Definition of Periprosthetic Hip and Knee Joint Infections and the Economic Burden

The health-economic burden of hip and knee periprosthetic joint infections in Europe : a comprehensive analysis following primary arthroplasty

Aims

Periprosthetic joint infections (PJIs) pose significant challenges to patients and healthcare systems worldwide. The aim of this study was to estimate the health-economic burden of reimbursement payment in Europe for PJIs following primary hip and knee arthroplasty.

Methods

The calculation was based on health-economic modelling using data on primary hip and knee arthroplasties for the year 2019 from the Statistical Office of the European Union (Eurostat) and published infection rates to estimate the total number of hip and knee PJIs in 30 European countries. Revision procedures were stratified into: 1) debridement, antibiotics, and implant retention (DAIR); 2) one-stage exchange; and 3) two-stage revision procedures. The cases were then multiplied by the respective healthcare system reimbursement payments. Payment data were acquired from a survey of 13 countries (Austria, Croatia, France, Germany, Italy, Lithuania, Netherlands, Norway, Portugal, Slovenia, Switzerland, Turkey, and the UK) and extrapolated for the remaining countries.

Results

In 2019, a total of 2,048,778 primary total joint replacements were performed (total hip arthroplasty (THA) = 1,147,316 and total knee arthroplasty (TKA) = 901,462), with an estimated 20,416 cases of PJIs (11,131 hip and 9,285 knee) in Europe. This results in an estimated total reimbursement burden of €346,262,026 for European healthcare systems. The breakdown for hip PJI reimbursement was €197,230,953 (€9,751,962 for DAIR procedures, €45,135,894 for one-stage revisions, and €142,343,097 for two-stage revisions). For knee PJIs, the analysis yielded a total reimbursement of €149,031,073 (€9,335,075 for DAIR procedures, €48,058,479 for one-stage revisions, and €91,637,518 for two-stage revisions).

Conclusion

This is the first study to evaluate the health-economic burden of PJIs in Europe, revealing a substantial impact on healthcare systems with an estimated case load of 20,414 cases and overall reimbursement of €346,262,026 for primary THAs and TKAs performed in 2019.

Optimizing debridement and implant retention in acute periprosthetic joint infections

Periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) represents a complex challenge in orthopaedic surgery associated with substantial morbidity and healthcare expenditures. The debridement, antibiotics, and implant retention (DAIR) protocol is a viable treatment, offering several advantages over exchange arthroplasty. With the evolution of treatment strategies, considerable efforts have been directed towards enhancing the efficacy of DAIR, including the development of a phased debridement protocol for acute PJI management. This article provides an in-depth analysis of DAIR, presenting the outcomes of single-stage, two-stage, and repeated DAIR procedures. It delves into the challenges faced, including patient heterogeneity, pathogen identification, variability in surgical techniques, and antibiotics selection. Moreover, critical factors that influence the decision-making process between single- and two-stage DAIR protocols are addressed, including team composition, timing of the intervention, antibiotic regimens, and both anatomical and implant-related considerations. By providing a comprehensive overview of DAIR protocols and their clinical implications, this annotation aims to elucidate the advancements, challenges, and potential future directions in the application of DAIR for PJI management. It is intended to equip clinicians with the insights required to effectively navigate the complexities of implementing DAIR strategies, thereby facilitating informed decision-making for optimizing patient outcomes.

Proceedings of the United Kingdom Periprosthetic Joint Infection Meeting 2022: Combined and Arthroplasty Sessions

Considerable variation in practice exists in the prevention, diagnosis, and treatment of periprosthetic joint infection (PJI), which is a devastating complication for patients and surgeons. The consensus principle has been increasingly embraced by the orthopaedic community to help guide practice, especially where high-level evidence remains unavailable. The third United Kingdom Periprosthetic Joint Infection (UK PJI) Meeting was held in Glasgow on April 1, 2022, with more than 180 delegates in attendance, representing orthopaedics, microbiology, infectious diseases, plastic surgery, anesthetics, and allied health professions, including pharmacy and arthroplasty nurses. The meeting comprised a combined session for all delegates, and separate breakout sessions for arthroplasty and fracture-related infection. Consensus questions for each session were prepared in advance by the UK PJI working group, based upon topics that were proposed at previous UK PJI Meetings, and delegates participated in an anonymized electronic voting process. We present the findings of the combined and arthroplasty sessions of the meeting in this article, and each consensus topic is discussed in relation to the contemporary literature.

Engineering 3D-Printed Advanced Healthcare Materials for Periprosthetic Joint Infections

The use of additive manufacturing or 3D printing in biomedicine has experienced fast growth in the last few years, becoming a promising tool in pharmaceutical development and manufacturing, especially in parenteral formulations and implantable drug delivery systems (IDDSs). Periprosthetic joint infections (PJIs) are a common complication in arthroplasties, with a prevalence of over 4%. There is still no treatment that fully covers the need for preventing and treating biofilm formation. However, 3D printing plays a major role in the development of novel therapies for PJIs. This review will provide a deep understanding of the different approaches based on 3D-printing techniques for the current management and prophylaxis of PJIs. The two main strategies are focused on IDDSs that are loaded or coated with antimicrobials, commonly in combination with bone regeneration agents and 3D-printed orthopedic implants with modified surfaces and antimicrobial properties. The wide variety of printing methods and materials have allowed for the manufacture of IDDSs that are perfectly adjusted to patients' physiognomy, with different drug release profiles, geometries, and inner and outer architectures, and are fully individualized, targeting specific pathogens. Although these novel treatments are demonstrating promising results, in vivo studies and clinical trials are required for their translation from the bench to the market.

Quality of lower limb preoperative skin preparation using colorless versus colored disinfectants-results of an experimental, randomized study in a close to reality setting

BACKGROUND

Appropriate preoperative skin cleansing is important to control surgical site infections. Both colored and colorless skin disinfectants are available, however certain types of skin preparation, such as octenidine-dihydrochloride with alcohol have a long residual antimicrobial effect but are available only in colorless form. We hypothesized that colorless skin disinfectants lead to more incomplete skin preparation of lower limbs compared to colored agents.

METHODS

We randomly assigned healthy volunteers to undergo a determined skin cleansing protocol for total hip arthroplasty in the supine position to either a colored or colorless skin cleansing protocol. The adequacy of skin preparation was compared between orthopedic consultants and residents. The colorless disinfectant was mixed with a fluorescent dye and missed skin areas were visualized using UV lamps. Both preparations were photo-documented following standardized protocols. The primary outcome of interest was the number of legs with an incomplete scrubbed area. The secondary outcome was the cumulative skin area not disinfected.

RESULTS

Fifty-two healthy volunteers (104 legs; 52 colored and 52 colorless) underwent surgical skin preparation. The number of legs incompletely disinfected was significantly higher in colorless compared to colored disinfectant group (38.5% (n = 20) vs. 13.5% (n = 7); p = 0.007). Regardless of the disinfectant, consultants performed better than the residents. When using colored disinfectant, residents incompletely prepared the site in 23.1% (n = 6) compared with 57.7% (n = 15) with a colorless disinfectant (p = 0.023). Conversely consultants using colored disinfectant incompletely prepared the site in 3.8% (n = 1) compared with 19.2% (n = 5) for colorless disinfectant (p = 0.191). The total amount of uncleansed skin was significantly higher using colorless skin disinfectant (mean ± standard deviation: 8.78 cm2± 35.07 vs. 0.65 cm2 ± 2.66, p = 0.002).

CONCLUSIONS

Application of colorless skin disinfectants for hip arthroplasty cleansing protocol led to decreased skin coverage among consultants and residents compared to colored preparations. Colored disinfectants remain the gold standard in hip surgery, however we should be aiming to develop newer colored disinfectants with long residual antimicrobial effects to enable visual control during the scrubbing process.

The multidisciplinary approach to managing prosthetic joint infection: could this lead to improved outcomes?

Periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) is a devastating complication of the total joint arthroplasty (TJA). It presents a great challenge for the treating clinician. Diagnosis as well as management can prove difficult with significant morbidity for the patients and cost for patients, health care providers and society as a whole. Outcomes of equally challenging pathology such as tumors and polytrauma have been shown to be improved when patients are managed by a team as specialists as opposed to single individuals. The purpose of this study is to review the role of the multi-disciplinary team (MDT) approach in the diagnosis and management of PJI. We examine the influence of this approach on clinical outcomes in patients with PJI. We also discuss the organisational and logistical issues associated with establishment of a MDT as well as several other issues not mentioned in the contemporary orthopaedic literature. All published literature examining the role of multidisciplinary care in the management of PJI and the influence of this approach to the management and outcomes of patients with this diagnosis were included. Studies published in languages other than English were excluded. There is a paucity of data on the influence of multidisciplinary care on outcomes of the management of PJI. Evidence suggests that the MDT has important role in ensuring all factors in the management of this complex group are considered and best possible care is delivered. Multicentre randomised clinical trials are required to assess the influence of MDT'S on outcome as well as important questions around the structuring of these teams.

Management strategies for prosthetic joint infection: long-term infection control rates, overall survival rates, functional and quality of life outcomes

DAIR (debridement, antibiotics, and implant retention), one-stage and two-stage revision surgery are the most common management strategies for prosthetic joint infection (PJI) management. Our knowledge concerning their efficacy is based on short to medium-term low-quality studies.

Most studies report infection recurrence rates or infection-free time intervals. However, long-term survival rates of the infection-free joints, functional and quality of life outcome data are of paramount importance.

DAIR, one-stage and two-stage revision strategies are not unique surgical techniques, presenting several variables. Infection control rates for the above strategies vary from 75% to 90%, but comparisons are difficult because different indications and patient selection criteria are used in each strategy.

Recent outcome data show that DAIR and one-stage revision in selected patients (based on host, bacteriological, soft tissue and type of infection criteria) may present improved functional and quality of life outcomes and reduced costs for health systems as compared to those of two-stage revision.

It is expected that health system administrators and providers will apply pressure on surgeons and departments towards the wider use of DAIR and one-stage revision strategies. It is the orthopaedic surgeon’s responsibility to conduct quality studies in order to fully clarify the indications and outcomes of the different revision strategies.

Cite this article: EFORT Open Rev 2021;6:727-734. DOI: 10.1302/2058-5241.6.210008

[Comparison of DRG revenues between fast and slow-track procedures for a two-stage replacement of prostheses for periprosthetic hip infections in the aG-DRG system 2020]

BACKGROUND

The treatment of periprosthetic hip infections is usually cost intensive, so it is generally not cost effective for hospitals. In chronic infections, a two-stage procedure is often indicated, which can be done as a fast-track procedure with a short prosthetic-free interim interval (2-4 weeks) or as a slow-track procedure with a long prosthetic-free interim interval (over 4 weeks).

AIM

The aim of this study was to elucidate the revenue situation of both forms of treatment in the aG-DRG-System 2020, taking into account revenue-relevant influencing factors.

METHODS

For fast-track and slow-track procedures with two-stage revision and detection of a staphylococcus aureus (MSSA), treatment cases were simulated using a grouper software (3M KODIP Suite) based on the diagnoses (ICD-10-GM) and procedures (OPS) and then grouped into DRGs. Revenue-relevant parameters, such as length of stay and secondary diagnoses (SD), were taken into account. In addition, two real treatment cases with fast-track and slow-track procedures were compared to each other.

RESULTS

The total revenues for the slow-track procedure with a length of stay of 25 days (without SD) were 27,551 € and for a length of stay of 42 days (with SD) even 40,699 €, compared to 23,965 € with the fast-track procedure with a length of stay of 25 days (without SD) and 27,283 € for a length of stay of 42 days (with SD). The real treatment cases also showed a big difference in the total revenues of 12,244 € in favor of the slow-track procedure.

DISCUSSION

Even in the aG-DRG-System 2020, the two-stage revision procedure with a long interim interval seems to be more interesting from a financial point of view and the hospital perspective compared to the fast-track procedure, especially with multimorbid patients. This creates a financial barrier to the treatment of such patients with a short interim interval.

At what point during total knee arthroplasty operations are gloves most frequently torn?

PURPOSE

The aim of this study was to determine the time points during a total knee arthroplasty operation when there is the greatest possibility of tearing a surgical glove and thus the stage of the operation at which there is the greatest risk of infection.

METHODS

The study included 300 total knee arthroplasty cases performed by 10 orthopedic surgeons. Using a chronometer during the operation, the upper layer of each surgical glove was removed and inflated with sterile saline at 10-min intervals. When a tear was determined, a record was made of the time it occurred, the stage of the operation, the finger that was torn, and the side (right or left hand).

RESULTS

The mean time of the glove perforation was 40.74 ± 10.69 min. Glove tears occurred at the rate of 28.9% (n = 39) in the thumb, 63.7% (n = 86) in the index finger, 2.2% (n = 3) in the middle finger, and 5.2% (n = 7) in the ring finger. The tears occurred after the femoral cut in 8.1% (n = 11), after the tibial cut in 14.8% (n = 20), at the stage of trial component reduction in 52.6% of cases (n = 71), after placement of the prosthesis in 7.4% (n = 10), and at the closure stage in 17% (n = 23) (p < 0.001).

CONCLUSION

The fingers requiring the most care during total knee arthroplasty are the thumb and index finger. The stages of the operation with the greatest risk for glove tears are trial component reduction and wound closure. Changing gloves after these high-risk surgical stages would help to decrease the risk of periprosthetic infections.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level IV/Case series.

Irrigation and Debridement with Chronic Antibiotic Suppression Is as Effective as 2-Stage Exchange in Revision Total Knee Arthroplasty with Extensive Instrumentation

BACKGROUND

Extraction of implants because of periprosthetic infection (PJI) following complex revision total knee arthroplasty (rTKA) with extensive instrumentation is a daunting undertaking for surgeon and patient alike. The purpose of the present study was to evaluate whether infections following complex rTKA are better treated with 2-stage exchange or irrigation and debridement (I&D) with modular component exchange and antibiotic suppression in terms of infection control, reoperation, and function.

METHODS

We reviewed rTKAs that had been performed for the treatment of PJI from 2005 to 2016. Extensive instrumentation was defined as the presence ≥1 of the following: metaphyseal cones/sleeves, distal femoral replacement, periprosthetic fracture instrumentation, or fully cemented stems measuring >75 mm. Cases were categorized according to the initial treatment (I&D with antibiotic suppression or initiation of 2-stage exchange).

RESULTS

Eighty-seven patients with PJI and extensive instrumentation were identified: 56 patients who were managed with I&D with suppression and 31 who were managed with the initiation of 2-stage exchange. The rate of success (defined as no reoperation for infection) was similar for the 2 groups (62.5% the I&D group compared with 67.7% for the 2-stage group; p = 0.62). The rate of mortality was also similar (39.3% for the I&D group compared with 38.7% for the 2-stage group; p = 0.96). Of the 31 patients in the 2-stage group, 18 (58.1%) underwent reimplantation with a revision replacement. Of those 18 patients, 13 were still infection-free at the time of the most recent follow-up; however, when the analysis was expanded to all 31 patients in the 2-stage group, only 13 (41.9%) both had a successful reimplantation and did not require additional surgery for infection. Nine (29.0%) of the 31 patients in the 2-stage group never underwent the second stage, and 4 (12.9%) of the 31 required arthrodesis at the second stage. In contrast, 35 (62.5%) of the 56 patients in the I&D group were successfully managed, without additional surgery for the treatment of infection. At the time of the latest follow-up (mean, 3.2 years; range, 2 to 13 years), more patients in the I&D group were ambulatory (76.8% in the I&D group compared with 54.8% in the 2-stage group; p = 0.05) and maintained a functional bending knee joint (85.7% in the I&D group compared with 45.2% in the 2-stage group; p < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

In the treatment of periprosthetic infection of rTKA with extensive instrumentation, I&D with chronic antibiotic suppression was as effective as 2-stage exchange in terms of preventing reoperation for infection and was more effective in terms of maintaining function. These data apply to rTKA with extensive periarticular instrumentation and should not be extrapolated to primary or simple revision implants.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

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

Antibiotic Choice: The Synergistic Effect of Single vs Dual Antibiotics

INTRODUCTION

This review summarizes single vs dual antibiotic cement literature, evaluating for synergistic activity with dual antibiotics.

METHODS

A systematic review was performed for literature regarding dual antibiotics in cement, identifying 13 studies to include for review.

RESULTS

Many in vitro studies reported higher elution from cement and/or improved bacteria inhibition with dual antibiotics, typically at higher dosages with a manual mixing technique. Limited clinical data from hip hemiarthroplasties and spacers demonstrated that dual antibiotics were associated with improved infection prevention and higher intra-articular antibiotic concentrations.

CONCLUSION

In addition to broader pathogen coverage, several studies document synergy of elution and increased antibacterial activity when dual antibiotics are added to cement. Limited clinical evidence suggests that dual antibiotic cement may be associated with reduced infection rates.

Diagnostic criteria of periprosthetic joint infection: a prospective study protocol to validate the feasibility of the 2018 new definition for Chinese patients

BACKGROUND

Periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) is a challenging complication following total joint arthroplasty (TJA), and the diagnostic criteria remains controversial. The 2018 new definition proposed in May 2018 consists of new diagnostic criteria for PJI. We conducted a retrospective study and demonstrated that the new definition could improve the diagnostic efficiency in Chinese patients. However, missing data led to bias in the previous retrospective study. Therefore, this prospective study is designed to further validate the feasibility of 2018 new definition (and its modified version) for Chinese patients.

METHODS/DESIGN

This is a single-centre, prospective diagnostic study with 1 year of follow-up. The patients enrolled in the trial will be divided into a PJI group and an Aseptic group based on the eligibility criteria. We will recruit at least 70 patients for each group from October 2019 to October 2020. Blood samples, synovial fluid samples and intraoperative variables of all the included patients will be collected to assess various indicators. We will integrate the results of the various tests and examine the diagnostic efficiency (sensitivity and specificity) of five diagnostic criteria.

DISCUSSION

We design the prospective study in the hope of reducing the bias caused by missing data. Therefore, the prospective study will further support the conclusion of our preceding retrospective study. The results of this study will be submitted to a peer-reviewed journal for publication.

CONCLUSION

Through this prospective study, we will validate the feasibility of the 2018 new PJI definition (and its modified version) for Chinese patients and determine the optimal method of PJI diagnosis.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Chinese Clinical Trial Registry, ChiCTR1900025395. Registered on 25 August 2019.

2019 Frank Stinchfield Award: A comparison of prosthetic joint infection rates between direct anterior and non-anterior approach total hip arthroplasty

AIMS

We studied the impact of direct anterior (DA) versus non-anterior (NA) surgical approaches on prosthetic joint infection (PJI), and examined the impact of new perioperative protocols on PJI rates following all surgical approaches at a single institution.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

A total of 6086 consecutive patients undergoing primary total hip arthroplasty (THA) at a single institution between 2013 and 2016 were retrospectively evaluated. Data obtained from electronic patient medical records included age, sex, body mass index (BMI), medical comorbidities, surgical approach, and presence of deep PJI. There were 3053 male patients (50.1%) and 3033 female patients (49.9%). The mean age and BMI of the entire cohort was 62.7 years (18 to 102, sd 12.3) and 28.8 kg/m² (13.3 to 57.6, sd 6.1), respectively. Infection rates were calculated yearly for the DA and NA approach groups. Covariates were assessed and used in multivariate analysis to calculate adjusted odds ratios (ORs) for risk of development of PJI with DA compared with NA approaches. In order to determine the effect of adopting a set of infection prevention protocols on PJI, we calculated ORs for PJI comparing patients undergoing THA for two distinct time periods: 2013 to 2014 and 2015 to 2016. These periods corresponded to before and after we implemented a set of perioperative infection protocols.

RESULTS

There were 1985 patients in the DA group and 4101 patients in the NA group. The overall rate of PJI at our institution during the study period was 0.82% (50/6086) and decreased from 0.96% (12/1245) in 2013 to 0.53% (10/1870) in 2016. There were 24 deep PJIs in the DA group (1.22%) and 26 deep PJIs in the NA group (0.63%; p = 0.023). After multivariate analysis, the DA approach was 2.2 times more likely to result in PJI than the NA approach (OR 2.2 (95% confidence interval 1.1 to 3.9); p = 0.006) for the overall study period.

CONCLUSION

We found a higher rate of PJI in DA versus NA approaches. Infection prevention protocols such as use of aspirin, dilute povidone-iodine lavage, vancomycin powder, and Gram-negative coverage may have been positively associated with diminished PJI rates observed for all approaches over time. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2019;101-B(6 Supple B):2-8.

The 2018 new definition of periprosthetic joint infection improves the diagnostic efficiency in the Chinese population

BACKGROUND

Periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) is a devastating complication following total joint arthroplasty (TJA). Now, the definition of PJI traditionally used in clinical practice was set out by the International Consensus Meeting (ICM) and Infectious Diseases Society (IDSA). There was a new definition proposed in May 2018 on a paper published in the Journal of Arthroplasty. The new scoring system for PJI demonstrated a higher sensitivity and specificity than Musculoskeletal Infection Society and IDSA criteria. Therefore, we wanted to find further evidence to support the new definition in the Chinese population.

METHODS

The patients who were included in our study were divided into PJI group and aseptic group. Medical records of patients (98 in PJI group and 165 in aseptic group) were reviewed, and the score of every patient was aggregated based on the new definition and collected data. The sensitivity and specificity were compared between new definition and classical criteria.

RESULTS

For patients in our hospital, the overall sensitivity and specificity of the new criteria were respectively 94.9% (95% confidence interval [CI] 87.9-98.1%) and 95.2% (95% CI 90.3-97.7%). The new definition demonstrated a higher sensitivity than traditional criteria in Chinese population, and the specificity was similar to existing criteria.

CONCLUSION

We believe the new scoring system about periprosthetic joint infection could also apply to Chinese population for diagnosing PJI following TJA. It can obviously improve diagnostic efficiency for PJI compared with traditional criteria.

Characteristics of Enterobacter cloacae prosthetic joint infections

OBJECTIVES

Enterobacter cloacae prosthetic joint infections (PJI) are rare and poorly documented.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

We conducted a retrospective and monocentric study in an orthopedic unit supporting complex bone and joint infections. Between 2012 and 2016 we collected background, clinical, biological, and microbiological data from 20 patients presenting with prosthetic joint infection and positive for E. cloacae, as well as data on their surgical and medical treatment and outcome.

RESULTS

Infections were localized in the hip (n=14), knee (n=5), or ankle (n=1). The median time between arthroplasty and septic revision was three years. Fourteen patients (70%) had undergone at least two surgeries due to previous prosthetic joint infections. The median time between the last surgery and the revision for E. cloacae infection was 31 days. Eleven patients (55%) were infected with ESBL-producing strains. The most frequently used antibiotics were carbapenems (n=9), cefepime (n=7), quinolones (n=7), and fosfomycin (n=4). The infection was cured in 15 patients (78.9%) after a 24-month follow-up. Five patients had a recurrent infection with another microorganism and four patients had a relapse of E. cloacae infection. The global success rate was 52.7% (58.3% for DAIR and 75% for DAIR+ciprofloxacin).

CONCLUSION

Prosthetic joint infections due to E. cloacae usually occur early after the last prosthetic surgery, typically in patients with complex surgical and medical histories. The success rate seems to be increased when DAIR is associated with ciprofloxacin.

The cost of managing complex surgical site infections following primary hip and knee arthroplasty: A population-based cohort study in Alberta, Canada

Objective

Nearly 800,000 primary hip and knee arthroplasty procedures are performed annually in North America. Approximately 1% of these are complicated by a complex surgical site infection (SSI), leading to very high healthcare costs. However, population-based studies to properly estimate the economic burden are lacking. We aimed to address this knowledge gap.

Design

Economic burden study.

Methods

Using administrative health and clinical databases, we created a cohort of all patients in Alberta, Canada, who received a primary hip or knee arthroplasty between April 1, 2012, and March 31, 2015. All patients who developed a complex SSI postoperatively were identified through a provincial infection prevention and control database. A combination of corporate microcosting data and gross costing methods were used to determine total mean 12- and 24-month costs, enabling comparison of costs between the infected and noninfected patients.

Results

Mean 12-month total costs were significantly greater in patients who developed a complex SSI compared to those who did not (CAD$95,321 [US$68,150] vs CAD$19,893 [US$14,223];P< .001). The magnitude of the cost difference persisted even after controlling for underlying patient factors. The most commonly identified causative pathogen (38%) wasStaphylococcus aureus(95% MSSA).

Conclusions

Complex SSIs following hip and knee arthroplasty lead to high healthcare costs, which are expected to rise as the yearly number of surgeries increases. Using our costing estimates, the cost-effectiveness of different strategies to prevent SSIs should be investigated.