1
|
Metz AK, Rainey JP, Blackburn BE, Taylor AJ, Peters CL. Limited Satisfaction and Increased Risk With Intra-articular Corticosteroid Injections in Patients Who Have Hip Osteoarthritis Needing Total Hip Arthroplasty. J Arthroplasty 2025:S0883-5403(25)00249-9. [PMID: 40113183 DOI: 10.1016/j.arth.2025.03.037] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/18/2024] [Revised: 03/11/2025] [Accepted: 03/13/2025] [Indexed: 03/22/2025] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND The value of intra-articular corticosteroid injections (CSI) in the treatment of hip osteoarthritis has come into question due to concerns regarding efficacy and complication profile. This study aimed to assess patient satisfaction after CSI for hip osteoarthritis and the association of CSI with potential complications following subsequent total hip arthroplasty (THA). METHODS A survey was sent to 510 patients who received at least one CSI before THA. Data collected included reduction in visual analog scale pain scores, duration of relief, and patient satisfaction. A retrospective review of 1,090 THA patients at our institution was performed to evaluate the association of CSI to potential complications following THA. Chi-square, Fisher exact, and logistic regression were used for comparison between groups. A total of 104 patients, who had injections in 129 hips, responded (response rate 20.4%); there was 45.8% of patients who had one injection per hip, with a mean of 2.2 injections per hip (range, one to 10). RESULTS Patients reported a mean reduction in visual analog scale pain scores of 5.2 (SD = 3.2), with the average relief lasting 6.2 weeks (SD = 8.4). Of note, 16.5% reported no satisfaction after CSI, and 44.4% stated they would not undergo CSI again. Of the 1,090 THA patients that were retrospectively reviewed, 247 patients (22.7%) received a CSI before THA; this was associated with an increased rate of septic revision (2.0 versus 0.5%, odds ratio = 4.98, P = 0.014). There were no significant differences in aseptic revision rates (P = 0.28). CONCLUSIONS Almost half of the patients who received a CSI before THA would not do so again, with average pain relief lasting approximately 6 weeks. Given the increased risk of septic revision for those who underwent CSI before THA, this draws further concern regarding the value of CSI before THA.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Allan K Metz
- Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, University of Utah, Salt Lake City, Utah
| | - Joshua P Rainey
- Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, University of Utah, Salt Lake City, Utah
| | - Brenna E Blackburn
- Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, University of Utah, Salt Lake City, Utah
| | - Adam J Taylor
- Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, University of Utah, Salt Lake City, Utah
| | | |
Collapse
|
2
|
Benzon HT, Provenzano DA, Nagpal A, Souza D, Eckmann MS, Nelson AM, Mina M, Abd-Elsayed A, Elmofty D, Chadwick AL, Doshi TL, Pino CA, Rana M, Shah S, Shankar H, Stout A, Smith E, Abdi S, Cohen SP, Hirsch JA, Schneider BJ, Manchikanti L, Maus TP, Narouze S, Shanthanna H, Wasan AD, Hoang TD, Rivera J, Hunt C, FitzGerald JD. Use and safety of corticosteroid injections in joints and musculoskeletal soft tissue: guidelines from the American Society of Regional Anesthesia and Pain Medicine, the American Academy of Pain Medicine, the American Society of Interventional Pain Physicians, and the International Pain and Spine Intervention Society. Reg Anesth Pain Med 2025:rapm-2024-105656. [PMID: 40015722 DOI: 10.1136/rapm-2024-105656] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/09/2024] [Accepted: 02/03/2025] [Indexed: 03/01/2025]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Intra-articular corticosteroid (IACS) injection and peri-articular corticosteroid injection are commonly used to treat musculoskeletal conditions. Results vary by musculoskeletal region, but most studies report short-term benefit with mixed results on long-term relief. Publications showed adverse events from single corticosteroid injections. Recommended effective doses were lower than those currently used by clinicians. METHODS Development of the practice guideline for joint injections was approved by the Board of Directors of the American Society of Regional Anesthesia and Pain Medicine and the participating societies. A Corticosteroid Safety Work Group coordinated the development of three guidelines: peripheral nerve blocks and trigger points; joints; and neuraxial, facet, and sacroiliac joint injections. The topics included safety of the technique in relation to landmark-guided, ultrasound-guided, or radiology-aided injections; effect of the addition of the corticosteroid on the efficacy of the injectate; and adverse events related to the injection. Experts on the topics were assigned to extensively review the literature and initially develop consensus statements and recommendations. A modified version of the US Preventive Services Task Force grading of evidence and strength of recommendation was followed. A modified Delphi process was adhered to in arriving at a consensus. RESULTS This guideline focuses on the safety and efficacy of corticosteroid joint injections for managing joint chronic pain in adults. The joints that were addressed included the shoulder, elbow, hand, wrist, hip, knee, and small joints of the hands and feet. All the statements and recommendations were approved by all participants and the Board of Directors of the participating societies after four rounds of discussion. There is little evidence to guide the selection of one corticosteroid over another. Ultrasound guidance increases the accuracy of injections and reduces procedural pain. A dose of 20 mg triamcinolone is as effective as 40 mg for both shoulder IACS and subacromial subdeltoid bursa corticosteroid injections. The commonly used dose for hip IACS is 40 mg triamcinolone or methylprednisolone. Triamcinolone 40 mg is as effective as 80 mg for knee IACS. Overall, IACS injections result in short-term pain relief from a few weeks to a few months. The adverse events include an increase in blood glucose, adrenal suppression, detrimental effect on cartilage lining the joint, reduction of bone mineral density, and postoperative joint infection. CONCLUSIONS In this practice guideline, we provided specific recommendations on the role of corticosteroids in joint, bursa, and peritendon injections for musculoskeletal pain.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Honorio T Benzon
- Anesthesiology, Northwestern University Feinberg School of Medicine, Chicago, Illinois, USA
| | | | - Ameet Nagpal
- PM&R, Medical University of South Carolina, Charleston, South Carolina, USA
| | - Dmitri Souza
- Pain Medicine, Summa Western Reserve Hospital, Cuyahoga Falls, Ohio, USA
| | - Maxim S Eckmann
- Anesthesiology, The University of Texas Health Science Center at San Antonio, San Antonio, Texas, USA
| | - Ariana M Nelson
- Department of Anesthesiology and Perioperative Medicine, University of California, Irvine, Irvine, California, USA
- Department of Aerospace Medicine, Exploration Medical Capability, NASA Johnson Space Center, Houston, Texas, USA
| | - Maged Mina
- Anesthesiology, The University of Texas Health Science Center at San Antonio, San Antonio, Texas, USA
| | - Alaa Abd-Elsayed
- University of Wisconsin Madison School of Medicine and Public Health, Madison, Wisconsin, USA
| | - Dalia Elmofty
- Department of Anesthesia, University of Chicago Medical Center, Chicago, Illinois, USA
| | - Andrea L Chadwick
- Anesthesiology, The University of Kansas Medical Center, Kansas City, Kansas, USA
| | - Tina L Doshi
- Anesthesiology and Critical Care Medicine, Johns Hopkins Medicine, Baltimore, Maryland, USA
| | - Carlos A Pino
- Anesthesiology, Naval Medical Center San Diego, San Diego, California, USA
| | - Maunak Rana
- Department of Anesthesia, University of Chicago Medical Center, Chicago, Illinois, USA
| | - Shalini Shah
- University of California, Irvine, Orange, California, USA
| | - Hariharan Shankar
- Anesthesiology, Clement J Zablocki VA Medical Center, Milwaukee, Wisconsin, USA
| | - Alison Stout
- PM&R, Cleveland Clinic Neurological Institute, Cleveland, Ohio, USA
| | - Elizabeth Smith
- American Society of Regional Anesthesia and Pain Medicine, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, USA
| | - Salahadin Abdi
- Pain, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas, USA
| | - Steven P Cohen
- Anesthesiology, Pain Medicine Division; PM&R; Neurology; Psychiatry; Neurosurgery, Northwestern University Feinberg School of Medicine, Chicago, Illinois, USA
| | - Joshua A Hirsch
- Department of Interventional Radiology, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, Massachusetts, USA
| | - Byron J Schneider
- PM&R, Vanderbilt University Medical Center, Nashville, Tennessee, USA
| | | | | | - Samer Narouze
- Pain Medicine, University Hospitals Cleveland Medical Center, Cleveland, Ohio, USA
| | | | - Ajay D Wasan
- University of Pittsburgh Health Sciences, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, USA
| | - Thanh D Hoang
- Endocrinology, Walter Reed Army Medical Center, Bethesda, Maryland, USA
| | | | - Christine Hunt
- Anesthesiology-Pain Medicine, Mayo Clinic, Jacksonville, Florida, USA
| | | |
Collapse
|
3
|
Tse S, Chut AK, Hutt J. Air arthrography: a safe technique for intra-articular hip injections. Hip Int 2025; 35:4-8. [PMID: 39611262 DOI: 10.1177/11207000241301036] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/30/2024]
Abstract
INTRODUCTION Diagnosing the specific causes of young adult hip pain remains challenging due to non-specific symptoms. Fluoroscopy-guided injections are useful for confirming intra-articular hip pain and differentiating it from extra-articular pathology. When performing injections, accurate needle placement into the hip joint is critical. Traditionally, a contrast agent is used to confirm intra-articular positioning. Air arthrograms are an alternative technique that avoids adverse reactions to contrast, which may compromise interpretation of results, as well as being more cost-effective. This study presents the air arthrography technique for intra-articular hip injections, and assesses outcomes and complications in a consecutive patient cohort. METHODS A retrospective review was performed on patients who underwent an air arthrography guided intra-articular hip injection at a single institution between April 2019 and September 2022. We identified 352 hips in 294 patients. Patient records were evaluated for complications from the injection or any subsequent hip surgery. RESULTS Mean age at time of injection was 38 years (±14.7 SD) for 216 females and 78 males. Mean follow-up time post injection was 138 days (IQR = 46-186). Results showed a 2.56% complication rate, primarily attributed to steroid flares, all of which resolved without further intervention. 102 patients proceeded to subsequent hip surgery; the mean time from injection to procedure was 341 days (IQR = 194-456) and the mean follow-up post subsequent procedure was 346 days (IQR = 87-531). There were no infective complications following the injections or any subsequent procedures. CONCLUSIONS This is the first study that evaluates longer-term patient outcomes following air arthrography guided injections with or without subsequent surgery. Our results demonstrate that the use of air arthrograms is a reliable, safe, and cost-effective method for intra-articular hip injections, without the additional risks posed by contrast media.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Shannon Tse
- Department of Trauma & Orthopaedic Surgery, University College Hospital, London, UK
| | - Ashley K Chut
- Department of Trauma & Orthopaedic Surgery, University College Hospital, London, UK
| | - Jonathan Hutt
- Department of Trauma & Orthopaedic Surgery, University College Hospital, London, UK
- London Hip Unit, Princess Grace Hospital, London, UK
| |
Collapse
|
4
|
Schoell K, Crabb R, Simpson E, Deshpande V, Gardner V, Quilligan E, Parvaresh K, Kassam H. Preoperative corticosteroid injections are associated with a higher periprosthetic infection rate following primary total shoulder arthroplasty: a systematic review and meta-analysis. J Shoulder Elbow Surg 2024; 33:2734-2742. [PMID: 39002882 DOI: 10.1016/j.jse.2024.05.025] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/29/2024] [Revised: 05/01/2024] [Accepted: 05/10/2024] [Indexed: 07/15/2024]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Corticosteroid injections (CSIs) are commonly used for the treatment of shoulder pain in patients with osteoarthritis and rotator cuff arthropathy. These injections may increase the risk of infection following eventual shoulder arthroplasty. The purpose of this study was to perform a systematic review and meta-analysis of existing data to explore the relationship between preoperative CSI's and postoperative periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) following shoulder arthroplasty. METHODS A literature search was performed on PubMed, Embase, and Web of Science databases through September 29, 2023. Of the 4221 retrieved, 7 studies including 136,233 patients were included for qualitative analysis. Studies describing patients receiving CSI prior to shoulder arthroplasty and the effect on postoperative infection risk were included in the systematic review and subsequent meta-analysis. Assessment of risk of bias was performed using the Methodological Index for Non-Randomized Studies (MINORS) criteria. RESULTS Receiving a CSI prior to shoulder arthroplasty was found to have a statistically significant association with increased risk for PJI (odds ratio [OR]: 1.13; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.06-1.19; P < .0001). The rate of PJI increased when injections were given closer to the time of surgery. Patients who received an injection at any time point before surgery had a 5.4% risk of PJI compared to 7.9% and 9.0% in patients receiving an injection within 3 months and 1 month of surgery, respectively. This time dependent association however did not reach statistical significance: 1 month OR 1.48; 95% Cl: 0.86-2.53; P = .16, 3 months OR 1.95; 95% Cl: 0.95-4.00; P = .07. CONCLUSION The results of this systematic review and meta-analysis demonstrate that patients receiving corticosteroid shoulder injections prior to shoulder arthroplasty may be at an increased risk for PJI postoperatively. While time dependent stratification did not reach statistical significance, our findings indicate a clear trend of increased risk for patients receiving injections closer to surgery.
Collapse
|
5
|
Prkić A, Peet M, Benner JL, Slot K, van der List JP, Temmerman OPP, Vos SJ. Role of Preoperative Intra-Articular Corticosteroid Injections on Periprosthetic Joint Infection in Total Hip Arthroplasty and Its Association With Preoperative Timing: A Single-Center Series of 5,909 Hips. J Arthroplasty 2024; 39:2100-2103. [PMID: 38423259 DOI: 10.1016/j.arth.2024.02.063] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/01/2023] [Revised: 02/20/2024] [Accepted: 02/21/2024] [Indexed: 03/02/2024] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND Preoperative intra-articular corticosteroid injections to the hip joint increase the risk of periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) during primary total hip arthroplasty (THA). This study aimed to determine the relationship between preoperative timing of intra-articular corticosteroid injections and PJI risk following THA using data from a single-center hospital. METHODS This single-center, retrospective cohort study included patients who underwent a THA between 2014 and 2020. Medical records were checked for intra-articular corticosteroid injections and PJI within 1 year of surgery. Patients were categorized into groups based on whether they received "no injection" or "injection 0 to 3 months," "3 to 6 months," and "> 6 months prior to THA." Hazard ratios (HRs) for these groups were calculated using multivariate Cox regression analysis, correcting for potential confounders, and presented with 95% confidence intervals [95% CIs]. RESULTS In total, 4,507 patients (5,909 THAs) were identified. A total of 1,581 patients (27%) received an injection prior to THA. Without considering the timing factor, no increased risk for PJI following an intra-articular injection was noted (P = .19). Comparing the specified groups using multivariate analysis, corticosteroid injection within 3 months of THA showed an increased risk of PJI (HR 2.63, 95% CI 1.18 to 5.87, P = .018), but this effect was not observed for the "injection 3 to 6 months" group (HR 1.51, 95% CI 0.74 to 3.08, P = .264). CONCLUSIONS Corticosteroid injections administered up to 3 months prior to THA increased the risk of PJI within 1 year after THA, with an HR of 2.63; however, injections between 3 and 6 months before surgery did not have a significantly higher infection rate.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Ante Prkić
- Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, NorthWest Clinics, Alkmaar, The Netherlands; Centre for Orthopaedic Research Alkmaar (CORAL), Alkmaar, The Netherlands
| | - Marijn Peet
- Centre for Orthopaedic Research Alkmaar (CORAL), Alkmaar, The Netherlands
| | - Joyce L Benner
- Centre for Orthopaedic Research Alkmaar (CORAL), Alkmaar, The Netherlands; Faculty of Behavioral and Movement Sciences, Department of Human Movement Sciences, Vrije Universiteit, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - Karin Slot
- Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, NorthWest Clinics, Alkmaar, The Netherlands
| | | | - Olivier P P Temmerman
- Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, NorthWest Clinics, Alkmaar, The Netherlands; Centre for Orthopaedic Research Alkmaar (CORAL), Alkmaar, The Netherlands
| | - Stan J Vos
- Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, NorthWest Clinics, Alkmaar, The Netherlands; Centre for Orthopaedic Research Alkmaar (CORAL), Alkmaar, The Netherlands
| |
Collapse
|
6
|
Vicenti G, Albano F, Buono C, Passarelli AC, Pesare E, Colasuonno G, Ladogana T, Moretti B, Solarino G. Risk of Periprosthetic Joint Infection after Intra-Articular Injection: Any Difference among Shoulder, Knee and Hip? Healthcare (Basel) 2024; 12:1060. [PMID: 38891135 PMCID: PMC11171832 DOI: 10.3390/healthcare12111060] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/03/2024] [Revised: 05/16/2024] [Accepted: 05/21/2024] [Indexed: 06/21/2024] Open
Abstract
Osteoarthritis is a degenerative joint disease caused by the wear and tear of joint cartilage. The definitive and resolving treatment is prosthetic replacement of the articular surface, the demand of which is on the rise for patients with mild to moderate severity. However, a conservative strategy may be considered that aims to reduce and contain pain symptoms by postponing surgical treatment in the case of worsening that can no longer be otherwise controlled. Intra-articular infiltrations, like other therapeutic strategies, are not without complications, and among these the most feared is joint infection, especially in anticipation of future prosthetic replacement. Is important to avoid periprosthetic joint infections because they represent one of the third most common reasons for revision surgery. Using cases found in the literature, the aim of this article is to determine if there is a real correlation between the type of injections, the number of doses injected and the time between infiltrations and the surgical procedure.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | | | - Claudio Buono
- Orthopaedic & Trauma Unit, Department of Translational Biomedicine and Neuroscience (DiBraiN), School of Medicine, University of Bari Aldo Moro, AOU Consorziale “Policlinico”, 70124 Bari, Italy; (G.V.); (F.A.); (A.C.P.); (E.P.); (G.C.); (T.L.); (B.M.); (G.S.)
| | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Collapse
|
7
|
Battaglia AG, D’Apolito R, Labionda F, Ramazzotti J, Zagra L. Ultrasound-Guided Hip Injections with High Density Hyaluronic Acid: Outcome at One Year Follow Up. J Clin Med 2024; 13:2515. [PMID: 38731044 PMCID: PMC11084914 DOI: 10.3390/jcm13092515] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/10/2024] [Revised: 04/14/2024] [Accepted: 04/22/2024] [Indexed: 05/13/2024] Open
Abstract
Background: The ultrasound-guided viscosupplementation of the hip joint with hyaluronic acid (HA) is considered a standard procedure among the conservative treatments for hip arthritis. The aim of this study was to evaluate the clinical benefit and the incidence of adverse events of the technique in an observational study at one year follow up. Methods: We evaluated a consecutive series of 85 patients with a diagnosis of symptomatic arthritis who underwent intra-articular ultrasound-guided hyaluronic acid injections. The scales used for evaluation were modified Harris Hip Score (mHHS), WOMAC (Western Ontario and McMaster University), and Hip Outcome Score (HOS) with subscale Sport (HOSs), for pain the Visual Analogic Scale (VAS). The patients were classified according to Tonnis' radiological classification of arthritis (range 0-3): 20 patients (grade 0), 32 (grade 1), 18 (grade 2), 15 (grade 3). Results: At last follow up, all the scales increased: mHHS from 59.35 to 82.1, HOS from 69.45 to 78.53, HOss from 47.4 to 58.11, VAS from 6.09 to 3.97, WOMAC from 33.2 to 31.5 (p < 0.05 for all the parameters); the results were elaborated with GraphPad Prism v5.0 (Prism Software La Jolla, CA, USA) using Wilcoxon's test. A total of 13 patients out of 85 needed arthroplasty, all classified as Tonnis grade 3. No serious adverse events were noted due to the procedure. Conclusions: Based on our findings, indication for the use of hyaluronic acid is limited to patients with mild to moderate arthritis. Patients in advanced arthritis refusing replacement surgery and asking for this treatment should be informed about the poor results of the technique even in the short term.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Antonino Giulio Battaglia
- IRCCS Istituto Ortopedico Galeazzi, Hip Department, 20157 Milan, Italy; (R.D.); (F.L.); (J.R.); (L.Z.)
| | | | | | | | | |
Collapse
|
8
|
Vicenti G, Pesare E, Colasuonno G, Buono C, Albano F, Ladogana T, Passarelli AC, Solarino G. Debridement, Antibiotic Pearls, and Retention of the Implant (DAPRI) in the Treatment of Early Periprosthetic Knee Joint Infections: A Literature Review. Healthcare (Basel) 2024; 12:843. [PMID: 38667605 PMCID: PMC11050335 DOI: 10.3390/healthcare12080843] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 02/18/2024] [Revised: 04/10/2024] [Accepted: 04/11/2024] [Indexed: 04/28/2024] Open
Abstract
(1) Background: Periprosthetic joint infections (PJIs) are severe and frightening complications in orthopaedic surgery, and they are generally divided into three categories: early infections (those occurring within the first 4-6 weeks), delayed infections (those occurring between 3 and 24 months), and late infections (those occurring more than 2 years after surgery). PJI treatment comprises "debridement, antibiotics, and implant retention" (DAIR), single-stage revision, and double-stage revision. Nowadays, to improve the chances of retaining an infected implant and to improve the traditional DAIR method, a modified surgical technique has been developed, named DAPRI (debridement, antibiotic pearls, and retention of the implant). Our study aims to present an up-to-date concept evaluation of the DAPRI technique and its success rate. (2) Methods: Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses (PRISMA) standards were followed, applying a protocol defined by the authors: a total of 765 articles were identified, and at the end of the screening process only 7 studies were included. (3) Results: Currently, the DAPRI procedure can be performed only on patients who have had PJI symptoms for less than 4 weeks, and in order to achieve the highest success rate, indications are quite strict: it is appropriate in patients with acute, superficial infections without sinus tract presence, and well-fixed implants with known sensitive bacteria. The DAPRI surgical method follows a step-by-step process consisting of a first phase of biofilm identification with intra-articular injection of methylene blue, followed by biofilm removal (thermic, mechanical, and chemical aggression), and a last step consisting of prevention of PJI recurrence by using calcium sulphate antibiotic-added beads. (4) Conclusions: The DAPRI approach improves the traditional DAIR technique. It is a correct treatment for acute and early haematogenous PJI, and improves the DAIR success rate.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | - Elisa Pesare
- Orthopaedics Unit, Department of Basic Medical Science, Neuroscience and Sensory Organs, School of Medicine, University of Bari “Aldo Moro”, AOU Consorziale Policlinico, 70124 Bari, Italy; (G.V.); (G.C.); (C.B.); (F.A.); (T.L.); (A.C.P.); (G.S.)
| | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Collapse
|
9
|
Lucenti L, Testa G, Caldaci A, Sammartino F, Cicio C, Ilardo M, Sapienza M, Pavone V. Preoperative Risk Factors for Periprosthetic Joint Infection: A Narrative Review of the Literature. Healthcare (Basel) 2024; 12:666. [PMID: 38540630 PMCID: PMC10970643 DOI: 10.3390/healthcare12060666] [Citation(s) in RCA: 4] [Impact Index Per Article: 4.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 02/07/2024] [Revised: 03/10/2024] [Accepted: 03/12/2024] [Indexed: 01/03/2025] Open
Abstract
Periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) poses a challenging complication for many patients undergoing arthroplasty, and the literature identifies numerous risk factors. A comprehensive understanding of the primary risk and protective factors for PJI is valuable for surgeons. This article aims to compile and summarize the key risk factors for PJI documented in the literature. Some risk factors are related to the nutritional status of patients, with obesity, weight loss, hypovitaminosis, and malnutrition being frequently reported. Pathologies affecting patients also contribute to PJI risk, including septic arthritis, hepatitis, diabetes, urinary tract infections, anemia, hypothyroidism, osteoporosis, and dental pathologies. Unhealthy habits, such as tobacco and drug abuse, are significant factors. Previous corticosteroid injections may also play a role in infection development. A few protective factors are also reported in the literature (use of statins, preoperative decolonization, and preadmission skin preparation). The identification of risk factors and the implementation of evidence-based preoperative protocols are essential steps in reducing the incidence of PJI.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | - Vito Pavone
- Department of General Surgery and Medical Surgical Specialties, Section of Orthopaedics and Traumatology, Policlinico Rodolico-San Marco, University of Catania, 95123 Catania, Italy; (L.L.); (G.T.); (A.C.); (F.S.); (C.C.); (M.I.); (M.S.)
| |
Collapse
|