Risk of Periprosthetic Joint Infection in Patients With Multiple Arthroplasties

Periprosthetic Hip and Knee Infection: Is an Ipsilateral Uninfected Total Joint Arthroplasty at Risk?

BACKGROUND

Periprosthetic joint infections (PJIs) of total hip arthroplasty (THA) or total knee arthroplasty (TKA) may occur in the setting of an uninfected ipsilateral prosthetic joint. However, the risk to that uninfected ipsilateral joint is unknown. We analyzed the survivorship free from PJI in at risk THAs and TKAs following treatment of an ipsilateral knee or hip PJI, respectively.

METHODS

Using our institutional total joint registry, we identified 205 patients who underwent treatment for PJI (123 THAs and 83 TKAs) with an at-risk ipsilateral in situ knee or hip, respectively, between 2000 and 2019. In total, 54% of index PJIs were chronic and 46% were acute. The mean age was 70 years, 47% were female, and the mean body mass index was 32. Kaplan-Meier survivorship analyses were performed. Mean follow-up was 6 years.

RESULTS

The 5-year survivorship free of PJI in an at-risk THA after an ipsilateral TKA was treated for PJI was 97%. The 5-year survivorship free of PJI in an at-risk TKA when the ipsilateral THA was treated for PJI was 99%. Three PJIs occurred (2 THAs and 1 TKA), all over 1 year from the index ipsilateral PJI treatment. One hip PJI was an acute hematogenous infection that resulted from pneumonia. The other 2 new PJIs were caused by the same organism as the index PJI and were due to a failure of source control at the index joint.

CONCLUSIONS

When diagnosed with PJI in a single joint, the risk of developing PJI in an ipsilateral prosthetic joint within 5 years was low (1 to 3% risk). In the rare event of an ipsilateral infection, all occurred greater than one year from the index PJI and 2 of 3 were with the same organism when source infection control failed.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Prognostic Level III.

Risk of Periprosthetic Joint Infection in Patients With Ipsilateral Infected Arthroplasties

Background

The risk of periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) subsequently developing at a second site after an initial PJI has been documented to be approximately 18%-20%. To the best of our knowledge, only a single study has evaluated the incidence in ipsilateral joints and if the risk of infection would be different. While this was the only other study to evaluate this specific subfield, we set to re-evaluate and confirm the incidence of developing a second PJI in the setting of an ipsilateral prosthesis and possible associated risk factors.

Methods

We retrospectively reviewed all patients treated surgically for lower-extremity PJI at our institution by 5 surgeons from 2015 to 2021. Patients with multiple arthroplasties on the ipsilateral extremity were included. Time between initial and subsequent infection, risk factors for infection, bacterial source, and bacteremia were identified.

Results

Of 392 patients treated for PJI, 179 (45.6%) had multiple prosthetic joints. Forty-seven of those 179 patients had ipsilateral extremity prosthesis, which made up our study population. Three patients (6.4%) developed a separate infection at an ipsilateral TJA. In total, 10 patients (21.3%) developed a separate PJI. Patients on immunosuppressants had a higher likelihood of developing second PJI on the ipsilateral extremity (P = .02).

Conclusions

Our study identified the risk of developing an ipsilateral PJI to not be any greater than that in patients with contralateral TJAs. It appears that sharing an extremity with an infected TJA does not pose substantially increased risk of subsequent infection of the un-involved prosthesis. Furthermore, immunosuppressant use may increase the risk of a separate ipsilateral PJI.

Periprosthetic Infection in Patients With Multiple Joint Arthroplasties

The number of total joint arthroplasties performed in the United States is increasing every year. Owing to the aging population and excellent long-term prosthesis survival, 45% of patients who undergo joint arthroplasty will receive two or more joint arthroplasties during their lifetimes. Periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) is among the most common complications after arthroplasty. Evaluation and treatment of PJI in patients with multiple joint arthroplasties is challenging, and no consensus exists for the optimal management. Multiple PJI can occur simultaneously, synchronous, or separated by extended time, metachronous. Patient risk factors for both scenarios have been reported and may guide evaluation and long-term management. Whether to perform joint aspiration for asymptomatic prosthesis in the presence of suspected PJI in patients with multiple joint arthroplasties is controversial. Furthermore, no consensus exists regarding whether patients who have multiple joint arthroplasties and develop PJI in a single joint should be considered for prolonged antibiotic prophylaxis to reduce the risk of future infections. Finally, the optimal treatment of synchronous joint infections whether by débridement, antibiotics and implant retention, and one-stage or two-stage revision has not been defined. This review will summarize the best information available and provide pragmatic management strategies.

Single, Recurrent, Synchronous, and Metachronous Periprosthetic Joint Infections in Patients With Multiple Hip and Knee Arthroplasties

BACKGROUND

The rate for periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) exceeds 1% for primary arthroplasties. Over 30% of patients who have a primary arthroplasty require an additional arthroplasty, and the impact of PJI on this population is understudied. Our objective was to assess the prevalence of recurrent, synchronous, and metachronous PJI in patients who had multiple arthroplasties and to identify risk factors for a subsequent PJI.

METHODS

We identified 337 patients who had multiple arthroplasties and at least 1 PJI that presented between 2003 and 2021. The mean follow-up after revision arthroplasty was 3 years (range, 0 to 17.2). Patients who had multiple infected prostheses were categorized as synchronous (ie, presenting at the same time as the initial infection) or metachronous (ie, presenting at a different time as the initial infection). The PJI diagnosis was made using the MusculoSkeletal Infection Society (MSIS) criteria.

RESULTS

There were 39 (12%) patients who experienced recurrent PJI in the same joint, while 31 (9%) patients developed PJI in another joint. Positive blood cultures were more likely in the second joint PJI (48%) compared to recurrent PJI (23%) or a single PJI (15%, P < .001). Synchronous PJI represented 42% of the second joint PJI cases (n = 13), while metachronous PJI represented 58% (n = 18). Tobacco users had 75% higher odds of metachronous PJI (odds ratio 1.75, 95% confidence interval: 1.1-2.9, P = .041).

CONCLUSION

Over 20% of the patients with multiple arthroplasties and a single PJI will develop a subsequent PJI in another arthroplasty with 12% recurring in the initial arthroplasty and nearly 10% ocurring in another arthroplasty. Particular caution should be taken in patients who use tobacco, have bacteremia, or have Staphylococcus aureus isolation at time of their initial PJI. Optimizing the management of this high-risk patient population is necessary to reduce the additional burden of subsequent PJI.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Prognostic Level IV.

What is the Safe Distance Between Hip and Knee Implants to Reduce the Risk of Ipsilateral Metachronous Periprosthetic Joint Infection?

BACKGROUND

Periprosthetic joint infection (PJI), the most common cause of revision after TKA and THA, is a devastating complication for patients that is difficult to diagnose and treat. An increase in the number of patients with multiple joint arthroplasties in the same extremity will result in an increased risk of ipsilateral PJI. However, there is no definition of risk factors, micro-organism patterns, and safe distance between knee and hip implants for this patient group.

QUESTIONS/PURPOSES

(1) In patients with hip and knee arthroplasties on the same side who experience a PJI of one implant, are there factors associated with the development of subsequent PJI of the other implant? (2) In this patient group, how often is the same organism responsible for both PJIs? (3) Is a shorter distance from an infected prosthetic joint to an ipsilateral prosthetic joint associated with greater odds of subsequent infection of the second joint?

METHODS

We designed a retrospective study of a longitudinally maintained institutional database that identified all one-stage and two-stage procedures performed for chronic PJI of the hip and knee at our tertiary referral arthroplasty center between January 2010 and December 2018 (n = 2352). Of these patients, 6.8% (161 of 2352) had an ipsilateral hip or knee implant in situ at the time of receiving surgical treatment for a PJI of the hip or knee. The following criteria led to the exclusion of 39% (63 of 161) of these patients: 4.3% (seven of 161) for incomplete documentation, 30% (48 of 161) for unavailability of full-leg radiographs, and 5% (eight of 161) for synchronous infection. With regard to the latter, per internal protocol, all artificial joints were aspirated before septic surgery, allowing us to differentiate between synchronous and metachronous infection. The remaining 98 patients were included in the final analysis. Twenty patients experienced ipsilateral metachronous PJI during the study period (Group 1) and 78 patients did not experience a same-side PJI (Group 2). We analyzed the microbiological characteristics of bacteria during the first PJI and ipsilateral metachronous PJI. Calibrated, full-length plain radiographs were evaluated. Receiver operating characteristic curves were analyzed to determine the optimal cutoff for the stem-to-stem and empty native bone distance. The mean time between the initial PJI and ipsilateral metachronous PJI was 8 ± 14 months. Patients were followed for a minimum of 24 months for any complications.

RESULTS

The risk of ipsilateral metachronous PJI in the other joint secondary to a joint implant in which PJI develops can increase up to 20% in the first 2 years after the procedure. There was no difference between the two groups in age, sex, initial joint replacement (knee or hip), and BMI. However, patients in the ipsilateral metachronous PJI group were shorter and had a lower weight (1.6 ± 0.1 m and 76 ± 16 kg). An analysis of the microbiological characteristics of bacteria at the time of the initial PJI showed no differences in the proportions of difficult-to-treat, high virulence, and polymicrobial infections between the two groups (20% [20 of 98] versus 80% [78 of 98]). Our findings showed that the ipsilateral metachronous PJI group had a shorter stem-to-stem distance, shorter empty native bone distance, and a higher risk of cement restrictor failure (p < 0.01) than the 78 patients who did not experience ipsilateral metachronous PJI during the study period. An analysis of the receiver operating characteristic curve showed a cutoff of 7 cm for the empty native bone distance (p < 0.01), with a sensitivity of 72% and a specificity of 75%.

CONCLUSION

The risk of ipsilateral metachronous PJI in patients with multiple joint arthroplasties is associated with shorter stature and stem-to-stem distance. Appropriate position of the cement restrictor and native bone distance are important in reducing the risk of ipsilateral metachronous PJI in these patients. Future studies might evaluate the risk of ipsilateral metachronous PJI owing to bone adjacency.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level III, therapeutic study.

Periprosthetic joint infection in patients with multiple arthroplasties

Despite numerous studies focusing on periprosthetic joint infections (PJIs), there are no robust data on the risk factors and timing of metachronous infections. Metachronous PJIs are PJIs that can arise in the same or other artificial joints after a period of time, in patients who have previously had PJI. Between January 2010 and December 2018, 661 patients with multiple joint prostheses in situ were treated for PJI at our institution. Of these, 73 patients (11%) developed a metachronous PJI (periprosthetic infection in patients who have previously had PJI in another joint, after a lag period) after a mean time interval of 49.5 months (SD 30.24; 7 to 82.9). To identify patient-related risk factors for a metachronous PJI, the following parameters were analyzed: sex; age; BMI; and pre-existing comorbidity. Metachronous infections were divided into three groups: Group 1, metachronous infections in ipsilateral joints; Group 2, metachronous infections of the contralateral lower limb; and Group 3, metachronous infections of the lower and upper limb. We identified a total of 73 metachronous PJIs: 32 PJIs in Group 1, 38 in Group 2, and one in Group 3. The rate of metachronous infection was 11% (73 out 661 cases) at a mean of four years following first infection. Diabetes mellitus incidence was found significantly more frequently in the metachronous infection group than in non-metachronous infection group. The rate of infection in Group 1 (21.1%) was significantly higher (p = 0.049) compared to Groups 2 (6.2%) and 3 (3%). The time interval of metachronous infection development was shorter in adjacent joint infections. Concordance between the bacterium of the first PJI and that of the metachronous PJI in Group 1 (21/34) was significantly higher than Group 2 (13/38; p = 0.001). The findings of this study suggest that metachronous PJI occurs in more than one in ten patients with an index PJI. Female patients, diabetic patients, and patients with a polymicrobial index PJI are at significantly higher risk for developing a metachronous PJI. Furthermore, metachronous PJIs are significantly more likely to occur in an adjacent joint (e.g. ipsilateral hip and knee) as opposed to a more remote site (i.e. contralateral or upper vs lower limb). Additionally, adjacent joint PJIs occur significantly earlier and are more likely to be caused by the same bacteria as the index PJI.

Prosthetic Knee Joint Infection Due to Candida lusitaniae: A Diagnostic and Therapeutic Odyssey: A Case Study

Prosthetic joint infections (PJIs) caused by fungi, although relatively rare, represent a major surgery-related complication. An extremely rare fungal PJI, following revised total knee replacement (TKR) caused by Candida lusitaniae, is reported, and a meticulous review of similar cases is provided. A 74-year-old female, who underwent primary total knee arthroplasty 10 years ago and a revision surgery three weeks ago, presented with signs and symptoms of PJI. C. lusitaniae was eventually isolated from the periprosthetic tissue using the MALDI-TOF VitekMS–bioMérieux technique. Multiple strategies for managing this fungal PJI were performed, and finally, the patient was treated successfully with an intramedullary arthrodesis system and proper antifungal treatment, including fluconazole. A multidisciplinary approach is essential for the diagnosis and treatment of such severe infections. In persistent cases and in cases where revision surgery is extremely difficult to perform, arthrodesis seems to be an effective solution for the elimination of the infection. The efficacy of the therapeutic management of fungal PJIs remains unclear. Therefore, more research should be reported, focusing on proper treatment so that the optimal strategy in treating these severe infections may be established.

Synchronous Periprosthetic Joint Infections: A Scoping Review of the Literature

Prosthetic joint infections (PJIs) occurring in multiple joints at the same time (synchronous PJI) are an extremely rare complication, frequently associated with bacteremia, and are associated with high mortality rates. The presence of three or more prosthetic joints, rheumatoid arthritis, neoplasia, bacteremia and immune-modulating therapy seem to be the recurring risk factors for synchronous PJI. In case of PJIs, all other replaced joints should be considered as potentially infected and investigated if PJI is suspected. Treatments of synchronous multiple PJIs vary and must be decided on a case-by-case basis. However, the advantages of one-stage exchange seem to outweigh the two-stage protocol, as it decreases the number of necessary surgical procedures. Nonetheless, too few studies have been conducted to allow firm conclusions about the best handling of synchronous PJI. Thus, additional studies are needed to understand this devastating complication and to design the most appropriate diagnostic and therapeutic path.

Synchronous Periprosthetic Joint Infections: High Mortality, Reinfection, and Reoperation

BACKGROUND

Synchronous periprosthetic joint infections (PJIs) are a catastrophic complication with potentially high mortality. We aimed to report mortality, risk of reinfection, revision, reoperation, and implant survivorship after synchronous PJIs.

METHODS

We identified 34 patients treated for PJI in more than one joint within a single 90-day period from 1990 to 2018. PJIs involved bilateral knee arthroplasty (27), bilateral hip arthroplasty (4), 1 knee arthroplasty and 1 elbow arthroplasty (1), 1 knee arthroplasty and 1 shoulder arthroplasty (1), and bilateral hip and knee arthroplasty (1). Irrigation and debridement with component retention was performed in 23 patients, implant resection in 10 patients, and a combination of irrigation and debridement with component retention and implant resection in 1 patient. A competing risk model was used to analyze implant survivorship, and Kaplan-Meier survival was used for patient mortality. Mean follow-up was 6 years.

RESULTS

Mortality was high at 18% at 30 days and 27% at 1 year. The 1-year cumulative incidence of any reinfection was 13% and 27% at 5 years. The 1-year cumulative incidence of any revision or implant removal was 6% and 20% at 5 years. The 1-year cumulative incidence of unplanned reoperation was 25% and 35% at 5 years. Rheumatoid arthritis was associated with increased risk of mortality (HR 7, P < .01), as was liver disease (HR 4, P = .02).

CONCLUSION

In the largest series to date, patients with synchronous PJIs had a high 30-day mortality rate of 18%, and one-fourth underwent unplanned reoperation within the first year.

Low Reinfection Rates But a High Rate of Complications in THA for Infection Sequelae in Childhood: A Systematic Review

BACKGROUND

Childhood hip infections can result in serious sequelae during adulthood, including persistent pain, functional limitations, and premature THA. When THA is performed in patients who had hip joint infections during childhood, surgeons surmise these arthroplasties are at an increased risk of complications and incomplete recovery. However, the degree to which this is true is not well characterized and has varied across a large number of small, retrospective studies.

QUESTIONS/PURPOSES

(1) What proportion of THAs performed in patients who had pediatric septic arthritis result in periprosthetic joint infection? (2) What are the Harris hip scores associated with these reconstructions? (3) What proportion of these patients develop complications after THA? (4) What proportion of patients undergo revision after these THAs?

METHODS

For this systematic review, we searched the MEDLINE (PubMed), Scopus, and CINAHL (EbscoHost) electronic databases. We evaluated studies published in English between 1980 and 2020 that had a minimum of 10 patients (with a minimum of 2 years of follow-up) in whom sequelae of septic arthritis of the hip were treated with single-stage THA. We also evaluated studies reporting clinical outcomes by means of the Harris hip score, along with a radiographic assessment of the prosthesis. Updates of previous studies using the same database, case reports, surgical technique reports, systematic reviews, and expert opinions were excluded. No restrictions were applied regarding study design and loss to follow-up. A total of 430 studies were identified through the initial search, and 11 studies were included after applying the inclusion and exclusion criteria. All but two studies, which included a historical control group, were retrospective case series. A total of 691 patients with a mean age of 45 years were involved. A total of 599 patients underwent cementless THAs, 84 patients underwent hybrid THA (cemented stems), and the remaining eight patients received a cemented THA. A total of 287 additional procedures were performed on the acetabulum, including autografting, allografting, and medial wall osteotomies; in three hips, tantalum augments were used. Three hundred thirty-five additional procedures were performed on the femora, including 223 shortening osteotomies and 112 greater trochanter osteotomies. The mean follow-up duration ranged from 5.5 to 15.2 years (minimum follow-up range 2-13 years). To assess the quality of the studies, we used the Methodological Index for Non-randomized Studies and the Assessment of Quality in Lower-limb Arthroplasty, for which a higher score represents a better study quality. The mean Methodological Index for Non-randomized Studies score for case series was 9 of 16 (range 6-12), and 19 and 18 of 24 for the two comparative studies. The mean reporting quality of the Assessment of Quality in Lower Limb Arthroplasty score was 6 of 8 (range 3-8).

RESULTS

Because of loss to follow-up, which was not consistently reported in the source studies, we caution the reader that the estimates provided here likely underestimate the risks of adverse events and overestimate the mean hip scores. The pooled proportion of patients in whom infections developed was 1% (seven of 691 THAs). Considering only studies published in the past 10 years, the proportion was 0.7% (two of 276 THAs). The Harris hip score increased from a mean of 52 ± 6 points before THA to a mean of 88 ± 2 points after THA. The pooled proportion of complications, including sciatic nerve palsy, femoral nerve palsy, intraoperative periprosthetic fracture, deep venous thrombosis, and dislocation, was 11% (76 complications among 691 THAs). The pooled proportion of patients who underwent revision was 8% (53 revisions of any components for any reason among 691 THAs) at a mean follow-up interval of 9.1 ± 3 years.

CONCLUSION

In THAs for sequelae of childhood septic arthritis, reinfections were uncommon, whereas generally, infection rates were slightly higher than those reported for conventional primary THAs. However, the duration of follow-up might have been insufficient to identify all patients in whom infections later developed, and the available data were not adequate to precisely detect the minimum quiescent period to avoid reinfections. Moreover, the studies in this systematic review were retrospective, and selection bias, transfer bias, and assessment bias likely influenced our findings. The general effect of these biases is to cause an underestimation of the harms of the intervention. Complications, especially intraoperative fracture and nerve palsy, were common in patients with the most-severe infections. Further data on this topic are needed, ideally from multicenter or registry studies with even longer follow-up durations.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level IV, therapeutic study.

Periprosthetic Joint Infection in Patients Who Have Multiple Prostheses in Place: What Should Be Done with the Silent Prosthetic Joints

BACKGROUND

Although periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) can affect multiple joints concurrently, the majority of patients with multiple prosthetic joints present with PJI of a single joint. Data regarding the optimal management of these patients are limited. We aimed to identify the prevalence, risk factors for a subsequent PJI, and clinical circumstances of PJI in patients with multiple prosthetic joints.

METHODS

We retrospectively reviewed the clinical records of 197 patients with ≥2 total joint prostheses in place who presented with PJI from 2000 to 2017. The average follow-up was 3.6 years (range, 0.5 to 17 years). Demographic data and risk factors for synchronous or metachronous PJI were identified. The time from the initial to the second PJI and organism profile data were collected as well. The workup for other joints with a prosthesis in place at the time of the initial PJI was noted.

RESULTS

Among the 197 patients with PJI and multiple joint prostheses in situ, 37 (19%) developed PJI in another joint; 11 had a synchronous PJI and 26 had a metachronous PJI. The average time between the first and the second infection in the metachronous cases was 848 days (range, 20 to 3,656 days). Females and patients with an initial PJI with methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) were more likely to have a metachronous PJI, and patients with rheumatoid arthritis had an increased risk of a second (metachronous or synchronous) PJI. Three of 11 patients in the synchronous group and 19% (5) of the 26 in the metachronous group had bacteremia at the time of the initial PJI compared with 12% (19) of the 160 with a single PJI. The percentage of negative cultures increased from 10% for the initial PJIs to 38% for the metachronous PJIs.

CONCLUSIONS

Patients who have multiple prosthetic joints in place and present with PJI of a single joint are at risk of developing PJI in another joint. Female sex, rheumatoid arthritis, bacteremia at presentation, and infection with MRSA appear to be risk factors for PJI of another joint. Clinical evaluation of the other prosthetic joint(s) should be carried out in all patients and aspiration of those joint(s) should be considered for patients with any of the above risk factors.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Prognostic Level IV. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

Risk factors of uncontrolled periprosthetic knee joint infection after two-stage reimplantation

BACKGROUND

Periprosthetic infection after total knee arthroplasty is a challenging problem, and physicians should identify risk factors to decrease recurrence. However, risk factors for reinfection with two-stage reimplantation have not yet been well established. The purpose of this study was to assess treatment outcomes of subsequent two-stage knee reimplantation and identify risk factors for uncontrolled periprosthetic knee joint infections.

METHODS

We retrospectively reviewed 70 knees diagnosed with a periprosthetic knee joint infection treated with two-stage reimplantation between September 2011 and October 2016 at our institution. Patients in the controlled infection group (group C) required no further medication or surgical treatment within 2 years after reimplantation. Patients in the uncontrolled infection group (group U) displayed symptoms of active infection after resection arthroplasty or were reinfected after two-stage reimplantation. We compared group C and group U, and analyzed potential risk factors for uncontrolled prosthetic joint infection (PJI).

RESULTS

Of 70 knees included in this analysis, 53 (75.7%) were clinically deemed free from infection at the latest follow-up. The remaining 17 knees (24.3%) required additional surgical procedures after two-stage reimplantation. Demographics were not statistically significantly different between the two groups. Wound complications were statistically more frequent in group U (p = 0.030). Pre-reimplantation C-reactive protein (CRP) was statistically different between groups C and U (0.44 and 1.70, respectively, p = 0.025). Among the cultured microorganisms, fungus species were statistically more frequently detected in group U compared with group C (p = 0.031).

CONCLUSIONS

The reinfection rate of our two-stage reimplantation protocol was 24.3% in the included cases. Wound complications, higher pre-reimplantation CRP levels, and fungus species were statistically more common in group U compared with group C. Our findings will help in counseling patients and physicians to understand that additional caution may be required when treating PJI if the aforementioned risk factors are present.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

IV, case series.

Synchronous Periprosthetic Joint Infections: The Need for All Artificial Joints to Be Aspirated Routinely

BACKGROUND

Periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) is a severe complication with increasing incidence. However, we are not aware of any robust data on patients having PJI at the same time in ≥2 joints that had undergone total joint arthroplasty, referred to as synchronous PJI throughout this article. The aims of this study were to investigate the probability of the development of synchronous PJI of another prosthetic joint and to identify possible clinical risk factors for the development of synchronous PJI. In addition, we aimed to determine whether routine aspiration of all other prosthetic joints was warranted after a diagnosis of PJI in a single joint.

METHODS

A total of 2,532 septic revision procedures were performed during the study period. In the final analysis, 644 patients (26 with synchronous PJI and 618 with non-synchronous PJI) with 1,508 prosthetic joints were included. The mean age (and standard deviation) was 71 ± 9.6 years. Using bivariate analyses, we calculated the odds of synchronous PJI as a function of various demographic and clinical variables.

RESULTS

A suspicious clinical presentation of the non-primary joint had the strongest association with synchronous PJI (odds ratio [OR], 58.5 [95% confidence interval (CI), 22.4 to 152.8]). Additional associations with synchronous PJI were detected for a history of neoplasia (OR, 12 [95% CI, 3.9 to 37.2]), the use of immune-modulating therapy (OR, 9.5 [95% CI, 3.4 to 26.2]), the presence of systemic inflammatory response syndrome or sepsis (OR, 8.4 [95% CI, 2.8 to 25]), and having ≥3 prosthetic joints (OR, 3.0 [95% CI, 1.37 to 6.64]).

CONCLUSIONS

Synchronous PJI is a rare but very serious complication and every prosthetic joint should be investigated meticulously. Suspicious clinical presentation, a history of neoplasia, sepsis, immune-modulating therapy, and ≥3 prosthetic joints were identified as risk factors and should increase the physician's vigilance. In the case of PJI, aspiration of each joint that had undergone total joint arthroplasty should be considered.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Prognostic Level III. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

Three Concurrent Periprosthetic Joint Infections: A Case Report and Literature Review

Periprosthetic joint infections are a major cause of morbidity and mortality following total joint arthroplasty. Two-stage arthroplasty, with the use of an antibiotic cement spacer, is an effective means of managing periperiprosthetic joint infections. There is a lack of data relating to the management, prognosis, and clinical outcomes associated with multiple peri-prosthetic joint infections. Here, we present a case report of a patient successfully treated for three synchronic peri-prosthetic joint infections of both knees and a single hip.

Malnutrition and the Development of Periprosthetic Joint Infection in Patients Undergoing Primary Elective Total Joint Arthroplasty

BACKGROUND

Although an abundance of literature exists linking malnutrition with infectious complications in surgical patients, there is little specifically examining the link between malnutrition and periprosthetic joint infection (PJI). This study evaluated the relationship between abnormal nutritional parameters and development of PJI in patients undergoing primary total joint arthroplasty (TJA).

METHODS

We retrospectively reviewed TJA patients from 2000 to 2016 with preoperative nutritional screening at a single institution. Any development of PJI at 2 years was assessed as the primary outcome. The Musculoskeletal Infection society criteria were used to define PJI. The association between the aforementioned nutritional markers and PJI was evaluated in a bivariate analysis followed by multivariate logistic regression. Performance for markers was assessed using receiver operator characteristic curves. Sensitivity and specificity were also compared.

RESULTS

Multivariate analysis demonstrated that low albumin (adjusted odds ratio [OR], 4.69; 95% confidence interval [CI], 2.428-9.085; P < .001) and low hemoglobin (adjusted OR, 2.718; 95% CI, 1.100-2.718; P = .018) were significantly associated with PJI. Albumin had the highest specificity and (95% CI, 97.8%-98.4%) and positive predictive value compared to all other markers. Platelet-to-white blood cell ratio had the highest sensitivity (95% CI, 29.5%-40.3%). The area under the curve was greatest for albumin (0.61; 95% CI, 0.55-0.67) followed by hemoglobin (0.57; 95% CI, 0.51-0.63), platelets (0.56; 95% CI, 0.50-0.62), and platelet-to-white blood cell ratio (0.54; 95% CI, 0.49-0.60).

CONCLUSION

The most valuable predictor of PJI following primary TJA, among nutritional parameters examined, was preoperative albumin with a very high specificity and positive predictive value.