Are adverse outcome rates higher in multiple sclerosis patients after total hip arthroplasty?

Aims: This study compared multiple sclerosis (MS) patients who underwent primary total hip arthroplasty (THA) with a matched cohort. Specifically, we evaluated: 1) implant survivorship; 2) functional outcomes (modified Harris Hip Scores (mHHS), Hip Disability and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score, Joint Replacement (HOOS JR), and modified Multiple Sclerosis Impact Scale (mMSIS) scores (with the MS cohort also evaluated based on the disease phenotype)); 3) physical therapy duration and return to function; 4) radiographic outcomes; and 5) complications. Patients and Methods: We reviewed our institution's database to identify MS patients who underwent THA between January 2008 and June 2016. A total of 34 MS patients (41 hips) were matched in a 1:2 ratio to a cohort of THA patients who did not have MS, based on age, body mass index (BMI), and Charlson/Deyo score. Patient records were reviewed for complications, and their functional outcomes and radiographs were reviewed at their most recent follow-up. Results: Compared with the matched cohort, MS patients had lower all-cause implant survivorship at eight years (91.5% (95% confidence interval (CI) 82.7 to 100) vs 98.7% (95% CI 96.2 to 100)) (p = 0.033), lower mHHS scores (66 vs 80, p < 0.001), and HOOS JR scores (79 vs 88, p = 0.009). Multiple sclerosis patients also required more physiotherapy (five weeks vs three weeks, p = 0.002) and took longer to return to baseline (seven weeks vs five weeks, p = 0.010) than the matched cohort. Furthermore, MS patients had more complications than the non-MS patients (six vs zero, p < 0.001). The worse outcomes of the MS group can potentially be explained by predisposition of these patients to mechanical complications and progression of their disease during the period of this study, as demonstrated by worsening of the mMSIS scores (2.9 vs 3.4; p = 0.008). Conclusion: MS patients had lower implant survivorship, lower functional outcome scores, and increased complication rates; in addition, MS patients took longer to return to their baseline functional level after THA. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2018;100-B:875-81.

Serum biomarkers in periprosthetic joint infections.

OBJECTIVES: The diagnosis of periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) is difficult and requires a battery of tests and clinical findings. The purpose of this review is to summarize all current evidence for common and new serum biomarkers utilized in the diagnosis of PJI. METHODS: We searched two literature databases, using terms that encompass all hip and knee arthroplasty procedures, as well as PJI and statistical terms reflecting diagnostic parameters. The findings are summarized as a narrative review. RESULTS: Erythrocyte sedimentation rate (ESR) and C-reactive protein (CRP) were the two most commonly published serum biomarkers. Most evidence did not identify other serum biomarkers that are clearly superior to ESR and CRP. Other serum biomarkers have not demonstrated superior sensitivity and have failed to replace CRP and ESR as first-line screening tests. D-dimer appears to be a promising biomarker, but more research is necessary. Factors that influence serum biomarkers include temporal trends, stage of revision, and implant-related factors (metallosis). CONCLUSION: Our review helped to identify factors that can influence serum biomarkers' level changes; the recognition of such factors can help improve their diagnostic utility. As such, we cannot rely on ESR and CRP alone for the diagnosis of PJI prior to second-stage reimplantation, or in metal-on-metal or corrosion cases. The future of serum biomarkers will likely shift towards using genomics and proteomics to identify proteins transcribed via messenger RNA in response to infection and sepsis.Cite this article:Bone Joint Res 2018;7:85-93.