Fungal periprosthetic joint infection: Rare but challenging problem

Periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) is the most difficult complication following total joint arthroplasty. Most of the etiological strains, accounting for over 98% of PJI, are bacterial species, with Staphylococcus aureus and Coagulase-negative staphylococci present in between 50% and 60% of all PJIs. Fungi, though rare, can also cause PJI in 1%–2% of cases and can be challenging to manage. The management of this uncommon but complex condition is challenging due to the absence of a consistent algorithm. Diagnosis of fungal PJI is difficult as isolation of the organisms by traditional culture may take a long time, and some of the culture-negative PJI can be caused by fungal organisms. In recent years, the introduction of next-generation sequencing has provided opportunity for isolation of the infective organisms in culture-negative PJI cases. The suggested treatment is based on consensus and includes operative and non-operative measures. Two-stage revision surgery is the most reliable surgical option for chronic PJI caused by fungi. Pharmacological therapy with antifungal agents is required for a long period of time with antibiotics and included to cover superinfections with bacterial species. The aim of this review article is to report the most up-to-date information on the diagnosis and treatment of fungal PJI with the intention of providing clear guidance to clinicians, researchers and surgeons.     

Identification and preoperative optimization of risk factors to prevent periprosthetic joint infection

Despite significant improvements over the past several decades in diagnosis, treatment and prevention of periprosthetic joint infection (PJI), it still remains a major challenge following total joint arthroplasty. Given the devastating nature and accelerated incidence of PJI, prevention is the most important strategy to deal with this challenging problem and should start from identifying risk factors. Understanding and well-organized optimization of these risk factors in individuals before elective arthroplasty are essential to the ultimate success in reducing the incidence of PJI. Even though some risk factors such as demographic characteristics are seldom changeable, they allow more accurate expectation regarding individual risks of PJI and thus, make proper counseling for shared preoperative decision-making possible. Others that increase the risk of PJI, but are potentially modifiable should be optimized prior to elective arthroplasty. Although remarkable advances have been achieved in past decades, many questions regarding standardized practice to prevent this catastrophic complication remain unanswered. The current study provide a comprehensive knowledge regarding risk factors based on general principles to control surgical site infection by the review of current literature and also share own practice at our institution to provide practical and better understandings.     

Risk factors for periprosthetic joint infection following total ankle replacement

BackgroundIdentifying preoperative patient characteristics that correlate with an increased risk of periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) following total ankle replacement (TAR) is of great interest to orthopaedic surgeons, as this may assist with appropriate patient selection. The purpose of this study is to systematically review the literature to identify risk factors that are associated with PJI following TAR.MethodsUtilizing the terms “(risk factor OR risk OR risks) AND (infection OR infected) AND (ankle replacement OR ankle arthroplasty)” we searched the PubMed/MEDLINE electronic databases. The quality of the included studies was then assessed using the AAOS Clinical Practice Guideline and Systematic Review Methodology. Recommendations were made using the overall strength of evidence.ResultsEight studies met the inclusion criteria. A limited strength of recommendation can be made that the following preoperative patient characteristics correlate with an increased risk of PJI following TAR: inflammatory arthritis, prior ankle surgery, age less than 65 years, body mass index less than 19, peripheral vascular disease, chronic lung disease, hypothyroidism, and low preoperative AOFAS hindfoot scores. There is conflicting evidence in the literature regarding the effect of obesity, tobacco use, diabetes, and duration of surgery.ConclusionsSeveral risk factors were identified as having an association with PJI following TAR. These factors may alert surgeons that a higher rate of PJI is possible. However, because of the low level of evidence of reported studies, only a limited strength of recommendation can be ascribed to regard these as risk factors for PJI at this time.     

Two-stage revision in periprosthetic knee joint infections

Periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) following total knee arthroplasty is one of the most catastrophic and costly complications that carries significant patient wellness as well as economic burdens. The road to efficiently diagnosing and treating PJI is challenging, as there is still no gold standard method to reach the diagnosis as early as desired. There are also international controversies with respect to the best approach to manage PJI cases. In this review, we highlight recent advances in managing PJI following knee arthroplasty surgery and discuss in depth the two-stage revision method.     

Risk factors for periprosthetic joint infection following primary total hip or knee arthroplasty: a meta‐analysis

To identify risk factors for periprosthetic joint infection following primary total joint arthroplasty, a systematic search was performed in Pubmed, Embase and Cochrane library databases. Pooled odds ratios (ORs) or standardised mean differences (SMDs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated. Patient characteristics, surgical‐related factors and comorbidities, as potential risk factors, were investigated. The main factors associated with infection after total joint arthroplasty (TJA) were male gender (OR, 1·48; 95% CI, 1.19–1.85), age (SMD, ?0·10; 95% CI, ?0.17–?0.03), obesity (OR, 1·54; 95% CI, 1·25–1·90), alcohol abuse (OR, 1·88; 95% CI, 1·32–2·68), American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) scale > 2 (OR, 2·06; 95% CI, 1·77–2·39), operative time (SMD, 0·49; 95% CI, 0·19–0·78), drain usage (OR, 0·36; 95% CI, 0·18–0·74), diabetes mellitus (OR, 1·58; 95% CI, 1·37–1·81), urinary tract infection (OR, 1·53; 95% CI, 1.09–2.16) and rheumatoid arthritis (OR, 1·57; 95% CI, 1·30–1·88). Among these risk factors, ASA score > 2 was a high risk factor, and drain usage was a protective factor. There was positive evidence for some factors that could be used to prevent the onset of infection after TJA.     

Two-stage revision arthroplasty for coagulase-negative staphylococcal periprosthetic joint infection of the hip and knee

BACKGROUND Periprosthetic joint infections(PJIs) are frequently caused by coagulase-negative Staphylococci(Co NS), which is known to be a hard-to-treat microorganism.Antibiotic resistance among causative pathogens of PJI is increasing. Two-stage revision is the favoured treatment for chronic Co NS infection of a hip or knee prosthesis. We hypothesised that the infection eradication rate of our treatment protocol for two-stage revision surgery for Co NS PJI of the hip and knee would be comparable to eradication rates described in the literature.AIM To evaluate the infection eradication rate of two-stage revision arthroplasty for PJI caused by Co NS.METHODS All patients treated with two-stage revision of a hip or knee prosthesis were retrospectively included. Patients with Co NS infection were included in the study, including polymicrobial cases. Primary outcome was infection eradication at final follow-up.RESULTS Forty-four patients were included in the study. Twenty-nine patients were treated for PJI of the hip and fifteen for PJI of the knee. At final follow-up after a mean of 37 mo, recurrent or persistent infection was present in eleven patients.CONCLUSION PJI with Co NS can be a difficult to treat infection due to increasing antibiotic resistance. Infection eradication rate of 70%-80% may be achieved.     

Periprosthetic joint infection: Current concept

Periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) is one of the most devastating and costly complications following total joint arthroplasty (TJA). Diagnosis and management of PJI is challenging for surgeons. There is no “gold standard” for diagnosis of PJI, making distinction between septic and aseptic failures difficult. Additionally, some of the greatest difficulties and controversies involve choosing the optimal method to treat the infected joint. Currently, there is significant debate as to the ideal treatment strategy for PJI, and this has led to considerable international variation in both surgical and nonsurgical management of PJI. In this review, we will discuss diagnosis and management of PJI following TJA and highlight some recent advances in this field.     

Accuracy of the International Consensus Scoring System for diagnosis of periprosthetic joint infection in revision shoulder arthroplasty

BackgroundTotal shoulder arthroplasty (TSA) continues to undergo dramatic growth with expanding indications and improvements in implants and surgical techniques. A major complication following TSA is periprosthetic joint infection (PJI), which remains difficult to diagnose, often relying on clinical judgment. A contemporary definition of PJI was established at the 2018 International Consensus Meeting (ICM) on Musculoskeletal Infection. We sought to retrospectively examine the accuracy of this scoring system in previously performed revision TSA and hypothesized that the ICM scoring system would be reliable in determining the presence of TSA PJI.MethodsOur institutional database was reviewed to identify patients undergoing revision TSA before the advent of the ICM PJI scoring system. Clinical notes and operative reports were reviewed for data regarding the preoperative clinical examination, laboratory values, and intraoperative findings. The findings were assigned scores based on the definition of probable PJI by the ICM scoring system. Scores were compared to treatment plans of infected vs. noninfected patients. The diagnosis of PJI was made using a combination of clinical examination, laboratory values, and intraoperative findings. Sensitivity, specificity, positive and negative predictive values, and accuracy of the ICM scoring system were calculated compared to actual treatment decision, the gold standard.ResultsOf 81 revision arthroplasties, 52 were revision reverse TSA (rTSA), and 29 were revision anatomic TSA (aTSA). Seven rTSA patients were treated as infected (7/52, 13.5%), and the scoring system identified 4 of those as being probable infections (4/7, 57.1%). One additional rTSA patient scored as probable infection, underwent a revision for instability, and was found to have no infection. Three aTSA patients were treated as infected (3/29, 10.3%), with one of those identified as probable infection by the scoring system (1/3, 33.3%). Four patients in the rTSA group and no patients in the aTSA group met the criteria for definite infection. Using the threshold of probable infection to identify PJI, the sensitivity of the scoring system was 0.6, and specificity was 0.99. The positive predictive value was 0.86, and the negative predictive value was 0.95. With the same threshold, the ICM scoring system was 93.8% accurate.ConclusionsIdentifying PJI in TSA remains difficult in the absence of definite signs of joint sepsis. This study found the scoring system to be highly accurate, although with modest sensitivity, and a reliable tool for the diagnosis of PJI following TSA.Level of evidenceLevel IV; Retrospective Case Series with No Comparison Group Treatment Study     

Comparative analysis of 23 synovial fluid biomarkers for hip and knee periprosthetic joint infection detection

There is interest in novel synovial fluid biomarkers for the detection of periprosthetic joint infection (PJI). Here, we assessed the diagnostic accuracy of 23 simple or sophisticated synovial fluid biomarkers for periprosthetic hip or knee infection detection. One hundred seven subjects were studied, 57 of whom had aseptic failure (AF) and 50 PJI. The following synovial fluid biomarkers were tested using spectrophotometric assays, immunoassays, lateral flow tests, or test strips: leukocyte count, monocyte percentage, lymphocyte percentage, neutrophil percentage, C-reactive protein (CRP), glucose, lactate, granulocyte-macrophage colony-stimulating factor, interferon-γ, interleukin-1β (IL-1β), IL-2, IL-4, IL-5, IL-6, IL-8, IL-10, IL-12p70, IL-13, IL-17A, IL-23, tumor necrosis factor-α, α-defensin, and leukocyte esterase. The best-performing synovial fluid biomarkers to differentiate PJI from AF—that is, those with highest area under the curve compared to all other biomarkers—were leukocyte count, percent neutrophils and percent monocytes, CRP, and α-defensin (P < .0001).     

Comprehensive meta-analysis of antibiotic-impregnated bone cement versus plain bone cement in primary total knee arthroplasty for preventing periprosthetic joint infection

PurposeAntibiotic-loaded bone cement (ALBC) was usually used to prevent periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) in primary total knee arthroplasty (PTKA), but whether to use ALBC or plain bone cement in PTKA remains unclear. We aimed to compare the occurrence rate of PJI using two different cements, and to investigate the efficacy of different antibiotic types and doses administered in preventing surgical site infection (SSI) with ALBC.MethodsThe availability of ALBC for preventing PJI was evaluated by using a systematic review and meta-analysis referring to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines. Existing articles until December 2021 involving PTKA patients with both ALBC and plain bone cement cohorts were scanned by searching “total knee arthroplasty”, “antibiotic-loaded cement”, “antibiotic prophylaxis”, “antibiotic-impregnated cement” and “antibiotic-laden cement” in the database of PubMed/MEDLINE, Embase, Web of Science and the Cochrane Library. Subgroup analysis included the effectiveness of different antibiotic types and doses in preventing SSI with ALBC. The modified Jadad scale was employed to score the qualities of included articles.ResultsEleven quantitative studies were enrolled, including 34,159 knees undergoing PTKA. The meta-analysis results demonstrated that the use of prophylactic ALBC could significantly reduce the prevalence of deep incisional SSI after PTKA, whereas there was no significant reduction in the rate of superficial incisional SSI. Moreover, gentamicin-loaded cement was effective in preventing deep incisional SSI, and the use of high-dose ALBC significantly reduced the rate of deep incisional SSI after PTKA. Besides, no significant adverse reactions and complications were stated during the use of ALBC in PTKA.ConclusionThe preventive application of ALBC during PTKA could reduce the rates of deep PJI. Furthermore, bone cement containing gentamicin and high-dose ALBC could even better prevent deep infection after PTKA. However, the existing related articles are mostly single-center and retrospective studies, and further high-quality ones are needed for confirmation.     

Intraoperative evaluation of polymorphonuclear leukocyte during second-stage revision surgery promote overdiagnosis of persistent periprosthetic joint infection

Objective

The aim of this study was to evaluate whether intraoperative histopathological examination could predict the risk of relapse of infection in periprosthetic joint infections (PJI).

髋膝关节置换术后假体周围感染预防护理方案的构建与实施

目的 制订并实施假体周围感染预防护理方案,以降低髋膝人工关节假体周围感染发生率。方法 建立多学科团队,参照相关诊断指南构建假体周围感染预防护理方案,包括术前金黄色葡萄球菌筛选去定植,备皮器具选择及皮肤准备流程优化;术中手术环境与植入物管理,伤口冲洗与体温控制,止血与输血管理;术后引流管留置、夹闭时机控制,伤口预警管理。选取髋膝人工关节置换术患者,根据住院治疗时间将患者分为对照组226例和观察组251例,对照组实施围术期常规护理,观察组在常规护理基础上实施假体周围感染预防护理方案。结果 观察组假体周围感染发生率为0.40％,对照组为1.77%;观察组住院时间（11.86±5.58）d ,对照组为（12.20±6.85 ）d,两组比较,差异无统计学意义（均P>0.05）。观察组术后1~7 d行走训练疼痛指数为（2.72±0.99）分,对照组为（3.59±1.38）分,两组比较,差异有统计学意义（P<0.01）。结论 假体周围感染预防护理方案的构建,融入了多项护理应对策略及质量持续改进项目,可降低术后感染发生率,减轻患者术后行走训练疼痛程度。