Repeat two-stage exchange arthroplasty for recurrent periprosthetic hip or knee infection: what are the chances for success?

Introduction Two-stage revision is a frequently chosen approach to treat chronic periprosthetic joint infection (PJI). However, management of recurrent infection after a two-stage exchange remains debated and the outcome of a repeat two-stage procedure is unclear. This study investigates the success rates of repeat two-stage exchange arthroplasty and analyzes possible risk factors for failure. Materials and methods We retrospectively identified 55 patients (23 hips, 32 knees) who were treated with repeat resection arthroplasty and planned delayed reimplantation for recurrent periprosthetic joint infection between 2010 and 2019 after a prior two-stage revision at the same institution. The minimum follow-up was 12 months with a median follow-up time of 34 months (IQR 22–51). The infection-free survival, associated revision surgeries, and potential risk factors for further revision were analyzed using Kaplan–Meier survival curves and comparative non-parametric testing. Results 78% (43/55) underwent reimplantation after a repeat implant removal. Of those who completed the second-stage surgery, 37% (16/43) underwent additional revision for infection and 14% (6/55) underwent amputation. The reinfection-free implant survivorship amounted to 77% (95% CI 64–89%) after 1 year and 38% (95% CI 18–57%) after 5 years. Patients with a higher comorbidity score were less likely to undergo second-stage reimplantation (median 5 vs. 3, p = 0.034). Furthermore, obese patients (p = 0.026, Fisher’s exact test) and diabetics (p < 0.001, log-rank test) had a higher risk for further infection. Most commonly cultures yielded polymicrobial growth at the repeat two-stage exchange (27%, 15/55) and at re-reinfection (32%, 9/28). Pathogen persistence was observed in 21% (6/28) of re-reinfected patients. Conclusion The success rates after repeat two-stage exchange arthroplasty are low. Patients must be counseled accordingly and different modes of treatment should be considered.

One-Stage Hip Revision Arthroplasty Using Megaprosthesis in Severe Bone Loss of The Proximal Femur Due to Radiological Diffuse Osteomyelitis

Managing substantial proximal and/or distal femoral bone defects is one of the biggest challenges in chronic hip periprosthetic joint infection. Most authors use two-stage arthroplasty with a temporary antibiotic-loaded cement spacer for the management of these patients. In this study, we show our experience with one-stage exchange arthroplasty in managing severe bone defects due to radiological-extensive proximal femoral osteomyelitis. Two patients were included in the study. They showed radiological-extensive proximal femoral osteomyelitis, and they were treated with one-stage exchange arthroplasty using megaprosthesis. Diffuse osteomyelitis was confirmed in both cases; in one case, the histology was compatible with osteomyelitis, and the other case had a positive culture identified in a bone sample. At a minimum of a four-year follow-up, the patients did not reveal any clinical, radiological or laboratory signs of infection. In conclusion, one-stage exchange arthroplasty and megaprosthesis is an option for the treatment of chronic hip periprosthetic joint infection associated with radiological-diffuse proximal femoral osteomyelitis.

Trend of serum C-reactive protein is associated with treatment outcome of hip Periprosthetic joint infection undergoing two-stage exchange arthroplasty: a case control study

Background Serum C-reactive protein (CRP) trends are critical for monitoring patients’ treatment response following a two-stage exchange arthroplasty for periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) of the hip. However, CRP trends are poorly described in the literature. The primary aim of this study was to identify the relationships between PJI treatment outcomes and our proposed CRP trend definitions, parameters, and microbiological data. The secondary aim was to investigate CRP trends after the occurrence of spacer-related complications. Methods We conducted a retrospective review of 74 patients treated with a two-stage exchange protocol for PJI in a tertiary referral joint center between 2014 and 2016. Patients with factors that may affect CRP levels (inflammatory arthritis, concomitant infections, liver and kidney diseases, and intensive care admissions) were excluded. CRP trends were categorized into five types and PJI treatment outcome was defined as “success” or “failure” according to the Delphi criteria. Results Treatment was successful in 67 patients and failed in 7 patients. Multivariate logistic regression analysis showed that type 5 CRP, defined as serum CRP fluctuation without normalization after first stage surgery (odds ratio [OR]: 17.4; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 2.3–129.7; p = 0.005), and methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA; OR: 14.5; 95% CI: 1.6–131.7; p = 0.018) were associated with treatment failure. Spacer-related complications occurred in 18 patients. Of these, 12 had elevated CRP levels at later follow-up, while six had no elevation in CRP levels. Conclusions We found that MRSA infection and type 5 CRP were associated with PJI treatment failure.

Two-Stage Exchange Arthroplasty for Periprosthetic Shoulder Infection Is Associated with High Rate of Failure to Reimplant and Mortality

Background: Patients with a periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) of the shoulder, who fail to undergo reimplantation in an attempted two-stage exchange seem to be neglected in the current literature. The aim of this study was to assess the clinical course of patients after the first stage in the process of an attempted two-stage exchange for shoulder PJI. Methods: After a retrospective review of our institutional database between 2008 and 2018, 49 patients, who were treated with an intended two-stage exchange for shoulder PJI, were identified. Patients’ demographics, laboratory and health status parameters, along with records of clinical outcome were collected. The primary outcome measurements analyzed were infection eradication, successful reimplantation, and patient survival. Results: Reimplantation was completed in only 35 (71%) of 49 cases and eradication of infection was achieved in 85.7% of patients with successful reimplantation after a mean follow-up duration of 5.1 years (1.1 to 10.2 years). Reasons for failure to reimplant were premature death in 36%, high general morbidity in 29%, satisfaction with the current status in 21%, or severe infection with poor bone and soft tissues in 14% of the patients. Of the 14 cases without reimplantation, eradication rate of infection was 57% after a mean follow-up of 5 years (2.6 to 11 years). The overall mortality rate of the entire cohort was 25% at the latest follow-up and 10% within ninety days after implant removal. Patients who deceased or did not undergo reimplantation during the follow-up were significantly older and had a significantly higher Charlson comorbidity index (CCI). Conclusions: While the two-stage exchange arthroplasty can lead to high rates of infection eradication, a considerable subset of patients never undergoes the second stage for a variety of reasons. Shoulder PJI and its treatment are associated with a high risk of mortality, especially in patients with older age and higher CCI.

Two-stage exchange Arthroplasty for knee Periprosthetic joint infection exhibit high infection recurrence rate in patients with chronic viral hepatitis

Background Currently, there is little evidence about the outcome of two-stage exchange arthroplasty for the treatment of knee periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) in patients with chronic viral hepatitis. To evaluate it, we set the primary outcome as infection recurrence, and the secondary outcome as the difference between patients diagnosed with hepatitis B virus or hepatitis C virus. Patients and methods Between June, 2010 and December, 2016, 172 patients with knee PJIs were treated with two-stage exchange arthroplasty at our institute. Treatment success was defined using Delphi-based consensus. These patients were further divided into groups with or without chronic hepatitis. Variables were analyzed, including age, sex, comorbidities, microbiology, and operative methods. Minimum follow-up was 12 months (mean, 35 months; range, 12-85 months). Results Of the 172 knee PJI patients, 25 were identified with chronic hepatitis. The infection recurrence rate in the hepatitis group (28%, 7 in 25) was significantly higher than that in the non-hepatitis group (9.5%, 14 in 147), p = 0.017. However, there was no significant difference in the infection recurrence rates between patients with HBV (24%, 4 in 16) and HCV (33.3%, 3 in 9). Regarding the outcomes of patients with infection recurrence, 4 of the non-hepatitis patients were treated with the debridement, antibiotic treatment, irrigation, and retention of prosthesis (DAIR) procedure, with a success rate of 75%. The other 17 patients (7 with hepatitis and 10 without) were treated with repeated two-stage exchange arthroplasty with 100% infection elimination rate until the final follow-up. Conclusions Knee PJI patients with chronic hepatitis have higher infection recurrence rate after two-stage exchange arthroplasty (28%).

Diagnosis and management of infected arthroplasty

Periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) is one of the most dreadful complications after THA and TKA. Though prevention is of utmost importance in PJI management, the last decade has seen many remarkable developments in PJI diagnosis, including the introduction of several standardized PJI diagnostic definitions and biomarkers. Depending on the specific clinical situation, a myriad of treatment options for PJI are offered. Our review aims to summarize the pertinent information on PJI diagnosis and synthesize literature on the different treatment methods currently used in clinical practice. One of the most accepted PJI diagnostic definitions was developed by the Musculoskeletal Infection Society (MSIS) in 2011, later modified in the 2013 International Consensus Meeting (ICM). After promising results from studies, alpha-defensins and D-dimer were recently incorporated into the 2018 ICM PJI definition. The management choices for PJI include irrigation and debridement (DAIR), one-stage exchange arthroplasty, or two-stage exchange arthroplasty, to name a few. While two-stage revision has traditionally been the treatment of choice in the United States, there has been a growing body of evidence framing one-stage revision as a comparable choice. One-stage revision should be offered in patients meeting strict selection criteria: no sinus tract, proper soft tissue available for wound closure, appropriate bone stock, a favorable identifiable organism with encouraging antibiotic sensitivities (for cement and oral suppression later), and robust immunological status. DAIR can be considered in case of early infections with sensitive infecting organisms. Patients with multiple unsuccessful revisions or those who refuse further surgical intervention for PJI can be offered antibiotic suppression. If nothing seems to work, salvage procedures (resection arthroplasty and arthrodesis) are available as a last resort. Further research is encouraged to improve on diagnostic capabilities and develop evidence on the best treatment of choice for PJI.