Can the Leukocyte Esterase Strip Test Predict Persistence of Periprosthetic Joint Infection at Second-Stage Reimplantation?

BACKGROUND: We evaluated the reliability of intraoperative assessment of leukocyte esterase (LE) in synovial fluid samples from patients undergoing reimplantation following implant removal and spacer insertion for periprosthetic joint infection (PJI). Our hypothesis was that a positive intraoperative LE test would be a better predictor of persistent infection than either serum C-reactive protein (CRP) or erythrocyte sedimentation rate (ESR) or the combination of serum CRP and ESR. METHODS: The records of 76 patients who received a 2-stage exchange for PJI were retrospectively reviewed. Synovial fluid was collected for LE measurement during surgery before arthrotomy in 79 procedures. Receiver operating characteristic curves were generated. Sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, negative predictive value, accuracy, and area under the curve (AUC) of LE, CRP, ESR, and CRP + ESR were calculated. RESULTS: Sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, and negative predictive value of the LE assay were 82%, 99%, 90%, and 97%, respectively. Receiver operating characteristic analysis revealed an LE threshold of 1.5 between the first (negative) and the second (positive) level of the ordinal variable, so that a grade starting from 1+ was accurate for a diagnosis of persistent infection (AUC 0.9044). The best thresholds for the CRP and the ESR assay were 8.25 mg/L (82% sensitivity, 84% specificity, AUC 0.8416) and 45 mm/h (55% sensitivity, 87% specificity, AUC 0.7493), respectively. CONCLUSION: The LE strip test proved a reliable tool to diagnose persistence of infection and outperformed the serum CRP and ESR assays. The strip test provides a valuable intraoperative diagnostic during second-stage revision for PJI.

Classification and management options for prosthetic joint infection.

Periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) is one of the major complications following arthroplasty implantation. Management of PJIs is a challenge for surgeons and various classification systems have been introduced, which consider variables such as onset of symptoms, pathogenesis and clinical manifestation. In an attempt to overcome the shortcomings which may limit their usefulness in borderline cases, a new classification system focusing on the topography of the infectious process has been proposed. This theory relies on the identification of the exact location of the bacterial colonization thus allowing to decide between a conservative or a more radical intervention irrespectively of the timing. The use of nuclear medicine device like radiolabelled white blood cells (WBC) scan could lead the path in identifying pathogenetic processes and their exact location thus guiding orthopaedic surgeons to the most appropriate diagnosis and treatment options. Currently management relies on debridement, antibiotics and implant retention (DAIR), which is traditionally performed at early stages, 1- or 2-stage revision arthroplasty which is commonly limited to chronic cases. Reports have demonstrated similar rates of infection recurrence following one and two-stage revisions, and the use of one-stage revision surgery is gaining popularity. More recently, satisfying results following partial implant retention during revision total arthroplasty for septic failures have been reported. In addition, in severe cases, definitive articulating antibiotic spacer, excision arthroplasty, arthrodesis or amputation can be performed.

The W.A.I.O.T. Definition of Peri-Prosthetic Joint Infection: A Multi-center, Retrospective Validation Study.

Peri-prosthetic joint infection (PJI) definition plays an important role in diagnostic and therapeutic decisions. However, while several criteria have been proposed by eminent institutions to define a PJI in the last decade, their clinical validation has been rarely performed. Aim of the present multicenter, international, retrospective study was to validate the World Association against Infection in Orthopedics and Trauma (WAIOT) pre/intra-operative PJI definition with post-operative confirmatory tests. A total of 210 patients, undergoing hip (n = 86) or knee (n = 124) revision surgery for any reason in six orthopedic centers in Africa, Asia, Europe and South America, were retrospectively evaluated at a two years minimum follow-up after surgery. All the available pre-, intra- and post-operative findings were collected and analyzed according to the WAIOT criteria, which include a set of tests to confirm (Rule In) or to exclude (Rule Out) a PJI. On average, patients were investigated pre/intra-operatively with 3.1 ± 1.1 rule out and 2.7 ± 0.9 rule in tests; the presence of a fistula or exposed implant was reported in 37 patients (17.6%). According to pre/intraoperative findings, 36.2% of the patients were defined as affected by high-grade PJI (n = 76; average score: 2.3 ± 0.8), 21.9% by low-grade PJI (n = 46; average score: 0.8 ± 0.8), 10.5% by biofilm-related implant malfunction (n = 22; average score: -1.6 ± 0.8), 2.9% as contamination (n = 6; average score: -3.5 ± 1.0), and 28.6% as no infection (n = 60; average score: -3.0 ± 1.4). Pre/intra-operative PJI definitions matched post-operative confirmatory tests, in 97.1% of the patients. This is, to our knowledge, one of the largest study ever conducted to validate a PJI definition The retrospective analysis in different centers was greatly facilitated by the structure of the WAIOT definition, that allows to include different tests on the basis of their sensitivity/specificity, while the comparison between pre/intra-operative and post-operative findings offered the internal validation of the scoring system. Our results authenticate the WAIOT definition as a reliable, simple tool to identify patients affected by PJI prior to joint revision surgery.