Search

Background: The optimal type of dressing in the setting of total joint arthroplasty (TJA) remains uncertain. The aim of this network meta-analysis was to compare various wound dressings and identify the optimal type of dressings for blister reduction and prevention of periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) in patients after TJA.Methods: Studies comparing 2 or more dressing groups after TJA (hip or knee) were systematically searched on PubMed, Embase, and Scopus. Two authors performed the study selection, risk of bias assessment, and data extraction. Both outcomes were assessed using odds ratios (OR) with 95% confidence intervals (CI) and were ranked using surface under the cumulative ranking curve (SUCRA) probabilities to determine a hierarchy of dressings. A sensitivity analysis was performed to reduce the effect of intransitivity between studies.Results: A total of 21 studies, consisting of 12 dressing types in 7293 TJAs, were included in the final analysis. The highest incidence of blisters occurred when using negative-pressure wound therapy (OR 9.33, 95% CI 3.51-24.83, vs gauze). All dressings ranked better than gauze in infection rate except for hydrofiber (OR 1.46, 95% CI 0.02-112.53) and fabric dressings (OR 1.46, 95% CI 0.24-9.02). For blister reduction, alginate (SUCRA = 87.7%) and hydrofiber with hydrocolloid (SUCRA = 92.3%) were ranked as the optimal dressings before and after a sensitivity analysis, respectively. Antimicrobial dressing (SUCRA = 83.7%) demonstrated the most efficacy for preventing PJI.Conclusion: Based on the evidence from our analysis, an antimicrobial dressing is the optimal dressing to prevent PJI. If negative-pressure wound therapy is used, surgeons should be aware of an increased incidence of blister formation. Further studies should focus on the alginate versus hydrofiber and hydrocolloid dressing to determine the optimal dressing to reduce blisters. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: The diagnosis of periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) in the early postoperative period remains a challenge. Although studies have established that serum C-reactive protein (CRP) and synovial markers may be useful, recent studies have suggested that the current thresholds used may lack sensitivity. The purpose of this study was to examine the role of serum CRP, erythrocyte sedimentation rate (ESR), synovial fluid white blood-cell (WBC) count, and polymorphonuclear neutrophil (PMN) percentage in the diagnosis of acute postoperative PJI and to identify the optimal threshold.Methods: This multicenter study included patients who were investigated for possible PJI within 90 days of an index arthroplasty. This study included 197 patients from 4 institutions who underwent total joint arthroplasty from 2000 to 2017. Of these patients, 123 were confirmed to have PJI, and 74 were ruled out as not having PJI (non-infected group). Analyses of receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves and the area under the curve were performed to determine the value of each test and optimal cutoff values.Results: The optimal cutoff value was 6,130 cells/μL for synovial fluid WBC count (91% sensitivity and 83% specificity), 39.8 mg/L for serum CRP (91% sensitivity and 87% specificity), 39.5 mm/hr for ESR (76% sensitivity and 67% specificity), and 79.5% for PMN percentage (95% sensitivity and 59% specificity). Reducing the acute period from 90 days to 30 days or 45 days made little difference in most threshold values. However, the optimal cutoff for synovial fluid WBC count was almost twice as high (10,170 cells/μL) when using a 30-day definition instead of a 90-day definition.Conclusions: The calculated cutoffs in our study were substantially lower than the thresholds used by the Musculoskeletal Infection Society. The calculated values of this study should be used, as previous cutoffs may be too high and lack sensitivity. In addition, it appears that the threshold values, at least for some of the tests, change as the duration since the index arthroplasty lengthens. A continuum of threshold values that is dependent on the number of days since the index arthroplasty may need to be used for the diagnosis of acute PJI.Level Of Evidence: Diagnostic Level III. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Based on current guidelines from the American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons (AAOS), a number of prophylactic modalities for the prevention of venous thromboembolism in total joint arthroplasty may be used. It is common practice that more potent prophylactic agents are used for patients at higher risk of venous thromboembolism. However, we are aware of no studies that have investigated the efficacy of potent anticoagulation in higher-risk individuals. Therefore, the purpose of our study was to test the hypothesis that low-molecular-weight heparin and warfarin result in a reduction in venous thromboembolism events in high-risk patients.Methods: A retrospective, multi-institutional study of 60,467 primary and revision total joint arthroplasties from 2000 to 2015 was performed. Identified medications were classified as aspirin, low-molecular-weight heparin, or warfarin. Patients with unavailable venous thromboembolism prophylaxis information or those not receiving the aforementioned prophylaxis were excluded. Information pertinent to the objective of this study was collected and a venous thromboembolism risk score was calculated based on 26 variables. Treatment outcomes assessed included 90-day rate of symptomatic venous thromboembolism and periprosthetic joint infection. Propensity score matching was performed (1:1), as well as logistic regression analysis on the total sample.Results: Aspirin prophylaxis demonstrated a lower rate of deep vein thrombosis, pulmonary embolism, and venous thromboembolism than warfarin and low-molecular-weight heparin alone throughout all risk scores. In the matched propensity score analysis, low-molecular-weight heparin and warfarin demonstrated increased odds of venous thromboembolism for both standard-risk and high-risk patients undergoing total knee arthroplasties compared with aspirin. For primary total hip arthroplasty, warfarin demonstrated an increased risk for high-risk patients and low-molecular-weight heparin demonstrated an increased risk for standard-risk patients. The prevalence of periprosthetic joint infection was higher in patients receiving warfarin (p < 0.001 for both comparisons of warfarin with aspirin and low-molecular-weight heparin).Conclusions: The results of this multi-institutional study demonstrate that the use of warfarin and low-molecular-weight heparin in higher-risk patients does not necessarily result in a reduction in symptomatic venous thromboembolism. Aspirin administered to higher-risk patients seems to be as effective as potent anticoagulation and more effective than warfarin.Level Of Evidence: Therapeutic Level III. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Current guidelines recommend serum erythrocyte sedimentation rate (ESR) and C-reactive protein (CRP) as the first-line testing for evaluation of suspected periprosthetic joint infection, in addition to synovial white blood-cell (WBC) count and polymorphonuclear percentage. However, the sensitivity and other diagnostic measures of these tests using a standardized definition of periprosthetic joint infection and the influence of organisms on these inflammatory markers remain inadequately investigated.Methods: A retrospective review of an institutional database of 549 periprosthetic joint infection cases and 653 aseptic total joint arthroplasty revisions was performed. Periprosthetic joint infection was defined using major criteria from the International Consensus Meeting (ICM) on Periprosthetic Joint Infection. The mean inflammatory marker levels were compared among organisms with Student t tests and the proportions of elevated laboratory levels were compared among organisms with chi-square analyses. Receiver operating characteristic curve analyses were performed to calculate new cutoffs, sensitivities, and specificities for each organism and overall for serum CRP and ESR and synovial WBC and polymorphonuclear percentage.Results: The sensitivity of these markers for diagnosing chronic periprosthetic joint infection was 0.85 for ESR, 0.88 for CRP, 0.83 for WBC count, and 0.78 for polymorphonuclear percentage. For ESR, antibiotic-resistant organisms had higher mean values (84.3 mm/hr) than culture-negative cases (57.4 mm/hr), coagulase-negative Staphylococcus (68.3 mm/hr), and Streptococcus species (66.1 mm/hr); Staphylococcus aureus (81.0 mm/hr) was higher than culture-negative cases (57.4 mm/hr). For CRP, culture-negative cases had lower mean values (41.0 mg/L) than gram-negative organisms (87.4 mg/L), antibiotic-resistant organisms (86.0 mg/L), S. aureus (112.2 mg/L), and Streptococcus species (114.6 mg/L); S. aureus (112.2 mg/L) was higher than coagulase-negative Staphylococcus (66.0 mg/L). For WBC count, culture-negative cases had lower mean values (27,984.5 cells/mL) than S. aureus (116,250.0 cells/mL) and Streptococcus species (77,933.7 cells/mL). For polymorphonuclear percentage, there were no significant differences in mean values among all organisms.Conclusions: It appears that serological markers, namely ESR and CRP, have a higher false-negative rate than previously reported. Synovial markers similarly exhibit high false-negative rates. Furthermore, the sensitivity of these tests appears to be related to organism type. Surgeons should be aware of the high rate of false-negatives associated with low-virulence organisms and culture-negative cases.Level Of Evidence: Diagnostic Level I. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Although morbid obesity is considered a modifiable risk factor for periprosthetic joint infection (PJI), there is no consensus regarding an appropriate threshold for body mass index (BMI) above which a high risk for infection may outweigh the benefits of surgery.Questions/purposes: (1) Is there a BMI cutoff threshold that is associated with increased risk for PJI? (2) Is the risk of PJI increased in higher obesity classes?Methods: A retrospective study was conducted of all primary THAs and TKAs performed at one institution between 2006 and 2015. Overall 19,226 patients were eligible to be included in the study; 1053 patients were excluded as a result of incomplete data, resulting in a final cohort of 18,173 patients (8757 TKAs and 9416 THAs). PJI was defined using the International Consensus Meeting criteria. To ensure accurate followup, and because there is evidence to support the association between obesity and early infection, we identified PJI within 90 days of the index surgery. This relationship was examined separately for BMI as a continuous variable and for each BMI category as defined by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (underweight ≤ 18.49 kg/m; normal 18.5-24.9 kg/m; overweight 25-29.9 kg/m; obese class I 30-34.9 kg/m; obese class II 35-39.9 kg/m; obese class III ≥ 40 kg/m). Analyses were performed with logistic regression, accounting for both patient and surgical risk factors. A BMI threshold was evaluated with a receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve and the Youden index.Results: The area under the ROC curve for BMI and risk of PJI within 90 days was only 0.58 (confidence interval [CI], 0.52-0.63) suggesting such a cutoff was not much better than random chance. Among the BMI classes, patients with class III obesity (≥ 40 kg/m) were the only ones showing a higher risk for PJI within 90 days (odds ratio [OR], 3.09 [1.46-6.54]; p = 0.003). The risk of developing PJI was not greater for overweight (OR, 0.72; 95% CI, 0.38-1.4), class I obese (OR, 1.06; 95% CI, 0.57-2.0), or class II obese (OR, 1.08; 95% CI, 0.52-2.2) patients. Underweight patients also demonstrated no increased risk for PJI (OR, 1.80; 95% CI, 0.23-13.9).Conclusions: The risk for infection increases gradually throughout the full range of BMI, but no threshold exists. Weight reduction before surgery may mitigate risk for infection for all patients with a BMI above normal. Of note, patients with a BMI > 40 kg/m carried a threefold higher risk for PJI and for these patients, the risks of surgery must be carefully weighed against its benefits.Level Of Evidence: Level III, therapeutic study. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Two-stage exchange arthroplasty involves resection and reimplantation of new implants at a later stage. An antibiotic-free period is often advocated by surgeons before reimplantation. However, there is no conclusive evidence supporting the utility or duration of this practice. This study evaluated the utility and optimal duration of the antibiotic-free period before reimplantation.Methods: Electronic infection databases of 2 institutions were retrospectively reviewed from 2000 to 2014 to identify 785 patients who underwent 2-stage exchange arthroplasty, of which 409 were reimplanted without any surgeries between the first and second stage. Total joint arthroplasties that met the Musculoskeletal Infection Society criteria for periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) and had a minimum of 1-year follow-up were included. The antibiotic holiday period was defined as the time period off antibiotics before reimplantation. Treatment success was defined according to the Delphi consensus criteria. A multivariate analysis and Fisher exact test were performed.Results: The duration of the antibiotic-free period was not significantly associated with reinfection following reimplantation after controlling for potential confounders, including joint involvement, gender, institution, and comorbidities. However, the duration of spacer implantation was significantly associated with reinfection. Of the patients who failed treatment, 41.5% failed on antibiotics while 58.5% failed during the antibiotic-free period at a mean of 26.1 days.Conclusion: The duration of an antibiotic-free period does not appear to significantly affect PJI rate after reimplantation. However, many patients fail during the antibiotic-free period. Further prospective studies are needed to determine the optimal timing of reimplantation for 2-stage exchange arthroplasty for PJI treatment. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Perioperative hyperglycemia has many etiologies, including medication, impaired glucose tolerance, uncontrolled diabetes mellitus, or stress, the latter of which is common in patients postoperatively. Our study investigated the influence of postoperative blood glucose levels on periprosthetic joint infection after elective total joint arthroplasty to determine a threshold for glycemic control for which surgeons should strive during a patient's hospital stay.Methods: A single-institution retrospective review was conducted on 24,857 primary total joint arthroplasties performed from 2001 to 2015. Of these, 13,196 had a minimum follow-up of 1 year (mean, 5.9 years). Postoperative day 1 morning blood glucose levels were utilized and were correlated with periprosthetic joint infection, as defined by the International Consensus Group on Periprosthetic Joint Infection. Multivariable analysis was used to determine the influence of several important covariates on infection. An alpha level of 0.05 was used to determine significance.Results: The rate of periprosthetic joint infection increased linearly from blood glucose levels of ≥115 mg/dL. Multivariable analysis revealed that blood glucose levels were significantly associated with periprosthetic joint infection (p = 0.028). The optimal blood glucose threshold to reduce the likelihood of periprosthetic joint infection was 137 mg/dL. The periprosthetic joint infection rate in the entire cohort was 1.59% (1.46% in patients without diabetes compared with 2.39% in patients with diabetes; p = 0.001). There was no significant association between blood glucose level and periprosthetic joint infection in patients with diabetes (p = 0.276), although there was a linear trend.Conclusions: The relationship between postoperative blood glucose levels and periprosthetic joint infection increased linearly, with an optimal cutoff of 137 mg/dL. Immediate and strict postoperative glycemic control may be critical in reducing postoperative complications, as even mild hyperglycemia was significantly associated with periprosthetic joint infection.Level Of Evidence: Prognostic Level III. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Preoperative identification of patients at risk for periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) following total hip arthroplasty (THA) or total knee arthroplasty (TKA) is important for patient optimization and targeted prevention. The purpose of this study was to create a preoperative PJI risk calculator for assessing a patient's individual risk of developing (1) any PJI, (2) PJI caused by Staphylococcus aureus, and (3) PJI caused by antibiotic-resistant organisms.Methods: A retrospective review was performed of 27,717 patients (12,086 TKAs and 31,167 THAs), including 1,035 with confirmed PJI, who were treated at a single institution from 2000 to 2014. A total of 42 risk factors, including patient characteristics and surgical variables, were evaluated with a multivariate analysis in which coefficients were scaled to produce integer scores. External validation was performed with use of data on 29,252 patients who had undergone total joint arthroplasty (TJA) at an independent institution.Results: Of the 42 risk factors studied, 25 were found not to be significant risk factors for PJI. The most influential of the remaining 17 included a previous open surgical procedure, drug abuse, a revision procedure, and human immunodeficiency virus (HIV)/acquired immunodeficiency syndrome (AIDS). The areas under the curves were 0.83 and 0.84 for any PJI, 0.86 and 0.83 for antibiotic-resistant PJI, and 0.86 and 0.73 for S. aureus PJI in the internal and external validation models, respectively. The rates of PJI were 0.56% and 0.61% in the lowest decile of risk scores and 15.85% and 20.63% in the highest decile.Conclusions: In this large-cohort study, we were able to identify and validate risk factors and their relative weights for predicting PJI. Factors such as prior surgical procedures and high-risk comorbidities should be considered when determining whether TJA is indicated and when counseling patients.Level Of Evidence: Prognostic Level IV. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: A prior survey of members of the American Association of Hip and Knee Surgeons revealed that 78% of responding surgeons were named as a defendant in at least 1 lawsuit, and 69% of these lawsuits were dismissed or settled out of court. The most common sources of litigation were nerve injury, limb-length discrepancy, and infection. This study examined common reasons for lawsuits after total joint arthroplasty (TJA) in a single metropolitan area.Methods: A retrospective review of lawsuits filed between 2009 and 2015 in a 5-county metropolitan area was performed, including 30 hospitals and 113 TJA surgeons. Complaints underwent a manual review to determine the number of lawsuits and the specific allegations filed against each surgeon.Results: Thirty-one (27.4%) surgeons were named as a defendant in at least 1 lawsuit. Eighty-three total lawsuits were filed during the period, 50 of which were dismissed or settled outside of court. Top reasons for lawsuits were, in descending order, infection, nerve injury, chronic pain, vascular injury, periprosthetic fracture, retention of foreign body, dislocation, limb-length discrepancy, venous thromboembolism, loosening, compartment syndrome, and other medical complaints.Conclusion: Infection appears to be the basis of most lawsuits after TJA. Surgeons should be aware of the potential for a lawsuit for complications and should strive to better communicate with patients regarding preoperative informed consent and disclosure after adverse events. Surgeons should minimize performing surgery in patients at high risk of complications, such as patients with a higher likelihood of developing postoperative infection or patients on chronic pain medications. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Despite the availability of a battery of tests, the diagnosis of periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) continues to be challenging. Serum D-dimer assessment is a widely available test that detects fibrinolytic activities that occur during infection. We hypothesized that patients with PJI may have a high level of circulating D-dimer and that the presence of a high level of serum D-dimer may be a sign of persistent infection in patients awaiting reimplantation.Methods: This prospective study was initiated to enroll patients undergoing primary and revision arthroplasty. Our cohort consisted of 245 patients undergoing primary arthroplasty (n = 23), revision for aseptic failure (n = 86), revision for PJI (n = 57), or reimplantation (n = 29) or who had infection in a site other than a joint (n = 50). PJI was defined using the Musculoskeletal Infection Society criteria. In all patients, serum D-dimer level, erythrocyte sedimentation rate (ESR), and C-reactive protein (CRP) level were measured preoperatively.Results: The median D-dimer level was significantly higher (p < 0.0001) for the patients with PJI (1,110 ng/mL [range, 243 to 8,487 ng/mL]) than for the patients with aseptic failure (299 ng/mL [range, 106 to 2,571 ng/mL). Using the Youden index, 850 ng/mL was determined as the optimal threshold value for serum D-dimer for the diagnosis of PJI. Serum D-dimer outperformed both ESR and serum CRP, with a sensitivity of 89% and a specificity of 93%. ESR and CRP had a sensitivity of 73% and 79% and a specificity of 78% and 80%, respectively. The sensitivity and specificity of ESR and CRP combined was 84% (95% confidence interval [CI], 76% to 90%) and 47% (95% CI, 36% to 58%), respectively.Conclusions: It appears that serum D-dimer is a promising marker for the diagnosis of PJI. This test may also have a great utility for determining the optimal timing of reimplantation.Level Of Evidence: Diagnostic Level II. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: The treatment outcomes of periprosthetic joint infection are frequently dependent on characteristics of the causative organism. The objective of this comparative study was to investigate the prevalence of and risk factors for development of polymicrobial periprosthetic joint infection, and the outcome of surgical treatment of these patients.Methods: All patients with polymicrobial, monomicrobial, or culture-negative periprosthetic joint infection treated from 2000 to 2014 were identified at a single institution. Ninety-five patients with a polymicrobial periprosthetic joint infection had a minimum follow-up of 12 months. We matched patients with a polymicrobial periprosthetic joint infection with the other cohorts using propensity score matching for several important parameters. Treatment success was defined according to the Delphi criteria; Kaplan-Meier survivorship curves were generated to demonstrate this. A multiple logistic regression analysis was performed to determine risk factors for a polymicrobial periprosthetic joint infection.Results: Overall, 10.3% (108 of 1,045) of the periprosthetic joint infections treated at our institution were polymicrobial in nature. Patients with a polymicrobial periprosthetic joint infection had a higher failure rate at 50.5% (48 of 95) compared with the monomicrobial periprosthetic joint infection cohort at 31.5% (63 of 200) and the culture-negative periprosthetic joint infection cohort at 30.2% (48 of 159) (p = 0.003). The survivorship of the polymicrobial periprosthetic joint infection group was 52.2% at the 2-year follow-up, 49.3% at the 5-year follow-up, and 46.8% at the 10-year follow-up. Patients with polymicrobial periprosthetic joint infection had a higher rate of amputation (odds ratio [OR], 3.80 [95% confidence interval (CI), 1.34 to 10.80]), arthrodesis (OR, 11.06 [95% CI, 1.27 to 96.00]), and periprosthetic joint infection-related mortality (OR, 7.88 [95% CI, 1.60 to 38.67]) compared with patients with monomicrobial periprosthetic joint infection. Isolation of gram-negative organisms (p < 0.01), enterococci (p < 0.01), Escherichia coli (p < 0.01), and atypical organisms (p < 0.01) was associated with polymicrobial periprosthetic joint infection. Only the presence of a sinus tract (OR, 2.20 [95% CI, 1.39 to 3.47]; p = 0.001) was a significant risk factor for polymicrobial periprosthetic joint infection on multivariate analysis.Conclusions: This study reveals that polymicrobial periprosthetic joint infection, occurring at a relatively low rate, is associated with poor outcomes when compared with monomicrobial and culture-negative periprosthetic joint infection. Patients with polymicrobial infections were more likely to require a salvage procedure or to have periprosthetic joint infection-related mortality. Polymicrobial periprosthetic joint infection was associated with soft-tissue defects such as a sinus tract and certain types of organisms, which should be considered when administering antibiotics to these patients.Level Of Evidence: Prognostic Level III. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: It is strongly recommended that tissue and synovial fluid culture samples be obtained during reimplantation performed as part of a 2-stage exchange arthroplasty. The rate of positive cultures during reimplantation and the influence of positive cultures on subsequent outcomes, to our knowledge, are unknown. This study was designed to determine the rate of positive cultures during reimplantation and to investigate the association between positive cultures at reimplantation and subsequent outcomes.Methods: We retrospectively reviewed the data of 259 patients who met the Musculoskeletal Infection Society criteria for periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) and who underwent both stages of 2-stage exchange arthroplasty at our institution from 1999 to 2013. Among these patients were 267 PJIs (186 knees and 81 hips); 33 (12.4%) had ≥1 positive culture result at reimplantation. Treatment failure was assessed according to the Delphi-based consensus definition. Logistic regression analysis was performed to assess the predictors of positive culture and risk factors for failure of 2-stage exchange arthroplasty.Results: Of the 33 cases with PJI, 15 (45.5%) had a subsequent failure of the 2-stage exchange arthroplasty compared with 49 (20.9%) of the cases that were culture-negative at reimplantation. When controlling for other variables using multivariate analyses, the risk of treatment failure was higher (odds ratio = 2.53; 95% confidence interval [CI] = 1.13 to 5.64) and reinfection occurred earlier (hazard ratio = 2.00; 95% CI = 1.05 to 3.82) for the cases with a positive culture during reimplantation. The treatment failure rate did not differ (p = 0.73) between cases with ≥2 positive cultures (36.4%) and 1 positive culture (50%).Conclusions: Positive intraoperative culture at the time of reimplantation, regardless of the number of positive samples, was independently associated with >2 times the risk of subsequent treatment failure and earlier reinfection. Surgeons should be aware that a positive culture at the time of reimplantation independently increases the risk of subsequent failure.Level Of Evidence: Prognostic Level III. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Although thyroxine has an important role in modulating the immune system, it has not been associated with periprosthetic joint infection. This study was conceived to examine the association between hypothyroidism and periprosthetic joint infection (PIJ).Methods: Using an institutional database, the preoperative comorbidities of 32,289 total joint arthroplasties performed between 2000 and 2013 were identified using an International Classification of Diseases, Ninth Revision-based comorbidity index.Results: In the multivariate analysis, hypothyroidism was found to be an independent risk factor (adjusted odds ratio: 2.46; P < .0001). In addition, patients who developed PJI demonstrated higher thyroid-stimulating hormone levels than those without (P = .04).Discussion: Surgeons should be aware of this increased risk of PJI in hypothyroid patients when risk stratifying, and future studies are needed to determine the potential role of thyroxine supplementation. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Two-stage exchange arthroplasty remains the preferred method to treat periprosthetic joint infection. The aim of this study was to investigate the clinical course of periprosthetic joint infection following resection arthroplasty and insertion of a spacer.Methods: Our institutional database was used to identify 504 cases of periprosthetic joint infection (326 knees and 178 hips) treated with resection arthroplasty and spacer insertion as part of a two-stage exchange arthroplasty. A review of the patient charts was performed to extract information relevant to the objectives of this study that included the details of the clinical course following resection arthroplasty.Results: The mean follow-up duration after initial spacer implantation was 56.2 months. Reimplantation occurred in the joints of 417 (82.7%) of 504 cases. Of these 417 cases, 329 (78.9%) had a minimum one-year follow-up, and 81.4% of these had successful treatment. The mean duration from resection arthroplasty to reimplantation was 4.2 months (range, 0.7 to 131.7 months). Sixty (11.9%) of the 504 joints required interim spacer exchange(s). Of the eighty-seven cases that did not undergo reimplantation, six (6.9%) required amputation, five (5.7%) underwent a Girdlestone procedure, four (4.6%) underwent arthrodesis, and seventy-two (82.8%) underwent spacer retention. Thirty-six patients died in the interstage period.Conclusions: The commonly held belief that two-stage exchange arthroplasty carries a high success rate for the eradication of periprosthetic joint infection may need to be reexamined. A considerable number of patients undergoing the first stage of a two-stage procedure do not undergo a subsequent reimplantation for a variety of reasons or require an additional spacer exchange in the interim. Reports on the success of two-stage exchange should account for the mortality of these patients and for patients who never undergo reimplantation. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Thus, although it is sensible to reserve ABC for high-risk patients in theory, there is no evidence to suggest that ABC prevents periprosthetic joint infection in patients with increased risk. Downloaded from http://journals.lww.com/jbjsjournal by BhDMf5ePHKbH4TTImqenVA+lpWIIBvonhQl60Etgtdnn9T1vLQWJq3kbRMjK/ocE on 12/26/2020 Downloaded from http://journals.lww.com/jbjsjournal by BhDMf5ePHKbH4TTImqenVA+lpWIIBvonhQl60Etgtdnn9T1vLQWJq3kbRMjK/ocE on 12/26/2020 Commentary & Perspective When to Use Commercially Available Antibiotic Cement: An Ongoing Debate Commentary on an article by Robert S. Namba, MD, et al.: "Commercially Prepared Antibiotic-Loaded Bone Cement and Infection Risk Following Cemented Primary Total Knee Arthroplasty" Timothy L. Tan, MD The use of antibiotic-loaded bone cement (ABC) to prevent periprosthetic joint infection, the most devastating complication followingarthroplasty,remainsatopicofcontention. [Extracted from the article]

Background: Patients with periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) undergoing 2-stage exchange arthroplasty may undergo an interim spacer exchange for a variety of reasons including mechanical failure of spacer or persistence of infection. The objective of this study is to understand the risk factors and outcomes of patients who undergo spacer exchange during the course of a planned 2-stage exchange arthroplasty.Methods: Our institutional database was used to identify 533 patients who underwent a 2-stage exchange arthroplasty for PJI, including 90 patients with a spacer exchange, from 2000 to 2017. A retrospective review was performed to extract relevant clinical information. Treatment outcomes included (1) progression to reimplantation and (2) treatment success as defined by a Delphi-based criterion. Both univariate and multivariate Cox regression models were performed to investigate whether spacer exchange was associated with failure. Additionally, a propensity score analysis was performed based on a 1:2 match.Results: A spacer exchange was required in 16.9%. Patients who underwent spacer exchanges had a higher body mass index (P < .001), rheumatoid arthritis (P = .018), and were more likely to have PJI caused by resistant (0.048) and polymicrobial organisms (P = .007). Patients undergoing a spacer exchange demonstrated lower survivorship and an increased risk of failure in the multivariate and propensity score matched analysis compared to patients who did not require a spacer exchange.Discussion: Despite an additional load of local antibiotics and repeat debridement, patients who underwent a spacer exchange demonstrated poor outcomes, including failure to undergo reimplantation and twice the failure rate. The findings of this study may need to be borne in mind when managing patients who require spacer exchange. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]