Effect of Antibiotic-Impregnated Bone Cement in Primary Total Knee Arthroplasty

Intrawound vancomycin powder in primary total knee arthroplasty: Does it reduce early postoperative infection?

BACKGROUND

The purpose of this retrospective analysis of a prospective quality control project was to determine whether the use of intrawound vancomycin powder (IVP) decreases the rate prosthetic joint infection (PJI) within 90-days following primary total knee arthroplasty (TKA).

METHODS

From October 2021-September 2022, a prospective quality control project was undertaken in which 10 high-volume arthroplasty surgeons alternated between using IVP and not using IVP each month. Patients who received IVP were compared to those who did not. The primary outcome was culture positive PJI within 90-days following primary total knee arthroplasty. Secondary outcomes included overall reoperation rate, wound complications, and readmission within 90-days post-operatively.

RESULTS

A total of 1,317 primary TKA patients were identified for analysis. Fifty-six and seven tenths percent (n = 747) of patients were included in the IVP group and 43.3% (n = 570) patients were included in the non-IVP group. The overall PJI rate was 0.5%. There was no difference in 90-day culture positive PJI rates between the groups (0.7% vs. 0.2%, p = 0.24). The overall reoperation rate did not differ between the IVP and non-IVP group (6.4% vs. 4.6%, p = 0.15). Reoperation for suspected infection was not statistically different by IVP administration (1.2% vs. 0.5%, p = 0.25). Additionally, there were no differences in the incidence of wound complications (p = 0.80) or readmissions (p = 0.15).

CONCLUSIONS

The overall infection rate for this cohort was low. IVP was not associated with decreased culture positive PJI, wound complications, reoperation or readmission rates. Further analysis of IVP use in TKA should be undertaken to fully determine its efficacy and safety profile.

Does the Addition of Low-Dose Antibiotics Compromise the Mechanical Properties of Polymethylmethacrylate (PMMA)?

The increasing numbers of total joint replacements and related implant-associated infections demand solutions, which can provide a high-dose local delivery of antibiotics. Antibiotic-loaded bone cement (ALBC) is an accepted treatment method for infected joint arthroplasties. The mechanical properties of low-dose gentamicin-loaded bone cement (BC) in medium- and high-viscosity versions were compared to unloaded BC using a vacuum mixing system. As an additional control group, manual mixed unloaded BC was used. In a uniaxial compression test, ultimate compressive strength, compressive yield strength, and compression modulus of elasticity, as well as ultimate and yield strain, were determined according to ISO 5833-2022 guidelines. All groups exceeded the minimum compressive strength (70 MPa) specified in the ISO 5833 guidelines. Both ALBC groups showed a similar ultimate compressive and yield strength to the unloaded BC. The results showed that vacuum mixing increased the compression strength of BC. ALBC showed similar compressive strength to their non-antibiotic counterparts when vacuum mixing was performed. Added low-dose gentamicin acted as a plasticizer on bone cement. From a biomechanical point of view, the usage of gentamicin-based ALBC formulations is viable.

The effect of different preventive strategies during total joint arthroplasty on periprosthetic joint infection: a network meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Periprosthetic joint infection after total joint arthroplasty has a large incidence, and it may often require two or more stages of revision, placing an additional burden on clinicians and patients. The purpose of this network meta-analysis is to evaluate the effect of four different preventive strategies during total joint arthroplasty on the prevention of periprosthetic joint infection.

METHODS

The study protocol was registered at PROSPERO (CRD: 42,023,448,868), and the literature search databases included Web of Science, PubMed, OVID Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, OVID EMBASE, and OVID MEDLINE (R) ALL that met the requirements. The network meta-analysis included randomized controlled trials, retrospective cohort studies and prospective cohort studies with the outcome of periprosthetic joint infection. The gemtc R package was applied to perform the network meta-analysis to evaluate the relative results of different preventive strategies.

RESULTS

This network meta-analysis study included a total of 38 articles with 4 preventive strategies and negative controls. No improvement was observed in antibiotic-loaded bone cement compared with negative controls. Chlorhexidine showed the highest probability of delivering the best preventive effect, and povidone iodine had the second highest probability. Although vancomycin ranked after chlorhexidine and povidone iodine, it still showed a significant difference compared with negative controls. In addition, the incidence after applying chlorhexidine was significantly lower than that after applying negative controls and vancomycin. In the heterogeneity test between direct and indirect evidence, there was no apparent heterogeneity between them.

CONCLUSION

The study indicated that chlorhexidine, povidone iodine and vancomycin showed significant efficacy in preventing periprosthetic joint infection after total joint arthroplasty, while antibiotic-loaded bone cement did not. Therefore, more high-quality randomized controlled trials are needed to verify the results above.

Periprosthetic Joint Infection After Total Knee Arthroplasty With or Without Antibiotic Bone Cement

Importance

Despite increased use of antibiotic-loaded bone cement (ALBC) in joint arthroplasty over recent decades, current evidence for prophylactic use of ALBC to reduce risk of periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) is insufficient.

Objective

To compare the rate of revision attributed to PJI following primary total knee arthroplasty (TKA) using ALBC vs plain bone cement.

Design, Setting, and Participants

This international cohort study used data from 14 national or regional joint arthroplasty registries in Australia, Denmark, Finland, Germany, Italy, New Zealand, Norway, Romania, Sweden, Switzerland, the Netherlands, the UK, and the US. The study included primary TKAs for osteoarthritis registered from January 1, 2010, to December 31, 2020, and followed-up until December 31, 2021. Data analysis was performed from April to September 2023.

Exposure

Primary TKA with ALBC vs plain bone cement.

Main Outcomes and Measures

The primary outcome was risk of 1-year revision for PJI. Using a distributed data network analysis method, data were harmonized, and a cumulative revision rate was calculated (1 - Kaplan-Meier), and Cox regression analyses were performed within the 10 registries using both cement types. A meta-analysis was then performed to combine all aggregated data and evaluate the risk of 1-year revision for PJI and all causes.

Results

Among 2 168 924 TKAs included, 93% were performed with ALBC. Most TKAs were performed in female patients (59.5%) and patients aged 65 to 74 years (39.9%), fully cemented (92.2%), and in the 2015 to 2020 period (62.5%). All participating registries reported a cumulative 1-year revision rate for PJI of less than 1% following primary TKA with ALBC (range, 0.21%-0.80%) and with plain bone cement (range, 0.23%-0.70%). The meta-analyses based on adjusted Cox regression for 1 917 190 TKAs showed no statistically significant difference at 1 year in risk of revision for PJI (hazard rate ratio, 1.16; 95% CI, 0.89-1.52) or for all causes (hazard rate ratio, 1.12; 95% CI, 0.89-1.40) among TKAs performed with ALBC vs plain bone cement.

Conclusions and Relevance

In this study, the risk of revision for PJI was similar between ALBC and plain bone cement following primary TKA. Any additional costs of ALBC and its relative value in reducing revision risk should be considered in the context of the overall health care delivery system.

Antibiotic bone cement accelerates diabetic foot wound healing: Elucidating the role of ROCK1 protein expression

Clinical studies indicate antibiotic bone cement with propeller flaps improves diabetic foot wound repair and reduces amputation rates, but the molecular mechanisms, particularly key proteins' role remain largely unexplored. This study assessed the efficacy of antibiotic bone cement for treating diabetic foot wounds, focusing on molecular impact on ROCK1. Sixty patients were randomized into experimental (EXP, n = 40) and control (CON, n = 20) groups, treated with antibiotic bone cement and negative pressure. Wound healing rate, amputation rate, wound secretion culture and C-reactive protein (CRP) changes, were monitored. Comprehensive molecular investigations were conducted and animal experiments were performed to further validate the findings. Statistical methods were employed to verify significant differences between the groups and treatment outcomes. The EXP group showed significant improvements in wound healing (χ 2 $$ {\chi}^2 $$ = 11.265, p = 0.004) and reduced amputation rates. Elevated levels of ROCK1, fibroblasts and VGF were observed in the trauma tissue post-treatment in the experimental group compared to pre-treatment and the control group (all p < 0.05). Improved trauma secretion culture and CRP were also noted in the EXP group (all p < 0.05). The study suggests that antibiotic bone cement enhances diabetic foot wound healing, possibly via upregulation of ROCK1. Further research is needed to elucidate the underlying molecular mechanisms and broader clinical implications.

Demographics and Early Outcomes of Commercial Antibiotic Cement Usage for Infection Prophylaxis During Primary Total Knee Arthroplasty in Patients Older Than 65 Years: An American Joint Replacement Registry Study

INTRODUCTION

The use of antibiotic-laden bone cement (ALBC) for infection prophylaxis in the setting of primary total knee arthroplasty (TKA) remains controversial. Using data from the American Joint Replacement Registry (AJRR), (1) we examined the demographics of ALBC usage in the United States and (2) identified the effect of prophylactic commercially available ALBC on early revision and readmission for prosthetic joint infection (PJI) after primary TKA.

METHODS

This is a retrospective cohort study of the AJRR from 2017 to 2020. Patients older than 65 years undergoing primary cemented TKA with or without the use of commercially available antibiotic cement were eligible for inclusion (N = 251,506 patients). Data were linked to available Medicare claims to maximize revision outcomes. Demographics including age, sex, race/ethnicity, Charlson Comorbidity Index (CCI), preoperative inflammatory arthritis, region, and body mass index (BMI) class were recorded. Cox proportional hazards regression analysis was used to evaluate the association between the two outcome measures and ALBC usage.

RESULTS

Patients undergoing cemented TKA with ALBC were more likely to be Non-Hispanic Black ( P < 0.001), have a CCI of 2 or 3 ( P < 0.001), reside in the South ( P < 0.001), and had a higher mean BMI ( P < 0.001). In the regression models, ALBC usage was associated with increased risk of 90-day revision for PJI (hazards ratio 2.175 [95% confidence interval] 1.698 to 2.787) ( P < 0.001) and was not associated with 90-day all-cause readmissions. Male sex, higher CCI, and BMI >35 were all independently associated with 90-day revision for PJI.

DISCUSSION

The use of commercial ALBC in patients older than 65 years for primary TKA in the AJRR was not closely associated with underlying comorbidities suggesting that hospital-level and surgeon-level factors influence its use. In addition, ALBC use did not decrease the risk of 90-day revision for PJI and was not associated with 90-day readmission rates.

Does antibiotic bone cement reduce infection rates in primary total knee arthroplasty?

INTRODUCTION

Infection after total knee arthroplasty (TKA) impacts the patient, surgeon, and healthcare system significantly. Surgeons routinely use antibiotic-loaded bone cement (ALBC) in attempts to mitigate infection; however, little evidence supports the efficacy of ALBC in reducing infection rates compared to non-antibiotic-loaded bone cement (non-ALBC) in primary TKA. Our study compares infection rates of patients undergoing TKA with ALBC to those with non-ALBC to assess its efficacy in primary TKA.

METHODS

A retrospective review of all primary, elective, cemented TKA patients over the age of 18 between 2011 and 2020 was conducted at an orthopedic specialty hospital. Patients were stratified into two cohorts based on cement type: ALBC (loaded with gentamicin or tobramycin) or non-ALBC. Baseline characteristics and infection rates determined by MSIS criteria were collected. Multilinear and multivariate logistic regressions were performed to limit significant differences in demographics. Independent samples t test and chi-squared test were used to compare means and proportions, respectively, between the two cohorts.

RESULTS

In total, 9366 patients were included in this study, 7980 (85.2%) of whom received non-ALBC and 1386 (14.8%) of whom received ALBC. There were significant differences in five of the six demographic variables analyzed; patients with higher Body Mass Index (33.40 ± 6.27 vs. 32.09 ± 6.21; kg/m2) and Charlson Comorbidity Index values (4.51 ± 2.15 vs. 4.04 ± 1.92) were more likely to receive ALBC. The infection rate in the non-ALBC was 0.8% (63/7,980), while the rate in the ALBC was 0.5% (7/1,386). After adjusting for confounders, the difference in rates was not significant between the two groups (OR [95% CI]: 1.53 [0.69-3.38], p = 0.298). Furthermore, a sub-analysis comparing the infection rates within various demographic categories also showed no significant differences between the two groups.

CONCLUSION

Compared to non-ALBC, the overall infection rate in primary TKA was slightly lower when using ALBC; however, the difference was not statistically significant. When stratifying by comorbidity, use of ALBC still showed no statistical significance in reducing the risk of periprosthetic joint infection. Therefore, the advantage of antibiotics in bone cement to prevent infection in primary TKA is not yet elucidated. Further prospective, multicenter studies regarding the clinical benefits of antibiotic use in bone cement for primary TKA are warranted.

Routine use of antibiotic-laden bone cement in total knee arthroplasty is a cost-effective practice in the single-payer healthcare system

PURPOSE

The purpose of this study was to determine the cost-effectiveness of antibiotic-laden bone cement (ALBC) in primary total knee arthroplasty (TKA) from the perspective of a single-payer healthcare system.

METHODS

A cost-utility analysis (CUA) was performed over a 2-year time horizon comparing primary TKA with either ALBC or regular bone cement (RBC) from the perspective of the single-payer Canadian healthcare system. All costs were in 2020 Canadian dollars. Health utilities were in the form of quality-adjusted life years (QALYs). Model inputs for cost, utilities and probabilities were derived from the literature as well as regional and national databases. One-way deterministic sensitivity analysis was performed.

RESULTS

Primary TKA with ALBC was found to be more cost-effective compared to primary TKA with RBC with an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) of -3,637.79 CAD/QALY. The use of routine ALBC remained cost-effective even with cost increases of up to 50% per bag of ALBC. TKA with ALBC was no longer cost-effective if the rate of PJI following this practice increased 52%, or the rate of PJI following the use of RBC decreased 27%.

CONCLUSIONS

The routine use of ALBC in TKA is a cost-effective practice in the single-payer Canadian healthcare system. This remains to be the case even with a 50% increase in the cost of ALBC. Policy makers and hospital administrators of single-payer healthcare systems can leverage this model to inform their local funding policies. Future prospective reviews and randomized controlled trials from the perspective of various healthcare models can further shed light on this issue.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

III.

Zn-Doped Calcium Magnesium Phosphate Bone Cement Based on Struvite and Its Antibacterial Properties

The development of magnesium calcium phosphate bone cements (MCPCs) has garnered substantial attention. MCPCs are bioactive and biodegradable and have appropriate mechanical and antimicrobial properties for use in reconstructive surgery. In this study, the cement powders based on a (Ca + Mg)/P = 2 system doped with Zn²⁺ at 0.5 and 1.0 wt.% were obtained and investigated. After mixing with a cement liquid, the structural and phase composition, morphology, chemical structure, setting time, compressive strength, degradation behavior, solubility, antibacterial activities, and in vitro behavior of the cement materials were examined. A high compressive strength of 48 ± 5 MPa (mean ± SD) was achieved for the cement made from Zn²⁺ 1.0 wt.%-substituted powders. Zn²⁺ introduction led to antibacterial activity against Staphylococcus aureus and Escherichia coli strains, with an inhibition zone diameter of up to 8 mm. Biological assays confirmed that the developed cement is cytocompatible and promising as a potential bone substitute in reconstructive surgery.

"Recommendations for periprosthetic joint infections (PJI) prevention: the European Knee Associates (EKA)-International Committee American Association of Hip and Knee Surgeons (AAHKS)-Arthroplasty Society in Asia (ASIA) survey of members"

PURPOSE

Periprosthetic joint infections (PJIs) represent a devastating consequence of total joint arthroplasty. The European Knee Associates (EKA), the American Association of Hip and Knee Surgeons (AAHKS) International Committee, and the Arthroplasty Society in Asia (ASIA) board members were interested in quantifying differences in arthroplasty surgeons' use of various PJI prevention measures to provide clinical recommendations to reduce PJI incidence.

METHODS

A prospective Microsoft Forms online survey was distributed among EKA, AAHKS International Committee, and ASIA members and their affiliated arthroplasty surgeons. The survey consisted of 20 single and multiple response questions focused on PJI prevention strategies at three perioperative periods: preoperatively, intraoperatively, and postoperatively.

RESULTS

Three hundred and ninety-four arthroplasty surgeons from 6 different continents completed the survey. Preoperative: (A) PJI Risk Stratification: 40.6% routinely set thresholds (e.g., BMI, HgbA1C) to be met to qualify for surgery, 36.5% only review past medical history; 9.1% use machine learning to personalize PJI risk; (B) BMI limit: 36% no limit; 15.4% BMI < 35; 30.9% BMI < 40; 17.2% BMI < 45; (C) Nutritional status: 55.3% do not screen; among those who screen their patients (44.7%), albumin is the single most used marker (86.3%); (D) Hyperglycemia/Diabetes: 83.3% check this comorbidity; 88.1% use HgbA1C as single best screening test; (E) MRSA nasal colonization: 63.7% do not test; 28.9% test all patients; 7.4% test selectively. Intraoperative: (A) Antibiotic prophylaxis in high-risk patients: 43.4% use single antibiotic for 24 h; 21.3% use double antibiotic for 24 h; 14.2% use single/double antibiotic for 7 days postoperatively; (B) Skin-cleansing: 68.7% at home (45.6% chlorhexidine sponge; 11.9% clippers); (C) Intraoperative skin disinfection: 46.9% single chlorhexidine; 25% double chlorhexidine-povidone-iodine;15.4% single povidone-iodine; (D) Tranexamic acid (TXA) to reduce bleeding/SSI: 96% yes (51% double IV dose, 35.2% single IV dose, 23.6% intra-articular injection); (E) Surgical suction drain: 52% do not use drains; 19.7% use a drain < 24 h; (F) Intra-articular lavage: 64.9% use only saline; 28.1% use dilute povidone-iodine; (G) Antibiotic local delivery to prevent PJI: 82.4% use antibiotic-added cement. Postoperative: (A) Routine monitoring of PJI serologic markers: 42% only in symptomatic patients; 34.2% do not; 20.8% in all patients; (B) Serologic markers to rule in/out PJI: 95.9% CRP; 71% SEDRATE; 60.6% WBC; (C) Synovial fluid test to rule in/out PJI: 79.6% culture/sensitivity; 69.5% WBC count; 31.4% CRP.

CONCLUSIONS

This survey demonstrated that notable differences still exist in the application of PJI preventive measures across different geographic areas: Optimizing the patient preoperatively and applying multimodal intraoperative strategies represent newer, clinically relevant steps in the effort to reduce the burden of PJI. More uniform guidelines still need to be produced from international scientific societies in order facilitate a more comprehensive approach to this devastating complication.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

IV.

Effectiveness of antibiotics loaded bone cement in primary total knee arthroplasty: A systematic review and meta-analysis

INTRODUCTION

The application of antibiotics loaded bone cement (ALBC) in the revision of failed total knee arthroplasty (TKA) has been widely accepted to reduce risk of peri-prosthetic infection. However, the prophylactic use of ALBC in primary TKA remains controversial. This study was aimed to identify the prophylactic effect on peri-prosthetic infection and safety of ALBC in primary TKA.

HYPOTHESIS

The application of ALBC could reduce the risk of peri-prosthetic infection in primary TKA.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Electronic platforms including PubMed, EMBASE, and CENTRAL were retrieved to identify studies comparing outcomes of prophylactic ALBC and plain cement in primary TKA. For outcomes reported as dichotomous variable and continuous variable, risk ratio (RR) and weighted mean difference (WMD) as well as their 95% confidence intervals (95% CI) were selected as the effect sizes for pooling. While for those outcomes reported the adjusted effect sizes such as odds ratio (OR, derived from multivariate logistic regression), and hazard ratio (HR, derived from multivariate COX proportional hazard model), the reported effect sizes were selected for pooling.

RESULTS

A total of 17 studies with 2,074,844 patients (1,093,920 in ALBC group and 980,924 in plain cement group) were eligible for final inclusion. No significant difference was found between ALBC and plain cement groups both for the unadjusted (RR=1.02, 95% CI: 0.86∼1.21, p=0.832) and adjusted (OR=0.94, 95% CI: 0.76∼1.17, p=0.596) peri-prosthetic infection rate. ALBC application was related to significantly increased length of hospital stay (WMD=0.13, 95% CI: 0.10∼0.17, p<0.001). There was no significance on the difference of operation related adverse events between two groups (RR=1.31, 95% CI: 0.68∼2.52, p=0.420). Significantly increased risks of acute renal failure and readmission, and temporarily increased ototoxicity in ALBC group were reported in one of the primary study.

DISCUSSION

There is no sufficient evidence supporting decreased peri-prosthetic infection rate with ALBC application in primary TKA. What's more, it must be taken into consideration about the safety and added cost of additional impregnated antibiotics.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

III; meta-analysis.

Prevention of Orthopedic Prosthetic Infections Using Evidence-Based Surgical Site Infection Care Bundles: A Narrative Review

Background: The number of primary/revision total joint replacements (TJR) are expected to increase substantially with an aging population and increasing prevalence of comorbid conditions. The 30-day re-admission rate, in all orthopedic specialties, is 5.4% (range, 4.8%-6.0%). A recent publication has documented that the surgical site infection (SSI) infection rate associated with revision total knee (rTKR, 15.6%) and revision total hip (rTHR, 8.6%) arthroplasties are four to seven times the rate of the primary procedures (2.1%-2.2%). These orthopedic infections prolong hospital stays, double re-admissions, and increase healthcare costs by a factor of 300%. Methods: A search of PubMed/MEDLINE, EMBASE and the Cochrane Library publications, which reported the infection risk after TKR and THR, was undertaken (January 1, 1995 to December 31, 2021). The search also included documentation of evidence-based practices that lead to improved post-operative outcomes. Results: The evidence-based approach to reducing the risk of SSI was grouped into pre-operative, peri-operative, and post-operative periods. Surgical care bundles have existed within other surgical disciplines for more than 20 years, although their use is relatively new in peri-operative orthopedic surgical care. Pre-admission chlorhexidine gluconate (CHG) showers/cleansing, staphylococcal decolonization, maintenance of normothermia, wound irrigation, antimicrobial suture wound closure, and post-operative wound care has been shown to improve clinical outcome in randomized controlled studies and meta-analyses. Conclusions: Evidence-based infection prevention care bundles have improved clinical outcomes in all surgical disciplines. The significant post-operative morbidity, mortality, and healthcare cost, associated with SSIs after TJR can be reduced by introduction of evidence-based pre-operative, intra-operative, and post-operative interventions.

Prevention of Periprosthetic Joint Infection (PJI): A Clinical Practice Protocol in High-Risk Patients

Background: Periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) represents 25% of failed total knee arthroplasties (TKA). The European Knee Associates (EKA) formed a transatlantic panel of experts to perform a literature review examining patient-related risk factors with the objective of producing perioperative recommendations in PJI high-risk patients. Methods: Multiple databases (Pubmed/MEDLINE, EMBASE, Scopus, Cochrane Library) and recommendations on TKA PJI prevention measures from the International Consensus Meetings on PJI from the AAOS and AAHKS were reviewed. This represents a Level IV study. Results: Strong evidence was found on poor glycemic control, obesity, malnutrition, and smoking being all associated with increased rates of PJI. In the preoperative period, patient optimization is key: BMI < 35, diet optimization, Hemoglobin A1c < 7.5, Fructosamine < 292 mmol/L, smoking cessation, and MRSA nasal screening all showed strong evidence on reducing PJI risk. Intraoperatively, a weight-based antibiotic prophylaxis, accurate fluid resuscitation, betadine and chlorhexidine dual skin preparation, diluted povidone iodine solution irrigation, tranexamic acid administration, and monofilament barbed triclosan-coated sutures for soft tissues closure all represented effective prevention measures. In the postoperative period, failure to reach normalization of ESR, CRP, D-dimer, and IL-6 six weeks postoperatively suggested early PJI. Conclusion: The current recommendations from this group of experts, based on published evidence, support risk stratification to identify high-risk patients requiring implementation of perioperative measures to reduce postoperative PJI.

Is Dual Antibiotic-Loaded Bone Cement More Effective and Cost-Efficient Than a Single Antibiotic-Loaded Bone Cement to Reduce the Risk of Prosthetic Joint Infection in Aseptic Revision Knee Arthroplasty?

BACKGROUND

Higher rates of prosthetic joint infections (PJIs) are related to patient risk factors and/or to special surgical procedures such as revision total knee arthroplasty (rTKA). Among the measures discussed to better protect those patients from the higher infection risks use of dual antibiotic-loaded bone cement has emerged as a further prophylactic option.

METHODS

This retrospective study included 246 patients undergoing strictly aseptic revision knee arthroplasty at our institution in the time period 2015-2018. Based on the type of bone cement used for the cementation of the revision prosthesis, 2 groups were defined. In total, 143 patients received the low-dose single antibiotic-loaded bone cement (SALBC) PALACOS R+G and 103 patients received the high-dose dual antibiotic-loaded bone cement (DALBC) COPAL G+C. The number of PJI cases in each group over a follow-up time of minimum 1 year was compared and the extra costs for the DALBC use calculated against the economic savings per each avoided PJI case on basis of 3 different assumptions (treatment costs and amount of cement use).

RESULTS

Use of DALBC in aseptic rTKA was associated with a significant reduction in PJI cases (relative risk = 57%, PJI rate in the SALBC group 4.1% vs 0% in the DALBC group, P = 0.035). The calculated total savings per patient was $1367. Depending on the economic assumptions the range of savings was between $1413 (less favorable calculation model) and $3661 (most favorable calculation model).

CONCLUSION

The use of DALBC in rTKA has been found to be more effective in preventing PJI and proved cost-efficient in all our cost-calculation models.

Antibiotic-Laden Bone Cement Use and Revision Risk After Primary Total Knee Arthroplasty in U.S. Veterans

BACKGROUND

It is controversial whether the use of antibiotic-laden bone cement (ALBC) in primary total knee arthroplasty (TKA) affects periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) or revision rates. The impact of ALBC on outcomes of primary TKA have not been previously investigated in U.S. veterans, to our knowledge. The purposes of this study were to quantify utilization of ALBC among U.S. veterans undergoing primary TKA and to determine if ALBC usage is associated with differences in revision TKA rates.

METHODS

Patients who had TKA with cement from 2007 to 2015 at U.S. Veterans Health Administration (VHA) hospitals with at least 2 years of follow-up were retrospectively identified. Patients who received high-viscosity Palacos bone cement with or without gentamicin were selected as the final study cohort. Patient demographic and comorbidity data were collected. Revision TKA was the primary outcome. All-cause revisions and revisions for PJI were identified from both VHA and non-VHA hospitals. Unadjusted and adjusted regression analyses were performed to identify variables that were associated with increased revision rates.

RESULTS

The study included 15,972 patients who had primary TKA with Palacos bone cement at VHA hospitals from 2007 to 2015. Plain bone cement was used for 4,741 patients and ALBC was used for 11,231 patients. Utilization of ALBC increased from 50.6% in 2007 to 69.4% in 2015. At a mean follow-up of 5 years, TKAs with ALBC had a lower all-cause revision rate than those with plain bone cement (5.3% versus 6.7%; p = 0.0009) and a lower rate of revision for PJI (1.9% versus 2.6%; p = 0.005). On multivariable regression, ALBC use was associated with a lower risk of all-cause revision compared with plain bone cement (hazard ratio [HR]: 0.79, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.68 to 0.92; p = 0.0019). Seventy-one primary TKAs needed to be implanted with ALBC to avoid 1 revision TKA.

CONCLUSIONS

The utilization of ALBC for primary TKAs performed at VHA hospitals has increased over time and was associated with a lower all-cause revision rate and a lower rate of revision for PJI.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

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

Progress of antibiotic-loaded bone cement in joint arthroplasty

Bone cement, consisting of polymethyl methacrylate, is a bioinert material used for prothesis fixation in joint arthroplasty. To treat orthopedic infections, such as periprosthetic joint infection, antibiotic-loaded bone cement (ALBC) was introduced into clinical practice. Recent studies have revealed the limitations of the antibacterial effect of ALBC. Moreover, with the increase in high infection risk patients and highly resistant microbes, more researches and modification of ALBC are required. This paper reviewed latest findings about ALBC for most popular and destructive pathogens, summarized the influence of antibiotic kind, drug dosage, application method, and environment towards characteristic of ALBC. Subsequently, new cement additives and clinical applications of ALBC in joint arthroplasty were also discussed.

Antibiotic-loaded bone cement in primary total knee arthroplasty: does it reduce the risk of periprosthetic joint infection?

BACKGROUND

Total knee arthroplasty (TKA) is a widely used technique, the purpose of which is to improve or eliminate knee pain produced by osteoarthritis. One of the most severe complications of primary TKA is periprosthetic joint infection (PJI). To reduce the risk of PJI, some surgeons use antibiotic-loaded bone cement (ALBC) in primary TKA, but others do not. In other words, the routine use of ALBC in primary TKA is controversial.

OBJECTIVE

The purpose of this article is to perform a narrative review of recent literature with the aim of answering the following question: Does ALBC reduce the risk of PJI in primary TKA?

METHODS

A Cochrane Library and PubMed (MEDLINE) search related to the role ALBC in primary TKA was analyzed. The only language searched was English. Scientific meeting abstracts and other sources of evidence were not considered. The main criteria for selection were articles that were focused on the role of ALBC in primary TKA.

RESULTS

One meta-analysis concluded that the prophylactic application of ALBC is not effective in preventing PJI in primary TKA. Two systematic reviews stated that the ALBC does not reduce the prevalence of PJI in primary TKA, so they consider it an unnecessary expense for health systems. One of these systematic reviews concluded that hospital systems that perform 1000 primary TKA operations per year can save between $155,000 and $310,000 per year if they always use plain cement. A prospective study suggested that in patients with diabetes mellitus who are treated with primary TKA, cement impregnated with cefuroxime is effective in preventing PJI.

CONCLUSIONS

It is logical to recommend the cautious use of ALBC, perhaps only in patients at high risk of infection (immunocompromised, morbid obesity, diabetics, and patients with a history of fracture or infection around the knee).

Cementless Fixation for Total Knee Arthroplasty in Various Patient Populations: A Literature Review

The number of total knee arthroplasties (TKAs) performed in the United States has increased considerably in recent years, with a major contribution from younger patients. Maximizing survivorship of these implants has always been a point of emphasis. Early TKA designs with cementless fixation were associated with high rates of complications and implant failures. However, recent advances in cementless designs have shown excellent results. The decision to use cemented or cementless fixation for patients undergoing TKA is typically based on the surgeon's experience and preference. However, several patient characteristics must also be taken into account. The purpose of this review was to describe the clinical outcomes of studies in which a cementless TKA system was utilized for patients who (1) were less than 60 years of age, (2) were greater than 75 years of age, (3) were obese, (4) had rheumatoid arthritis, and (5) had osteonecrosis of the knee. Based on the studies included in this review, it appears that cementless fixation is a viable option for patients who have all of the above demographics.

Antibiotic containing bone cement in prevention of hip and knee prosthetic joint infections: A systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Prosthetic joint infection (PJI) is the most serious total joint arthroplasty (TJA) complication despite several aseptic and antiseptic preventive measures. There is no clear evidence or even consensus, whether antibiotic-loaded bone cement (ALBC) should be used, in addition to systemic short-term routine antibiotic prophylaxis, to reduce the risk of PJI in primary TJA. We aimed to analyze the efficacy of ALBC for prevention of PJI in patients undergoing primary TJA.

METHODS

We searched systematically for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) in PubMed, Scopus, Embase, Web of Science and Cochrane library. Two reviewers independently screened potentially eligible studies according to predefined selection criteria and assessed the risk of bias using a modified version of the Cochrane risk of bias tool. PJI was prespecified as the primary outcome of interest. The meta-analyses were based on risk ratios using random-effects model per default. For the purpose of sensitivity, the corresponding fixed effects model odds ratios were calculated with the use of the Peto method as well. To evaluate a potential difference in effect sizes using different types (subgroups) of antibiotics used in bone cement, and at different follow-up periods, we performed stratified meta-analyses.

RESULTS

Thirty-seven studies were eligible for the systematic review and qualitative synthesis, and 9 trials (6507 total joint arthroplasties) were included in this meta-analysis. Overall ALBC significantly reduced the risk of PJI following primary TJAs (RRs, 0.36; 95% CIs, 0.16 to 0.80; P = 0.01) with a moderate degree of inconsistency (I2 = 47%). Based on stratified meta-analyses the use of gentamicin appeared to have a better effect (P = 0.0005) in the total hip arthroplasty. Pooled data of different antibiotics used in knee arthroplasties showed a significant association of cefuroxime (RRs, 0.08; 95% CIs, 0.01 to 0.63; P = 0.02). Further, ALBCs significantly reduced the PJI at one and two years of follow-up (P = 0.03 and P = 0.005 respectively).

CONCLUSIONS

The evidence suggests that ALBCs are effective in reducing the PJI following primary TJA; i.e. between 20 and 84% reduced risk. However, the clear limitations of the available trial evidence highlight the need for joint-specific confirmatory trials, that will need to be designed as cluster-randomized trials of clinics in countries with well-functioning arthroplasty registries.The translational potential of this article: This meta-analysis highlights the prophylactic potential of ALBCs in lowering the risk of infection following primary hip or knee arthroplasties but emphasizes the need for more recent confirmatory trials.

Does an Antimicrobial Incision Drape Prevent Intraoperative Contamination? A Randomized Controlled Trial of 1187 Patients

BACKGROUND

The risk of periprosthetic joint infection (PJI), a serious complication after arthroplasty, has not changed for years. Interventions such as eradication of Staphylococcus aureus and antibiotic bone cement are used to diminish infection risk but despite these efforts, the percentage of infection in TKA remains constant. Antimicrobial drapes have a dual action, acting both as a physical and antimicrobial barrier to counter bacterial contamination of the surgical wound. To study the effect of antimicrobial drapes, we used intraoperative contamination as a proxy for infection in our investigation.

QUESTIONS/PURPOSES

(1) Do antimicrobial surgical drapes reduce the risk of intraoperative microbial contamination in patients undergoing primary knee arthroplasty? (2) Are other factors such as sex, season, age, type of arthroplasty and duration of surgery associated with an increased risk of contamination in patients undergoing primary knee arthroplasty? (3) Does loosening of the antimicrobial drape increase contamination risk?

METHODS

An investigator-initiated, two-arm, non-blinded, multicenter, randomized, controlled trial was performed at five different hospitals in the capital and central regions of Denmark. Twenty-four surgeons participated in the study. Participants were patients older than 18 years undergoing primary knee arthroplasty. We excluded patients with an iodine allergy, previous open knee surgery, previous septic arthritis, any antibiotics taken 4 weeks before surgery, and if they were unable to understand the implications of study participation. Patients were randomly assigned to operation with an antimicrobial drape (intervention group) or operation without (control group). We screened 1769 patients, of which 100 were ineligible and 10 declined to participate. In all, 94% (1659 of 1769) of patients consented and were randomized to the intervention group (51%, 838 of 1659) and control group (49%, 821 of 1659), respectively. In all, 36% (603 of 1659) of patients in the intervention group and 35% (584 of 1659) patients in the control group were available for final analysis. No crossover was performed, and analysis was done per-protocol. Patients were excluded due to logistic failures like lack of utensils, samples disappearing en route to the laboratory mainly caused by implementation of a new electronic patient chart (EPIC, Verona, WI, USA), and forgetful surgeons. Intraoperatively, we swabbed for bacteria at the surgical site and in a rinse from the surgeons' gloves. All samples were sent for cultivation, and colony forming units (CFUs) counts ≥ 1 were deemed contaminated. The primary outcome measure was the difference in the proportion of contaminated patients between the two randomized groups. Secondary outcome measures were the affiliation of sex, season, age, type of implant used, and duration of surgery on contamination risk. To investigate whether other factors were affiliated with contamination risk, we did a logistic regression to control for confounding variables, including sex, age, season, type of implant and duration of surgery.

RESULTS

Use of iodinated drapes reduced contamination, with contamination detected in 10% (60 of 603) procedures where iodinated drapes were used compared with 15% (90 of 584) when they were not (odds ratio 0.61 [95% CI 0.43 to 0.87]; p = 0.005), with a relative risk reduction of 35% (95% CI 12.3 to 52.5) and a number needed to treat of 18 patients. After controlling for confounding variables such as sex, age, type of implant, and duration of surgery, we found that not using an antimicrobial drape increased contamination risk by a factor of 1.6 (95% CI 1.08 to 2.35; p = 0.02). Female sex and undergoing surgery in the central region were associated with lower odds of contamination (OR 0.55 [95% CI 0.39 to 0.8]; p = 0.002 and OR 0.45 [95% CI 0.25 to 0.8]; p = 0.006, respectively). Patients with more than a 10-mm separation of the drape from the skin had higher odds of contamination (OR 3.54 [95% CI 1.64 to 11.05]; p = 0.0013).

CONCLUSIONS

The use of an antimicrobial drape resulted in lower contamination risk than operating without an antimicrobial drape. Our findings suggest that antimicrobial drapes are useful in infection prevention, but further studies are needed to investigate the effect of antimicrobial drapes on infection.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level I, therapeutic study.

Hospital Volume and Postoperative Infections in Total Knee Arthroplasty

BACKGROUND

The purpose of this study was to evaluate the associations of hospital volume with revision surgery for infection and superficial incisional infections.

METHODS

A review of 12,541 primary total knee arthroplasties (TKAs) at a large integrated health system from 2014 to 2017 was conducted. Sixteen hospitals were classified as low-volume, medium-volume, or high-volume hospitals according to the mean number of TKAs/year (<250, 250-500, and >500, respectively). Thresholds were guided by percentiles and the literature on volume-outcome relationships. Medical records were reviewed for revision surgery for infection and superficial incisional infections during a mean 2-year review period. Multivariate analyses, adjusted for clinical and patient characteristics, were performed to evaluate the association between hospital volume and infection.

RESULTS

The overall rate of revision surgery for infection was 0.7% (n = 82), and the overall rate of superficial incisional infection was 2.6% (n = 324). After accounting for potential confounders, hospital volume was not found to have a significant association with revision surgery for infection when comparing high-volume and low-volume hospitals (odds ratio, 1.615; 95% confidence interval, 0.761-3.427; P = .212) as well as when comparing high-volume and medium-volume hospitals (odds ratio, 1.464; 95% confidence interval, 0.853-2.512; P = .166). Moreover, the risk of superficial incisional infection at high-volume hospitals was similar to that at low-volume (P = .107) and medium-volume (P = .491) hospitals.

CONCLUSION

Infection outcomes are quality metrics that are frequently used to compare hospitals including those of varying volumes. Using contemporary thresholds, this study found that infection rates after TKA at high-volume hospitals are comparable to low-volume and medium-volume hospitals.

Intraoperative and Postoperative Infection Prevention

Implementation of strategies for prevention of surgical site infection and periprosthetic joint infection is gaining further attention. We provide an overview of the pertinent evidence-based guidelines for infection prevention from the World Health Organization, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, and the second International Consensus Meeting on Musculoskeletal Infection. Future work is needed to ascertain clinical efficacy, optimal combinations, and the cost-effectiveness of certain measures.