[Translated article] Overview of systematic reviews of risk factors for prosthetic joint infection.

BACKGROUND: Prosthetic joint infection is one of the most serious complications in orthopedics. Prognostic systematic reviews (SRs) detecting and assessing factors related to prosthetic joint infection, allow better prediction of risk and implementation of preventive measures. Although prognostic SRs are increasingly frequent, their methodological field presents some knowledge gaps. PURPOSE: To carry out an overview of SR assessing risk factors for prosthetic joint infection, describing and synthesizing their evidence. Secondarily, to assess the risk of bias and methodological quality. MATERIAL AND METHODS: We conducted a bibliographic search in 4 databases (May 2021) to identify prognostic SR evaluating any risk factor for prosthetic joint infection. We evaluated risk of bias with the ROBIS tool, and methodological quality with a modified AMSTAR-2 tool. We computed the overlap degree study between included SR. RESULTS: Twenty-three SRs were included, studying 15 factors for prosthetic joint infection, of which, 13 had significant association. The most frequently studied risk factors were obesity, intra-articular corticosteroids, smoking and uncontrolled diabetes. Overlapping between SR was high for obesity and very high for intra-articular corticoid injection, smoking and uncontrolled diabetes. Risk of bias was considered low in 8 SRs (34.7%). The modified AMSTAR-2 tool showed important methodological gaps. CONCLUSIONS: Identification of procedural-modifiable factors, such as intra-articular corticoids use, can give patients better results. Overlapping between SR was very high, meaning that some SRs are redundant. The evidence on risk factors for prosthetic joint infection is weak due to high risk of bias and limited methodological quality.

Overview of systematic reviews of risk factors for prosthetic joint infection. / Revisión de revisiones sistemáticas de factores pronóstico para infección protésica.

BACKGROUND: Prosthetic joint infection is one of the most serious complications in orthopedics. Prognostic systematic reviews (SR) detecting and assessing factors related to prosthetic joint infection, allow better prediction of risk and implementation of preventive measures. Although prognostic SR are increasingly frequent, their methodological field presents some knowledge gaps. PURPOSE: To carry out an overview of SR assessing risk factors for prosthetic joint infection, describing and synthesizing their evidence. Secondarily, to assess the risk of bias and methodological quality. MATERIAL AND METHODS: We conducted a bibliographic search in 4databases (May 2021) to identify prognostic SR evaluating any risk factor for prosthetic joint infection. We evaluated risk of bias with the ROBIS tool, and methodological quality with a modified AMSTAR-2 tool. We computed the overlap degree study between included SR. RESULTS: Twenty-three SR were included, studying 15 factors for prosthetic joint infection, of which, 13 had significant association. The most frequently studied risk factors were obesity, intra-articular corticosteroids, smoking and uncontrolled diabetes. Overlapping between SR was high for obesity and very high for intra-articular corticoid injection, smoking and uncontrolled diabetes. Risk of bias was considered low in 8SRs (34.7%). The modified AMSTAR-2 tool showed important methodological gaps. CONCLUSIONS: Identification of procedural-modifiable factors, such as intra-articular corticoids use, can give patients better results. Overlapping between SR was very high, meaning that some SR are redundant. The evidence on risk factors for prosthetic joint infection is weak due to high risk of bias and limited methodological quality.

Arthrotomy debridement of arthrostic septic arthritis of the knee is more effective than arthroscopic debridement and delays the need for prosthesis despite progression. / El desbridamiento por artrotomía de la artritis séptica de rodilla artrósica es más eficaz que el artroscópico y retrasa la necesidad de prótesis a pesar de la progresión de la artrosis.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: 40%-50% of this septic arthritis occurs in the knee, despite rapid medical surgical treatment, 24%-50% will have a poor clinical outcome. It is not clear which debridement technique, by arthrotomy or arthroscopy, is more effective in controlling infection, or whether or not previous osteoarthritis worsens the outcome. The objective of this study on septic arthritis of the osteoarthritic knee was to analyse which surgical debridement technique, arthroscopy or arthrotomy, is more effective, the clinical and radiographic outcomes of the patients, and how many go on to require a TKR after the infection has healed. MATERIAL AND METHODS: A retrospective study was performed in 27 patients with native septic arthritis of the knee. Eighteen were men and the mean age was 64.8 years (30-89years). Fifteen patients were debrided by arthrotomy and 12 by arthroscopy. The effectiveness of debridement in controlling infection, the radiographic progression of the osteoarthritis on the Ahlbäch scale, the need for subsequent replacement, and pain and functional status were analysed using the VAS and WOMAC scales at 52.8±11.2-month follow-up. RESULTS: The infection was controlled in 93% and 92% of the patients, 13% and 42% required 2 or more surgeries for infection control, 18% and 44.4% showed progression of arthritis in the arthrotomy and arthroscopy groups, respectively. One patient in each group required a knee replacement. The VAS score was superior in the arthrotomy group and there were no differences in WOMAC score. CONCLUSION: Debridement by arthrotomy in the emergency department by non-sub-specialist knee surgeons is more effective than arthroscopic debridement in controlling septic arthritis of the knee. Surgical debridement of septic arthritis in knees with previous osteoarthritis enabled control of the infection with no pain despite the progression of the osteoarthritis.

Validity of the KLIC and CRIME80 scores in predicting failure in late acute infection treated by debridement and implant retention. / Validez de las escalas KLIC y CRIME80 en la predicción del fracaso en la infección aguda tardía tratada mediante desbridamiento y retención de implantes.

It is very important to treat prosthetic infections correctly in order to ensure a higher success rate. Debridement with implant retention (DAIR) is widely used in acute and late infections, however patients who fail after this surgery are known to have a higher risk of failure in subsequent surgeries. Therefore, it is important to find a scale that enables us to predict the risk of DAIR failure. Hence the KLIC and CRIME80 scores for acute and late acute infections, respectively. This study analysed the validity of both scores in acute late periprosthetic knee infections. We observed that the KLIC score has no predictive value for this type of infection, but the CRIME80 score does.