Simultaneous Periprosthetic Joint Infection and Infective Endocarditis: Prevalence, Risk Factors, and Clinical Presentation.

BACKGROUND: Infective endocarditis (IE) and periprosthetic joint infections (PJI) occur due to hematogenous bacterial spread, theoretically increasing the risk for concurrent infections. There is a scarcity of literature investigating this specific association. We aimed to assess the prevalence, comorbidities, and clinical presentation of patients who have simultaneous PJI and IE. METHODS: We retrospectively identified 655 patients (321 men, 334 women; 382 total hip arthroplasty, 273 total knee arthroplasty) who developed a PJI from July 1, 2015, to December 31, 2020, at one institution. There were two groups created: patients diagnosed with PJI with IE (PJI + IE) and PJI patients who did not have IE (PJI). We analyzed clinical outcomes and comorbidities. RESULTS: There were nine patients who had PJI with IE (1.4% of PJI patients). The C-reactive protein (170.9 versus 78, P = 0.026), Elixhauser comorbidity score (P = 0.002), length of hospital stay (LOS) (10.9 versus 5.7 days, P = 0.043), and the two-year post-discharge mortality rate (55.6 versus 9.0%, P = 0.0007) were significantly greater in the PJI+IE group. Comorbidities such as iron deficiency anemia (P = 0.03), coagulopathy (P = 0.02), complicated diabetes mellitus (P = 0.02), electrolyte disorders (P = 0.01), neurological disease (P = 0.004), paralysis (P = 0.04), renal failure (P = 0.0001), and valvular disease (P = 0.0008) occurred more frequently in the PJI + IE group. Modified Duke's criteria were met for possible or definite IE in 8 of the 9 patients (88.9%). CONCLUSION: Concurrent PJIs and IE, although rare, are a potentially devastating disease state with increased LOS and two-year mortality rates. This emphasizes the need for appropriate IE workups in patients who have a PJI. The modified Duke's criteria is effective in establishing a diagnosis for IE in this scenario.

Treatment of Hip and Knee Periprosthetic Joint Infection Requires Extensive Administrative Work.

BACKGROUND: Treatment of periprosthetic joint infections (PJIs) typically requires more resource utilization than primary total joint arthroplasty. This study quantifies the amount of time spent in the electronic medical record (EMR) for patients who have PJI requiring surgical intervention. METHODS: A retrospective analysis of EMR activity for 165 hip and knee PJIs was performed to capture work during the preoperative and postoperative time periods. Independent sample t tests were conducted to compare total time based on procedure, age, insurance, health literacy, sex, race, and ethnicity. RESULTS: The EMR work performed by the orthopaedic team was 338.4 minutes (min) (SD 130.3), with 119.4 minutes (SD 62.8) occurring preoperatively and 219.0 minutes (SD 112.9) postoperatively. Preoperatively, the surgeon's work accounted for 35.7 minutes (SD 25.4), mid-level providers 21.3 minutes (SD 15.9), nurses 38.6 minutes (SD 36.8), and office staff 32.7 minutes (SD 29.9). Infectious disease colleagues independently performed 158.9 minutes (SD 108.5) of postoperative work. Overall, PJI of the knees required more postoperative work. Secondary analysis revealed that patients who have hip PJI and a body mass index <30 and patients <65 years of age required more work when compared to the PJI of heavier and older individuals. There was no difference in total work based on insurance, health literacy, race, or ethnicity. CONCLUSIONS: Over 8 hours of administrative work is required for surgical management of PJI. Surgeons alone performed 451% more work for PJI during the preoperative period (7.9 versus 35.7 min) compared to primary total joint arthroplasty. In efforts to provide best care for our sickest patients, much work is required perioperatively. This work is necessary to consider when assigning value and physician reimbursement.

How Many Patients Qualify for Extended Oral Antibiotic Prophylaxis Infection Following Primary and Revision Hip and Knee Arthroplasties?

Extended oral antibiotic prophylaxis (EOAP) has been suggested to reduce rates of periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) postoperatively after total joint arthroplasty (TJA). The purpose of this multicenter study is to define how many TJA patients are considered high risk for developing PJI based on published EOAP criteria and determine whether this status is associated with socioeconomic or demographic factors. All primary and aseptic revision TJAs performed in 2019 at three academic medical centers were reviewed. High-risk status was defined based on prior published EOAP criteria. Area deprivation index (ADI) was calculated as a measure of socioeconomic status. Data were reported as means with standard deviation. Both overall and institutional differences were compared. Of the 2,511 patients (2,042 primary and 469 revision) in this cohort, 73.3% met criteria for high risk (primary: 72.9% [1,490] and revision: 74.6% [350]). Patient's race or age did not have a significant impact on risk designation; however, a larger proportion of high-risk patients were women (p = 0.002) and had higher Elixhauser scores (p < 0.001). The mean ADI for high-risk patients was higher (more disadvantaged) than for standard-risk patients (64.0 [20.8] vs. 59.4 [59.4]) (p < 0.001). Over 72% of primary and revision TJA patients at three medical centers met published criteria for EOAP. These patients were more often women, had more comorbidities, and lived in more disadvantaged areas. Our findings suggest that most patients qualify for EOAP, which may call for more stringent criteria on who would benefit extended antibiotic prophylaxis.

A Review of Periprosthetic Tibial Fractures: Diagnosis and Treatment.

Periprosthetic fracture occurring during or after total knee arthroplasty is a rare injury. Literature concerning periprosthetic tibial factures is sparse, and there is limited guidance for evidence-based management. This review aims to provide readers with an overview of the epidemiology, risk factors, and classification of these fractures. Management includes nonoperative treatment of nondisplaced fractures, fixation for those with stable implants, and revision for those with loose implants.