Lower Rates of Reoperation Following Partial or Complete Revision Arthroplasty Compared to Debridement, Antibiotics, and Implant Retention for Early Postoperative and Acute Hematogenous Periprosthetic Hip Infection.

BACKGROUND: This study aimed to: 1) compare treatment outcomes between debridement, antibiotics, and implant retention (DAIR) and partial or complete revision arthroplasty (RA) for early postoperative and acute hematogenous total hip arthroplasty periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) and 2) identify factors associated with treatment outcome. METHODS: The study consisted of a retrospective cohort of patients who underwent surgery for PJI between 2004 and 2021. There were 76 patients (74.5%) who underwent DAIR and 26 patients (25.5%) who underwent RA. Treatment success was defined as treatment eradication at a minimum of a 2-year follow up. Bivariate regression analysis was used to assess the effect of different factors on treatment outcomes. Kaplan-Meier survivorship was performed to compare survivorship between cohorts. RESULTS: At a mean follow-up of 8.2 years (range, 2.2 to 16.4), significantly more DAIR failed treatment (DAIR, 50 [65.8%]; 10 [38.5%]; P = .015). The 8-year Kaplan-Meier survivorship was 35.1% [95% confidence interval (CI), 24.3 to 45.9] for patients treated with DAIR and 61.5% [95% CI, 42.9 to 80.1] for those treated with RA (log rank = 0.039). Bivariate regression analysis showed performing a RA was associated with a higher likelihood of treatment success (odds ratio 4.499, 95% CI 1.600 to 12.647, P = .004), whereas a higher body mass index was associated with treatment failure (odds ratio 0.934, 95% CI 0.878 to 0.994, P = .032). CONCLUSIONS: To reduce the rate of recalcitrant infection following early postoperative or acute hematogenous total hip arthroplasty PJI, RA may be of benefit over DAIR. This is especially relevant in the early postoperative period, when components can be readily exchanged.

Fellowship Training in Arthroplasty Improves Treatment Success of Debridement, Antibiotics, and Implant Retention for Periprosthetic Knee Infections.

Background: Debridement, antibiotics, and implant retention (DAIR) is a well-accepted surgical strategy for periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) following total knee arthroplasty (TKA). DAIR in TKA may be incorrectly thought of as a "simple" procedure not requiring formal specialized training in arthroplasty. Currently, there are no studies comparing the risk of treatment failure based on surgeon fellowship training. Methods: A retrospective review was performed of consecutive patients who underwent DAIR for TKA PJI at our institution. Two cohorts were created based on whether DAIR was performed by an arthroplasty fellowship-trained (FT) surgeon or nonarthroplasty fellowship-trained (NoFT) surgeon. Primary outcome was treatment failure following DAIR at a minimum of 1 year postoperatively. Treatment failure was based on the Tier 1 International Consensus Meeting definition of infection control. Secondary outcomes were also recorded including death during the totality of PJI treatment. Results: A total of 112 patients were identified (FT = 68, NoFT = 44). At a mean follow-up of 7.3 years [standard deviation = 3.9], 73 patients (59.8%) failed treatment. Fellowship training in arthroplasty significantly improved treatment success rates (FT, 35/68 [51.5%]; NoFT, 10/44 [22.7%]; odds ratio 2.5 [95% confidence interval 1.1 to 5.9; P = .002]). Survivorship also differed significantly between the cohorts; at timepoints of 1.5 months, 5 months, 30 months, and 180 months, survivorship of the FT cohort was 79.4%, 67.6%, 54.4%, and 50.7%, respectively, compared with a survivorship of 65.9%, 52.3%, 25%, and 22.7% in the NoFT cohort (P = .002). Conclusions: TKA PJI treated with DAIR should not be considered a simple procedure. Improved treatment success may be associated with subspecialty fellowship training in arthroplasty. Level of Evidence: IV.

Periprosthetic joint infection following hip hemiarthroplasty : factors associated with infection and treatment outcome.

AIMS: The aims of this study were to determine the incidence and factors for developing periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) following hemiarthroplasty (HA) for hip fracture, and to evaluate treatment outcome and identify factors associated with treatment outcome. METHODS: A retrospective review was performed of consecutive patients treated for HA PJI at a tertiary referral centre with a mean 4.5 years' follow-up (1.6 weeks to 12.9 years). Surgeries performed included debridement, antibiotics, and implant retention (DAIR) and single-stage revision. The effect of different factors on developing infection and treatment outcome was determined. RESULTS: A total of 1,984 HAs were performed during the study period, and 44 sustained a PJI (2.2%). Multiple logistic regression analysis revealed that a higher CCI score (odds ratio (OR) 1.56 (95% confidence interval (CI) 1.117 to 2.187); p = 0.003), peripheral vascular disease (OR 11.34 (95% CI 1.897 to 67.810); p = 0.008), cerebrovascular disease (OR 65.32 (95% CI 22.783 to 187.278); p < 0.001), diabetes (OR 4.82 (95% CI 1.903 to 12.218); p < 0.001), moderate-to-severe renal disease (OR 5.84 (95% CI 1.116 to 30.589); p = 0.037), cancer without metastasis (OR 6.42 (95% CI 1.643 to 25.006); p = 0.007), and metastatic solid tumour (OR 15.64 (95% CI 1.499 to 163.087); p = 0.022) were associated with increasing PJI risk. Upon final follow-up, 17 patients (38.6%) failed initial treatment and required further surgery for HA PJI. One-year mortality was 22.7%. Factors associated with treatment outcome included lower preoperative Hgb level (97.9 g/l (SD 11.4) vs 107.0 g/l (SD 16.1); p = 0.009), elevated CRP level (99.1 mg/l (SD 63.4) vs 56.6 mg/l (SD 47.1); p = 0.030), and type of surgery. There was lower chance of success with DAIR (42.3%) compared to revision HA (66.7%) or revision with conversion to total hip arthroplasty (100%). Early-onset PJI (≤ six weeks) was associated with a higher likelihood of treatment failure (OR 3.5 (95% CI 1.2 to 10.6); p = 0.007) along with patients treated by a non-arthroplasty surgeon (OR 2.5 (95% CI 1.2 to 5.3); p = 0.014). CONCLUSION: HA PJI initially treated with DAIR is associated with poor chances of success and its value is limited. We strongly recommend consideration of a single-stage revision arthroplasty with cemented components.Cite this article: Bone Jt Open 2022;3(12):924-932.

Management of Periprosthetic Joint Infections After Hemiarthroplasty of the Hip: A Critical Analysis Review.

➢: Periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) following hip hemiarthroplasty (HA) is a devastating complication, incurring immense health-care costs associated with its treatment and placing considerable burden on patients and their families. These patients often require multiple surgical procedures, extended hospitalization, and prolonged antimicrobial therapy. ➢: Notable risk factors include older age, higher American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) score, inadequate antibiotic prophylaxis, non-antibiotic-loaded cementation of the femoral implant, longer duration of the surgical procedure, and postoperative drainage and hematoma. ➢: Although the most frequent infecting organisms are gram-positive cocci such as Staphylococcus aureus, there is a higher proportion of patients with gram-negative and polymicrobial infections after hip HA compared with patients who underwent total hip arthroplasty. ➢: Several surgical strategies exist. Regardless of the preferred surgical treatment, successful management of these infections requires a comprehensive surgical debridement focused on eradicating the biofilm followed by appropriate antibiotic therapy. ➢: A multidisciplinary approach led by surgeons familiar with PJI treatment and infectious disease specialists is recommended for all cases of PJI after hip HA to increase the likelihood of treatment success.