Antibiotic Therapy for 6 or 12 Weeks for Prosthetic Joint Infection.

BACKGROUND: The management of prosthetic joint infection usually consists of a combination of surgery and antimicrobial therapy. The appropriate duration of antimicrobial therapy for this indication remains unclear. METHODS: We performed an open-label, randomized, controlled, noninferiority trial to compare 6 weeks with 12 weeks of antibiotic therapy in patients with microbiologically confirmed prosthetic joint infection that had been managed with an appropriate surgical procedure. The primary outcome was persistent infection (defined as the persistence or recurrence of infection with the initial causative bacteria, with an antibiotic susceptibility pattern that was phenotypically indistinguishable from that at enrollment) within 2 years after the completion of antibiotic therapy. Noninferiority of 6 weeks of therapy to 12 weeks of therapy would be shown if the upper boundary of the 95% confidence interval for the absolute between-group difference (the value in the 6-week group minus the value in the 12-week group) in the percentage of patients with persistent infection within 2 years was not greater than 10 percentage points. RESULTS: A total of 410 patients from 28 French centers were randomly assigned to receive antibiotic therapy for 6 weeks (205 patients) or for 12 weeks (205 patients). Six patients who withdrew consent were not included in the analysis. In the main analysis, 20 patients who died during follow-up were excluded, and missing outcomes for 6 patients who were lost to follow-up were considered to be persistent infection. Persistent infection occurred in 35 of 193 patients (18.1%) in the 6-week group and in 18 of 191 patients (9.4%) in the 12-week group (risk difference, 8.7 percentage points; 95% confidence interval, 1.8 to 15.6); thus, noninferiority was not shown. Noninferiority was also not shown in the per-protocol and sensitivity analyses. We found no evidence of between-group differences in the percentage of patients with treatment failure due to a new infection, probable treatment failure, or serious adverse events. CONCLUSIONS: Among patients with microbiologically confirmed prosthetic joint infections that were managed with standard surgical procedures, antibiotic therapy for 6 weeks was not shown to be noninferior to antibiotic therapy for 12 weeks and resulted in a higher percentage of patients with unfavorable outcomes. (Funded by Programme Hospitalier de Recherche Clinique, French Ministry of Health; DATIPO ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT01816009.).

Epidemiology and Risk Factors for Revision Total Knee Arthroplasty in Chinese Patients: A Retrospective Study in Changchun, Jilin Province, China.

BACKGROUND Over the past decades, total knee arthroplasty (TKA) in China has increased substantially. Owing to a lack of a joint registry, there is restricted information concerning the epidemiology of TKA failures in China. We aimed to (1) investigate the etiology of TKA failures in a cohort of Chinese patients and (2) determine the related demographic and anthropometric risk factors in Jilin, China, to have a look at the actual situation. MATERIAL AND METHODS A total of 1927 primary and 109 revision TKAs performed between April 2014 and May 2022 were analyzed in this retrospective study. Patient demographics and anthropometric measures, the interval from primary TKA to revision procedures, and the mechanisms for primary TKA failure were evaluated. A chi-square test, unpaired t test, and multivariate logistic regression were used to investigate the relationships between different factors and TKA failures. RESULTS The leading failure mechanism was infection (53.3%), followed by aseptic loosening (21.5%), stiffness (15.0%), instability (3.7%), malposition (2.8%), periprosthetic fractures (2.8%), and extensor mechanism disruption (0.9%). Infection (59.7%) was the main reason for early revision. Aseptic loosening (43.3%) was the leading cause of late revision. The male ratio in infection patients was higher (35.1% vs 20.6%). The smoking rate in patients with revision and infection was higher (18.9%, 23.9% vs 7%) than in primary patients. There was no difference in BMI between groups. CONCLUSIONS The leading cause of revision TKA in Jilin, China, was infection, followed by aseptic loosening and stiffness. Sex and smoking history were associated with TKA failures in this region.

Neutrophil Extracellular Trap-related Biomarkers Are Increased in the Synovial Fluid of Patients With Periprosthetic Joint Infections.

BACKGROUND: The diagnosis of periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) is a major challenge in clinical practice. The role of neutrophils in fighting infection has been increasingly understood, and one mechanism of action of these cells is neutrophil extracellular traps. However, little is known about this process in PJI. QUESTIONS/PURPOSES: (1) Are the biomarkers of neutrophil extracellular trap formation (citrullinated histone H3 [H3Cit], cell-free DNA [cf-DNA], and myeloperoxidase [MPO]) increased in the synovial fluid of patients with PJI? (2) What is the diagnostic accuracy of biomarkers of neutrophil extracellular trap formation for PJI? METHODS: Between May 2020 and March 2021, 43 patients who underwent revision THA or TKA were enrolled in this study. Eleven patients were excluded and 32 patients were categorized into the PJI group (n = 16) or non-PJI group (n = 16) according to the 2018 Second International Consensus Meeting on Musculoskeletal Infection criteria. There were 15 men and 17 women in this study, with a median (range) age of 70 years (60 to 80 years). Twenty-seven patients had TKA and five had THA. We measured cf-DNA, MPO, and H3Cit in synovial fluid. The sensitivity, specificity, and receiver operating characteristic curve were calculated for each biomarker using the Musculoskeletal Infection Society criteria as the gold standard for diagnosis and considering a clinical surveillance of 2 years for patients in the non-PJI group. RESULTS: Patients with PJI had higher levels of synovial fluid cf-DNA (median [range] 130 ng/µL [18 to 179] versus 2 ng/µL [0 to 6]; p < 0.001), MPO (1436 ng/µL [55 to 3996] versus 0 ng/µL [0 to 393]; p < 0.001), and H3Cit (2115 ng/µL [5 to 2885] versus 3 ng/µL [0 to 87]; p < 0.001) than those in the non-PJI group. In receiver operating characteristic curve analyses, we observed near-perfect performance for all biomarkers evaluated, with an area under the curve of 1 (95% CI 0.9 to 1), 0.98 (95% CI 0.9 to 1), and 0.94 (95% CI 0.8 to 0.99) for cf-DNA, MPO, and H3Cit, respectively. The sensitivity for detecting PJI using synovial fluid was 100% for cf-DNA, 94% for MPO, and 88% for H3Cit. The specificity was 100% for cf-DNA and MPO, and 88% for H3Cit. CONCLUSION: Our results show that neutrophils in the periprosthetic microenvironment release neutrophil extracellular traps as part of the bactericidal arsenal to fight infection. These results allow a better understanding of the cellular and molecular processes that occur in this microenvironment, enabling the design of more assertive strategies for identifying new biomarkers and improving the available ones. Novel studies are needed to define whether and how neutrophil extracellular trap-related biomarkers can be useful for diagnosing PJI. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level II, diagnostic study.

Static Versus Articulating Spacer: Does Infectious Pathogen Type Affect Treatment Success?

BACKGROUND: Treatment with a static or an articulating antibiotic-containing spacer is a common strategy for treating periprosthetic joint infection (PJI), yet many patients have persistent infections after spacer treatment. Although previous studies have compared the efficacy of a static and articulating spacer for treating PJI, few studies have assessed infection control from the time of spacer implantation, or they defined treatment failure as including reinfection, reoperation, or chronic suppressive therapy. Additionally, few studies have examined whether there is an interaction between spacer and pathogen type with respect to treatment success. QUESTIONS/PURPOSES: (1) Is there a difference in failure-free survival (defined as no reoperation, reinfection, or suppressive antibiotic therapy) between static and articulating spacers after spacer implantation for PJI? (2) Did the relationship between spacer type and failure-free survival differ by pathogen type (staphylococcal versus nonstaphylococcal and difficult-to-treat [including methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus, methicillin-susceptible S. aureus , Corynebacterium, Mycobacterium, Enterococcus spp , and other gram-negative bacterium] versus not-difficult-to-treat organisms)? METHODS: Between January 2014 and January 2022, a convenience sample of 277 patients was identified as having knee PJIs treated with an articulating (75% [208 of 277]) or static (25% [69 of 277]) antibiotic spacer and potentially eligible for this study. During that time, providers at our institution generally used spacers for later-presenting or chronic infections. Spacer choice was determined by surgeon preference, with static spacers used more often in instances of higher bone loss and poor soft tissue coverage. Thirty-one patients (8 static and 23 articulating spacers) were considered lost to follow-up or had incomplete datasets and were excluded from the analysis, resulting in a final analysis cohort of 246 patients: 25% (61 of 246) received a static spacer and 75% (185 of 246) received an articulating spacer. The mean ± standard deviation age of patients was 66 ± 9.9 years, BMI was 33.3 ± 6.9 kg/m 2 , and Elixhauser score was 18.1 ± 16.9. Demographic and clinical characteristics were similar between the two groups. Pathogen type was collected and categorized as staphylococcal versus nonstaphylococcal , and difficult-to-treat (including methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus , methicillin-susceptible S. aureus , Corynebacterium, Mycobacterium, Enterococcus spp , and other gram-negative bacterium) versus not-difficult-to-treat, as defined by an infectious disease physician. Other variables we collected included sex, age, American Society of Anesthesiologists classification, BMI, and Elixhauser score. The primary outcome of interest was failure-free survival, which was a composite time-to-event outcome, with failure defined as reoperation, reinfection, death owing to infection, or chronic antibiotic use at a minimum of 1 year after the completion of the patient's Stage 1 postoperative antibiotic course, whichever came first. Reinfection was determined by the treating physicians in accordance with the Musculoskeletal Infection Society guidelines and included an evaluation of infectious laboratory values, cultures, and clinical signs of infection. We compared static and articulating spacers using a Cox proportional hazards model, with spacer type as the primary predictor variable. We compared staphylococcal versus nonstaphylococcal and difficult-to-treat versus not-difficult-to-treat infections by running additional models with interaction terms between spacer type and pathogen type. RESULTS: No difference was observed in the cause-specific hazard ratio for static versus articulating (reference) spacers (HR 1.45 [95% confidence interval 0.94 to 2.22]; p = 0.09), after adjusting for covariates. Additionally, no difference in the association between spacer type and failure-free survival was found between pathogen types or treatment difficulty after evaluating interactions (staphylococcal HR 0.37 [95% CI 0.15 to 0.91], nonstaphylococcal HR 0.79 [95% CI 0.49 to 1.28]; p value for interaction = 0.14; difficult-to-treat HR 0.37 [95% CI 0.14 to 0.99], not-difficult-to-treat HR 0.75 [95% CI 0.47 to 1.20]; p value for interaction = 0.20). CONCLUSION: The lack of a difference in failure-free survival and insufficient evidence of a difference in the association between spacer type and treatment failure by pathogen type suggests that infectious organism may not be an important consideration in the decision about spacer treatment type. Further studies should aim to elucidate which patient factors are the most influential in surgeon decision-making when choosing a spacer type in patients with PJI of the knee.Level of Evidence Level III, therapeutic study.

Effect of body mass index on 30-day complication rate and implant survival rate after simultaneous bilateral unicompartmental knee arthroplasty: a multicentre retrospective study.

OBJECTIVE: The practice of simultaneous bilateral unicompartmental knee arthroplasty (SBUKA) remains a topic of debate, particularly in patients with obesity. Thus, the purpose of this study was to assess the impact of body mass index (BMI) on the 30-day complication rate and the survival rate of the implant following SBUKA. METHODS: We retrospectively examined the clinical records of 245 patients (490 knees) who underwent SBUKA at the Affiliated Hospital of Qingdao University and the Third Hospital of Hebei Medical University between January 2010 and December 2020. Patients were categorised based on their BMI at the time of surgery into four groups: normal weight (BMI 18.5 to 22.9 kg/m2), overweight (BMI 23.0 to 24.9 kg/m2), obese (BMI 25.0 to 29.9 kg/m2), and severely obese (BMI ≥30 kg/m2). Variables such as length of hospital stay, duration of surgery, and costs of hospitalisation were compared across all groups. Additionally, we recorded the 30-day postoperative complication rate and the time from surgery to any required revision. The Kaplan-Meier survival analysis was employed to evaluate and compare the implant survival rates. RESULTS: The follow-up period for the 245 patients ranged from 39 to 114 months, with an average of 77.05±18.71 months. The incidence of complications within 30 days post-surgery did not significantly differ across the groups (χ2 = 1.102, p = 0.777). The implant survival rates from the lowest to the highest BMI groups were 97.14%, 93.9%, 94.44%, and 96.43%, respectively. Both the rate of implant revision (χ2 =1.612, p = 0.657) and the survival curves of the implants (p = 0.639) showed no statistically significant differences among the groups. CONCLUSIONS: BMI did not influence the 30-day complication rate nor the survival rate of implants following SBUKA, suggesting that SBUKA should not be contraindicated based on BMI alone.

Risk of tibial baseplate loosening is low in patients following unrestricted kinematic alignment total knee arthroplasty using a cruciate-retaining medial conforming insert: A study using radiostereometric analysis at 2 years.

PURPOSE: Assessing the risk of tibial baseplate loosening in patients after unrestricted kinematically aligned (unKA) total knee arthroplasty (TKA) using a medially conforming insert is important because baseplates generally are aligned in varus which has been linked to an increased incidence of aseptic loosening following mechanically aligned TKA. Two limits that indicate long-term stability in patients are a change in maximum total point motion between 1 and 2 years (ΔMTPM) < 0.2 mm and anterior tilt at 2 years < 0.8°. The purposes were to determine: (1) the number of patients with ΔMTPM > 0.2 mm, (2) the number of patients with anterior tilt > 0.8° and (3) whether increased varus baseplate and limb alignment were associated with increased migration. METHODS: Thirty-five patients underwent cemented, caliper-verified, unKA TKA using a medially conforming tibial insert with posterior cruciate ligament (PCL) retention. Biplanar radiographs acquired on the day of surgery and at 1.5, 3, 6, 12 and 24 months were processed with model-based radiostereometric analysis (RSA) software to determine migration and the number of patients with migration above the two stability limits. Medial proximal tibial angle (MPTA), hip-knee-ankle angle (HKAA) and posterior slope angle (PSA) were analyzed for an association with migration in six degrees of freedom and in MTPM. RESULTS: Thirty-two of 35 patients were available for analysis at 2 years. One patient exhibited ΔMTPM > 0.2 mm. The same patient exhibited anterior tilt > 0.8°. Varus rotation (p = 0.048, r ≤ 0.34) and medial translation (p = 0.0273, r ≤ 0.29) increased with increased varus baseplate alignment. CONCLUSION: The results indicate low risk of long-term baseplate loosening in patients. Although varus rotation and medial translation increased with increased varus baseplate alignment, the magnitudes of the migrations were minimal and did not increase ΔMTPM and anterior tilt. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level II, therapeutic prospective cohort study.

Low implantation volume, comorbidities, male sex and implantation of constrained TKA identified as risk factors for septic revision in knee arthroplasty: A register-based study from the German Arthroplasty Registry.

PURPOSE: Periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) is a major cause of revision surgery after total knee arthroplasty (TKA) and unicondylar knee arthroplasty (UKA). Patient- and hospital-related risk factors need to be assessed to prevent PJI. This study identifies influential factors and differences in infection rates between different implant types. METHODS: Data were obtained from the German Arthroplasty Registry. Septic revisions were calculated using Kaplan-Meier estimates with septic revision surgery as the primary endpoint. Patients with constrained and unconstrained TKA or UKA were analysed using Holm's multiple log-rank test and Cox's proportional hazards ratio. The 300,998 cases of knee arthroplasty analysed included 254,144 (84.4%) unconstrained TKA, 9993 (3.3%) constrained TKA and 36,861 (12.3%) UKA with a maximum follow-up of 7 years. RESULTS: At 1 year, the PJI rate was 0.5% for UKA and 2.8% for TKA, whereas at 7 years, the PJI rate was 4.5% for UKA and 0.9% for TKA (p < 0.0001). The PJI rate significantly increased for constrained TKA compared to unconstrained TKA (p < 0.0001). The PJI rate was 2.0% for constrained TKA and 0.8% for unconstrained TKA at 1 year and 3.1% and 1.4% at 7 years. Implantation of a constrained TKA (hazard ratio [HR] = 2.55), male sex (HR = 1.84), increased Elixhauser score (HR = 1.18-1.56) and implant volume of less than 25 UKA per year (HR = 2.15) were identified as risk factors for revision surgery; an Elixhauser score of 0 (HR = 0.80) was found to be a preventive factor. CONCLUSIONS: Reduced implant volume and constrained knee arthroplasty are associated with a higher risk of PJI. Comorbidities (elevated Elixhauser score), male sex and low UKA implant volume have been identified as risk factors for PJI. Patients who meet these criteria require specific measures to prevent infection. Further research is required on the potential impact of prevention and risk factor modification. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level III.

Static spacers play a crucial role in the treatment of complex periprosthetic joint infections of the knee.

PURPOSE: To determine the superior spacer design, a growing number of studies are comparing treatment results between patients having been treated with articulating and static knee spacers in the setting of two-stage revision for periprosthetic joint infection (PJI). In contrast, the primary objective of this study was to compare preoperative characteristics between patients from both spacer groups and examine whether significant differences were present prior to spacer implantation. METHODS: This retrospective, single-centre, cohort study examined the preoperative situation of 80 consecutive knee PJIs between 2017 and 2020. All patients underwent two-stage revision, with 35 (44%) receiving an articulating and 45 (56%) a static spacer. RESULTS: No significant differences were observed in terms of patient gender (p = 0.083), age (p = 0.666), comorbidity (p = 0.1) and preoperative clinical function (p = 0.246). Static spacers were significantly more often used in the presence of a periarticular fistula (p = 0.033), infection of a revision implant (p < 0.001), higher degree of bone loss (p < 0.001) and infection caused by a difficult-to-treat pathogen (p = 0.038). Complication and revision rates were similar for both spacer types during the interim period, while patients with articulating spacers demonstrated a superior clinical function (p < 0.001) during the interim period and after reimplantation. CONCLUSION: Static spacers are being utilised in significantly more complex and unfavourable preoperative scenarios. Therefore, a preoperative selection bias may be at least partially accountable for any disparities observed in postoperative outcomes. To achieve the best possible results, surgeons should know and respect the distinct indications of static and articulating spacers and consequently understand and use them as complementary surgical options. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level III.

Unicondylar knee arthroplasty demonstrating a significant increased risk for aseptic revisions compared to unconstrained and constrained total knee arthroplasty: An analysis of aseptic revisions after unicondylar and primary total knee arthroplasty of the German Arthroplasty Registry.

PURPOSE: Due to ageing population, the implantation rate of total knee arthroplasties (TKAs) is continuously growing. Aseptic revisions in primary knee arthroplasty are a major cause of revision. The aim of the following study was to determinate the incidence and reasons of aseptic revisions in constrained and unconstrained TKA, as well as in unicondylar knee arthroplasties (UKAs). METHODS: Data collection was performed using the German Arthroplasty Registry. Reasons for aseptic revisions were calculated. Incidence and comparison of aseptic revisions were analysed using Kaplan-Meier estimates. A multiple χ2 test with Holm's method was used to detect group differences in ligament ruptures. RESULTS: Overall, 300,998 cases of knee arthroplasty with 254,144 (84.4%) unconstrained TKA, 9993 (3.3%) constrained TKA and 36,861 (12.3%) UKA were analysed. Aseptic revision rate in UKA was significantly increased compared to unconstrained and constrained TKA (p < 0.0001). In constrained TKA, a 2.0% revision rate for aseptic reasons were reported after 1 year, while in unconstrained TKA 1.1% and in UKA, 2.7% of revisions were identified. After 7 years in constrained TKA 3.3%, in unconstrained TKA 2.8%, and in UKA 7.8% sustained aseptic revision. Ligament instability was the leading cause of aseptic revision accounting for 13.7% in unconstrained TKA. In constrained TKA, 2.8% resulted in a revision due to ligament instability. In the UKA, the most frequent cause of revisions was tibial loosening, accounting for 14.6% of cases, while progression of osteoarthritis accounted for 7.9% of revisions. Ligament instability was observed in 14.1% of males compared to 15.9% of females in unconstrained TKA and in 4.6% in both genders in UKA. CONCLUSION: In patients with UKA, aseptic revision rates are significantly higher compared to unconstrained and constrained TKA. Ligament instability was the leading cause of aseptic revision in unconstrained TKA. In UKA, the most frequent cause of revisions was tibial loosening, while progression of osteoarthritis was the second most frequent cause of revisions. Comparable levels of ligament instability were observed in both sexes. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level III, cohort study.

The Current Epidemiology of Revision Total Knee Arthroplasty in the United States From 2016 to 2022.

BACKGROUND: The number of revision total knee arthroplasties (TKAs) is projected to reach 268,200 cases annually by 2030 in the United States. The growing demand for revision TKA can be attributed to the successes of primary TKAs combined with an aging population, patient desires to remain active, as well as expanded indications for younger patients. Given the evolving nature of revision TKAs, an epidemiological analysis of: (1) etiologies; (2) demographics, including age and region; as well as (3) lengths of stay (LOS) offers a way to minimize the gap between appropriate understanding and effective intervention. METHODS: From 2016 to 2022, a national, all-payer database was queried. Incidences and indications were analyzed for a total of 135,983 patients who had revision TKA procedures. RESULTS: The most common etiologies for revision TKA procedures were infection (19.3%) and aseptic loosening (12.8%), followed by mechanical complications (7.9%). The largest age group was 65 to 74 years (34.9%) followed by 55 to 64 years (32.2%), then age >75 years (20.5%). The South had the largest total procedure cohort (39.8%), followed by the Midwest (28.6%), then the Northeast (18.6%), and the West (13.0%). The mean length of stay was 3.86 days (range, 1.0 to 15.0). CONCLUSIONS: Our study details the current status of revision TKA through 2022. While infection and aseptic loosening remain leading causes, we found a low aseptic loosening rate of 12.8%.

Isolated Liner Exchange Versus All-Component Revision for Instability After Total Knee Arthroplasty.

BACKGROUND: Instability is a common cause for revision total knee arthroplasty (TKA). The risks and benefits of polyethylene liner exchange (LE) as compared to full metal component revision continue to be debated. The purpose of this study was to investigate the success rate and complication profiles of revision TKA for instability based on surgical procedure. METHODS: This was a retrospective study of patients undergoing revision TKA for instability from 2015 to 2019. Patients with prior revisions were excluded. 42 patients undergoing isolated polyethylene LE without an increase in constraint were compared with 48 patients undergoing full component revision revision (FCR) of both tibial and femoral components. The primary outcome was differences in rerevision for instability. Noninstability reoperations, 90-day readmissions, and lengths-of-stay were also compared. RESULTS: LEs had a 10.1% higher rerevision for instability rate that approached statistical significance (LE 14.3% versus FCR 4.2%, P = .092). Additionally, FCR had a 4.2% rate of aseptic loosening and a 4.2% rate of periprosthetic-joint-infection, whereas LE had none (P = .181). FCR also had a longer length-of-stay (FCR 3.0 ± 1.3 versus LE: 1.8 ± 0.9 days, P < .001). No differences were found in 90-day readmissions (LE 7.1% versus FCR 4.2%, P = .661). CONCLUSION: All component revision may have a higher success rate than isolated LE in addressing instability but is associated with higher rates of surgical complications. With appropriate patient selection and risk-benefit discussion, isolated LE may be a reasonable surgical option for TKA instability with a lower complication profile and length-of-stay.

Low-Dose Irradiation and Rotating-Hinge Revision for the Treatment of Severe Idiopathic Arthrofibrosis Following Total Knee Arthroplasty: A Review of 60 Patients With a Mean 6-Year Follow-Up.

BACKGROUND: Severe idiopathic arthrofibrosis after total knee arthroplasty (TKA) is a challenging problem to treat. Low-dose irradiation may decrease fibro-osseous proliferation, while rotating-hinge (RH) revision allows for distal femur shortening and collateral ligament sacrifice. This study reports the clinical outcomes and implant survivorship in patients treated with low-dose irradiation and RH revision for severe idiopathic arthrofibrosis following TKA. METHODS: A retrospective review was performed on 60 consecutive patients. Patients who had greater than 80° arc of knee motion or less than 15° flexion contracture were excluded. Mean follow-up was 6 years (range, 2 to 14). Kaplan-Meier survivorship analyses were performed, and logistic regressions were used to determine associations between preoperative patient characteristics and clinical outcomes. RESULTS: Median flexion contracture and median terminal flexion at presentation were 20 and 70°, respectively; at final follow-up, 59 of 60 patients (98%) had ≤10° flexion contracture and 49 of 60 patients (82%) had ≥90° of flexion. The 10-year survivorship free from reoperation for any reason, revision for any reason, and revision for aseptic loosening were 63, 87, and 97%, respectively. There were 27% percent of patients who underwent a manipulation under anesthesia postoperatively, which was the most common reason for return to the operating room. A greater number of prior surgeries was significantly associated with worse range of motion at the final follow-up (P = .004). There were no known radiation-associated complications. CONCLUSIONS: Patients with severe idiopathic arthrofibrosis following TKA treated with low-dose irradiation and RH revision maintained a gain in knee range of motion of 60° with reliable flexion contracture correction at a mean 6-year follow-up. A manipulation under anesthesia was common in the postoperative period. Survivorship free from revision for aseptic loosening was excellent at 10 years.

Floating Knee Arthrodesis After Prosthetic Knee Infection: A Report of 48 Cases.

BACKGROUND: Knee arthrodesis is a means of avoiding above-knee amputation after a prosthetic joint infection (PJI). The objective of this study was to analyze the results of floating knee arthrodesis in patients who had a history of aprosthetic knee infection. The analysis consisted of determining reinfection rates, functional results, and the survival of arthrodesis. METHODS: There were 48 patients who underwent a cemented floating knee arthrodesis in cases of PJI retrospectively included in the study, having been operated on between 2012 and 2020. In addition to being evaluated clinically, analytically, and radiographically, the patients were assessed functionally by means of a newly-created scale. RESULTS: At a mean follow-up of 4 years (1 year to 9 years), 7 patients suffered reinfection (14.6%). The recurrence of infection was not observed to be significantly affected by sex (P = .16), age(P = .09), or the type of surgery previously undergone (P = .18), nor was the McPherson Host Grade (P = .4) observed to have a significant effect. Patients who had a McPherson Limb Grade 3 were more likely to suffer reinfection than those with a McPherson Limb Grade 2 (P = .034). There were 26 patients (54%)fully evaluated and scored on the Knee Arthrodesis Functional Scale(BAOR). For 11 patients (42%), the results were evaluated as excellent, for 11 (42%) acceptable, for 3 (12%) low, and for 1(4%) poor. CONCLUSION: The arthrodesis nail is an effective and safe procedure for patients who have a recurrent PJI, providing an effective alternative when the criteria for a new revision total knee arthroplasty are not met.

A Comparison of Clinical Outcomes After Total Knee Arthroplasty in Patients Who Have and Do Not Have Self-Reported Nickel Allergy: Matched and Unmatched Cohort Comparisons.

BACKGROUND: The impact of a preoperative self-reported nickel allergy in patients undergoing primary total knee arthroplasty (TKA) remains unclear. The aim of this study was to compare the revision rates and outcomes of patients who have a self-reported nickel allergy undergoing primary TKA to patients who do not have a self-reported nickel allergy. METHODS: Over 5 years, a total of 284 TKAs in patients who have and 17,735 in patients who do not have a self-reported nickel allergy were performed. Revision rates and differences in preoperative and postoperative patient-reported outcome measures, including Knee Osteoarthritis Outcome Score Joint Replacement (KOOS JR), Visual Analog Scale, Lower Extremity Activity Scale, and the Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System Mental and Physical Scores, were compared. RESULTS: Survivorship free of all-cause revision at 1 year was similar for patients who have and do not have a self-reported nickel allergy (99.5% [95% CI (confidence interval): 98.6 to 100.0] versus 99.3% [95% CI: 99.1 to 99.4]), P = .49). Patients who have a self-reported nickel allergy undergoing primary TKA had no difference in KOOS JR, Visual Analog Scale, or Lower Extremity Activity Scale scores at 6 weeks and 1 year and slightly worse Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System mental and physical scores at 6 weeks compared to patients who did not have an allergy. Matched analysis revealed no difference in 6-week or 1-year KOOS, JR scores between patients who did and did not have a self-reported nickel allergy when stratified by implant class (nickel-free versus standard cobalt-chromium) (P = .113 and P = .415, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: Patients who have a self-reported nickel allergy can be advised that, on average, their clinical outcome scores will improve similarly to patients who do not have a self-reported nickel allergy, and revision rates will be similar.

Commercial Synovial Antigen Testing is Inferior to Traditional Culture for the Diagnosis of Periprosthetic Joint Infection in Patients Undergoing Revision Total Knee Arthroplasty.

BACKGROUND: Despite its limitations, a culture remains the "gold standard" for pathogen identification in patients who have periprosthetic joint infection (PJI). Recently, a synovial fluid antigen test has been introduced by a commercial entity. The purpose of this multicenter study was to determine the accuracy of the antigen test in the diagnosis of PJI. METHODS: This retrospective study identified 613 patients undergoing revision total knee arthroplasty who had undergone preoperative synovial fluid analysis. A PJI was defined using the 2018 International Consensus Meeting (ICM) criteria. Patients who had an extended period (> 180 days) from aspiration to revision procedure (n = 62), those presenting within 90 days of their index arthroplasty procedure (n = 17), and patients who had an inconclusive ICM score (n = 8) were excluded. Using receiver operator characteristic curve analyses, we examined the utility of the microbial identification (MID) antigen test and any positive culture (either preoperative or intraoperative) in the diagnosis of PJI. RESULTS: A total of 526 patients were included. Of these, 125 (23.8%) were ICM positive and 401 (76.2%) were ICM negative. Culture demonstrated an area under the curve (AUC) of 0.864, sensitivity of 75.2%, and specificity of 97.5%. On the other hand, the MID test exhibited an AUC of 0.802, sensitivity of 61.6%, and specificity of 98.8%. The AUC of culture was significantly higher than that of the MID test (P = .037). The MID test was positive in 41.9% of culture-negative PJI cases. We also observed a high rate of discordance (29.7%) when both culture and the MID test were positive in the ICM-positive group. CONCLUSIONS: Synovial fluid antigen testing does not provide additional clinical benefit when compared to traditional cultures for the diagnosis of PJI. The antigen test had low sensitivity in the diagnosis of PJI and a relatively high rate of discordance with culture. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level III.

Early Versus Late Periprosthetic Joint Infection After Total Knee Arthroplasty: Do Patient Differences Exist?

BACKGROUND: Periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) is a devastating complication following total knee arthroplasty (TKA). Little evidence exists comparing those with early versus late PJI. The purpose of the study was to determine comorbidity profile differences between patients developing early and late PJI. METHODS: There were 72,659 patients undergoing primary TKA from 2009 to 2021, who were identified from a commercial claims and encounters database. Subjects diagnosed with PJI were categorized as either 'early' (within 90 days of index procedure) or 'late' (> 2 years after index arthroplasty). Non-infected patients within these periods served as control groups following 4:1 propensity score matching on other extraneous variables. Logistic regression analyses were performed comparing comorbidities between groups. RESULTS: Patients were significantly younger in the late compared to the early infection group (58.1 versus 62.4 years, P < .001). When compared to those with early PJI, patients who had chronic kidney disease (13.3 versus 4.1%; OR [odds ratio] 5.17, P = .002), malignancy (20.4 versus 10.5%; OR 2.53, P = .009), uncomplicated diabetes (40.8 versus 30.6%; OR 2.00, P = .01), rheumatoid arthritis (9.2 versus 3.3%; OR 2.66, P = .046), and hypertension (88.8 versus 81.6%; OR 2.17, P = .04), were all significant predictors of developing a late PJI. CONCLUSIONS: When compared to patients diagnosed with early PJI following primary TKA, the presence of chronic kidney disease, malignancy, uncomplicated diabetes, rheumatoid arthritis, and hypertension, were independent risk factors for the development of late PJI. Younger patients who have these comorbidities may be targets for preoperative optimization interventions that minimize the risk of PJI.

Unsuspected Positive Intraoperative Cultures in Aseptic Revision Knee Arthroplasty: Prevalence, Management, and Infection-Free Survivorship.

BACKGROUND: The purpose of this study was to evaluate the management and outcomes of aseptic revision total knee arthroplasty (arTKA) with unsuspected positive cultures (UPCs) compared to those with sterile cultures. METHODS: The institutional database at a single tertiary center was retrospectively reviewed for arTKA from January 2013 to October 2023. Patients who met Musculoskeletal Infection Society criteria for periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) based on available preoperative infectious workup, received antibiotic spacers, or did not have at least 1 year of follow-up were excluded. Patients were stratified based on intraoperative cultures into 4 cohorts: sterile cultures, 1 UPC, ≥ 2 UPCs with different organisms, and ≥ 2 UPCs with the same organism. Univariable analyses were used to compare these groups. Kaplan-Meier survivorship analysis assessed infection-free survival at 5 years, and Cox proportional hazards regressions were used to evaluate factors that influence infection-free survival. A total of 691 arTKAs at a mean follow-up of 4.2 years were included in the study. Of these, 49 (7.1%) had 1 UPC with a new organism, 10 (1.4%) had ≥2 UPCs of the same organism, and 2 (0.2%) had ≥2 UPCs with different organisms. RESULTS: Postoperative antibiotics were prescribed to 114 (16.5%) patients-13 (26.5%) with 1 UPC, 6 (60.0%) with ≥2 UPCs of the same organism, and 0 (0.0%) of patients who had ≥2 UPCs of different organisms. There were no differences in infection-free survival at 5 years between patients who had sterile cultures and 1 UPC (96 versus 89%; P = .39) nor between sterile cultures and ≥2 UPCs of different organisms (96 versus 100%; P < .72). However, patients who had ≥2 UPCs of the same organism had significantly worse infection-free survival at 5 years compared to patients who had sterile cultures (58 versus 96%; P < .001). Cox proportional hazards regression suggested that when adjusting for covariates, an American Society of Anesthesiologists classification of ≥3 (hazard ratio [HR] = 3.1; P = .007), ≥2 UPCs of the same organism (HR = 11.0; P < .001), 1 UPC (HR = 4.2; P = .018), and arTKA with hinge constructs (HR = 4.1; P = .008) were associated with increased risk of rerevision for PJI. CONCLUSIONS: Patients who had 1 UPC or ≥2 UPCs with different organisms had similar infection-free survival at 5 years as patients who had sterile cultures. However, patients who had ≥2 UPCs of the same organism had significantly worse infection-free survival at 5 years. Overall, 1 UPC or ≥2 UPCs of the same organism at the time of arTKA may suggest the patient is at higher risk of rerevision for PJI. More studies are needed to determine what interventions can be implemented to mitigate this risk.

Comparison of Delphi Consensus Criteria and Musculoskeletal Infection Society Outcome Reporting Tool Definitions of Successful Surgical Treatment of Periprosthetic Knee Infection.

BACKGROUND: Agreement on success following surgical treatment for periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) is important for comparing the efficacy of different surgical approaches with varying consequences and outcomes and setting patient expectations. We compared success rates following two-stage exchange arthroplasty for knee PJI using two expert-consensus definitions of success. METHODS: Prospectively documented data for 57 knees treated by a single surgeon at an academic tertiary care center were retrospectively reviewed. Treatment outcomes were quantified using the Delphi Consensus Criteria and the Musculoskeletal Infection Society Outcome Reporting Tool (MSIS ORT). RESULTS: Success rates were 81% using the Delphi Consensus Criteria and 56% using the MSIS ORT (P = .008). The MSIS ORT success rates increased to 76% when aseptic revisions and deaths unrelated to PJI were not penalized as failures of treatment. Predicted probabilities of successful treatment in a hypothetical case scenario were lowest based on the MSIS ORT and similarly higher using Delphi Consensus Criteria and MSIS ORT modified for both women (53.0, 90.8, and 88.7%) and men (29.1, 89.1, and 89.3%). CONCLUSIONS: Study observations underscore the need for a uniformly accepted single definition of surgical treatment success.

A Comparison Between Polyethylene Exchange and Full Revision for Arthrofibrosis Following Total Knee Arthroplasty.

BACKGROUND: Arthrofibrosis is a debilitating postoperative complication and a major cause of patient dissatisfaction following total knee arthroplasty (TKA). There is no consensus regarding the optimal treatment for stiffness after TKA. For cases not amenable to manipulation under anesthesia (MUA), one component or full revision are both suitable options. In a value-based healthcare era, maximizing cost-effectiveness with optimized clinical outcomes for patients remains the ultimate goal. As such, we compared (1) Knee Injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Scores for Joint Replacement (KOOS, JR), (2) range of motion (ROM), as well as (3) complication rates, including MUA and lysis of adhesions (LOA), between polyethylene exchange and full component revision for TKA arthrofibrosis. METHODS: Patients were queried from an institutional database who underwent revision TKA for arthrofibrosis between January 1, 2015, and April 31, 2021. There were 33 patients who underwent full revision and 16 patients who underwent polyethylene exchange. Demographics and baseline characteristics between the cohorts were analyzed. Postoperative outcomes included MUA, LOA, and re-revision rates as well as KOOS, JR, and extension and flexion ROM at a mean follow-up of 3.8 years. Baseline comorbidities, including age, body mass index, alcohol use, tobacco use, and diabetes, were comparable between the full revision and polyethylene exchange revision cohorts (P > .05). The one and full component revisions had similar preoperative KOOS, JR (43 versus 42, P = .85), and flexion (81 versus 82 degrees, P = .80) versus extension (11 versus 11 degrees, P = .87) ROM. RESULTS: The full component revision had higher KOOS, JR (65 versus 55, P = .04), and flexion (102 versus 92 degrees, P = .02), but similar extension (3 versus 3 degrees, P = .80) ROM at final follow-up compared to the polyethylene exchange revision, respectively. The MUA (18.2 versus 18.8%, P = .96) and LOA (2.0 versus 0.0%, P = .32) rates were similar between full component and polyethylene exchange revisions. There was one re-revision (3.0%) for the cohort of patients who initially underwent full revision. There were four full re-revisions (25.0%) and two polyethylene exchange re-revisions (12.5%) performed in the cohort of patients who initially underwent a polyethylene exchange revision. CONCLUSIONS: The full component revision for stiffness after TKA showed favorable KOOS, JR, ROM, and outcomes in comparison to the polyethylene exchange revision. While the optimal treatment for stiffness after TKA is without consensus, this study supports the use of the full component revision when applied to the institutional population at hand. It is imperative that homogeneity exists in preoperative definitions, preoperative baseline patient demographics, ROM and function levels, outcome measures, and preoperative indications, as well as the inclusion of clinical data that assesses complete exchange, single exchange, and tibial insert exchange.

Metal Ion Release in Cancer Patients Following Megaprosthesis Salvage Surgery.

BACKGROUND: Megaprostheses contain many more modular components than conventional total hip and knee arthroplasty, which may lead to higher serum levels of metal ions. The aim of this study was to determine serum concentrations of titanium, chromium, and cobalt ions in cancer patients after limb salvage surgery with a megaprosthesis. METHODS: A retrospective, descriptive cohort analysis consisting of patients who underwent cancer-related limb salvage surgery with a megaprosthesis at our hospital between 2010 and 2020 was conducted. Baseline and follow-up data were extracted from clinical and surgical records. Blood samples were prospectively obtained. Descriptive statistics were used for the analysis. RESULTS: A total of 71 patients underwent limb salvage surgery during the study period. Of these, 22 (10 women, 12 men) were included in the study. The mean age was 52 years (range, 21 to 80). Most cases (n = 16; 72.7%) involved the femur. Most patients (n = 14, 63.6%) underwent total knee megaprosthesis surgery. Implant revision surgery was required in 45% of cases (n = 10), with a mean interval of 4.32 years between the initial and revision surgeries. The mean follow-up time after revision surgery was 4.05 years. High levels of chromium were observed in 22.7% of patients (n = 5). High cobalt levels were found in 68.2% (n = 15) of patients, with toxic levels in 9.1% (n = 2). Titanium levels were high in 77.3% (n = 17) of cases and toxic in 22.7% (n = 5). Postoperative chemotherapy was significantly associated with titanium levels (P = .017). No correlation was observed between metal ion levels and time from primary or revision surgery or time from the first to revision surgery. CONCLUSIONS: This study shows that cancer-related limb salvage surgery with megaprosthesis is associated with metal ion levels that exceed established safe thresholds. Compared to conventional hip arthroplasty, a higher proportion of the patients in this cohort presented elevated levels of metal ions. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: III.