RESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) poses a significant challenge in total knee arthroplasty (TKA), with recurrence rates as high as 14-28%, leading to substantial morbidity and treatment costs. When conventional treatments fail, knee fusion and above-the-knee amputation (AKA) emerge as alternative options. Existing literature offers conflicting views on the efficacy and impact of knee fusion versus AKA with varied outcomes and limitations. METHODS: This retrospective national study spanning 2010-2022 investigates Knee Fusion and AKA as options for addressing Knee PJI. Utilizing PearlDiver Patient Records Database, procedural, and reimbursement data on over 100 million individuals from all the US was evaluated. Readmission rates, costs, and complications of the mentioned procedures were assessed using ICD-9 and ICD-10 codes within a 90-day period and one-year post-operation. Statistical analyses, including chi-square tests and regression models, were conducted using integrated R software. RESULTS: The study reveals a substantial escalation (p < 0.0001) in the proportion of patients opting for AKA compared to arthrodesis. While age as a demographic factor showed no significant difference, arthrodesis patients exhibited lower comorbidity scores (3.6 ± 2.9 vs. 4.6 ± 3.4, p < 0.001). Arthrodesis correlated with higher 90-day thromboembolism rates (9.2% vs. 7.3%, p < 0.001), blood transfusion requirements (23.2% vs. 14.4%, p < 0.001), and acute renal failure incidence (p = 0.008) but demonstrated lower rates of urinary tract infections (p = 0.047) and cerebrovascular accidents (p < 0.001). At 1 year, arthrodesis was associated with higher infection rates (38.7% vs. 36.4%, p < 0.001). Arthrodesis patients had significant increased 90-day and 1-year readmission rates and hospitalization costs ($12,732 vs. $18,826, p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: We found higher rates of 1-year thromboembolism, infection, acute renal failure, and readmission in the arthrodesis group. AKA patients had more sepsis and cerebrovascular accidents. A patient-centered conversation is best for persistent infections and failed revision TKA. Considering the patient's quality of life, goals, and health status, this discussion should cover each procedure's risks and complications.
RESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Total Joint Arthroplasties (TJAs) are becoming more popular, resulting in a growing economic burden due to potential postoperative complications, with periprosthetic joint infections (PJIs) playing a significant role. The effect of immunosuppression on PJI risk, particularly in cancer patients following chemotherapy, is unknown. The hypothesis of this study investigated whether chemotherapy increases PJI rates in patients who received post-arthroplasty chemotherapy within one year of surgery. METHODS: Data from the M161Ortho dataset of PearlDiver patient records database were utilized using ICD-9, ICD-10, and CPT codes. The cohort includes Total Knee Arthroplasty (TKA), Total Hip Arthroplasty (THA), and Total Shoulder Arthroplasty (TSA) patients who underwent post-arthroplasty chemotherapy within one year after surgery between 2010 and 2022. Patients in the matched control group did not receive post-arthroplasty chemotherapy. Pre-arthroplasty chemotherapy recipients, PJI, and post-op first year revisions were excluded. Analyses including the linear logistic regression were performed via R statistical software. RESULTS: Totally, 17,026 patients (8,558 TKAs, 6,707 THAs, and 1,761 TSAs) were included. At two (OR = 1.59, p = 0.034), three (OR = 1.57, p = 0.009), and four (OR = 1.40, p = 0.032) years for TKA, and two (OR = 2.27, p = 0.008), three (OR = 2.32, p < 0.001), and four (OR = 2.25, p0.001) years for THA, PJI rates were significantly higher in the chemotherapy group. TSA patients had a significant rise in PJI after four years (OR = 2.20, p = 0.031). CONCLUSIONS: This study reveals a possible relationship between postoperative chemotherapy and an increased incidence of PJI in patients with arthroplasty. Chemotherapy suppresses the immune system, rendering patients more vulnerable to infections. Additional research is required to confirm these findings.
RESUMEN
PURPOSE: The gold standard to decrease total joint arthroplasty (TJA) periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) is preoperative antibiotic prophylaxis. Despite substantial prevention efforts, rates of PJIs are increasing. While cefazolin is the drug of choice for preoperative prophylaxis, adjunctive vancomycin therapy has been used in methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) endemic areas. However, studies examining these combinations are lacking. Therefore, we sought to examine complications among vancomycin plus cefazolin and cefazolin-only recipients prior to primary TJA in a single institutional sample and specifically assessed: (1) microbiological aspects, including periprosthetic joint and surgical site infections, microbes cultured from the infection, and frequency of microbes cultured from nasal swab screening; (2) 30-day emergency department (ED) visits and re-admissions; as well as (3) associated risk factors for infection. METHODS: A total of 2,907 patients (1,437 receiving both cefazolin and vancomycin and 1,470 given cefazolin only) who underwent primary TJA between 1 January 2014 and 31 May 2021 were identified. SSI and PJI as well as rates of cultured microbes rates were obtained through one year, those with prior nasal swab screening and 30-day re-admission were identified. Subsequently, multiple regression analyses were performed to investigate potential independent risk factors for PJIs. RESULTS: There was no significant difference in the rates of SSI (P = 0.089) and PJI (P = 0.279) between the groups at one year after operation. Commonly identified organisms included Staphylococcus and Streptococcus species. The VC cohort did have a greater reduction of MRSA in the previously nasal swab-screened subset of patients. Multiple regression analyses demonstrated emergency as well as inpatient admissions as risk factors for PJI. CONCLUSIONS: Adjunctive vancomycin therapy offers increased protection against MRSA in previously screened individuals. However, those negative for MRSA screening do not require vancomycin and have similar protection to infection compared to recipients of cefazolin only in a high-powered single institution analysis in an MRSA endemic area.