Search

Periprosthetic joint infections occur in about 2% of patients who undergo primary total joint arthroplasty, a procedure performed over 1 million times in the United States. The gold standard of treatment is a two‐stage revision. This study aimed to establish a two‐stage procedure in a preclinical small animal model (rat) to test and compare the efficacy of an antibiotic‐eluting material in managing infection. Joint replacement was simulated by transchondylarly implanting a polyethylene (PE) plug into the distal femur and a titanium screw in the proximal tibia. Methicillin‐sensitive Staphylococcus aureus (MSSA) 108 CFU/mL was injected into the tibial canal and the joint space before wound closure. The control groups were killed on postoperative day (POD) 18 (n = 12) and on POD 42 (n = 4) to assess both early and later‐stage outcomes in the control group. The test group underwent revision surgery on POD 18 for treatment using gentamicin‐eluting polyethylene (GPE, n = 4) and was observed until POD 42 to evaluate the efficacy of treatment. Our results showed that the bone loss for the treatment group receiving GPE was significantly less than that of the control (p < 0.05), which was supported by the histology images and an AI‐tool assisted infection rate evaluation. Gait metrics duty factor imbalance and hindlimb temporal symmetry were significantly different between the treatment and control groups on Day 42. This animal model was feasible for evaluating treatments for peri‐prosthetic joint infections (PJI) with a revision surgery and specifically that revision surgery and local antibiotic treatment largely hindered the peri‐prosthetic bone loss. Statement of clinical significance: This revision model of peri‐prosthetic infection has the potential of comparatively evaluating prophylaxis and treatment strategies and devices. Antibiotic‐eluting UHMWPE is devised as at tool in treating PJI while providing weight bearing and joint space preservation. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]