Early Staphylococcal Periprosthetic Joint Infection (PJI) Treated with Debridement, Antibiotics, and Implant Retention (DAIR): Inferior Outcomes in Patients with Staphylococci Resistant to Rifampicin.

It is unknown how rifampicin resistance in staphylococci causing a periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) affects outcomes after debridement, antibiotics, and implant retention (DAIR). We thus aimed to compare the risk of relapse in DAIR-treated early PJI caused by staphylococci with or without rifampicin resistance. In total, 81 patients affected by early PJI were included, and all patients were treated surgically with DAIR. This was repeated if needed. The endpoint of relapse-free survival was estimated using the Kaplan-Meier method, and Cox regression models were fitted to assess the risk of infection relapse for patients infected with rifampicin-resistant bacteria, adjusted for age, sex, type of joint, and type of index surgery. In patients with rifampicin-resistant staphylococci, relapse was seen in 80% after one DAIR procedure and in 70% after two DAIR procedures. In patients with rifampicin-sensitive bacteria, 51% had an infection relapse after one DAIR procedure and 33% had an infection relapse after two DAIR procedures. Patients with rifampicin-resistant staphylococcal PJI thus had an increased adjusted risk of infection relapse of 1.9 (95% CI: 1.1-3.6, p = 0.04) after one DAIR procedure compared to patients with rifampicin-sensitive bacteria and a 4.1-fold (95% CI: 1.2-14.1, p = 0.03) increase in risk of infection relapse after two DAIR procedures. Staphylococcal resistance to rifampicin is associated with inferior outcomes after DAIR. These findings suggest that DAIR may not be a useful strategy in early PJI caused by rifampicin-resistant staphylococci.

Low accuracy in preoperative tissue biopsies for diagnosing chronic periprosthetic joint infection: an observational retrospective single-centre study.

OBJECTIVE: Diagnosing periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) can be challenging. The ability to distinguish between septic and aseptic failure of a joint prosthesis is crucial for treatment strategy optimisation and prognosis prediction. Preoperative tissue cultures are included in many diagnostic algorithms; however, studies report different degrees of concordance (63%-85%) with intraoperative cultures. This study aimed to investigate the diagnostic performance of tissue biopsies in the preoperative diagnostic process with the 2018 International Consensus Meeting criteria as a reference and to describe the concordance between microbiological findings in pre- and intraoperative biopsies. METHODS: This observational retrospective study included 44 patients requiring revision surgery of a total hip or knee arthroplasty, where the diagnostic workup included biopsies of periprosthetic tissue. The accuracy of preoperative biopsies was calculated, and concordance between microbiological findings in pre- and intraoperative biopsies was described. RESULTS: The accuracy was 59%, with a sensitivity of 50% and specificity of 79%. Full concordance between microbiological findings in pre- and intraoperative biopsies was found in 64% of the cases. CONCLUSION: An open biopsy of periprosthetic tissue cannot reliably confirm or exclude PJI, and, therefore, should not be performed.

Study protocol: The DAICY trial-dual versus single-antibiotic impregnated cement in primary hemiarthroplasty for femoral neck fracture-a register-based cluster-randomized crossover-controlled trial.

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Older patients with a displaced femoral neck fracture (FNF) are often treated with a cemented primary hemiarthroplasty (HA). The DAICY trial investigates whether high-dose dual-impregnated antibioticloaded cement (DIAC) including gentamicin and clindamycin can reduce the risk of periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) in comparison with low-dose single-impregnated gentamicin antibiotic-loaded cement (SIAC), in patients ≥ 60 years treated with a cemented HA for a displaced FNF. STUDY DESIGN: The trial is a national, multicenter, register-based, cluster-randomized, crossover trial. Patients ≥ 60 years with a non-pathological, displaced FNF (Type Garden 3-4/AO 31-B2 or B3) suitable for HA according to local guidelines are eligible for inclusion. Participating orthopedic departments will be randomized to start with either SIAC (control group) or DIAC treatment (intervention group) for 2 years. After 2 years, the study departments will then change to the other treatment arm for the remaining 2 years of the study. Approximately 7,000 patients will be included. The study is pragmatic in that the choice of implant brands, surgical approach and peri- and postoperative protocols follow the local routines of each participating department. All outcome variables will be retrieved after linkage of the study cohort to the following Swedish registers: the Fracture Register, the Arthroplasty Register, the National Patient Register and the Prescribed Drug Registry Outcome: The primary outcome will be periprosthetic joint infection of the index joint within 1 year after surgery. Secondary outcomes will be any reoperation on the index joint, mortality within 90 days and 1 year, resistance patterns of causative bacteria in cases of PJI, and health economics. Potential added value: This trial is designed to support or refute the efficacy of DIAC used in patients with a displaced FNF, potentially reducing PJI and resource allocation. Start of the trial and estimated duration - The DAICY trial started recruiting patients in January 2022 and will continue recruiting for approximately 4 years. Complete follow-up expected in 5 years.

Patient-related factors associated with superficial surgical site infection and progression to a periprosthetic joint infection after elective primary total joint arthroplasty: a single-centre, retrospective study in Sweden.

OBJECTIVES: Superficial surgical site infection (SSSI) may increase the risk of serious complications such as periprosthetic joint infection (PJI). This study aims to identify patient-related risk factors associated with SSSI and investigate their correlation with the progression of PJI. DESIGN: In this retrospective study, 1191 elective hip and knee prostheses were included. Patients were interviewed 3-5 months after surgery to answer questions about the postoperative period. Patient records were reviewed to determine whether there had been any documentation of wound-healing difficulties or whether antibiotics were prescribed to treat an infection related to arthroplasty surgery. SETTING: Uppsala University Hospital, patients treated between November 2008 and December 2012. PARTICIPANTS: The study population comprised 433 knees and 758 hips. OUTCOME MEASURES: We studied patient-related risk factors (joint, age, sex, the American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) classification, body mass index (BMI), smoking, diabetes and rheumatic disease) to determine whether they were associated with (1) SSSI and (2) the progress from SSSI to PJI. RESULTS: 84 (7%) patients of the total cohort developed SSSI. This infection progressed to a PJI in 24 (29%) of the patients. Factors with increased adjusted risk ratios (aRRs) for SSSIs were knee surgery (1.7; 95% CI: 1.1 to 2.7), age≥65 years (1.7; 95% CI: 1.1 to 2.8), BMI≥30 (1.9; 95% CI: 1.0 to 3.4) and ASA classification≥3 (1.7; 95% CI: 1.0 to 2.9). ASA classification≥3 was the only factor showing a significant progression from SSSI to PJI (aRR=3.3; 95% CI: 1.0 to 10.3). CONCLUSIONS: The risk of progressing from an SSSI to a PJI is high. Older patients, patients with obesity, and those with a high ASA classification considered for elective total knee arthroplasty seem to have an increased risk of developing SSSI. Patients with a high ASA classification seem to have an increased risk of progressing from SSSI to PJI.

EPOS trial: the effect of air filtration through a plasma chamber on the incidence of surgical site infection in orthopaedic surgery: a study protocol of a randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial.

INTRODUCTION: There is controversy regarding the importance of air-transmitted infections for surgical site infections (SSIs) after orthopaedic surgery. Research has been hindered by both the inability in blinding the exposure, and by the need for recruiting large enough cohorts. The aim of this study is to investigate whether using a new form of air purifier using plasma air purification (PAP) in operating rooms (ORs) lowers the SSI rate or not. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: Multicentre, double-blind, cluster-randomised, placebo-controlled trial conducted at seven hospitals in 2017-2022. All patients that undergo orthopaedic surgery for minimum 30 min are included. Intervention group: patients operated in OR with PAP devices turned on. CONTROL GROUP: patients operated in OR with PAP devices turned off. Randomisation: each OR will be randomised in periods of 4 weeks, 6 weeks or 8 weeks to either have the devices on or off. PRIMARY OUTCOME: any SSI postoperatively defined as a composite endpoint of any of the following: use of isoxazolylpenicillin, clindamycin or rifampicin for 2 days or more, International Classification of Diseases codes or Nordic Medico-Statistical Committee codes indicating postoperative infection. In a second step, we will perform a chart review on those patients with positive indicators of SSI to further validate the outcome. Secondary outcomes are described in the Methods section. Power: we assume an SSI rate of 2%, an SSI reduction rate of 25% and we need approximately 45 000 patients to attain a power of 80% at a significance level of 0.05. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: The study is approved by the Swedish Ethical Review Authority. The interim analysis results from the study will be presented only to the researchers involved unless the study thereafter is interrupted for whatever reason. Publication in a medical journal will be presented after inclusion of the last patient. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT02695368.

Linezolid in the treatment of periprosthetic joint infection caused by coagulase-negative staphylococci.

Background: Periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) caused by coagulase-negative staphylococci (CoNS) is increasingly common and is sometimes treated with off-label use of linezolid. Methods: We conducted a retrospective study of patients with PJI caused by CoNS treated with surgical intervention and orally administrated linezolid during the period 1995-2014 (n = 28). Clinical outcomes and adverse events related to linezolid administration were evaluated. Mean time to follow-up was 4.3 years (range: 0.2-12). Results: Twenty-two of 28 patients were infection-free at follow-up. No CoNS strain was resistant to vancomycin, but 16 of 28 were resistant to rifampicin, 23 of 28 to clindamycin and 20 of 27 to quinolones. The mean duration of linezolid treatment was 4.2 weeks (range: 1-12). Eleven of 28 patients had an adverse event related to the antimicrobial treatment, and four had to discontinue linezolid, but all adverse events were reversible within 2 months after discontinuation. Conclusions: Oral linezolid administration combined with adequate surgical treatment may be useful for the treatment of PJIs caused by CoNS.

Algorithm to Diagnose Delayed and Late PJI: Role of Joint Aspiration.

Total Joint Arthroplasty (TJA) continues to gain acceptance as the standard of care for the treatment of severe degenerative joint disease, and is considered one of the most successful surgical interventions in the history of medicine. A devastating complication after TJA is infection. Periprosthetic joint infection (PJI), represents one of the major causes of failure and remains a significant challenge facing orthopaedics today. PJI usually requires additional surgery including revision of the implants, fusion or amputations causing tremendous patient suffering but also a heavy health economics burden. PJI is at the origin of around 20-25 % of total knee arthroplasty (Bozic et al. 2010; de Gorter et al. 2015; Sundberg et al. 2015) and 12-15 % of total hip arthroplasty (Bozic et al. 2009; Garellick et al. 2014; de Gorter et al. 2015) failures.

Hydroxyapatite coating does not improve uncemented stem survival after total hip arthroplasty!

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: It is still being debated whether HA coating of uncemented stems used in total hip arthroplasty (THA) improves implant survival. We therefore investigated different uncemented stem brands, with and without HA coating, regarding early and long-term survival. PATIENTS AND METHODS: We identified 152,410 THA procedures using uncemented stems that were performed between 1995 and 2011 and registered in the Nordic Arthroplasty Register Association (NARA) database. We excluded 19,446 procedures that used stem brands less than 500 times in each country, procedures performed due to diagnoses other than osteoarthritis or pediatric hip disease, and procedures with missing information on the type of coating. 22 stem brands remained (which were used in 116,069 procedures) for analysis of revision of any component. 79,192 procedures from Denmark, Norway, and Sweden were analyzed for the endpoint stem revision. Unadjusted survival rates were calculated according to Kaplan-Meier, and Cox proportional hazards models were fitted in order to calculate hazard ratios (HRs) for the risk of revision with 95% confidence intervals (CIs). RESULTS: Unadjusted 10-year survival with the endpoint revision of any component for any reason was 92.1% (CI: 91.8-92.4). Unadjusted 10-year survival with the endpoint stem revision due to aseptic loosening varied between the stem brands investigated and ranged from 96.7% (CI: 94.4-99.0) to 99.9% (CI: 99.6-100). Of the stem brands with the best survival, stems with and without HA coating were found. The presence of HA coating was not associated with statistically significant effects on the adjusted risk of stem revision due to aseptic loosening, with an HR of 0.8 (CI: 0.5-1.3; p = 0.4). The adjusted risk of revision due to infection was similar in the groups of THAs using HA-coated and non-HA-coated stems, with an HR of 0.9 (CI: 0.8-1.1; p = 0.6) for the presence of HA coating. The commonly used Bimetric stem (n = 25,329) was available both with and without HA coating, and the adjusted risk of stem revision due to aseptic loosening was similar for the 2 variants, with an HR of 0.9 (CI: 0.5-1.4; p = 0.5) for the HA-coated Bimetric stem. INTERPRETATION: Uncemented HA-coated stems had similar results to those of uncemented stems with porous coating or rough sand-blasted stems. The use of HA coating on stems available both with and without this surface treatment had no clinically relevant effect on their outcome, and we thus question whether HA coating adds any value to well-functioning stem designs.

Effects of hydroxyapatite coating of cups used in hip revision arthroplasty.

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Coating of acetabular revision implants with hydroxyapatite (HA) has been proposed to improve ingrowth and stability. We investigated whether HA coating of revision cups can reduce the risk of any subsequent re-revision. METHODS: We studied uncemented cups either with or without HA coating that were used at a primary acetabular revision and registered in the Swedish Hip Arthroplasty Register (SHAR). 2 such cup designs were identified: Harris-Galante and Trilogy, both available either with or without HA coating. These cups had been used as revision components in 1,780 revisions of total hip arthroplasties (THA) between 1986 and 2009. A Cox proportional hazards model including the type of coating, age at index revision, sex, cause of cup revision, cup design, the use of bone graft at the revision procedure, and the type of cup fixation at primary THA were used to calculate adjusted risk ratios (RRs with 95% CI) for re-revision for any reason or due to aseptic loosening. RESULTS: 71% of the cups were coated with HA and 29% were uncoated. At a mean follow-up time of 6.9 (0-24) years, 159 (9%) of all 1,780 cups had been re-revised, mostly due to aseptic loosening (5%), dislocation (2%), or deep infection (1%). HA coating had no significant influence on the risk of re-revision of the cup for any reason (RR = 1.4, CI: 0.9-2.0) or due to aseptic loosening (RR = 1.1, 0.6-1.9). In contrast, HA coating was found to be a risk factor for isolated liner re-revision for any reason (RR = 1.8, CI: 1.01-3.3). Age below 60 years at the index cup revision, dislocation as the cause of the index cup revision, uncemented cup fixation at primary THA, and use of the Harris-Galante cup also increased the risk of re-revision of the cup. In separate analyses in which isolated liner revisions were excluded, bone grafting was found to be a risk factor for re-revision of the metal shell due to aseptic loosening (RR = 2.1, CI: 1.05-4.2). INTERPRETATION: We found no evidence to support the notion that HA coating improves the performance of the 2 studied cup designs in revision arthroplasty. In contrast, patient-related factors such as younger age and dislocation as the reason for cup revision, and technical factors such as the choice of revision cup were found to influence the risk of subsequent re-revision of the cup. The reason for inferior results after revision of uncemented cups is not known, but it is possible that these hips more often had pronounced bone loss at the index cup revision.

Effects of hydroxyapatite coating on survival of an uncemented femoral stem. A Swedish Hip Arthroplasty Register study on 4,772 hips.

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Hydroxyapatite (HA) is widely used as a coating for uncemented total hip arthroplasty components. This has been suggested to improve implant ingrowth and long-term stability. However, the evidence behind the use of HA coating on femoral stems is ambiguous. We investigated survival of an uncemented, tapered titanium femoral stem that was available either with or without HA coating (Bi-Metric). PATIENTS AND METHODS: The stem had been used in 4,772 total hip arthroplasties (THAs) in 4,169 patients registered in the Swedish Hip Arthroplasty Register between 1992 and 2009. 59% of the stems investigated were coated with HA and 41% were uncoated. Kaplan-Meier survival analysis and a Cox regression model with adjustment for age, sex, primary diagnosis, and the type of cup fixation were used to calculate survival rates and adjusted risk ratios (RRs) of the risk of revision for various reasons. RESULTS: The 10-year survival rates of the HA-coated version and the uncoated version were about equal when we used revision for any reason as the endpoint: 98% (95% CI: 98-99) and 98% (CI: 97-99), respectively. A Cox regression model adjusting for the covariates mentioned above showed that the presence of HA coating did not have any influence on the risk of stem revision for any reason (RR = 1.0, 95% CI: 0.6-1.6) or due to aseptic loosening (RR = 0.5, CI: 0.2-1.5). There was no effect of HA coating on the risk of stem revision due to infection, dislocation, or fracture. INTERPRETATION: The uncemented Bi-Metric stem showed excellent 10-year survival. Our findings do not support the use of HA coating on this stem to enhance implant survival.

Increased risk of revision of acetabular cups coated with hydroxyapatite.

BACKGROUND: Hydroxyapatite (HA) is the main inorganic component of bone, and HA coating is widely used on acetabular cups in hip arthroplasty. It has been suggested that this surface finish improves cup survival. METHODS: All patients registered in the Swedish Hip Arthroplasty Register between 1992 and 2007 with an uncemented acetabular implant that was available either with or without HA coating were identified. 8,043 total hip arthroplasties (THAs) with the most common cup types (Harris-Galante, Romanus, and Trilogy) were investigated. A Cox regression model including type of coating, age, sex, primary diagnosis, cup type, and type of stem fixation was used to calculate adjusted risk ratios (RRs) for the risk of revision. RESULTS: HA coating was a risk factor for cup revision due to aseptic loosening (adjusted RR 1.7; 95% CI: 1.3-2). Age at primary arthroplasty of < 50 years, a diagnosis of pediatric hip disease, the use of a cemented stem, and the Romanus and Harris-Galante cup types were also associated with statistically significantly increased risk of cup revision due to aseptic loosening. INTERPRETATION: Our findings question the routine use of HA-coated cups in primary total hip arthroplasty. With some designs, this practice may even increase the risk of loosening-resulting in revision surgery.