Reduced Infection Rate After Aseptic Revision Total Knee Arthroplasty With Extended Oral Antibiotic Protocol

Extended oral antibiotics in primary and revision total joint arthroplasty: An update

Periprosthetic joint infections (PJI) are a significant healthcare and economic burden after joint replacement surgery. Extended oral antibiotic prophylaxis (EOAP) has been highlighted as a safe, efficacious, and cost-effective measure to mitigate the risk of infection against the increasing demands for total joint arthroplasty (TJA). Several studies have demonstrated substantial reductions in PJI rates, particularly among high-risk populations receiving a 7-day course of antibiotics, mainly with use of cefadroxil. Conversely, other studies have found no significant differences or even increased infection rates, highlighting concerns over antimicrobial resistance, Clostridium difficile infections (CDI), and other antibiotic-related adverse events. Additionally, recent trends show a substantial rise in EOAP utilization across the United States, demonstrating need for clear and evidence-based guidelines. There is a need for high quality randomized controlled trials to help identify optimal patient selection criteria, antibiotic type, and duration to effectively balance the benefits of EOAP against potential risks. Although there is limited evidence of significant antibiotic associated complications with the use of EOAP, care should be utilized prior to widespread adoption with antibiotic stewardship in mind.

Is Younger Age a Risk Factor for Failure Following Aseptic Revision Total Knee Arthroplasty?

BACKGROUND

Revision total knee arthroplasties (rTKAs) are being performed more frequently in the United States in younger patients. Few large studies have evaluated the effect of age following rTKA. The study sought to evaluate the effect of age on rTKA outcomes.

METHODS

The American Joint Replacement Registry was used to identify aseptic rTKAs in younger (18 to 64 years, n = 32,631) and older (> 65 years, n = 43,992) patients from January 2012 to September 2020, allowing for a minimum 2-year follow-up. The mean age was 56 years in the younger cohort and 73 years in the older cohort. The mean follow-up was 5.4 years. Sex and body mass index were similar between groups. Kaplan-Meier survivorship analysis was performed with rerevision as the primary endpoint. Secondarily, multivariate analyses were performed to adjust for demographics and comorbidities.

RESULTS

The proportion with rerevision was higher in the younger cohort compared to the older (8.1 versus 5.4%, P < 0.001). The 10-year survivorship free of all-cause rerevision was 90.2% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 89.7 to 90.7) in the younger cohort versus 93.7% (95% CI: 93.4 to 94.1) in the older cohort (P < 0.0001). Younger age was significantly associated with a higher adjusted hazard ratio (HR) for all-cause rerevision (HR: 1.4, 95% CI: 1.3 to 1.6), as were men (HR: 1.4, 95% CI: 1.2 to 1.5) and initial revision for instability (HR: 1.3, 95% CI: 1.1 to 1.5). In a subgroup analysis of patients aged < 65 years, a 5-year decrease in age was associated with a 10.0% increase in risk of rerevision. Indications for rerevisions differed among the younger and older cohorts (P < 0.01): infection (30.2 versus 34.9%), aseptic loosening (19.0 versus 15.8%), and instability (12.2 versus 12.7%).

CONCLUSIONS

Younger age, men, and initial revision performed for instability were associated with significantly increased risk for all-cause rerevision following aseptic rTKA. Notably, age may have a continuous effect on rerevision rates, as each 5-year decrease in age was associated with a 10% increase in risk of rerevision. Future research may further elucidate these increased risks in this younger patient population.

Increasing Utilization of Extended Oral Antibiotic Prophylaxis Following Total Knee Arthroplasty From 2010 to 2022

BACKGROUND

Extended oral antibiotic (EOA) prophylaxis has been shown to reduce rates of periprosthetic joint infection in high-risk patients following total knee arthroplasty (TKA). Although national societies' recommendations against their use and clinical efficacy remain controversial, the increase in the literature surrounding EOA prophylaxis suggests a potential change in practice patterns that may warrant the creation of national guidelines. The purpose of this study was to investigate the trends in the utilization of EOA prophylaxis following TKA from 2010 to 2022.

METHODS

Patients who underwent primary or aseptic revision TKA between 2010 and 2022 were identified in a national administrative claims database. Temporal trends in EOA usage following primary or revision TKA were calculated, and secondary analysis examined rates of utilization across demographics, including patients considered at high risk for infection. In total, 1,258,759 primary and 91,530 aseptic revision TKA patients were included in this study.

RESULTS

From 2010 to 2022, EOA prescriptions increased by 321 and 368% following primary and revision TKA, respectively. Rates of utilization among high-risk individuals were similar to those of the general population.

CONCLUSIONS

The use of EOA prophylaxis after TKA has increased significantly since 2010. Given their increasing usage and variation in prescription patterns among patients at high risk of infection, guidelines surrounding their use are necessary to promote antibiotic stewardship while preventing rates of infection.

Rates of Extended Oral Antibiotic Prophylaxis After Primary Total Knee Arthroplasty Among High-Risk and Standard-Risk Patients: 2009 to 2022

BACKGROUND

Recent evidence suggests extended courses of oral antibiotics (EOA) after total hip arthroplasty and total knee arthroplasty (TKA) may reduce the risk of periprosthetic joint infection in high-risk patients. EOA rates after total hip arthroplasty have risen significantly. However, there is a lack of epidemiologic data on EOA prophylaxis following TKA. Therefore, we investigated national trends in EOA prophylaxis for primary TKA and whether these rates were reflective of changes in patient risk or prescribing practices.

METHODS

Adult patients undergoing TKA between 2009 and 2022 were identified in a national insurance claims database. An EOA was defined as a 7 to 14-day course of a first-generation cephalosporin, cefdinir, clindamycin, doxycycline, or trimethoprim-sulfamethoxazole filled between 5 days preoperatively and 3 days postoperatively. Annual EOA rates were calculated and stratified by preoperative periprosthetic joint infection risk. Multivariable logistic regression was used to explore whether rates reflected changing patient characteristics. Future rates were predicted with time-series forecasting.

RESULTS

We identified 712,212 eligible TKA cases. EOA rates rose from 0.91% in 2009 to 7.95% in 2022. Rates increased by 686% among standard-risk patients and 786% among high-risk patients. Logistic regression models using patient comorbidities could not account for changes in EOA rates. EOA rates were projected to rise to 18.3% by 2030.

CONCLUSIONS

Rates of EOA prophylaxis after TKA rose significantly from 2009 to 2022. This trend could not be explained by changing patient characteristics, suggesting widespread changes in antibiotic prescribing practices, which may be reflective of recent studies favoring EOA use. There is a need for further high-quality research examining the safety, efficacy, and role of EOA prophylaxis in the primary TKA patient population.

Impact of Extended Prophylactic Antibiotics on Risk of Prosthetic Joint Infection in Primary Total Hip Arthroplasty: A Matched Cohort Analysis

BACKGROUND

Extended oral prophylactic antibiotics have been increasingly used in arthroplasty with the goal of reducing the risk of prosthetic joint infection (PJI). While a reduction in the rate of PJI has been noted with extended oral antibiotic regimens in high-risk patients, no large database study has assessed infection risk after primary total hip arthroplasty among well-balanced cohorts receiving and not receiving postoperative extended oral antibiotics.

METHODS

A retrospective cohort study was conducted using a national database, TriNetX, to identify patients who underwent primary total hip arthroplasty. This cohort was stratified by oral antibiotic prescription within one day of procedure. A one-to-one propensity score matching based on age, sex, class of obesity, and medical comorbidities was conducted. Outcomes explored in this study were 90-day risk of PJI, superficial skin infection, deep skin infection, and all-cause revision.

RESULTS

90-day postoperative infection complications of PJI were higher in the group receiving antibiotics (hazard ratio: 1.83, P -value = 0.012). Other complications such as superficial skin infection, deep skin infection, and all-cause revision showed no statistically significant differences.

CONCLUSION

This database analysis of 5,476 patients demonstrated no decrease in complications of PJI, superficial or deep skin infection, or revision at 90 days. Future randomized controlled trials are needed to evaluate the efficacy of extended oral antibiotics.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

III.

Trends and Epidemiology in Revision Total Hip Arthroplasty: A Large Database Study

BACKGROUND

The clinical and financial burden of revision total hip arthroplasty (rTHA) continues to grow. Therefore, further investigation is needed to characterize case volume, reason for failure, and postoperative complications. The purpose of this study was to characterize contemporary indications for and complications following rTHA.

METHODS

Patients undergoing rTHA between 2010 and 2021 were identified within the PearlDiver database. Adjusted rTHA incidence was calculated by dividing the annual rTHA volume by the annual primary total hip arthroplasty (THA) and multiplying by 100,000. Mann-Kendall trend tests were utilized to trend revision volume, etiology, and 90-day postoperative complications. A total of 225,958 rTHAs were identified.

RESULTS

The annual volume of rTHA did not change over the study period (18,871 to 15,994; P = 0.064). However, the adjusted incidence of rTHA significantly decreased (20,169.3 to 13,061.2 per 100,000 THAs; P < 0.001). The most common causes of rTHA were aseptic implant loosening (21.5%), instability (19.8%), and infection (19.1%). The adjusted incidences of revision due to infection (4,659.9 to 2,596.1 per 100,000 THAs; P < 0.001) and aseptic implant loosening (4,651.4 to 2,493.2 per 100,000 THAs; P < 0.001) decreased over time. The adjusted rate of instability (3,149.8 to 3,245.3 per 100,000 THAs; P = 0.304) did not change. Rates of post-revision deep vein thrombosis, hematoma, surgical site infection, and transfusion significantly decreased over the study period (P < 0.05), while rates of emergency department visits and readmission did not change.

CONCLUSIONS

In addition to a decreased adjusted incidence of rTHA, our analysis demonstrated a decreased incidence of infection, aseptic loosening, and various postoperative complications. However, no difference in the adjusted incidence of instability and periprosthetic fracture was seen over our study period. Continued study is necessary to further decrease the need for rTHA with a focus on the etiologies and complications that have remained unchanged.

Trends and Epidemiology in Revision Total Knee Arthroplasty: A Large Database Study

BACKGROUND

As the volume of primary total knee arthroplasty (TKA) continues to grow, the clinical and financial burden of revision total knee arthroplasty (rTKA) is expected to increase. The purpose of this investigation was to characterize contemporary indications and complications for rTKA.

METHODS

Patients undergoing rTKA between 2010 and 2021 were identified within an administrative claims database. Adjusted rTKA incidence was calculated by dividing the annual rTKA volume by the annual primary TKA and multiplying by 100,000. Mann-Kendall trend tests were utilized to trend revision volume, etiology, 90-day postoperative complications, and patient demographics.

RESULTS

A total of 397,367 rTKA were identified over our study period, of which 287,492 (72.4%) had coding regarding revision etiology. The volume of annual rTKA (31,091 to 33,850; P = 0.451) did not change over the study period. The adjusted incidence of rTKA decreased (25,568.3 to 19,272.2 per 100,000 annual TKA; P = 0.011). The leading causes of revision TKA were infection (21.2%), aseptic implant loosening (19.3%), and instability (9.8%). The rate of septic revision (4,710.5 to 4,426.1 per 100,000 annual TKAs) and aseptic implant loosening (4,502.5 to 3,636.4 per 100,000 annual TKAs) did not change (both P values > 0.05). The rates of instability increased (1,369.2 to 2,609.85 per 100,000 annual TKAs; P = 0.007). The rates of postrevision surgical site infection, periprosthetic joint infection, deep vein thrombosis, and transfusion decreased over the study period, while rates of emergency department visits and readmission increased (all P values <0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

The incidence of revision TKA may be slowing. While the risk of revision for infection and aseptic loosening remains unchanged, revision for instability has increased. The rates of postoperative complications appear to have decreased. Improved surgical technique, implant design, and perioperative protocols may have contributed to these findings. Continued work is necessary to reduce the risk of failure and postoperative complications.

Benefits and Adverse Events Associated With Extended Antibiotic Use for One Year Following Periprosthetic Joint Infection in Total Knee Arthroplasty: A Prospective Cohort Analysis

BACKGROUND

Periprosthetic joint infections (PJIs) are common and serious complications following knee and hip arthroplasty. Our previous retrospective study suggested extended antibiotics following debridement, antibiotics, and implant retention (DAIR) decreased failure rates and were not associated with increased adverse events (AEs) as compared to a standard 6 weeks of antibiotic therapy. Further, extended antibiotics beyond one year did not provide additional benefits. These observations were tested in this prospective cohort study.

METHODS

A prospective cohort of patients who underwent DAIR for total knee arthroplasty PJI and received primary antibiotics were compared to patients who received primary antibiotics combined with extended antibiotics for one year. Participants had a minimum of 2-year follow-up after the final dose of antibiotics.

RESULTS

A prospective cohort of 79 patients was followed, where 39 participants (52.7%) received primary antibiotics and 35 participants (47.3%) received both primary and extended antibiotics following DAIR. Multivariable time-to-event analyses revealed that extended antibiotic use was an independent predictor of treatment success. Infection-free survival differed significantly between the two treatment regimens, as the hazard of PJI failure was significantly lower for extended antibiotics as compared to primary antibiotics alone (adjusted hazard ratio [HR] = 0.46 [0.24 to 0.87], P = 0.017). The AE rates did not significantly differ between patients treated with primary antibiotics only versus primary combined with extended antibiotics.

CONCLUSIONS

This prospective cohort study supports our previous observations that extended antibiotics for one year were associated with lower failure rates as compared to primary antibiotics alone. Extended antibiotics after primary antibiotics were not found to be associated with increased AEs as compared to only primary antibiotics.

Dhvar5-chitosan nanogels and their potential to improve antibiotics activity

Infection is one of the main causes of orthopedic implants failure, with antibiotic-resistant bacteria playing a crucial role in this outcome. In this work, antimicrobial nanogels were developed to be applied in situ as implant coating to prevent orthopedic-device-related infections. To that regard, a broad-spectrum antimicrobial peptide, Dhvar5, was grafted onto chitosan via thiol-norbornene "photoclick" chemistry. Dhvar5-chitosan nanogels (Dhvar5-NG) were then produced using a microfluidic system. Dhvar5-NG (1010 nanogels (NG)/mL) with a Dhvar5 concentration of 6 μg/mL reduced the burden of the most critical bacteria in orthopedic infections - methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) - after 24 h in medium supplemented with human plasma proteins. Transmission electron microscopy showed that Dhvar5-NG killed bacteria by membrane disruption and cytoplasm release. No signs of cytotoxicity against a pre-osteoblast cell line were verified upon incubation with Dhvar5-NG. To further explore therapeutic alternatives, the potential synergistic effect of Dhvar5-NG with antibiotics was evaluated against MRSA. Dhvar5-NG at a sub-minimal inhibitory concentration (109 NG/mL) demonstrated synergistic effect with oxacillin (4-fold reduction: from 2 to 0.5 μg/mL) and piperacillin (2-fold reduction: from 2 to 1 μg/mL). This work supports the use of Dhvar5-NG as adjuvant of antibiotics to the prevention of orthopedic devices-related infections.

Should All Patients Receive Extended Oral Antibiotic Prophylaxis? Defining Its Role in Patients Undergoing Primary and Aseptic Revision Total Joint Arthroplasty

BACKGROUND

Prior studies have demonstrated reduced periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) rates following extended oral antibiotics (EOAs) for high-risk patients undergoing primary total joint arthroplasty (TJA). This study compared 3-month PJI rates in all patients undergoing primary or aseptic revision TJA with or without EOA prophylaxis.

METHODS

In total, 2,982 consecutive primary (n = 2,677) and aseptic revision (n = 305) TJAs were performed by a single, fellowship-trained arthroplasty surgeon from 2016 to 2022 were retrospectively reviewed. Beginning January 2020, all patients received 7 days of 300 mg oral cefdinir twice daily immediately postoperatively. Rates of PJI at 3 months were compared between patients who received or did not receive EOA.

RESULTS

Rates of PJI at 3 months in patients undergoing primary and aseptic revision TJA were significantly lower in those receiving EOA prophylaxis compared to those who did not (0.41 versus 1.13%, respectively; P = .02). After primary TJA, lower PJI rates were observed with EOA prophylaxis utilization (0.23 versus 0.74%, P = .04; odds ratio [OR] 3.85). Following aseptic revision TJA, PJI rates trended toward a significant decrease with the EOA compared to without (1.88 versus 4.83%, respectively; P = .16; OR 2.71).

CONCLUSIONS

All patients undergoing primary or aseptic revision TJA who received EOA prophylaxis were 3.85 and 2.71 times less likely, respectively, to develop PJI at 3 months compared to those without EOA. Future studies are needed to determine if these results are maintained at postoperative time periods beyond 3 months following primary TJA.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

III, Retrospective review.

Low Risk of Periprosthetic Joint Infection After Aseptic Revision Total Knee Arthroplasty With Intraosseous Vancomycin

BACKGROUND

Aseptic revisions are the most common reason for revision total knee arthroplasty (rTKA). Previous literature reports early periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) rates after aseptic rTKA to range from 3 to 9.4%. Intraosseous (IO) regional administration of vancomycin has previously been shown to produce high local tissue concentrations in primary and rTKA. However, no data exist on the effect of prophylactic IO vancomycin on early PJI rates in the setting of aseptic rTKA. The aim of this study was to determine the following: (1) what is the rate of early PJI during the first year after surgery in aseptic rTKA performed with IO vancomycin; and (2) how does this compare to previously published PJI rates after rTKA.

METHODS

A consecutive series of 117 cases were included in this study who underwent rTKA between January 2016 and March 2022 by 1 of 2 fellowship-trained adult reconstruction surgeons and received IO vancomycin at the time of surgery in addition to standard intravenous antibiotic prophylaxis. Rates of PJI at 3 months, 1 year, and the final follow-up were evaluated and compared to prior literature.

RESULTS

Follow-up at 3 months was available for 116 of the 117 rTKAs, with 1 lost to follow-up. The rate of PJI was 0% at 3 months postoperatively. Follow-up at 1 year was obtained for 113 of the 117 rTKAs, and the PJI rate remained 0%. The rate of PJI at the final follow-up of ≥ 1 year was 0.88% (95% confidence interval: -0.84 to 2.61). Previous literature reports PJI rates in aseptic rTKA to range from 3 to 9.4%.

CONCLUSIONS

Dual prophylactic antibiotics with IO vancomycin in conjunction with intravenous cephalosporins or clindamycin were associated with a substantial reduction in early PJI compared to prior published literature. These data supplement the early evidence about the potential clinical benefits of IO vancomycin for infection prevention in high-risk cases.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level III, therapeutic study.

Infection Rates After Aseptic Revision Total Hip Arthroplasty With Extended Oral Antibiotic Prophylaxis

INTRODUCTION

Few US studies have investigated the efficacy of extended oral antibiotic prophylaxis (EOAP) in the prevention of periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) after aseptic revision total hip arthroplasty (R-THA). This study compared PJI rates in aseptic R-THA performed with EOAP with PJI rates in published studies of aseptic R-THA patients not receiving EOAP.

METHODS

Prospectively documented data on 127 consecutive aseptic R-THAs were retrospectively reviewed. Evidence-based perioperative infection prevention protocols were used, and all patients were discharged on 7-day EOAP. Superficial and deep infections at 30 and 90 days postoperatively and at mean latest follow-up of 27.8 months were statistically compared with all US studies reporting the prevalence of PJI after aseptic R-THA. Complications related to EOAP within 120 days of the index procedure also are reported.

RESULTS

No superficial or deep infections were observed at 30 and 90 days postoperatively when 7-day postdischarge EOAP was used. Superficial and deep infection rates were 1.57% (two patients) and 3.15% (four patients) at mean latest follow-up, respectively. Comparisons with published 30-day PJI rates of 1.37% ( P = 0.423) and 1.85% ( P = 0.257) were not statistically significant. Two of four comparisons with published 90-day PJI rates of 3.43% ( P = 0.027) and 5.74% ( P = 0.001) were statistically different. The deep PJI rate of 3.15% at mean latest follow-up was significantly lower than two of three published rates at equivalent follow-up including 10.10% ( P = 0.009) and 9.12% ( P = 0.041). No antibiotic-related complications were observed within 120 days of the index procedure.

DISCUSSION

Study findings possibly support the use of EOAP after aseptic R-THA to prevent catastrophic PJI with revision implants, indicating that the efficacy of EOAP cannot be definitively ruled-in or ruled-out based on available evidence.

Isolated Liner Exchange Versus All-Component Revision for Instability After Total Knee Arthroplasty

BACKGROUND

Instability is a common cause for revision total knee arthroplasty (TKA). The risks and benefits of polyethylene liner exchange (LE) as compared to full metal component revision continue to be debated. The purpose of this study was to investigate the success rate and complication profiles of revision TKA for instability based on surgical procedure.

METHODS

This was a retrospective study of patients undergoing revision TKA for instability from 2015 to 2019. Patients with prior revisions were excluded. 42 patients undergoing isolated polyethylene LE without an increase in constraint were compared with 48 patients undergoing full component revision revision (FCR) of both tibial and femoral components. The primary outcome was differences in rerevision for instability. Noninstability reoperations, 90-day readmissions, and lengths-of-stay were also compared.

RESULTS

LEs had a 10.1% higher rerevision for instability rate that approached statistical significance (LE 14.3% versus FCR 4.2%, P = .092). Additionally, FCR had a 4.2% rate of aseptic loosening and a 4.2% rate of periprosthetic-joint-infection, whereas LE had none (P = .181). FCR also had a longer length-of-stay (FCR 3.0 ± 1.3 versus LE: 1.8 ± 0.9 days, P < .001). No differences were found in 90-day readmissions (LE 7.1% versus FCR 4.2%, P = .661).

CONCLUSION

All component revision may have a higher success rate than isolated LE in addressing instability but is associated with higher rates of surgical complications. With appropriate patient selection and risk-benefit discussion, isolated LE may be a reasonable surgical option for TKA instability with a lower complication profile and length-of-stay.

How are Oral Antibiotics Being Used in Total Joint Arthroplasty? A Review of the Literature

While the role and benefit of perioperative intravenous (IV) antibiotics in patients undergoing total joint arthroplasty (TJA) is well-established, oral antibiotic use in TJA remains a controversial topic with wide variations in practice patterns. With this review, we aimed to better educate the orthopedic surgeon on when and how oral antibiotics may be used most effectively in TJA patients, and to identify gaps in the literature that could be clarified with targeted research. Extended oral antibiotic prophylaxis (EOAP) use in high-risk primary, aseptic revision, and exchange TJA for infection may be useful in decreasing periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) rates. When prescribing oral antibiotics either as EOAP or for draining wounds, patient factors, type of surgery, and type of infectious organisms should be considered in order to optimally prevent and treat PJI. It is important to maintain antibiotic stewardship by administering the proper duration, dose, and type of antibiotics and by consulting infectious disease when necessary.

Graphic type differentiation of cell count data for diagnosis of early and late periprosthetic joint infection: A new method

BACKGROUND

Graphic type differentiation of cell count data of synovial aspirates is a new method for the diagnosis of early and late periprosthetic joint infection.

OBJECTIVE

The aim of the study was to analyse if the same 6 LMNE-types can be differentiated in the new Yumizen H500 cell counter as it was the case for the old cell counter ABX Pentra XL 80 of previous publications, to verify if the erythrocyte and thrombocyte curves of the new device give additional information and to calculate the difference of cell count in LMNE-type I and III (with abrasion) in the cell counter and in the manual counting chamber (Neubauer improved).

METHODS

450 aspirates of 152 total hip arthroplasties and 298 knee arthroplasties obtained for the diagnosis of periprosthetic joint infection were analysed with the Yumizen H500.

RESULTS

All LMNE-matrices of the 450 aspirates could assigned to one of the six LMNE-types. There were 76 LMNE-type I, 72 LMNE-type II, 14 LMNE-type III, 241 LMNE-type IV, 36 LMNE-type V and 12 LMNE-type VI. The erythrocyte and thrombocyte distribution curves were very helpful for differentiation of hematoma and infection. The cell count in the manual counting procedure was lower than in the cell counter: for the LMNE-type I (abrasion type) the median of the difference was 925/μL (median) and for the LMNE-type III (combined type of infection and abrasion) 3570/μL (median).

CONCLUSION

The described graphic type differentiation is a new and helpful method for differentiation of hematoma and early PJI as well as abrasion and late PJI.

The Use of Oral Antibiotics After Total Joint Arthroplasty: A Critical Analysis Review

» There is conflicting and insufficient evidence that extended oral antibiotic (EOA) therapy prevents infection in high-risk patients undergoing primary total joint arthroplasty (TJA), limiting recommendation for or against the practice.» In the case of aseptic revision TJA, the evidence is also conflicting and limited by underlying confounders, preventing recommendation for use of EOA.» There is fair evidence that use of EOA after debridement antibiotic therapy and implant retention of the prosthesis prolongs infection-free survival, but randomized controlled trials are needed. On the other hand, there is strong evidence that patients undergoing 2-stage revision should receive a period of suppressive oral antibiotics after the second stage.» The optimal duration of EOA in primary TJA, aseptic revision, and debridement antibiotic therapy and implant retention of the prosthesis is unknown. However, there is strong evidence that 3 months of EOA suppression may be appropriate after reimplantation as part of 2-stage exchange arthroplasty.» Complications secondary to EOA are reported to be between 0% and 13.7%, yet are inconsistently reported and poorly defined. The risks associated with antibiotic use, including development of antimicrobial resistance, must be weighed against a possible decrease in infection rate.

10-Year Cumulative Incidence and Indications for Revision Total Knee Arthroplasty Among Patients Who Have Sickle Cell Disease

BACKGROUND

Literature regarding total knee arthroplasty (TKA) outcomes in sickle cell disease (SCD) is limited. Moreover, 10-year survivorship of SCD implants is unknown. This study aimed to observe 10-year cumulative incidence and indications for revision TKA in patients who did and did not have SCD.

METHODS

Patients who underwent primary TKA were identified using a large national database. The SCD patients were matched by age, sex, and a comorbidity index to a control cohort in a 1:4 ratio. The 10-year cumulative incidence rates were determined using Kaplan-Meier survival analyses. Multivariable analyses were conducted using Cox proportional hazard modeling. Chi-squared analyses were conducted to compare indications for revision between cohorts. In total, 1,010 SCD patients were identified, 100,000 patients included in the unmatched control, and 4,020 patients included in the matched control.

RESULTS

Compared to the unmatched control cohort, SCD patients exhibited higher 10-year all-cause revision (HR: 1.86; P < .001) with higher proportions of revisions for periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) (P < .001), aseptic loosening (P < .001), and hematoma (P < .001). Compared to the matched control, SCD patients had higher 10-year all-cause revision (Hazard Ratio (HR): 1.39; P = .034) with a higher proportion of revisions for PJI (P = .044), aseptic loosening (P = .003), and hematoma (P = .019).

CONCLUSION

Independent of other comorbidities, SCD patients are more likely to undergo revisions for PJI, aseptic loosening, and hematoma compared to patients who do not have SCD. Due to the high-risk of these complications, perioperative and postoperative surgical optimization should be enforced in SCD patients.

A Low Rate of Periprosthetic Infections after Aseptic Knee Prosthesis Revision Using Dual-Antibiotic-Impregnated Bone Cement

AIM

The incidence of periprosthetic joint infections (PJI) following aseptic knee revision arthroplasty lies between 3% and 7.5%. The aim of this study was to verify the hypothesis that the use of dual-antibiotic-impregnated cement in knee revision arthroplasty leads to a lower rate of periprosthetic joint infections.

METHODS

We retrospectively reviewed 403 aseptic revision knee arthroplasties performed between January 2013 and March 2021 (148 revisions of a unicompartmental prosthesis, 188 revisions of a bicondylar total knee arthroplasty (TKA), 41 revisions of an axis-guided prosthesis, and 26 revisions of only one component of a surface replacement prosthesis). The bone cement Copal G+C (Heraeus Medical, Wertheim, Germany) with two antibiotics-gentamycin and clindamycin-was used for the fixation of the new implant. The follow-up period was 53.4 ± 27.9 (4.0-115.0) months.

RESULTS

Five patients suffered from PJI within follow-up (1.2%). The revision rate for any reason was 8.7%. Survival for any reason was significantly different between the types of revision (p = 0.026, Log-Rank-test), with lower survival rates after more complex surgical procedures. The 5-year survival rate with regard to revision for any reason was 91.3% [88.2-94.4%] and with regard to revision for PJI 98.2% [98.7-99.9%], respectively.

CONCLUSION

The use of the dual-antibiotic-impregnated bone cement Copal G+C results in a lower rate of periprosthetic infections after aseptic knee prosthesis replacement than that reported in published prosthesis revisions using only one antibiotic in the bone cement.

Clinical Outcomes and Infection Rates Following Revision Total Knee Arthroplasty: Aseptic Failure versus Septic Failure

Background

It is controversial whether revision total knee arthroplasty (TKA) due to septic failure shows inferior clinical outcomes compared with TKA due to aseptic failure. Moreover, few studies have compared the infection rates after revision TKA between aseptic and septic failure. We aimed to compare the clinical outcomes and infection rates after aseptic and septic revision TKA.

Methods

Between April 2006 and May 2019, 68 and 26 patients underwent revision TKA due to aseptic failure (aseptic group) and septic failure (septic group), respectively. The postoperative range of motion (ROM), Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis index, Knee Society Knee Score (KSKS), Knee Society Function Score (KSFS), and infection rates were compared between the two groups.

Results

The mean follow-up durations in the aseptic and septic groups were 44.4 and 54.8 months, respectively. The septic group showed inferior postoperative ROM (124.1° and 109.4°, p = 0.004), KSKS (88.9 and 78.8, p = 0.001), and KSFS (72.8 and 59.0, p = 0.001). Three patients of aseptic group had infection. Three patients of septic group had recurred infection (same pathogen with the first infection) and 1 patient had a new infection (different pathogen). The septic group showed slightly higher but not significantly different infection rates (4.4% and 15.4%, p = 0.089).

Conclusions

Revision TKA with septic failure showed inferior postoperative clinical outcomes compared with aseptic revision surgery. A slightly higher infection rate was observed in the septic group but it was not significantly different.

The Challenge of Emerging Resistant Gram-Positive Pathogens in Hip and Knee Periprosthetic Joint Infections

➤ An increase in resistant bacterial pathogens has occurred over the last 4 decades.➤ Careful patient selection and improving or correcting risk factors for periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) before elective surgical treatment are strongly recommended. ➤ Appropriate microbiological methods, including those used to detect and grow Cutibacterium acnes, are recommended. ➤ Antimicrobial agents used in the prevention or management of infection should be selected appropriately and the duration of therapy should be carefully considered in order to mitigate the risk of developing bacterial resistance.➤ Molecular methods including rapid polymerase chain reaction (PCR) diagnostics, 16S sequencing, and/or shotgun and/or targeted whole-genome sequencing are recommended in culture-negative cases of PJI.➤ Expert consultation with an infectious diseases specialist (if available) is recommended to assist with the appropriate antimicrobial management and monitoring of patients with PJI.

Treatment of periprosthetic knee infection and coexistent periprosthetic fracture: A case report and literature review

BACKGROUND

Periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) and periprosthetic fracture (PPF) are among the most serious complications following total knee arthroplasty. Herein, we present one patient with these two complications with details on the characteristics, treatment strategy, and outcome.

CASE SUMMARY

A 69-year-old female patient who suffered from PJI and PPF following total knee arthroplasty was treated by a two-stage revision surgery. After thorough foreign material removal and debridement, we used a plate that was covered with antibiotic-loaded bone cement to link with a hand-made cement spacer to occupy the joint space and fix the fracture. Although the infection was cured, the fracture did not heal and caused bone defect due to the long interval between debridement and revision. In the revision surgery, a cemented stem and cortical allogenic splints were used to reconstruct the fracture and bone defect. At the final follow-up 27 mo after revision, the patient was satisfied with postoperative knee functions with satisfactory range of motion (104º) and Hospital for Special Surgery knee score (82 points). The radiographs showed no loosening of the prosthesis and that the bone grafts healed well with the femur.

CONCLUSION

Our two-stage revision surgery has proved to be successful and may be considered in other patients with PJI and PPF.

Antibiotic Prophylaxis in One-Stage Revision of Septic Total Knee Arthroplasty: A Scoping Review

BACKGROUND

Total knee replacement (TKA) is becoming a routine procedure in orthopedic surgery. One of the possible complications of this surgery is periprosthetic joint infection (PJI). The purpose of this study is to identify, through a literature review, which antibiotic is used as prophylaxis for septic one-stage revision TKA and what is the rationale for its use.

METHODS

We searched: MEDLINE, Embase, PsycINFO on Ovid, the Cochrane Library, and the Google Scholar Database. The searches were limited by date (January 2005 to September 2022) and to the English language. All types of original research were considered, including prospective or retrospective longitudinal studies, cross-sectional studies, and randomized trials. The specific search terms were ((antibiotic [MeSH]) AND (prophylaxis)) and (TKA OR TKR OR "Arthroplasty, Replacement, Knee" [MeSH] OR ((knee) adj2 (replace* OR arthroplasty* OR prosthe*))).

RESULTS

Despite our research efforts, we found no article capable of answering the question of which antibiotic to use as surgical prophylaxis for a septic revision one-stage TKA.

CONCLUSIONS

Although the research results are inconclusive, we would recommend using the same antibiotic prophylaxis as for primary joint replacement, i.e., cefazolin, as it was recommended for its low side effect rate and relative effectiveness.

Intraosseous Vancomycin May Not Be Helpful in Aseptic Revision Knee Arthroplasty: A Single-Surgeon Consecutive Case Series

BACKGROUND

Infection after aseptic revision total knee arthroplasty (TKA) has been reported from 9% to 14%. Intraosseous (IO) vancomycin infusion has decreased the risk of infection after primary TKA. The results of this additional prophylaxis were evaluated in aseptic revision TKA.

METHODS

In this prospective, single-surgeon study of 20 consecutive patients having aseptic revision TKA, 500 milligrams of vancomycin in 120 mL of saline were infused into the tibia prior to incision, in addition to intravenous (IV) cefazolin. There were 18 men and 2 women who had a mean age of 67 years (range, 47-79), and mean body mass index of 34.4 (range, 25.9-51.2). The knees were aspirated in the operating room prior to IV and IO antibiotics. The outcomes were infections at 90 days requiring reoperation and complications from the infusion.

RESULTS

Three of the 20 aseptic revisions had early prosthetic joint infection, 2 with gram-negative organisms and one with coagulase-negative Staphylococcus. All had debridement, liner exchange and IV antibiotic treatment, but 1 patient eventually had an above knee amputation. No patient had total body "erythema syndrome", but 1 patient had transient facial flushing. Six patients had a transient elevation of serum creatinine including 3 with an abnormal preoperative serum creatinine.

CONCLUSION

In this small series of aseptic revision TKA, there was no added benefit of IO vancomycin infusion, but there were no infections with methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus. Additional studies are needed before this technique should be routinely recommended.

Extended Oral Antibiotic Prophylaxis After Aseptic Total Hip or Knee Arthroplasty Revisions: A Preliminary Report

BACKGROUND

It is unknown whether extended oral antibiotic (EOA) prophylaxis reduces periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) rates after aseptic revision total hip (THA) and knee arthroplasty (TKA). The literature is scarce. Therefore, we sought to ascertain whether EOA prophylaxis decreases PJI rates after aseptic first-time revision THA and TKA when compared to standard prophylaxis.

METHODS

This is a retrospective review of 328 consecutive revisions (3 surgeons, single institution, from September 27, 2017 to December 31, 2019). Preoperative 2013 Musculoskeletal Infection Society (MSIS) criteria, radiographs, and medications were reviewed. Inclusion criteria included aseptic first-time revision THA and TKA. Exclusion criteria were positive intraoperative cultures and/or histology, PJI (2013 MSIS criteria), hemiarthroplasty/partial arthroplasty revision, revision using foreign material (ie, mesh), metastatic bone disease, and intravenous antibiotics >24 hours after surgery. A total of 178 revisions were included, and 2 groups were set apart based on antibiotic prophylactic regime. The following were the groups: (1) EOA prophylaxis (>24 hours, n = 93) and (2) standard prophylaxis (≤24 hours, n = 85). Demographics, joint types, lengths of stay, skin-to-skin operative times, revision types, transfusions, discharge dispositions, and PJIs (per 2013 MSIS criteria) after the first-time revision were compared between groups. There were no significant differences in demographics. However, skin-to-skin operative time was significantly higher in the EOA group (123 minutes versus 98 minutes, P = .01). Mean follow-up was 849 days (range, 15-1,671). Statistical significance was set at a P value lower than .05.

RESULTS

Postoperative PJI rates were not significantly different: 2.2% EOA prophylaxis versus 3.5% standard prophylaxis (P = .671).

CONCLUSION

No significant difference was found between PJI rates between both prophylactic regimens. A large multicenter study with a larger sample size is needed to support EOA after aseptic revisions.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level III.

Cefadroxil-Induced Clostridium difficile Infection Following Total Knee Arthroplasty

Perioperative infection prophylaxis is a fundamental element of total knee arthroplasty (TKA). There has been a recent trend toward the use of extended postoperative oral antibiotics in high-risk patients. We describe a case report of a patient who underwent a primary TKA and subsequently developed Clostridium difficile colitis after an extended course of postoperative prophylactic oral cefadroxil. Following the C. difficile infection, the patient eventually developed bacteremia and a multidrug-resistant Escherichia coli prosthetic joint infection which required multiple debridements. Extended use of postoperative prophylactic oral cefadroxil may increase the risk of C. difficile-associated diarrhea. Additionally, our case suggests that C. difficile infection may subsequently increase the risk of bacteremia which could lead to prosthetic joint infection. More evidence is required to further define this risk.

Efficacy of Postoperative Oral Antibiotics in Foot and Ankle Surgery

BACKGROUND

Preoperative oral antibiotic use in patients undergoing foot and ankle surgery is standard practice, but no consensus has been reached regarding the efficacy of postoperative oral antibiotics. The purpose of this study was to determine whether postoperative oral antibiotics reduce the rate of surgical site infections (SSIs) in patients, with and without comorbidities, undergoing foot and ankle surgery.

METHODS

A retrospective chart review was conducted identifying patients who underwent foot and ankle surgery by 4 fellowship-trained, foot and ankle orthopaedic surgeons between January 1, 2015, and January 1, 2019. Patients were divided into 2 groups: those who received postoperative oral antibiotics (group 1) and those who did not (group 2). Two surgeons routinely prescribed postoperative oral antibiotics, and 2 did not. Demographics, comorbidities, and procedure complexity based on surgical site and Current Procedural Terminology code were recorded from the charts. The primary outcome was postoperative infection (superficial or deep) within 6 months after surgery. Patients with antibiotic use prior to surgery, preoperative infection, or lack of follow-up >6 weeks were excluded. Multivariate logistic regression modeling was used to analyze differences in infection rate and severity.

RESULTS

Chart review identified 3631 patients, 1227 of whom did not receive postoperative oral antibiotics whereas 2394 patients did. Routine postoperative oral antibiotic use did not significantly affect postoperative infection rates or severity. However, all covariates studied (diabetes, hypertension, obesity, tobacco use, alcohol use, rheumatoid conditions, and age) influenced postoperative infection rates and severity.

CONCLUSION

The results of this study indicate that postoperative oral antibiotics are not associated with differences in infection rates or severity. We do not recommend routine use in foot and ankle surgery.