How Reliable Is the Absolute Synovial Polymorphonuclear Neutrophil Cell Count in Diagnosing Periprosthetic Joint Infection?

BACKGROUND: Diagnosing periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) is a daunting task for even the most experienced orthopedic surgeons, as there is currently no test available that can provide absolute accuracy. Utilizing an established synovial indicator for detecting PJI without incurring additional costs or resources would be the optimal solution for predicting the presence of infection. Therefore, we hypothesized that synovial absolute neutrophil count (ANC) would improve the diagnostic accuracy of chronic knee and hip PJI. METHODS: The study included 260 patients (134 men and 126 women, mean age of 70 years [range, 26 to 89]) who underwent aspiration during preoperative workup. Of these, 109 patients (41.9%) were diagnosed with chronic PJI (50 knees, 59 hips), and 151 patients (58.1%) were diagnosed as aseptic (94 knees, 57 hips). Data obtained from all patients included age, sex, procedure type (total hip or total knee arthroplasty), operation side, synovial white blood cell count (cells/µL), synovial polymorphonuclear cells percentage, and synovial α-defensin immunoassay value at the admission were retrieved from the electronic medical record. RESULTS: The calculated optimal threshold for synovial ANC of 1,415.5 cells/µL was associated with an area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) of 0.930 for chronic knee PJI diagnosis. The calculated optimal threshold for synovial ANC of 2,247 cells/µL was associated with an AUC of 0.905 for chronic hip PJI diagnosis. CONCLUSIONS: This study has conclusively shown that the synovial ANC serves as a valuable marker in the complicated diagnosis of PJI. This highly effective and efficient approach should be utilized for obtaining further information through standard tests, thereby ruling out the possibility of PJI. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: III.

Intramedullary Positive Tissue Culture Increases the Risk of Reinfection Following One-Stage Septic Revision Total Knee Arthroplasty.

BACKGROUND: Intraoperative acquisition of representative tissue samples is essential during revision arthroplasty of the infected total knee arthroplasty (TKA). While the number of intraoperative tissue samples needed to identify the organism is well described in the literature, there is still a paucity of evidence regarding the location of positive intraoperative samples and their correlation to postoperative outcomes. METHODS: There were forty-two patients who had septic failure following one-stage revision TKA for periprosthetic joint infection who were identified between January 2009 and December 2017. They were matched to a control group of patients who had successful one-stage revision TKA without septic failure. The location of positive intraoperative tissue samples was categorized as: 1) soft tissue; 2) interface between bone and prosthesis; and 3) intramedullary (IM). Chi-square, Student's t-, and Wilcoxon Mann-Whitney U-tests were used as appropriate. Univariate and multivariate logistic regression analyses were performed to evaluate predictors of septic failure. RESULTS: Weight > 100 kilograms (P = .033), higher Charlson Comorbidity Index (P < .001), and positive IM cultures (P < .001) were associated with a higher risk of reinfection after one-stage revision TKA. A positive IM sample carried a nearly five-fold increase in odds of reinfection (odds ratio 4.86, 95% confidence interval 1.85 to 12.78, P = .001). CONCLUSIONS: A positive IM culture sample is significantly associated with septic failure after one-stage exchange for periprosthetic joint infection of the knee. Patients who had positive IM cultures may benefit from longer postoperative antibiotic therapy for the treatment of one-stage exchange arthroplasty to minimize the risk of reinfection.

Unexpected Positive Cultures in Hip and Knee Periprosthetic Fractures.

BACKGROUND: The purpose of this study was to determine the prevalence of unexpected positive cultures noted at the time of revision surgery for periprosthetic fracture (PPF) after total hip or knee arthroplasty. Moreover, we evaluated whether this finding should be considered clinically significant and what type of treatment, if any, was required. METHODS: This was a single-center retrospective review of 270 patients undergoing surgery for PPFs from December 2010 to December 2021. Exclusion criteria included: open fractures; history of infection at fractured joint; non-operatively treated patients; and intraoperative fractures. The primary end point was the prevalence of unexpected positive cultures noted at the time of revision surgery. This was defined as one or more positive cultures in a PPF that the surgeon had preoperatively classified as aseptic according to the 2018 International Consensus Meeting. Data collection included patient demographics, medical histories, preoperative investigations, postoperative microbiology, and treatment. RESULTS: During the study period, 159 patients were admitted with PPFs of the hip and 61 with PPFs of the knee. The mean age was 70 years (range, 32 to 93 years). Unexpected positive cultures were diagnosed postoperatively in 15 patients (6.8%; 10 hips, 5 knees). The most prevalent organism was Staphylococcus epidermidis (35.0%). Of those 15 patients, 6 required a surgical revision for infection. None of the patient-related risk factors were found to be associated with an increased risk of unexpected positive cultures. The comparison between infected and noninfected patients showed a significant association between preoperative C-reactive protein >10 mg/mL (P = .04), loose implant (P = .07), and infection. CONCLUSIONS: The prevalence of unexpected positive cultures was 6.8% in our study cohort. Although surgical treatment may be required, the majority of patients seem to require no treatment. Larger series are required to investigate the clinical importance of this rare finding. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: III.

Increased Involvement of Staphylococcus epidermidis in the Rise of Polymicrobial Periprosthetic Joint Infections.

BACKGROUND: In this study, we aimed to analyze the temporal distribution of polymicrobial periprosthetic joint infections (PJIs), while also evaluating the patient risk factors associated with these infections following total joint arthroplasty at our institution across 2 distinct periods. METHOD: This retrospective cross-sectional study evaluated 259 patients who had knee or hip PJI from 2001 to 2006 and 2018 to 2022. A PJI was diagnosed using the 2018 International Consensus Meeting criteria. We utilized the Polymicrobial Pathogens' Co-occurrence Network Analysis, a novel approach that leverages network theory to map and quantify the complex interplay of organisms in PJIs. RESULTS: Of the 259 patients who had polymicrobial PJI, 58.7% were men, with mean age 67 years (range, 24 to 90). Of the 579 identified pathogens, Staphylococcus epidermidis was the most common (22.1%), followed by Staphylococcus aureus (9.0%) and Cutibacterium acnes (7.8%). The co-occurrence analysis indicated that Staphylococcus epidermidis frequently coexisted with Cutibacterium acnes (26 cultures) and Staphylococcus capitis (22 cultures). A notable increase in body mass index from 27.7 ± 4.4 in 2001 to 2006 to 29.7 ± 6.2 in 2018 to 2022 was observed (P = .001). Moreover, infections from Staphylococcus epidermidis, Cutibacterium acnes, and Staphylococcus capitis saw a significant uptick (P < .001). CONCLUSIONS: The study shows that from 2001 to 2022, there was a significant change in the pathogens responsible for polymicrobial PJIs, particularly an increase in Staphylococcus epidermidis, Cutibacterium acnes, and Staphylococcus capitis. Alongside these microbial changes, there was a rise in body mass index and shifts in comorbid conditions, such as more renal disease and fewer cases of congestive heart failure. These changes highlight the dynamic interplay between host and microbial factors in the pathogenesis of polymicrobial PJIs, necessitating adaptive strategies in both surgical and postoperative care to mitigate the rising tide of these complex infections.

Outcomes of rotating versus pure hinge knee arthroplasty in the setting of one-stage exchange for periprosthetic joint infection.

PURPOSE: Rotating or pure hinge knee prostheses are often used in case of periprosthetic joint infection (PJI). Five-year survival data of rotating hinge implants ranging from 52 to 90%, whereas pure hinge data are sparse. This study describes the results of both hinge knee prostheses after one-stage septic exchange. METHODS: One hundred sixty-seven one-stage septic exchanges of a primary unconstrained total knee arthroplasty (TKA) to a cemented hinge prosthesis (117 rotating and 50 pure hinge TKAs) performed between 2008 and 2017 were retrospectively reviewed. Exclusion criteria were stem extensions or augments used in primary TKA, history of extensor mechanism reconstruction, and a follow-up less than two years after surgery. Rates of reinfection, mechanical failures, and all-cause revision-free survival data were documented. RESULTS: At five years, the all-cause revision-free survival was 77% (95% CI 69 to 82). Thirty-one patients (19%) had further revision for aseptic reasons. In the rotating hinge group, the mechanical failure rate was more than twice as high as in the pure hinge group (13% vs 6%), significantly influenced by higher body weight. At a mean follow-up of 6.7 years, 21 (13%) patients had a reinfection and underwent a further surgery. Reinfection rates did not differ between the two groups. CONCLUSION: The use of hinge TKA in the revision of PJI shows favourable five year infection-free and all-cause revision-free survival rates of 91% and 77%, respectively. Our study showed poorer results of the rotating hinge design. These results may help surgeons to choose proper implants in case of septic knee revision.

Unexpected positive cultures in patients with arthrofibrosis following total hip and total knee arthroplasty.

PURPOSE: It has been suggested that low-grade infections could be the cause of arthrofibrosis. However, this hypothesis has not been conclusively proven. The aim of this study is to assess the incidence of unexpected positive cultures (UPC) in patients undergoing revision total joint arthroplasty for a diagnosis of arthrofibrosis. METHODS: A retrospective single-centre review was performed. All patients who underwent an aseptic revision due to histologically confirmed arthrofibrosis (based on the synovial-like interface membrane (SLIM) criteria) were included. The incidence of UPC was then calculated. RESULTS: A total of 147 patients were included. Of these, 100 underwent a total knee arthroplasty (TKA) procedure and 46 a total hip arthroplasty (THA) surgery. One patient had a periprosthetic joint infection and was therefore excluded. Of the 146 included patients, 6 had confirmed UPC (4.08%). The following bacteria were identified: Anaerococcus octavius, Staphylococcus epidermidis, Enterobacter cloacae, Staphylococcus hominis, Streptococcus pluranimalium, Staphylococcus pettenkoferi. CONCLUSIONS: Our results suggest that the incidence of UPC in patients with arthrofibrosis is low. It is lower than that of UPC in patients that undergo a revision for other causes. There is no proven relationship between histologically confirmed arthrofibrosis following total joint arthroplasty and prosthetic joint infection.

Unexpected positive cultures in revision total knee arthroplasty after unicompartmental knee arthroplasty.

PURPOSE: Unexpected positive cultures are defined as a single positive culture in intraoperative samples taken during revision surgery after prosthetic joint infection was preoperatively ruled out. This study aims to determine the prevalence of unexpected positive cultures (UPC) in revision total knee arthroplasty (TKA) after unicompartmental knee arthroplasty (UKA). As a secondary objective, this study aims to compare the re-intervention rate in this specific group, between UPC and non-UPC patients. The hypothesis is that the UPC prevalence in patients who undergo a revision TKA after UKA is not higher than in other TKA revision cases and this does not increase the risk of re-intervention. METHODS: This is a retrospective study where all patients who underwent a UKA revision from January 2016 to February 2023 in a high-volume arthroplasty centre, were analyzed. Unexpected positive culture prevalence in this group of patients was obtained. RESULTS: During the included period, 270 UKA revision surgeries were performed. Eight cases had at least two positive cultures and were therefore excluded. The final analysis included 262 patients. Of these, 8 (3.05%) patients presented UPCs and the isolated microorganisms were low-virulence organisms. None of the UPC patients received any treatment. No statistical differences were found between UPC and non-UPC groups in the analyzed variables. CONCLUSION: The prevalence of unexpected positive cultures in patients following revision of unicompartmental knee arthroplasty is lower than in patients who undergo a revision of total knee arthroplasty. In UKA patients a UPC does not seem to increase the risk of a re-intervention, so it can be safely ignored if ICM criteria are not met.

How reliable is the soft tissue radiological knee index in predicting superficial surgical site infection following total knee arthroplasty?

INTRODUCTION: The purpose of this study was to evaluate the association between the Soft Tissue Radiological Knee (SToRK) Index and the risk of developing a superficial surgical site infection (SSSI) following primary total knee arthroplasty (TKA). METHODS: The SToRK Index was measured using calibrated long leg radiographs (LLR) in 174 patients undergoing TKA. RESULTS: A moderate correlation was found between the SToRK Index and body mass index (BMI) (rs=0.574; p < 0.001). The SToRK Index was a better predictor of SSSI in females than males. In females, a SToRK Index cutoff of 2.01 had a sensitivity and specificity of 41.3% and 74.6% for developing SSSI, respectively, with a positive likelihood ratio of 1.63. CONCLUSION: The SToRK Index can be used as an additional tool in assessing the risk for SSSI after TKA. It might be more predictive in females due to the different fat distribution compared to males.

In-hospital outcomes following primary and revision total hip arthroplasty in nonagenarian patients.

PURPOSE: The primary goal of this study was to assess the risk of postoperative surgical and medical complications and problems among nonagenarian patients operated with hip arthroplasty. METHODS: Data from a specific high-volume arthroplasty clinic, were collected to evaluate postoperative morbidity and complication rates after hip arthroplasty in nonagenarians, compared with a control group of younger, but similar patients. Outcomes evaluated included length of stay, transfusion rate, and postoperative medical and surgical complication rates. RESULTS: A total of 97 nonagenarian patients (mean age 91.4 years) were included, and compared with 89 control group patients (mean age 70.18 years). Nonagenarian patients had significantly longer length of stay (11.44 vs. 7.98 days, p < 0.01), significantly higher risk of needing a transfusion (11.30% vs. 3.40%, p = 0.04), and significantly higher risk of a postoperative medical complication (28.90% vs. 11.20%, p = 0.03). There was no difference in postoperative surgical complication rate (7.20% vs. 2.20%, p = 0.12). CONCLUSION: Nonagenarian patients, when compared to a younger control group, experience significantly longer hospital stays, and risk of non-surgical complications. Arthroplasty in nonagenarian patients carries with it a high risk of complications, and thus careful pre-operative evaluation and the care of these patients at high volume, specialized clinics is important to optimize outcomes. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level III retrospective cohort analysis.

Organism profile and C-reactive protein (CRP) response are different in periprosthetic joint infection in patients with hepatitis.

PURPOSE: Hepatitis B and C are important and relatively common health issues. It is known that many patients who underwent total knee and hip arthroplasty were also diagnosed with hepatitis. These patients are at higher risk of periprosthetic joint infection (PJI). This study aimed to investigate the differences in PJI cases in hepatitis B and C patients. METHODS: This is a retrospective case-controlled single-center study. A total of 270 patients with hepatitis and non-hepatitis (control group) who underwent one-stage septic exchange to the hip and knee joints were included in the study. All patients' previous surgical histories, infective organisms, C-reactive protein (CRP) values before septic exchange, and demographic data were evaluated. All microbiological and laboratory evaluations were performed separately for knee and hip arthroplasty. RESULTS: The mean CRP levels of Hep B- and C-positive patients, who underwent one-stage septic exchange in the knee joint, were 23.6 mg/L. In the control group, this value was 43.1 mg/L and a statistically significant difference was found between the groups (p = 0.004). Gram-negative organisms were identified in a larger proportion of patients with hepatitis who developed PJI in both hip and knee joints and underwent one-stage septic exchange (p = 0.041/p = 0.044). CONCLUSION: PJIs caused by Gram-negative bacteria are encountered more frequently in patients with hepatitis than in the control group. In addition, the CRP rise is less in patients with hepatitis compared to PJI cases in the control group. Patient-specific evaluation is required in cases of PJI in patient groups with co-existing hepatitis.

Neutrophil-Lymphocyte Ratio and Lymphocyte-Monocyte Ratio correlate with Chronic Prosthetic Joint Infection but are not useful markers for diagnosis.

PURPOSE: To investigate reported correlations between Neutrophil-to-Lymphocyte (NLR) and Lymphocyte-to-Monocyte (LMR) ratios and their value in diagnosis of chronic prosthetic joint infection (PJI) in a large cohort of patients from a single specialist hospital. METHODS: Diagnostic aspirations of 362 patients under investigation for PJI were identified. Of the included patients 185 patients received a final diagnosis of PJI and 177 were classed as aseptic. Established criteria (ICM 2018) were employed to define PJI. Included in the analysis are differential white cell counts, C-Reactive Protein (CRP), Synovial Leukocyte Count, Synovial Alpha-defensin ELISA and Synovial Leukocyte esterase activity. Receiver-operator characteristic (ROC) curves were calculated for each of the available diagnostic tests together with the corresponding area under the curve values (AUC). Youden's index was utilized to identify the optimal diagnostic threshold point for the NLR and LMR. Other diagnostic tests were evaluated as per the threshold values previously defined in the literature and specified in the ICM criteria. RESULTS: Using Youden's Index to identify the optimal NLR cut-off within our cohort we established a value of 2.93. This yielded a sensitivity of 0.60 and specificity of 0.64. The area under the curve (AUC) of a receiving operator characteristics (ROC) curve was 0.625. Regarding the LMR the results demonstrate similar findings; a positive correlation with a diagnosis of infection but poor sensitivity and specificity. The AUC for LMR was 0.633 and was not superior to NLR (P = 0.753). CONCLUSIONS: There is a significant correlation between higher Neutrophil-Lymphocyte and Lymphocyte-Monocyte ratios, and a diagnosis of PJI. The sensitivity and specificity of this calculation is poor and the does not add value to the diagnostic algorithm for PJI. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level III Retrospective Cohort analysis.

Preoperative MRSA screening using a simple questionnaire prior elective total joint replacement.

INTRODUCTION: The purpose of this study was to evaluate the management and results of our standarized protocol for preoperative identification of MRSA colonisation in patients undergoing primary total hip and knee replacement procedures. METHODS: Following hospital protocol, between January 2016 and June 2019 37,745 patients awaiting elective joint replacement underwent a standardized questionnaire to assess the risk of MRSA infection, identifying patients requiring preoperative MRSA screening. An evaluation of the questionnaire identified effective questions for identifying infected patients. Furthermore, an analysis evaluated the impact of comorbidities or Charlson Comorbidity Index scores on positive MRSA colonization. Additionally, we evaluated the cost savings of targeted testing compared to testing all surgery patients. RESULTS: Of the 37,745 patients, 8.057 (21.3%) were swabbed, with a total of 65 (0.81%) positive tests. From this group 27 (36.48%) who were treated were negative before surgery. Some of the questionnaire results were consistently associated with a higher chance of colonization, including hospitalization during the past year (47,7%), previous history of MRSA (44,6%), and agriculture or cattle farming related work (15,4%). By selectively testing high-risk patients identified through the questionnaire, we achieved a 79% reduction in costs compared to universal MRSA screening. CONCLUSION: Our results suggest that the simple and standardized questionnaire is a valuable tool for preoperative screening, effectively identifying high-risk patients prone to MRSA colonisation. The risk of periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) and its associated sequelae may be reduced by this approach.

Distinct clonal lineages and within-host diversification shape invasive Staphylococcus epidermidis populations.

S. epidermidis is a substantial component of the human skin microbiota, but also one of the major causes of nosocomial infection in the context of implanted medical devices. We here aimed to advance the understanding of S. epidermidis genotypes and phenotypes conducive to infection establishment. Furthermore, we investigate the adaptation of individual clonal lines to the infection lifestyle based on the detailed analysis of individual S. epidermidis populations of 23 patients suffering from prosthetic joint infection. Analysis of invasive and colonizing S. epidermidis provided evidence that invasive S. epidermidis are characterized by infection-supporting phenotypes (e.g. increased biofilm formation, growth in nutrient poor media and antibiotic resistance), as well as specific genetic traits. The discriminating gene loci were almost exclusively assigned to the mobilome. Here, in addition to IS256 and SCCmec, chromosomally integrated phages was identified for the first time. These phenotypic and genotypic features were more likely present in isolates belonging to sequence type (ST) 2. By comparing seven patient-matched nasal and invasive S. epidermidis isolates belonging to identical genetic lineages, infection-associated phenotypic and genotypic changes were documented. Besides increased biofilm production, the invasive isolates were characterized by better growth in nutrient-poor media and reduced hemolysis. By examining several colonies grown in parallel from each infection, evidence for genetic within-host population heterogeneity was obtained. Importantly, subpopulations carrying IS insertions in agrC, mutations in the acetate kinase (AckA) and deletions in the SCCmec element emerged in several infections. In summary, these results shed light on the multifactorial processes of infection adaptation and demonstrate how S. epidermidis is able to flexibly repurpose and edit factors important for colonization to facilitate survival in hostile infection environments.

What is the Safe Distance Between Hip and Knee Implants to Reduce the Risk of Ipsilateral Metachronous Periprosthetic Joint Infection?

BACKGROUND: Periprosthetic joint infection (PJI), the most common cause of revision after TKA and THA, is a devastating complication for patients that is difficult to diagnose and treat. An increase in the number of patients with multiple joint arthroplasties in the same extremity will result in an increased risk of ipsilateral PJI. However, there is no definition of risk factors, micro-organism patterns, and safe distance between knee and hip implants for this patient group. QUESTIONS/PURPOSES: (1) In patients with hip and knee arthroplasties on the same side who experience a PJI of one implant, are there factors associated with the development of subsequent PJI of the other implant? (2) In this patient group, how often is the same organism responsible for both PJIs? (3) Is a shorter distance from an infected prosthetic joint to an ipsilateral prosthetic joint associated with greater odds of subsequent infection of the second joint? METHODS: We designed a retrospective study of a longitudinally maintained institutional database that identified all one-stage and two-stage procedures performed for chronic PJI of the hip and knee at our tertiary referral arthroplasty center between January 2010 and December 2018 (n = 2352). Of these patients, 6.8% (161 of 2352) had an ipsilateral hip or knee implant in situ at the time of receiving surgical treatment for a PJI of the hip or knee. The following criteria led to the exclusion of 39% (63 of 161) of these patients: 4.3% (seven of 161) for incomplete documentation, 30% (48 of 161) for unavailability of full-leg radiographs, and 5% (eight of 161) for synchronous infection. With regard to the latter, per internal protocol, all artificial joints were aspirated before septic surgery, allowing us to differentiate between synchronous and metachronous infection. The remaining 98 patients were included in the final analysis. Twenty patients experienced ipsilateral metachronous PJI during the study period (Group 1) and 78 patients did not experience a same-side PJI (Group 2). We analyzed the microbiological characteristics of bacteria during the first PJI and ipsilateral metachronous PJI. Calibrated, full-length plain radiographs were evaluated. Receiver operating characteristic curves were analyzed to determine the optimal cutoff for the stem-to-stem and empty native bone distance. The mean time between the initial PJI and ipsilateral metachronous PJI was 8 ± 14 months. Patients were followed for a minimum of 24 months for any complications. RESULTS: The risk of ipsilateral metachronous PJI in the other joint secondary to a joint implant in which PJI develops can increase up to 20% in the first 2 years after the procedure. There was no difference between the two groups in age, sex, initial joint replacement (knee or hip), and BMI. However, patients in the ipsilateral metachronous PJI group were shorter and had a lower weight (1.6 ± 0.1 m and 76 ± 16 kg). An analysis of the microbiological characteristics of bacteria at the time of the initial PJI showed no differences in the proportions of difficult-to-treat, high virulence, and polymicrobial infections between the two groups (20% [20 of 98] versus 80% [78 of 98]). Our findings showed that the ipsilateral metachronous PJI group had a shorter stem-to-stem distance, shorter empty native bone distance, and a higher risk of cement restrictor failure (p < 0.01) than the 78 patients who did not experience ipsilateral metachronous PJI during the study period. An analysis of the receiver operating characteristic curve showed a cutoff of 7 cm for the empty native bone distance (p < 0.01), with a sensitivity of 72% and a specificity of 75%. CONCLUSION: The risk of ipsilateral metachronous PJI in patients with multiple joint arthroplasties is associated with shorter stature and stem-to-stem distance. Appropriate position of the cement restrictor and native bone distance are important in reducing the risk of ipsilateral metachronous PJI in these patients. Future studies might evaluate the risk of ipsilateral metachronous PJI owing to bone adjacency. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level III, therapeutic study.

What is the concordance rate of preoperative synovial fluid aspiration and intraoperative biopsy in detecting periprosthetic joint infection of the shoulder?

BACKGROUND: The accuracy of preoperative synovial fluid culture for microbe detection in shoulder periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) is poorly described. To evaluate the utility of preoperative culture data for early pathogen identification for shoulder PJI, we determined the concordance between preoperative synovial fluid culture results and intraoperative tissue culture results. METHODS: Fifty patients who met the 2014 Musculoskeletal Infection Society criteria for shoulder PJI between January 2016 and December 2019 were retrospectively reviewed for clinical and demographic data. This cohort of patients was divided into 2 groups based on the concordance between preoperative and intraoperative culture results. The pathogens identified on preoperative and intraoperative cultures were classified as high-virulence or low-virulence. Student's t tests and Mann-Whitney U tests were used as appropriate for continuous variables, and χ2 and Fisher's exact tests were used as appropriate for categorical variables. RESULTS: Concordance between preoperative aspiration and intraoperative tissue culture was identified in 28 of 50 patients (56%). Preoperative cultures positive for Gram-positive species were more likely to be concordant than discordant (P = .015). Preoperative cultures positive for Cutibacterium acnes were more likely to be concordant with intraoperative cultures (P = .022). There were more patients with polymicrobial infection in the discordant group compared with the concordant group (P < .001). No statistically significant correlation between the preoperative serum C-reactive protein level and the intraoperative category of bacteria was reported. Staphylococcus aureus and coagulase-negative Staphylococci were associated with high specificity and negative predictive value. Preoperative cultures positive for C. acnes demonstrated sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, and negative predictive value lower than 0.8. Gram-negative pathogens demonstrated the highest sensitivity (1) and specificity (1), whereas polymicrobial infections exhibited the lowest sensitivity and positive predictive value. CONCLUSION: Preoperative synovial fluid aspiration for shoulder PJI poorly predicts intraoperative culture results, with a discordance of 44%. More favorable concordance was observed for monomicrobial preoperative cultures, particularly for Gram-negative organisms and methicillin-sensitive S. aureus. The overall high rate of discordance between preoperative and intraoperative culture may prompt surgeons to base medical and surgical management on patient history and other factors and avoid relying solely on preoperative synovial fluid culture data.

Excellent Survival Rate of Cemented Modular Stems in One-Stage Revision for Periprosthetic Hip Infections With Massive Femoral Bone Loss: A Retrospective Single-Center Analysis of 150 Cases.

BACKGROUND: With the increasing incidence of total hip arthroplasty (THA), there is also an expected concurrent increase in revision THA (rTHA), which is known to have a high complication and re-revision rate. In the setting of infection, radical debridement is essential and options for femoral bone loss are limited. One viable solution is cemented modular stems, but limited evidence exists on their use in septic revision. This study aimed to analyze survival and complication related to the use of cemented modular stems in one-stage septic rTHA with severe femoral bone loss. METHODS: The institutional database of patients who underwent rTHA for septic one-stage revision with cemented modular stems was reviewed. Exclusion criteria were patients aged less than 18 years and nonseptic or 2 stage revisions. Outcomes measured were complication, re-infection, re-operation, and survivorship of the implant. A total of 150 patients were included. The mean age was 68 years (range, 30 to 91), and the mean follow-up was 105 months (range, 1 to 150). RESULTS: Treatment was considered successful in 81.3% of cases. Patients who underwent multiple prior surgeries demonstrated a lower rate of treatment success (P < .001). The main cause of failure was re-infection (11 of 28). Among cases failed for aseptic reasons (17 of 28), loosening of the cemented modular stem was the cause of re-revision in 2 patients (1.3%). CONCLUSIONS: The use of modular cemented stems is a viable option in case of septic one-stage rTHA associated with severe femoral bone loss. However, surgeons and patients should be aware that this treatment is still characterized by a high rate of complications, which may lead to further surgeries. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: III.

Unexpected Positive Cultures in Patients Who Have a History of Septic Revision in the Same Joint.

BACKGROUND: The prevalence of unexpected positive cultures (UPC) in an aseptic revision surgery of the joint with a prior septic revision in the same joint remains unknown. The purpose of this study was to determine the prevalence of UPC in that specific group. As secondary outcomes, we explored risk factors for UPC. METHODS: This retrospective study includes patients who had an aseptic revision total hip/knee arthroplasty procedure with a prior septic revision in the same joint. Patients who had less than 3 microbiology samples, without joint aspiration or with aseptic revision surgery performed <3 weeks after a septic revision were excluded. The UPC was defined as a single positive culture in a revision that the surgeon had classified as aseptic according to the 2018 International Consensus Meeting. After excluding 47, a total of 92 patients were analyzed, who had a mean age of 70 years (range, 38 to 87). There were 66 (71.7%) hips and 26 (28.3%) knees. The mean time between revisions was 83 months (range, 31 to 212). RESULTS: We identified 11 (12%) UPC and in 3 cases there was a concordance of the bacteria compared to the previous septic surgery. There were no differences for UPC between hips/knees (P = .282), diabetes (P = .701), immunosuppression (P = .252), previous 1-stage or 2-stages (P = .316), causes for the aseptic revision (P = .429) and time after the septic revision (P = .773). CONCLUSION: The prevalence of UPC in this specific group was similar to those reported in the literature for aseptic revisions. More studies are needed to better interpret the results.

Successful eradication rate following one-stage septic knee and hip exchange in selected pre-operative culture-negative periprosthetic joint infections.

PURPOSE: The main requirement for performing the one-stage septic exchange is the pre-operative identification of the pathogen and its susceptibility. The purpose of this study is to evaluate the success rate with special focus on reinfection in a cohort of patients who underwent one-stage septic knee or hip revision for pre-operative culture-negative PJI. METHODS: We retrospectively analyzed 640 patients treated by one-stage revision for chronic knee or hip PJI between January 1, 2016, and December 31, 2018. Only cases with pre-operative culture-negative PJI, with culture-negative synovial aspirations and one negative open biopsy, were analyzed. We evaluated the septic and aseptic complication and the rate of complication-free survival defined as the time from the date of first operation and the date of complication events. RESULTS: A total of 22 patients fulfilled the inclusion and were enrolled. The mean age of the group was 73.2 ± 9.8 years, with a median ASA score of 3 (range 3-4). After mean follow-up of 3.6 ± 2.6 years, 86.4% (19 out of 22) of patients reported no complications. Two patients (9.1%) after one-stage hip required revision arthroplasty due to septic failure, while one patient (4.5%) with one-stage knee had revision for femoral component aseptic loosening. CONCLUSION: Our analysis suggests that the absence of pre-operative pathogen detection may not be contraindication to the one-stage revision in selected patients. The one-stage exchange might be considered in patients with pre-operative negative cultures in presence of ASA > 3 and multiple comorbidities that are not able to tolerate multiple surgeries.

Tranexamic acid is safe and effective in patients with heterozygous factor V Leiden mutation during total joint arthroplasty.

INTRODUCTION: Patients with an inherent hypercoagulable state are at a higher risk of venous thromboembolism (VTE) following total joint arthroplasty (TJA). Further administration of tranexamic acid (TXA) during TJA may increase the risk of VTE in these high-risk patients. There is no study that specifically analyzes the safety and efficacy of TXA during TJA in patients with factor V Leiden (FVL) mutation; therefore, the purpose of this study was to evaluate the safety and efficacy of TXA use on the risk of VTE and bleeding in patients carrying FVL mutation. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A total of 42 patients with FVL mutation (22 hips, 20 knees) and 40 control patients (20 hips, 20 knees) who underwent TJA were retrospectively reviewed. All patients received 1 g TXA intravenously 15 min before the skin incision and 2 g of TXA was administered locally at the surgical site as a periarticular injection. Pharmacological thromboprophylaxis (low-molecular-weight heparin) was administered to all patients. Estimated blood loss and in-hospital thromboembolic complications were compared between the groups. RESULTS: In both total knee arthroplasty (TKA) and total hip arthroplasty (THA) patients, there was no significant difference in the amount of estimated blood loss among the groups (p = 0.980, and p = 0963, respectively). None of the patients in the THA group received a blood transfusion. The transfusion rate was similar in the TKA group (p = 0.756, one patient in each group). No VTE, myocardial infarction, or any other complications related to TXA use were observed in any of the patients. CONCLUSIONS: The combined local and systemic administration of TXA could be safely used in patients with heterozygous FVL mutation receiving pharmacological thromboprophylaxis during TJA without increasing the risk of VTE.

What is the failure rate of constrained liners in complex revision total hip arthroplasty?

BACKGROUND: Recurrent hip dislocation after multiple revision total hip arthroplasty is a severe complication. Therefore, constrained acetabular liners (CL) have been used during salvage procedures. We report our experience of constrained liners in a re-revision setting with focus on re-dislocation. We also evaluated acetabular and femoral bone loss as potential risk factor. METHODS: Between January 2013 and December 2016, 65 patients were treated in a single institution for revision and re-revision hip arthroplasty using CL. The indication for using a CL was a high risk of re-redislocation after multiple recurrent hip dislocation including failed Dual Mobility Cups (DMC). Compromising soft tissue defects as well as severe bone defect were therefore regarded as high risks. Thirty-eight patients (77.6%) underwent a minimum of three surgical procedures before the index revision procedure. Sixteen patients (24.6%) were excluded as they were lost to follow-up, expired before minimum follow-up or refused study participation, leaving 49 patients in the analysis (75.4%). The mean follow-up was 62 months (44-74; SD = 7.7). We assessed the following potential risk factors for revision or dislocation: type of surgical setting (septic/aseptic), BMI, cup inclination angle, size of liner used and acetabular and femoral bone loss according to Paprosky classification. The primary endpoints were dislocation or repeat revision for any reason. RESULTS: Of the 49 patients, we found an overall re-revision rate of 40.8% (20/49) and a dislocation rate of 30.6% (15/49). There were no significant differences among the surgical re-revision rate or dislocation rate as a factor of patient characteristics. In terms of bone loss, there was a trend towards higher revision rates for increasing acetabular and femoral bone loss, but without statistical significance. CONCLUSIONS: We found the use of a constrained liner in a re-revision setting still bears a high risk of re-revision and re-dislocation. Therefore we restrained from using constrained liners in favour of Dual mobility cups. In this study there was no significant higher dislocation rate in the subgroup of periprosthetic infection. Furthermore the rigid design of a constrained liner bears the known risk of structural failure of acetabular reconstruction implants. Severe acetabular or femoral bone defects seem to have an impact on the revision rate, but not on the dislocation rate with regards to the restored offset and center of the hip. Results have to be taken into context such that the study population inherently has a predisposition for poorer outcomes. Indications should be strongly filtered for patients at high risk for recurrent hip joint dislocation including failed DMCs with only limited bone loss and moderate soft tissue defects. Our modification to the existing classification with a high inter and intraobserver reliability will make future studies more comparable regarding revisions and bone stock loss. Still further research using objective and reproducible parameters is needed to better analyze data especially in the background of complex revision hip arthroplasty.