Positive Cultures Can Be Safely Ignored in Revision Arthroplasty Patients That Do Not Meet the 2018 International Consensus Meeting Criteria

BackgroundDuring aseptic revision total joint arthroplasty (TJA), one or more cultures may occasionally isolate an organism. The hypothesis of this study was that in a portion of patients undergoing revision arthroplasty for aseptic failure, culture may isolate an organism(s) that can be left untreated.MethodsAll patients undergoing revision TJA from 2000 to 2017 at two institutions were retrospectively reviewed. Patients were categorized as aseptic if they were appropriately investigated preoperatively and did not meet the 2018 International Consensus Meeting criteria. In the aseptic revision cohort, patients with a single positive culture or multiple cultures positive for different organisms (“organism-positive”) and patients who had negative intraoperative cultures (“organism-negative”) were compared based on demographics, comorbidities, operative details, subsequent reoperations, and periprosthetic joint infection (PJI).ResultsIn total, 3,234 International Consensus Meeting–negative aseptic revision TJAs were included, of which 215 patients (6.6%) were organism-positive, 196 (91.2%) had a single positive culture, and 19 (8.8%) were positive for 2 or more distinct organisms (ie, polymicrobial). The most prevalent organisms were coagulase-negative Staphylococci (37.5%), Staphylococcus epidermidis (9.6%), and Cutibacterium acnes (8.0%). Demographics and operative details were comparable between the groups. Using multiple regressions there was no association between culture positivity and the rate of reoperation or PJI.ConclusionIsolation of organisms by culture in patients undergoing revision for aseptic failure was not uncommon. As long as these patients were appropriately investigated preoperatively and PJI was excluded, these findings suggest that culture results may be ignored without subjecting patients to additional antimicrobial treatment.     

The Fate and Relevance of the Patella in Two-Stage Revision Total Knee Arthroplasty for Periprosthetic Joint Infection

BackgroundIt remains unclear whether reimplantation of a patellar component during a two-stage revision for periprosthetic total knee arthroplasty infection (PJI) affects patient reported outcome measures (PROMs) or implant survivorship. The purpose of this study was to evaluate whether patellar resurfacing during reimplantation confers a functional benefit or increases implant survivorship after two-stage treatment for PJI.MethodsTwo-stage revisions for knee PJI performed by three surgeons at a single tertiary care center were reviewed retrospectively. All original patellar components and cement were removed during resection and the patella was resurfaced whenever feasible during reimplantation. PROMs, implant survivorship, and radiographic measurements (patellar tilt and displacement) were compared between knees reimplanted with a patellar component versus those without a patellar component.ResultsA total of 103 patients met the inclusion criteria. Forty-three patients (41.7%) underwent reimplantation with, and 60 patients (58.3%) without a patellar component. At a mean follow-up of 33.5 months, there were no significant differences in patient demographics or PROMs between groups (P ≥ .156). No significant differences were found in the estimated Kaplan-Meier all-cause, aseptic, or septic survivorship between groups (P ≥ .342) at a maximum of 75 months follow-up. There was no significant difference in the change (pre-resection to post-reimplant) of patellar tilt (P = .504) or displacement (P = .097) between the groups.ConclusionPatellar resurfacing during knee reimplantation does not appear to meaningfully impact postoperative PROMs or survivorship. Given the risk of potential extensor mechanism complications with patellar resurfacing, surgeons may choose to leave the patella without an implant during total knee reimplantation and expect similar clinical outcomes.Level of EvidenceLevel III.     

Longer Operative Time Results in a Higher Rate of Subsequent Periprosthetic Joint Infection in Patients Undergoing Primary Joint Arthroplasty

Background

Whether prolonged operative time is an independent risk factor for subsequent surgical site infection (SSI) and periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) following total joint arthroplasty (TJA) remains a clinically significant and underexplored issue. The aim of this study is to investigate the association between operative time and the risk of subsequent SSI and PJI in patients undergoing primary TJA.

The 2018 International Consensus Meeting Minor Criteria for Chronic Hip and Knee Periprosthetic Joint Infection: Validation From a Single Center

BackgroundRecently, a revised definition of the minor criteria scoring system for diagnosing periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) was developed by the second International Consensus Meeting on musculoskeletal infection. The new system combines preoperative and intraoperative findings, reportedly achieving high sensitivity and specificity. We aimed to validate the modified scoring system at a high-volume center.MethodsWe retrospectively reviewed patients who underwent a revision total hip or knee arthroplasty at our institution from May 2015 to August 2018. Serum C-reactive protein, synovial white blood cell count and polymorphonuclear percentage, leukocyte esterase test, alpha-defensin, microbiological and histologic results, and documented existence of sinus tract and intraoperative purulence were available for all patients. Cases with at least 1 major criterion were considered as infected. Using the new minor criteria, a score of ≥6 reflects PJI, while a score <3 can be considered as noninfected. Sensitivity, specificity, mean accuracy (ACC), positive predictive value (PPV), and negative predictive value (NPV) were analyzed.ResultsA total of 345 cases were included. A cutoff score of ≥6 points had the following diagnostic performance: area under the curve (AUC) = 0.90; ACC = 0.88; sensitivity = 0.96; specificity = 0.84; PPV = 0.70; NPV = 0.98. Diagnostic performance was better for the hip (AUC = 0.92; ACC = 0.90; sensitivity = 0.96; specificity = 0.86; PPV = 0.81; NPV = 0.98) than the knee (AUC = 0.89; ACC = 0.85; sensitivity = 0.95; specificity = 0.83; PPV = 0.59; NPV = 0.98).ConclusionThe modified scoring system proposed by the 2018 International Consensus Meeting in diagnosing PJI showed high sensitivity and a good performance, especially as rule-out diagnostic criteria. The cutoff level seems to be different between the hip and knee. Further validation studies considering the acknowledged limitations are recommended.     

Diagnostic Utility of Platelet Count/Lymphocyte Count Ratio and Platelet Count/Mean Platelet Volume Ratio in Periprosthetic Joint Infection Following Total Knee Arthroplasty

BackgroundDiagnosing a periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) can be challenging and often requires a combination of clinical and laboratory findings. Monocyte/lymphocyte ratio, neutrophil/lymphocyte ratio, platelet/lymphocyte ratio (PLR), and platelet/mean platelet volume ratio (PVR) are simple predictors for inflammation that can be readily obtained from complete blood count. The aim of this study is to evaluate the diagnostic utility of these markers in predicting PJI in total knee arthroplasty (TKA) patients.MethodsA total of 538 patients who underwent revision TKA with calculable marker ratios prerevision in 2 groups were evaluated: (1) 206 patients with a preoperative diagnosis of PJI (group I) and (2) 332 patients treated for revision TKA for aseptic failures (group II). The diagnostic abilities of the markers were assessed via receiver operator characteristic curve analysis.ResultsThe optimal threshold of PVR at 30.82 had the highest sensitivity of 87.7%, while the optimal threshold of PLR at 234.13 had the highest specificity of 82.5%. Both PLR and PVR, when combined with Musculoskeletal Infection Society thresholds for erythrocyte sedimentation rate, C-reactive protein, synovial WBC, and PMN%, achieve significantly higher sensitivity and specificity rates for PJI at or above 97% (PLR: 99.03%; 98.80%; PVR: 98.54%;97.89%).ConclusionOur study demonstrates that PVR and PLR, which are readily available and inexpensive to obtain from complete blood counts, when combined with serum and synovial fluid markers have increased sensitivity and specificity comparable to that of alpha defensin. This suggests that PVR and PLR can be used together with other hematologic and aspirate markers to increase the accuracy of PJI diagnosis in TKA patients.     

Total Femur Antibiotic Spacers: Effective Salvage for Complex Periprosthetic Joint Infections

BackgroundA simultaneous periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) of an ipsilateral hip and knee arthroplasty is a challenging complication of lower extremity reconstructive surgery. We evaluated the use of total femur antibiotic-impregnated polymethylmethacrylate (PMMA) bone cement spacers in the staged treatment of such limb-threatening PJIs.MethodsThirteen patients were treated with a total femur antibiotic spacer. The mean age at the time of spacer placement was 65 years. Nine patients had polymicrobial PJIs. All spacers incorporated vancomycin (3.0 g/40 g PMMA) and gentamicin (3.6 g/40 g PMMA), while 8 also included amphotericin (150 mg/40 g PMMA). Eleven spacers were biarticular. Twelve spacers were implanted through one longitudinal incision, while 8 of 12 reimplantations occurred through 2 smaller, separate hip and knee incisions. Mean follow-up after reimplantation was 3 years.ResultsTwelve (92%) patients underwent reimplantation of a total femur prosthesis at a mean of 26 weeks. One patient died of medical complications 41 days after spacer placement. At latest follow-up, 3 patients had experienced PJI recurrence managed with irrigation and debridement. One required acetabular component revision for instability. All 12 reimplanted patients retained the total femur prosthesis with no amputations. Eleven (91%) were ambulatory, and 7 (58%) remained on suppressive antibiotics.ConclusionTotal femur antibiotic spacers are a viable, but technically demanding, limb-salvage option for complex PJIs involving the ipsilateral hip and knee. In the largest series to date, there were no amputations and 75% of reimplanted patients remained infection-free. Radical debridement, antimicrobial diversity, prolonged spacer retention, and limiting recurrent soft tissue violation are potential tenets of success.Level of EvidenceIV.     

Outcome of Debridement,Antibiotics, and Implant Retention With Modular Component Exchange in Acute Culture-Negative Periprosthetic Joint Infections

BackgroundModular component exchange and culture-directed antibiotic treatment is routinely employed for acute periprosthetic joint infection (PJI). However, as many as 7%-23% of PJIs have been reported to yield negative culture results. The efficacy of debridement, antibiotics, and implant retention (DAIR) with modular component exchange in the setting of acute culture negative PJI remains largely unknown. The aim of our study is to evaluate the outcomes of DAIR with modular component exchange in acute culture-positive and culture-negative PJI.MethodsA total of 149 consecutive patients with primary total joint replacements (90 total knee arthroplasties and 59 total hip arthroplasties) who underwent DAIR with modular component exchange for acute PJI with at least 3 years of follow-up were evaluated: (1) 46 culture-negative PJI patients and (2) 103 culture-positive PJI patients. Reinfection and aseptic revision rates along with complication rates were compared.ResultsThe reinfection rate for DAIR in acute culture-negative PJI was 13.0% compared to 19.4% in culture-positive PJI (P = .48). Mean survival time from reinfection between culture-negative (7.7 ± 0.4 years) and culture-positive (7.4 ± 0.3 years) PJI groups did not differ significantly (P = .40). Aseptic revision rates were 8.7% and 4.9% (P = .46), respectively, with loosening being the primary reason for implant failure in both cohorts.ConclusionsDespite lack of an identifying organism to guide postoperative antibiotic therapy, DAIR with modular component exchange for acute culture-negative PJI was associated with similar reinfection rates compared to acute culture-positive PJI, suggesting that culture negativity may not be a contraindication to DAIR in patients with acute PJI.     

Is Preoperative Staphylococcus aureus Screening and Decolonization Effective at Reducing Surgical Site Infection in Patients Undergoing Orthopedic Surgery? A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis With a Special Focus on Elective Total Joint Arthroplasty

BackgroundStaphylococcus aureus is a major pathogen implicated in orthopedic infections worldwide. Preoperative decolonization has been promoted but different strategies present mixed results. Thus, the goals of this study are to determine (1) whether S aureus screening and/or decolonization is effective at reducing surgical site infection in orthopedic surgery, (2) with a special focus on elective total joint arthroplasty (TJA), and (3) which preoperative S aureus screening/treatment strategy is most cost-effective for TJA.MethodsPubMed, Ovid MEDLINE, and Cochrane databases were searched on January 1, 2020, using a systematic strategy. We included papers with data comparing surgical site infection and periprosthetic joint infection rate in orthopedic surgery and/or elective total hip and knee arthroplasty patients before/after S aureus screening and/or decolonization protocol and papers evaluating the cost-effectiveness of different S aureus screening/treatment strategies.ResultsA total of 1260 papers were screened, and 32 papers were ultimately included. Results showed an increased risk of developing any infection (relative risk [RR] = 1.71 ± 0.16) and S aureus infection (RR = 2.79 ± 0.45) after orthopedic surgery without previous nares and whole-body decolonization. Focusing exclusively on elective TJA, there was an increased risk of developing any infection (RR = 1.70 ± 0.17) and S aureus infection (RR = 2.18 ± 0.41) if no decolonization is performed. All strategies appeared to be cost-effective, although universal decolonization without screening seemed to be the most advantageous.ConclusionPreoperative S aureus screening/decolonization protocol lowered the risk of infection after elective orthopedic and TJA surgeries. However, further studies are needed to determine optimal clinical and cost-effective methodologies.     

Topical Vancomycin Powder and Dilute Povidone-Iodine Lavage Reduce the Rate of Early Periprosthetic Joint Infection After Primary Total Knee Arthroplasty

BackgroundVancomycin powder and dilute povidone-iodine lavage (VIP) was introduced to reduce the incidence of periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) in high-risk total knee arthroplasty (TKA) patients. We hypothesize that VIP can reduce the incidence of early PJI in all primary TKA patients, regardless of preoperative risk.MethodsAn infection database of primary TKAs performed before a VIP protocol was implemented (January 2012-December 2013), during a time when only high-risk TKAs received VIP (January 2014-December 2015), and when all TKAs received VIP (January 2016-September 2019) at an urban, university-affiliated, not-for-profit orthopedic hospital was retrospectively reviewed to identify patients with PJI. Criteria used for diagnosis of PJI were the National Healthcare Safety Network and Musculoskeletal Infection Society guidelines.ResultsVIP reduced early primary TKA PJI incidence in both the high-risk and all-risk cohorts compared with the pre-VIP cohort by 44.6% and 56.4%, respectively (1.01% vs 0.56% vs 0.44%, P = .0088). In addition, after introducing VIP to all-risk TKA patients, compared with high-risk TKA patients, the relative risk of PJI dropped an additional 21.4%, but this finding did not reach statistical significance (0.56% vs 0.44%, P = .4212). There were no demographic differences between the 3 VIP PJI cohorts.ConclusionVIP is associated with a reduced early PJI incidence after primary TKA, regardless of preoperative risk. With the literature supporting its safety and cost-effectiveness, VIP is a value-based intervention, but given the nature of this historical cohort study, a multicenter randomized controlled trial is underway to definitively confirm its efficacy.     

Intraosseous Regional Administration of Vancomycin in Primary Total Knee Arthroplasty Does Not Increase the Risk of Vancomycin-Associated Complications

BackgroundPeriprosthetic joint infection (PJI) after total knee arthroplasty (TKA) is a rare but major complication. Owing to an increasing antibiotic resistance in bacteria causing PJI, vancomycin has been investigated as a prophylactic agent. Intraosseous regional administration (IORA) of vancomycin achieves significantly higher local tissue concentrations than systemic administration. There are limited data on IORA of vancomycin with respect to vancomycin-associated complications.MethodsSingle-surgeon retrospective review of primary TKA was performed between January 2015 and May 2019. All patients received 500 mg of IORA of vancomycin after tourniquet inflation and 3 × 1 g intravenous cefazolin in 24 hrs. Preoperative data collected included age, gender, body mass index, American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) score, diabetes, and chronic kidney disease (CKD). We documented in-hospital complications and complications requiring readmission within 12 months. Primary outcome measures were the incidence of acute kidney injury (AKI), ‘red man syndrome’ (RMS), and neutropenia. The secondary outcome measure was PJI incidence.ResultsWe identified 631 primary TKAs in 556 patients, of which 331 received IORA. The mean age was 67.7 ± 8.7 years, and 57.8% were women. CKD was prevalent in 17.2% of the cohort. AKI occurred in 25 (3.9%) cases. After controlling for covariates, CKD was the only significant predictor of AKI (odds ratio = 3.035, P = .023). RMS and neutropenia were not observed in this cohort. The 90-day PJI rate was 0%, and the 1-year PJI rate was 0.2%.ConclusionsLow-dose IORA of vancomycin in addition to standard intravenous systemic cefazolin prophylaxis in TKA is safe without significant adverse effects of vancomycin such as AKI, RMS, or neutropenia.