Mortality Following Revision Total Knee Arthroplasty: A Matched Cohort Study of Septic versus Aseptic Revisions

We report the medium-term mortality after septic versus aseptic revision total knee arthroplasty (TKA) and factors that can contribute to mortality in revision TKA. Mortality rates of 88 patients undergoing septic revision (septic group) were compared with age- and year of surgery-matched 88 patients of aseptic revision (aseptic group). The overall mortality after revision TKA was 10.7% at a median of 4 years of follow-up (range, 2–7 years). However, the mortality after septic revision (18%, 16/88) was six times higher than that of aseptic revision (3%, 3/88) (P = 0.003). Infections with Staphylococcus aureus and/or methicillin resistance was not associated with higher mortality rates. Multivariate analysis indicated that increased age (P < 0.001), higher ASA class (P = 0.002), and septic revision (P < 0.001) were identified as independent predictors of increased mortality after revision TKA.     

Reduced Infection Rate After Aseptic Revision Total Knee Arthroplasty With Extended Oral Antibiotic Protocol

BackgroundThe optimal postoperative antibiotic duration has not been determined for aseptic revision total knee arthroplasty (R-TKA) where the risk of periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) is 3%-7.5%. This study compared PJI rates in aseptic R-TKA performed with extended oral antibiotic prophylaxis (EOAP) to published rates.MethodsAseptic R-TKAs consecutively performed between 2013 and 2017 at a tertiary care referral center in the American Midwest were retrospectively reviewed. All patients were administered intravenous antibiotics while hospitalized and discharged on 7-day oral antibiotic prophylaxis. Infection rates and antibiotic-related complications were assessed.ResultsSixty-seven percent of the 176 analysis patients were female, with an average age of 64 years and body mass index of 35 kg/m². Instability and aseptic loosening comprised 86% of revision diagnoses. Overall, 87.5% of intraoperative cultures were negative, and the remainder were single positive cultures considered contaminants. PJI rates were 0% at 90 days, 1.8% (95% confidence interval 0.4%-5.3%) at 1 year, and 2.2% (95% confidence interval 0.6%-5.7%) at mean follow-up of approximately 3 years (range, 7-65 months).ConclusionEOAP after aseptic R-TKA resulted in a PJI rate equivalent to primary TKA, representing a 2- to-4-fold decrease compared with published aseptic R-TKA infection rates. Further study on the benefits and costs of EOAP after aseptic R-TKA is encouraged.     

Revision Total Knee Arthroplasty for Periprosthetic Joint Infection Is Associated With Increased Postoperative Morbidity and Mortality Relative to Noninfectious Revisions

Background

Periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) after primary total knee arthroplasty (TKA) is a devastating complication. The short-term morbidity profile of revision TKA performed for PJI relative to non-PJI revisions is poorly characterized. The purpose of this study is to determine 30-day postoperative outcomes after revision TKA for PJI, relative to primary TKA and aseptic revision TKA.

Long-Term Mortality Trends After Revision Total Knee Arthroplasty

Background

Long-term mortality following primary total knee arthroplasty (TKA) is lower than the general population. However, it is unknown whether this is true in the setting of revision TKA. We examined long-term mortality trends following revision TKA.

Mortality During Total Knee Periprosthetic Joint Infection

Background

Periprosthetic joint infections (PJIs) are fraught with multiple complications including poor patient-reported outcomes, disability, reinfection, disarticulation, and even death. We sought to perform a systematic review asking the question: (1) What is the mortality rate of a PJI of the knee undergoing 2-stage revision for infection? (2) Has this rate improved over time? (3) How does this compare to a normal cohort of individuals?

Two-Stage Exchange Arthroplasty for Periprosthetic Joint Infection Following Total Hip or Knee Arthroplasty Is Associated With High Attrition Rate and Mortality

BackgroundWe sought to determine the ultimate fate of patients undergoing resection arthroplasty as a first stage in the process of 2-stage exchange and evaluate risk factors for modes of failure.MethodsA retrospective case study was performed including all patients with minimum 2-year follow-up who underwent first-stage resection of a hip or knee periprosthetic joint infection from 2008 to 2015. Patient demographics, laboratory, and health status variables were collected. The primary outcome analyzed was defined as failure to achieve an infection-free 2-stage revision. Univariate pairwise comparison followed by multivariate regression analysis was used to determine risk factors for failure outcomes.ResultsEighty-nine patients underwent resection arthroplasty in a planned 2-stage exchange protocol (27 hips, 62 knees). Mean age was 64 years (range, 43-84), 56.2% were males, and mean follow-up was 56.3 months. Also, 68.5% (61/89) of patients underwent second-stage revision. Of the 61 patients who complete a 2-stage protocol, 14.8% (9/61) of patients failed with diagnosis of repeat or recurrent infection. Mortality rate was 23.6%. Multivariate analysis identified risk factors for failure to achieve an infection-free 2-stage revision as polymicrobial infection (P < .004; adjusted odds ratio [AOR], 7.8; 95% confidence interval [CI], 2.1-29.0), McPherson extremity grade 3 (P < .024; AOR, 4.1; 95% CI, 1.2-14.3), and history of prior resection (P < .013; AOR, 4.7; 95% CI, 1.4-16.4).ConclusionPatients undergoing resection arthroplasty for periprosthetic joint infection are at high risk of death (24%) and failure to complete the 2-stage protocol (32%). Those who complete the 2-stage protocol have a 15% rate of reinfection at 4.5-year follow-up.     

Intraoperative Fracture During Aseptic Revision Total Knee Arthroplasty

Bone encountered during revision knee arthroplasty is compromised and predisposed to fracture. This study reports the rate, location, timing, treatment, and outcome of intraoperative fractures occurring during revision knee arthroplasty. Between 1997 and 2011, 2836 aseptic revisions were performed. Ninety-seven fractures were identified in 89 patients (3%). Fifty occurred in femora, 42 in tibiae, and 5 in patellae. Forty-six occurred during exposure, 21 during bony preparation, 17 during trialing, and 13 during final component placement. Treatment included fixation (n = 43), observation (n = 21), component build-up (n = 17), bone grafting (n = 6), and a combination (n = 3). Ninety-four percent of fractures united. Fifteen patients required a re-revision (17%), of which infection was the leading cause (n = 5).     

Risk of Prosthetic Joint Infection Increases Following Early Aseptic Revision Surgery of Total Hip and Knee Arthroplasty

BackgroundIt is important to identify risk factors for periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) following total joint arthroplasty in order to mitigate the substantial social and economic burden. The objective of this study is to evaluate early aseptic revision surgery as a potential risk factor for PJI following total hip (THA) and total knee arthroplasty (TKA).MethodsPatients who underwent primary THA or TKA with early aseptic revision were identified in 2 national insurance databases. Control groups of patients who did not undergo revision were identified and matched 10:1 to study patients. Rates of PJI at 1 and 2 years postoperatively following revision surgery were calculated and compared to controls using a logistic regression analysis.ResultsIn total, 328 Medicare and 222 Humana patients undergoing aseptic revision THA within 1 year of index THA were found to have significantly increased risk of PJI at 1 year (5.49% vs 0.91%, odds ratio [OR] 5.61, P < .001 for Medicare; 7.21% vs 0.68%, OR 11.34, P < .001 for Humana) and 2 years (5.79% vs 1.10%, OR 4.79, P < .001 for Medicare; 8.11% vs 1.04%, OR 9.05, P < .001 for Humana). Similarly for TKA, 190 Medicare and 226 Humana patients who underwent aseptic revision TKA within 1 year were found to have significantly higher rates of PJI at 1 year (6.48% vs 1.16%, OR 7.69, P < .001 for Medicare; 6.19% vs 1.28%, OR 4.89, P < .001 for Humana) and 2 years (8.42% vs 1.58%, OR 6.57, P < .001 for Medicare; 7.08% vs 1.50%, OR 4.50, P < .001 for Humana).ConclusionEarly aseptic revision surgery following THA and TKA is associated with significantly increased risks of subsequent PJI within 2 years.     

Long-Term Outcome Following Revision Total Knee Arthroplasty is Associated With Indication for Revision

BackgroundThere is limited information about long-term clinical outcomes following revision total knee arthroplasty (TKA) in relation to the indication for revision. Previously, a clear relation between indication for revision and clinical outcome was shown after 2 years. Present study evaluated (1) whether the reported association at 2 year remains present at 7.5 years, and (2) how clinical outcome at 7.5 years developed compared to baseline and 2-year follow-up, and (3) whether patients had additional adverse events.MethodsA cohort of 129 patients with a total system revision TKA was selected. Range of motion, Visual Analog Scale for pain and satisfaction, and clinical and functional Knee Society Score were obtained preoperatively, at 3 months, 1, 2, and 7.5 years. Reasons for revision were septic loosening, aseptic loosening, malposition, instability, and severe stiffness.ResultsPatients revised for severe stiffness had significantly worse outcomes. No difference was found between the other indications. The clinical outcome after revision TKA at 7.5 years remained stable for septic and aseptic loosening, malposition, and instability but deteriorated slightly for the severe stiffness group. Visual Analog Scale satisfaction remained constant for all indications. There were 11 additional complications between 2- and 7.5-year follow-up, 9 of which necessitated reoperation.ConclusionAll indications except severe stiffness had a similar clinical outcome which was maintained up to 7.5-year follow-up. The severe stiffness group had worse outcomes and deteriorated slightly at longer follow-up. Outcome at 3 months seems predictive for long-term outcome. Additional complications did not differ significantly for the different reasons for revision.Level of EvidenceLevel III, prognostic study.     

Aseptic Reoperations Within 1 Year of Primary Total Knee Arthroplasty Markedly Increase the Risk of Later Periprosthetic Joint Infection

BackgroundDespite the high rate of success of primary total knee arthroplasty (TKA), some patients are candidates for early aseptic reoperation. The goal of this study is to evaluate the risk of subsequent periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) in patients treated with an aseptic reoperation within 1 year of primary TKA.MethodsA retrospective review of our total joint registry compared 249 primary TKAs requiring an aseptic reoperation within 1 year following index arthroplasty to a control group of 17,867 TKAs not requiring reoperation within 1 year. Patients were divided into groups based on time from index TKA: (1) 90 days or less (114 TKAs) and (2) 91 to 365 days (135 TKAs). Mean age was 68 years with 57% female. Mean follow-up was 7 years.ResultsAt 2 years postoperatively, patients undergoing an aseptic reoperation within 90 days subsequently had a 9% PJI rate, while patients undergoing an aseptic reoperation between 91 and 365 days subsequently had a 3% PJI rate. The control group had a 0.4% PJI rate. Compared to the control group, patients undergoing an aseptic reoperation within 90 days had an elevated risk of PJI (hazard ratio, 9; P < .0001), as did patients who had a reoperation between 91 and 365 days (hazard ratio, 4; P < .0001).ConclusionAseptic reoperation within 1 year of primary TKA was associated with a notably increased risk of subsequent PJI.     

Unexpected Positive Intraoperative Cultures in Aseptic Revision Arthroplasty

Unexpected positive intraoperative cultures (UPIC) in presumed aseptic revision arthroplasty can be difficult to interpret. The purpose of this retrospective study was to compare the incidence of subsequent periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) in patients who received antibiotic therapy according to an institutional protocol with those who did not and whether they meet Musculoskeletal Infection Society (MSIS) criteria for PJI. In patients who were treated with antibiotic according to institutional criteria, the incidence of PJI after revision was higher in those who did not meet MSIS criteria (22%) than in those that met MSIS criteria (14%; P > 0.71). UPIC in aseptic revision arthroplasty are not uncommon. PJI cannot be excluded in patients that do not meet MSIS definition.     

Long-Term Survival of Semi-Constrained Total Knee Arthroplasty for Revision Surgery

Semi-constrained implants provide stability in the setting of soft-tissue deficiency in revision total knee arthroplasty (TKA). This study evaluated our institution’s long-term survival results with a semi-constrained implant used in the revision TKA setting. 234 semi-constrained revision total knee arthroplasties were performed in 209 patients. The average follow-up was 9 years. Forty repeat revisions were performed. 5-year survival was 91% and 10-year survival was 81%. Male gender significantly increased the risk of revision. At 10 years the average range of motion, pain level, and Knee Society score improved significantly (P < 0.001). Ninety percent of patients reported an improvement in their knee. The semi-constrained implant used in revision knee arthroplasty has acceptable implant survival and functional outcomes in the long-term follow-up period.     

Weight Gain After Primary Total Knee Arthroplasty Is Associated With Accelerated Time to Revision for Aseptic Loosening

BackgroundObesity is a major health problem worldwide and is associated with complications after total knee arthroplasty (TKA). It remains unknown whether a change in body mass index (BMI) after primary TKA affects the reasons for revision TKA or the time to revision TKA.MethodsA total of 160 primary TKAs referred to an academic tertiary center for revision TKA were retrospectively stratified according to change in BMI from the time of their primary TKA to revision TKA. The association between change in BMI and time to revision was also analyzed according to indication for revision of TKA using Pearson's chi-square test.ResultsThe mean change in BMI from primary to revision TKA was 0.82 ± 3.5 kg/m². Maintaining a stable weight after primary TKA was protective against late revision TKA for any reason (P = .004). Patients who failed to reduce their BMI were revised for aseptic loosening earlier, at less than 5 years (P = .020), whereas those who reduced their BMI were revised later, at over 10 years (P = .004).ConclusionMaintaining weight after primary TKA is protective against later revision TKA for any reason but failure to reduce weight after primary TKA is a risk factor for early revision TKA for aseptic loosening and osteolysis. Orthopedic surgeons should recommend against weight gain after primary TKA to reduce the risk of an earlier revision TKA in the event that a revision TKA is indicated.     

Primary and Revision Total Knee Arthroplasty in Patients With Pulmonary Hypertension: High Perioperative Mortality and Complications

BackgroundAlthough perioperative medical management during total knee arthroplasty (TKA) has improved, there is limited literature characterizing outcomes of patients with pulmonary hypertension (HTN). This study examined mortality, medical complications, implant survivorship, and clinical outcomes in this medically complex cohort.MethodsWe identified 887 patients with pulmonary HTN who underwent 881 primary TKAs and 228 revision TKAs from 2000 to 2016 at a tertiary care center. Patients were followed up at regular intervals until death, revision surgery, or last clinical follow-up. Perioperative medical complications were individually reviewed. The risk of death was examined by calculating standardized mortality ratios and Cox proportional hazards regression models. Cumulative incidence analysis was used for reporting mortality, revision, and reoperation with death as a competing risk.ResultsThe 90-day mortality was 0.7% and 4.8% for primary and revision TKAs, respectively. The risk of death was 2-fold higher compared to primary (hazard ratio 2.54, 95% confidence interval [CI] 2.12-3.05) and revision (hazard ratio 2.16, 95% CI 1.78-2.62) TKA patients without pulmonary HTN. Rate of medical complications within 90 days from surgery was 6.5% and 14% in primary and revision TKAs. The 10-year cumulative incidence of any revision was 5% and 16% in primaries and revisions, respectively.ConclusionPatients with pulmonary HTN undergoing primary and revision TKAs had excess risk of death and experience a high rate of medical complications within 90 days of surgery. Counseling of risks, medical optimization, and referral to tertiary centers should be considered.Level of EvidenceLevel IV.     

Dilute Betadine Lavage Reduces the Risk of Acute Postoperative Periprosthetic Joint Infection in Aseptic Revision Total Knee and Hip Arthroplasty: A Randomized Controlled Trial

BackgroundThe purpose of this randomized, controlled trial is to determine whether dilute betadine lavage compared to normal saline lavage reduces the rate of acute postoperative periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) in aseptic revision total knee (TKA) and hip arthroplasty (THA).MethodsA total of 478 patients undergoing aseptic revision TKA and THA were randomized to receive a 3-minute dilute betadine lavage (0.35%) or normal saline lavage before surgical wound closure. Fifteen patients were excluded following randomization (3.1%) and six were lost to follow-up (1.3%), leaving 457 patients available for study. Of them, 234 patients (153 knees, 81 hips) received normal saline lavage and 223 (144 knees, 79 hips) received dilute betadine lavage. The primary outcome was PJI within 90 days of surgery with a secondary assessment of 90-day wound complications. A priori power analysis determined that 285 patients per group were needed to detect a reduction in the rate of PJI from 5% to 1% with 80% power and alpha of 0.05.ResultsThere were eight infections in the saline group and 1 in the betadine group (3.4% vs 0.4%, P = .038). There was no difference in wound complications between groups (1.3% vs 0%, P = .248). There were no differences in any baseline demographics or type of revision procedure between groups, suggesting appropriate randomization.ConclusionDilute betadine lavage before surgical wound closure in aseptic revision TKA and THA appears to be a simple, safe, and effective measure to reduce the risk of acute postoperative PJI.Level of EvidenceLevel I.     

Extended Antibiotic Prophylaxis Confers No Benefit Following Aseptic Revision Total Hip Arthroplasty: A Matched Case-Controlled Study

BackgroundAdministration of perioperative antibiotic prophylaxis is one of the most important practices for prevention of periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) in patients undergoing total hip arthroplasty (THA). It is common to continue perioperative antibiotic prophylaxis for 48 hours or longer in patients undergoing revision arthroplasty, until results of intraoperative culture samples become available. However, the utility of this practice remains unclear. We examined whether extended antibiotic prophylaxis following aseptic revision THA reduces the risk of subsequent PJI.MethodsWe retrospectively reviewed records of patients undergoing aseptic revision THA between January 2000 and December 2015. At our institution, some surgeons administer prophylactic antibiotics to revision patients for only 24 hours while others prefer to extend until intraoperative culture results become available. We matched 209 patients undergoing revision THA who received extended antibiotic prophylaxis (>24 hours) in a 1:1 ratio with 209 patients receiving standard antibiotic prophylaxis (≤24 hours). The matching criteria were age, sex, body mass index, Charlson comorbidity index, and operative time.ResultsThe incidence of subsequent PJI was 4.8% in patients receiving extended antibiotic prophylaxis vs 2.4% in patients receiving standard. After adjusting for all cofounders and using multivariate logistic regression, the administration of extended prophylactic antibiotics did not reduce the incidence of subsequent infection. When stratified by postoperative antibiotic regimens, the 2 groups had similar infection-free implant survival rate (95.2% in extended and 97.6% in standard).ConclusionIt appears that extending perioperative prophylactic antibiotics until intraoperative culture results become available in patients undergoing revision THA for aseptic failures does not provide any additional benefit in terms of reducing the risk of subsequent PJI.     

Prior Knee Arthroscopy Is Associated With Increased Risk of Revision After Total Knee Arthroplasty

BackgroundKnee arthroscopy (KA) is frequently performed to provide improved joint function and pain relief. However, outcomes following total knee arthroplasty (TKA) after prior KA are not fully understood. The purpose of this study is to determine the relationship between prior KA within 2 years of TKA on revision rates after TKA.MethodsData were collected from the Humana insurance database using the PearlDiver Patient Records Database from 2006 to 2017. Subjects were identified using Current Procedural Terminology and International Classification of Diseases procedure codes to identify primary TKA. Patients were stratified into 2 groups based upon a history of prior KA. Univariate and multivariate analyses were conducted to determine association between KA and outcomes at 2-year postoperative period.ResultsIn total, 138,019 patients were included in this study, with 3357 (2.4%) patients receiving a KA before TKA and 134,662 (97.6%) patients who did not. The most common reason for KA was osteoarthritis (40.0%), followed by medial tear of the meniscus (26.0%) and chondromalacia (21%.0). After adjustment, prior KA was associated with increased revision rate (odds ratio [OR], 1.392; P = .003), postoperative stiffness (OR, 1.251; P = .012), periprosthetic joint infection (OR, 1.326; P < .001), and aseptic loosening (OR, 1.401; P = .048).ConclusionPrior KA is significantly associated with increased 2-year TKA revision rate. The most common etiology for arthroscopy was osteoarthritis. The results of the study, showing that arthroscopy before TKA substantially increases the rates of revision, PJI, aseptic loosening, and stiffness, lend further credence to the idea that patients may be better served by nonsurgical management of their degenerative pathology until they become candidates for TKA. Subjecting this population to arthroscopy appears to offer limited benefit at the cost of poorer outcomes when they require arthroplasty in the future.Level of EvidenceLevel III therapeutic study.     

Revision Total Hip and Knee Arthroplasties After Solid Organ Transplant

Background

As solid organ transplant (SOT) patients' survival improves, the number undergoing total hip (THA) and total knee arthroplasty (TKA) is increasing. Accordingly, the number of revision procedures in this higher-risk group is also increasing. The goals of this study were to identify the most common failure mechanisms, associated complications, clinical outcomes, and patient survivorship of SOT patients after revision THA or TKA.

Isolated Versus Full Component Revision in Total Knee Arthroplasty for Aseptic Loosening

BackgroundRevision of both femoral and tibial components of a total knee arthroplasty (TKA) for aseptic loosening has favorable outcomes. Revision of only one loose component with retention of others has shorter operative time and lower cost; however, implant survivorship and clinical outcomes of these different operations are unclear.MethodsBetween January 2009 and December 2019, a consecutive cohort of revision TKA was reviewed. Univariate and multivariable analyses were used to study correlations among factors and surgical related complications, time to prosthesis failure, and functional outcomes (University of California Los Angeles, Knee Society functional, knee osteoarthritis and outcome score for joint replacement, Veterans RAND 12 (VR-12) physical, and VR-12 mental).ResultsA total of 238 patients underwent revision TKA for aseptic loosening. The mean follow-up time was 61 months (range 25 to 152). Ten of the 105 patients (9.5%) who underwent full revision (both femoral and tibial components) and 18 of the 133 (13.5%) who underwent isolated revision had subsequent prosthesis failure [Hazard ratio (HR) 0.67, P = .343]. The factor analysis of type of revision (full or isolated revision) did not demonstrate a significant difference between groups in terms of complications, implant failures, and times to failure. Metallosis was related to early time to failure [Hazard ratio 10.11, P < .001] and iliotibial band release was associated with more complications (Odds ratio 9.87, P = .027). Preoperative symptoms of instability were associated with the worst improvement in University of California Los Angeles score. Higher American Society of Anesthesiologists status and higher Charlson Comorbidity Index were related with worse VR-12 physical (?30.5, P = .008) and knee osteoarthritis and outcome score for joint replacement (?4.2, P = .050) scores, respectively.ConclusionIsolated and full component revision TKA for aseptic loosening does not differ with respect to prosthesis failures, complications, and clinical results at 5 years. Poor American Society of Anesthesiologists status, increased comorbidities, instability, and a severe bone defect are related to worse functional improvement.Level of evidenceIII, cohort with control.     

Knee Arthrodesis Is a Durable Option for the Salvage of Infected Total Knee Arthroplasty

BackgroundKnee arthrodesis (KA) and above-knee amputation (AKA) have been used for salvage of failed total knee arthroplasty (TKA) after periprosthetic joint infection (PJI). However, few studies have assessed the outcomes of KA after TKA PJI, as it remains an uncommon procedure. We investigated rates of AKA, control of infection, and ambulatory status after KA for TKA PJI treatment.MethodsThis was a retrospective and single-surgeon series of 51 failed TKAs due to PJI treated with two-stage KA between 2000 and 2016 with a minimum of 2-year follow-up. Patient demographics, comorbidities, surgical history, radiographic data, and outcomes of KA treatment were recorded.ResultsInfection was successfully controlled in 48 of 51 patients (94.1%); of these, 24 knees (50.0%) required no reoperation subsequent to the index KA, whereas the remaining 24 (50.0%) patients required a median of 1 additional operation. Nonunion, malunion, or delayed union was noted in 10 patients (19.6%). Of the 48 patients who were successfully treated with KA, 41 patients (85.4%) remained ambulatory after KA and 9 of these patients (18.8%) did not require assistive devices. Three of 51 patients (5.9%) progressed to AKA after KA.ConclusionPatients undergoing KA for TKA PJI had high rates of infection control and preservation of ambulatory status, with low rates of progression to AKA in our study.Level of EvidenceLevel IV—case series.