Orthopedic Infectious Diseases Online Library

Your search

In authors or contributors
  • Over the last several decades, periprosthetic joint infection has been increasing in incidence and is occurring in more complex patients. While there have been advances in both surgical and medical treatment strategies, there remain important gaps in our understanding. Here, we share our current approaches to the diagnosis and management of periprosthetic joint infection, focusing on frequent clinical challenges and collaborative interdisciplinary care.

  • BACKGROUND: While periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) has a huge impact on patient function and health, only a few studies have investigated its impact on mortality. The purpose of this large-scale study was to (1) determine the rate and trends of in-hospital mortality for PJI and (2) compare the in-hospital mortality rate of patients with PJI and those undergoing revision arthroplasty for aseptic failure and patients undergoing other nonorthopedic major surgical procedures. METHODS: Data from the Nationwide Inpatient Sample from 2002 to 2010 were analyzed to determine the risk of in-hospital mortality for PJI patients compared with aseptic revision arthroplasty. The Elixhauser comorbidity index was used to obtain patient comorbidities. Multiple logistic regression analyses were used to examine whether PJI and other patient-related factors were associated with mortality. RESULTS: PJI was associated with an increased risk (odds ratio, 2.05; P < .0001) of in-hospital mortality (0.77%) compared with aseptic revisions (0.38%). The in-hospital mortality rate of revision total hip arthroplasties with PJI was higher than those for interventional coronary procedures (1.22%; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.20-1.24), cholecystectomy (1.13%; 95% CI, 1.11-1.15), kidney transplant (0.70%; 95% CI, 0.61-0.79), and carotid surgery (0.89%; 95% CI, 0.86-0.93). CONCLUSION: Patients undergoing treatment for PJI have a 2-fold increase in in-hospital mortality for each surgical admission compared to aseptic revisions. Considering that PJI cases often have multiple admissions and that this analysis is by surgical admission, the risk of mortality will accumulate for every additional surgery. Surgeons should be cognizant of the potentially fatal outcome of PJI and the importance of infection control to reduce the risk of mortality.

  • Aims The diagnosis of periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) can be difficult. All current diagnostic tests have problems with accuracy and interpretation of results. Many new tests have been proposed, but there is no consensus on the place of many of these in the diagnostic pathway. Previous attempts to develop a definition of PJI have not been universally accepted and there remains no reference standard definition. Methods This paper reports the outcome of a project developed by the European Bone and Joint Infection Society (EBJIS), and supported by the Musculoskeletal Infection Society (MSIS) and the European Society of Clinical Microbiology and Infectious Diseases (ESCMID) Study Group for Implant-Associated Infections (ESGIAI). It comprised a comprehensive review of the literature, open discussion with Society members and conference delegates, and an expert panel assessment of the results to produce the final guidance. Results This process evolved a three-level approach to the diagnostic continuum, resulting in a definition set and guidance, which EBJIS, MSIS, and ESGIAI have fully endorsed. Conclusion The definition presents a novel three-level approach to diagnosis, based on the most robust evidence, which will be useful to clinicians in daily practice. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2021;103-B(1):18–25.

  • Background Previous studies demonstrated the efficacy of a rifampicin-based regimen in the treatment of acute staphylococcal periprosthetic joint infections (PJIs) treated with surgical debridement. However, evidence is lacking to support the use of rifampicin in cases where the implant is exchanged during revision. Methods We included all consecutive cases of staphylococcal PJIs treated from January 2013 to December 2018 with revision surgery in this international, retrospective, multicenter observational cohort study. PJI was defined according to the European Bone and Joint Infection Society diagnostic criteria. A relapse or reinfection during follow-up, the need for antibiotic suppressive therapy, the need for implant removal, and PJI-related death were defined as clinical failure. Cases without reimplantation or with follow-up <12 months were excluded. Results A total of 375 cases were included in the final analysis, including 124 1-stage exchanges (33.1%) and 251 2-stage exchanges (66.9%). Of those, 101 cases failed (26.9%). There was no statistically significant difference in failure of patients receiving rifampicin (22.5%, 42/187) and those not receiving rifampicin (31.4%, 59/188; P = .051). A subanalysis of chronic PJIs treated by 2-stage exchange arthroplasty demonstrated a lower failure rate in cases treated with rifampicin (15%) compared with the no-rifampicin group (35.5%; P = .005). In this subgroup, the use of rifampicin and an antibiotic holiday of >2 weeks were independent predictors of clinical success (odds ratio [OR], 0.36; 95% CI, 0.15–0.88; and OR, 0.19; 95% CI, 0.04–0.90; respectively). Conclusions Combination treatment with rifampicin increases treatment success in patients with chronic staphylococcal PJI treated with 2-stage exchange arthroplasty.

Last update from database: 11/10/24, 4:26 PM (UTC)