (sometimes multiple in the same patient). Of those, a definitive diagnosis of infection was made using the MSIS criteria in 178 of 503 (35%), whereas the others (325 of 503 [65%]) were diagnosed as without infection. A total of 53 of 325 (16%) were considered without infection based on MSIS criteria but had a positive implant sonicate culture. Twenty-five of 53 (47%) of these patients were followed for at least 2 years. The diagnosis of PJI was determined using the MSIS criteria.

Results

Sensitivity of implant sonicate culture was greater than synovial fluid culture and tissue culture (97% [89%–99%] versus 57% [44%–69%], p < 0.001; 97% [89%–99%] versus 70% [58%–80%], p < 0.001, respectively). The specificity of implant sonicate culture was not different from synovial fluid culture or tissue culture with the numbers available (90% [72%–97%] versus 100% [86%–100%], p = 0.833; 90% [72%–97%] versus 97% [81%–100%], p = 0.317, respectively). Coagulase-negative Staphylococcus was the most prevalent organism for both procedure types. In PJIs, the five most frequent bacteria identified by synovial fluid, tissue, and/or implant sonicate cultures were coagulase-negative Staphylococcus (26% [89 of 267]), methicillin-susceptible Staphylococcus aureus (19% [65 of 267]), methicillin-resistant S. aureus (12% [43 of 267]), α-hemolytic Streptococci (5% [19 of 267]), and Enterococcus faecalis (5% [19 of 267]). Fifty-three of 325 (16%) presumed aseptic revisions had a positive sonication culture. Thirty-four percent (18 of 53) of culture-positive aseptic revision patients received antibiotic treatment for infection and 8% (4 of 53) underwent a secondary revision.

Conclusions

The routine use of implant sonicate cultures in arthroplasty revisions improves the diagnostic sensitivity for detecting the presence of bacteria in both clinical and occult infections. Future studies will need to refine colony-forming unit thresholds for determining clinical infection and indications for treatment.

Level of Evidence

Level III, diagnostic study.

     

Is the Proportion of Patients with “Successful” Outcomes After Two-stage Revision for Prosthetic Joint Infection Different When Applying the Musculoskeletal Infection Society Outcome Reporting Tool Compared with the Delphi-based Consensus Criteria?

BackgroundThere are a variety of criteria for defining successful treatment after two-stage exchange arthroplasty for prosthetic joint infection (PJI). To accurately assess current practices and improve techniques, it is important to first establish reliable, clinically relevant, reproducible criteria for defining persistent infection and “successful” outcomes.Question/purposeIs the proportion of patients considered to have successful management of PJI after two-stage resection arthroplasty smaller using 2019 Musculoskeletal Infection Society Outcome Reporting Tool (MSIS ORT) criteria than when using a Delphi-based criterion?MethodsPatients were retrospectively identified by Current Procedural Technology codes for resection arthroplasty with placement of an antibiotic spacer for infected THA or TKA between April 1, 2011 and January 1, 2018 at a tertiary academic institution. The initial review identified 180 procedures during this time period. Nine patients had documented transition of care outside the system, 16 did not meet the MSIS criteria for chronic PJI, and 34 patients were excluded for lack of documented 2-year follow-up. The mean follow-up duration of the final cohort of 121 procedures in 120 patients was approximately 3.7 ± 1.7 years. Forty percent (49 of 121) of the procedures were performed on the hip and 60% (72 of 121) were performed on the knee. The mean time from primary THA or TKA to explantation was 4.6 years. The mean age of the patients at the time of explantation was 66 years. The mean time from spacer placement to replantation was 119 days. The final 121 patient records were reviewed by a single reviewer and outcomes were subsequently assigned to “successful” and “unsuccessful” outcomes based on the MSIS ORT and Delphi-based consensus criterion, two previously published and validated multidimensional definition schemes. Chi-squared and t-test analyses were performed to identify differences between “successful” and “unsuccessful” outcomes with respect to patient baseline characteristics using each outcome-reporting criterion.ResultsOverall, the MSIS ORT classified a smaller proportion of patients as having a “successful” treatment outcome after two-stage exchange arthroplasty for PJI than the Delphi-based consensus method did (MSIS: 55% [63 of 114], Delphi: 70% [71 of 102]; relative risk 0.79 [0.65-0.98]; p = 0.03). However, there were no differences when stratified by hips (MSIS: 55% [26 of 47], Delphi: 74% [29 of 39]; relative risk 0.74 [0.54-1.02]; p = 0.07) and knees (MSIS: 55% [37 of 67], Delphi: 67% [42 of 63]; relative risk 0.83 [0.63-1.09]; p = 0.19). Notably, the disease of 16% of the patients (19 of 121) was not classifiable per the Delphi method because these patients never underwent reimplantation.ConclusionThe present study demonstrated that the MSIS criteria detect fewer instances of “successful” infection management after two-stage resection arthroplasty for PJI than the Delphi method in this cohort. Based on these findings, researchers and surgeons should aim for standardized reporting after intervention for PJI to allow for a better comparison of outcomes across different studies and ultimately allow for improved techniques and approaches to the treatment of PJI.Level of EvidenceLevel III, diagnostic study.     

How Does a “Dry Tap” Impact the Accuracy of Preoperative Aspiration Results in Predicting Chronic Periprosthetic Joint Infection?

BackgroundPeriprosthetic joint infection (PJI) after total hip arthroplasty (THA) is challenging to diagnose. We aimed to evaluate the impact of dry taps requiring saline lavage during preoperative intra-articular hip aspiration on the accuracy of diagnosing PJI before revision surgery.MethodsA retrospective review was conducted for THA patients with suspected PJI who received an image-guided hip aspiration from May 2016 to February 2020. Musculoskeletal Infection Society (MSIS) diagnostic criteria for PJI were compared between patients who had dry tap (DT) vs successful tap (ST). Sensitivity and specificity of synovial markers were compared between the DT and ST groups. Concordance between preoperative and intraoperative cultures was determined for the 2 groups.ResultsIn total, 335 THA patients met inclusion criteria. A greater proportion of patients in the ST group met MSIS criteria preoperatively (30.2% vs 8.3%, P < .001). Patients in the ST group had higher rates of revision for PJI (28.4% vs 17.5%, P = .026) and for any indication (48.4% vs 36.7%, P = .039). MSIS synovial white blood cell count thresholds were more sensitive in the ST group (90.0% vs 66.7%). There was no difference in culture concordance (67.9% vs 65.9%, P = .709), though the DT group had a higher rate of negative preoperative cultures followed by positive intraoperative cultures (85.7% vs 41.1%, P = .047).ConclusionOur results indicate that approximately one third of patients have dry hip aspiration, and in these patients cultures are less predictive of intraoperative findings. This suggests that surgeons considering potential PJI after THA should apply extra scrutiny when interpreting negative results in patients who require saline lavage for hip joint aspiration.     

Systematic review of contemporary outcomes of endovascular and open thoracoabdominal aortic aneurysm repair

ObjectiveThe purpose of the study was to provide a systematic review of the literature reporting the contemporary early outcomes after endovascular and open repair of thoracoabdominal aortic aneurysms (TAAAs).MethodsMEDLINE and Embase were searched for studies from January 2006 to March 2018 that reported either endovascular (using branched or fenestrated endografts) or open repair of TAAA in at least 10 patients. Outcomes of interest included perioperative mortality, spinal cord injury (SCI), renal failure requiring dialysis, and stroke. Pooled proportions were determined using a random-effects model.ResultsThe analysis included 71 studies, of which 24 and 47 reported outcomes after endovascular and open TAAA repair, respectively. Endovascular cohort patients were older and had higher rates of coronary artery disease, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, and diabetes. Endovascular repair was associated with higher rates of SCI (13.5%; 95% confidence interval [CI], 10.5%-16.7%) compared with open repair (7.4%; 95% CI, 6.2%-8.7%; P < .01) but similar rates of permanent paralysis (5.2% [95% CI, 3.8%-6.7%] vs 4.4% [95% CI, 3.3%-5.6%]; P = .39), lower rates of postoperative dialysis (6.4% [95% CI, 3.2%-9.5%] vs 12.0% [95% CI, 8.2%-16.3%]; P = .03) but similar rates of being discharged on permanent dialysis (3.7% [95% CI, 2.0%-5.9%] vs 3.8% [95% CI, 2.9%-5.3%]; P = .93), a trend to lower stroke (2.7% [95% CI, 1.9%-3.6%] vs 3.9% [95% CI, 3.0%-4.9%]; P = .06), and similar perioperative mortality (7.4% [95% CI, 5.9%-9.1%] vs 8.9% [95% CI, 7.2%-10.9%]; P = .21).ConclusionsThis systematic review summarizes the contemporary literature results of endovascular and open TAAA repair. Endovascular repair studies included patients with more comorbidities and were associated with higher rates of SCI but similar rates of permanent paraplegia, whereas open repair studies had higher rates of postoperative dialysis but similar rates of being discharged on permanent dialysis. Perioperative mortality rates were similar. Universally adopted reporting standards for patient characteristics, outcomes, and the conduct of contemporary comparative studies will allow better assessment and comparisons of the risks associated with the two surgical treatment options for TAAA.     

Independent association of preoperative Hill grade with gastroesophageal reflux disease 2 years after sleeve gastrectomy

BackgroundThe sleeve gastrectomy (SG) is associated with postoperative gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD). Higher endoscopic Hill grade has been linked to GERD in patients without metabolic surgery. How preoperative Hill grade relates to GERD after SG is unknown.ObjectiveTo explore the relationship between preoperative Hill grade and GERD outcomes 2 years after SG.SettingAcademic hospital, United States.MethodsAll patients (n = 882) undergoing SG performed by 5 surgeons at a single academic institution from January 2015 to December 2019 were included. Complete data sets were available for 360 patients, which were incorporated in analyses. GERD was defined as the presence of a diagnosis in the medical record accompanied by pharmacotherapy. Patients with GERD postoperatively (n = 193) were compared with those without (n = 167). Univariable and multivariable analyses were conducted to explore independent associations between preoperative factors and GERD outcomes.ResultsThe presence of any GERD increased at the postoperative follow-up of 25.2 (3.9) months compared with preoperative values (53.6% versus 41.1%; P = .0001). Secondary GERD outcomes at follow-up included de novo (41.0%), persistent (33.1%), resolved (28.4%), worsened (26.4%), and improved (12.2%) disease. Postoperative endoscopy and reoperation for GERD occurred in 26.4% and 6.7% of the sample. Patients with GERD postoperatively showed higher prevalence of Hill grade III–IV (32.6% versus 19.8%; P = .0062) and any hiatal hernia (HH) (36.3% versus 25.1%; P = .0222) compared with patients without postoperative GERD. Frequencies of gastritis, esophagitis A or B, duodenitis, and peptic ulcer disease were similar between groups. Higher prevalence of preoperative GERD (54.9% versus 25.1%; P < .0001), obstructive sleep apnea (66.8% versus 54.5%; P = .0171), and anxiety (25.4% versus 15.6%; P = .0226) was observed in patients with postoperative GERD compared with those without it. Baseline demographics, weight, other obesity-associated diseases, whether an HH was repaired at index SG, and follow-up length were statistically similar between groups. After adjusting for collinearity, preoperative GERD (odds ratio [OR] = 3.6; 95% confidence interval [CI], 2.2–5.7; P < .0001) and Hill grade III–IV (OR [95% CI]: 1.9 [1.1–3.1]; P = .0174) were independently associated with the presence of any GERD postoperatively. The preoperative presence of an HH >2 cm and whether an HH was repaired at index SG showed no independent association with GERD at follow-up.ConclusionsMore than 50% of patients experienced GERD 2 years after SG. Preoperative GERD confers the highest risk for GERD postoperatively. Hill grade III–IV is independently associated with GERD after SG. Whether a hiatal hernia repair was performed did not influence GERD outcomes. Preoperative esophagogastroduodenoscopy should be obtained before SG and Hill grade routinely captured and used to counsel patients about the risk of postoperative GERD after this procedure. Hill grade may help guide the choice of metabolic operation.     

Is Patient-reported Penicillin Allergy Independently Associated with Increased Risk of Prosthetic Joint Infection After Total Joint Arthroplasty of the Hip,Knee, and Shoulder?

BackgroundPatients with a patient-reported penicillin allergy may be at greater risk for postoperative prosthetic joint infection (PJI) after total joint arthroplasty of the hip, knee, or shoulder. The increased risk of PJI in these patients has been attributed to these patients receiving a less-effective perioperative antibiotic. However, prior reports did not fully address the clinical characteristics of these unique patients, who may inherently be at greater risk of having a PJI, which may confound prior findings.Questions/purposesAfter controlling for risk factors for PJI such as BMI, anxiety, depression, and other comorbidities, we asked: Are patients with a patient-reported penicillin allergy more likely to have a PJI after THA, TKA, or total shoulder arthroplasty than patients without such a reported allergy?MethodsWe queried patient records from 2010 to 2017 from a nationwide administrative claims database of 122 million patients to adequately power an investigation comparing the 1-year incidence of PJI after TKA, total shoulder arthroplasty, and THA in patients with patient-reported penicillin allergy versus patients without a patient-reported penicillin allergy. Operative treatments for deep joint infection, identified by Current Procedural Terminology and ICD-9 and ICD-10 codes were used as a surrogate for PJI. Clinical characteristics such as age, sex, BMI, length of stay, and Charlson comorbidity index and specific comorbidities including alcohol abuse, anemia, anxiety, cardiac disease, diabetes, immunocompromised status, rheumatoid arthritis, depression, liver disease, chronic kidney disease, tobacco use, and peripheral vascular disease were queried for each study group. The odds of PJI within 1 year of THA, TKA, or total shoulder arthroplasty were compared using multiple logistic regression after adjusting for potential confounders.ResultsAfter adjusting for potential confounding factors such as BMI, anxiety, depression and other comorbidities, we found that patient-reported penicillin allergy was independently associated with an increased odds of PJI after TKA (odds ratio 1.3 [95% confidence interval 1.1 to 1.4]; p < 0.01) and total shoulder arthroplasty (OR 3.9 [95% CI 2.7 to 5.4]; p < 0.01). However, patient-reported penicillin allergy was not independently associated with an increased odds of PJI after THA (OR 1.1 [95% CI 0.9 to 1.3]; p = 0.36) after controlling for the same risk factors.ConclusionsIn this study, we found that patients with patient-reported penicillin allergy were at an increased risk for PJI after TKA and total shoulder arthroplasty, which we suspect—but cannot prove—is likely a function of those patients receiving a second-line antibiotic for presurgical prophylaxis. Since prior research has found that many patients listed in medical records as having a penicillin allergy are in fact not allergic to penicillin, we suggest that surgeons consider preoperative allergy testing, such as using an intraoperative test dose, to aid in choosing the most appropriate antibiotic choice before knee or shoulder arthroplasty and to amend patient medical records based on testing results. Future studies should determine whether this additional diagnostic maneuver is cost-effective.Level of EvidenceLevel III, therapeutic study.     

A clinical calculator for predicting intraoperative blood loss and transfusion risk in spine tumor patients

BACKGROUND CONTEXTSurgery for vertebral column tumors is commonly associated with intraoperative blood loss (IOBL) exceeding 2 liters and the need for transfusion of allogeneic blood products. Transfusion of allogeneic blood, while necessary, is not benign, and has been associated with increased rates of wound complication, venous thromboembolism, delirium, and death.PURPOSETo develop a prediction tool capable of predicting IOBL and risk of requiring allogeneic transfusion in patients undergoing surgery for vertebral column tumors.STUDY DESIGN/SETTINGRetrospective, single-center study.PATIENT SAMPLEConsecutive series of 274 patients undergoing 350 unique operations for primary or metastatic spinal column tumors over a 46-month period at a comprehensive cancer centerOUTCOME MEASURESIOBL (in mL), use of intraoperative blood products, and intraoperative blood products transfused.METHODSWe identified IOBL and transfusions, along with demographic data, preoperative laboratory data, and surgical procedures performed. Independent predictors of IOBL and transfusion risk were identified using multivariable regression.RESULTSMean age at surgery was 57.0±13.6 years, 53.1% were male, and 67.1% were treated for metastatic lesions. Independent predictors of IOBL included en bloc resection (p<.001), surgical invasiveness (β=25.43 per point; p<0.001), and preoperative albumin (β=?244.86 per g/dL; p=0.011). Predictors of transfusion risk included preoperative hematocrit (odds ratio [OR]=0.88 per %; 95% confidence interval [CI, 0.84, 0.93]; p<0.001), preoperative MCHgb (OR=0.88 per pg; 95% CI [0.78, 1.00]; p=0.048), preoperative red cell distribution width (OR=1.32 per %; 95% CI [1.13, 1.55]; p<0.001), en bloc resection (OR=3.17; 95%CI [1.33, 7.54]; p=0.009), and surgical invasiveness (OR=1.08 per point; [1.06; 1.11]; p<0.001). The transfusion model showed a good fit of the data with an optimism-corrected area under the curve of 0.819. A freely available, web-based calculator was developed for the transfusion risk model (https://jhuspine3.shinyapps.io/TRUST/).CONCLUSIONSHere we present the first clinical calculator for intraoperative blood loss and transfusion risk in patients being treated for primary or metastatic vertebral column tumors. Surgical invasiveness and preoperative microcytic anemia most strongly predict transfusion risk. The resultant calculators may prove clinically useful for surgeons counseling patients about their individual risk of requiring allogeneic transfusion.     

Re-revision Knee Arthroplasty in a Tertiary Center: Infection and Multiple Previous Surgeries Were Associated With Poor Early Clinical and Functional Outcomes

BackgroundThe incidence of re-revision knee arthroplasty (re-revision KA) is increasing and associated with high complication and failure rates. The aim of this study was to investigate re-revision rates, complications, and patient-reported outcomes following re-revision KA and factors associated with poor outcome.MethodsThis was a retrospective cohort study of 206 patients (250 knees) undergoing re-revision KA at a major revision center from 2015 to 2018. The mean follow-up was 26 months (range, 0 to 61) and mean age at re-revision KA was 69 years (range, 31 to 91 years). The main indications for surgery were prosthetic joint infection (PJI) (n = 171/250, 68.4%) and aseptic loosening (n = 25/250, 10.0%). We compared re-revision rates, joint function, and complications for aseptic and infective indications. Logistic regressions were performed to identify risk factors for further reoperation.ResultsThe estimated re-revision rates at 2 years were 28.7% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 22.7-35.9) and at 4 years were 42.0% (95% CI: 32.8-52.6). Mean Oxford Knee Score was 26 points (range, 1 to 48). Mean EuroQoL-5D-5L utility was 0.539 (range, -0.511 to 1.000). Multivariable analyses demonstrated that PJI (Odds Ratio [OR] 2.39, 95% CI 1.06-5.40, P = .036), greater number of previous surgeries (OR 1.18, 95% CI 1.04-1.33, P = .008), and higher Elixhauser score (OR 1.06, 95% CI 1.01-1.13, P = .045) were independently associated to further surgery.ConclusionRe-revision KA carried a high risk of early failure. Multiple revised joints and patients with more comorbidities had worse function. Patients undergoing re-revision KA for PJI should be counseled to expect higher failure rates and complications than patients who have aseptic indications.