Around 1% of total hip replacements are follow by prosthetic joint infection (PJI). There is uncertainty about best treatment method for PJI, and the most recent high quality systematic reviews in unselected patients indicates that re-infection rates following one-stage and two-stage revision arthroplasty are relatively similar. In the absence of evidence randomised controlled trials will help to identify the most clinically and cost-effective treatment for PJI. Before such trials are conducted, there is a need to establish reasons for current practice and to identify whether trials are feasible. This study aimed to deliver research that would inform trial design. Specifically, we aimed to characterise consultant orthopaedic surgeons' decisions about performing either one-stage or two-stage exchange arthroplasty for patients with PJI after hip replacement and to identify whether a randomised trial comparing one-stage with two-stage revision would be possible. Semi-structured interviews were conducted with 12 consultant surgeons from 5 high-volume National Health Service (NHS) orthopaedic departments in the UK. Surgeons were sampled on the basis that they perform revision surgery for PJI after hip arthroplasty and final sample size was justified on the basis of thematic saturation. Surgeons were interviewed face-to-face (n=2) or via telephone (n=10). The interview study took place before design of a multicentre prospective randomised controlled trial comparing patient and clinical outcomes after one-stage or two-stage revision arthroplasty. Data were audio-recorded, transcribed, anonymised and analysed using a thematic approach, with 25% of transcripts independently double-coded. Results: There is no standard surgical response to the treatment of PJI and surgeons manage a complex balance of factors when choosing a surgical strategy. These include multiple patient-related factors, their own knowledge and expertise, available infrastructure and the infecting organism. Surgeons questioned whether evidence supports the emergence of two-stage revision as a method. They described the use of loosely cemented articulating spacers as a way of managing uncertainty about best treatment method. All surgeons were supportive of a randomised trial to compare one-stage and two-stage revision surgery for PJI after hip replacement. Surgeons reported that they would put patients forward for randomisation when there was uncertainty about best treatment. Surgeons highlighted the need for evidence to support their choice of revision. Some surgeons now use revision methods that can better address both clinical outcomes and patients' quality of life, such as loosely cemented articulating spacers. Surgeons thought that a randomised controlled trial comparing one-stage and two-stage exchange joint replacement is needed and that randomisation would be feasible. The next stage of the work was to design a multi-centre randomised controlled trial, this has been achieved and the trial is now ongoing in the UK

Aims. The success rates of two-stage revision arthroplasty for infection have evolved since their early description. The implementation of internationally accepted outcome criteria led to the readjustment of such rates. However, patients who do not undergo reimplantation are usually set aside from these calculations. The aim of this study was to investigate the outcomes of two-stage revision arthroplasty when considering those who do not undergo reimplantation, and to investigate the characteristics of this subgroup. Methods. A retrospective cohort study was conducted. Patients with chronic hip or knee periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) treated with two-stage revision between January 2010 and October 2018, with a minimum follow-up of one year, were included. Variables including demography, morbidity, microbiology, and outcome were collected. The primary endpoint was the eradication of infection. Patients who did not undergo reimplantation were analyzed in order to characterize this subgroup better. Results. A total of 162 chronic PJIs were included in the study. After a mean follow-up of 57.3 months (12.1 to 115.7), 18 patients (11.1%) did not undergo reimplantation, due either to medical issues (10), the patient’s choice (4), or death (4). When only considering those who underwent reimplantation, the success rate was 80.6%. However, when those who did not undergo reimplantation were included, the success rate dropped to 71.6%. Advanced age, American Society of Anesthesiologists grade ≥ III, McPherson’s C host, and Gram-negative related PJI were independent risk factors for retention of the spacer. The mortality was higher in the non-reimplanted group. Conclusion. The real success rate of two-stage revision may not be as high as previously reported. The exclusion of patients who do not undergo reimplantation resulted in a 9% overestimation of the success rate in this series. Many comorbidity-related risk factors for retention of the spacer were identified, as well as higher death rates in this group. Efforts should be made to optimize these patients medically in order to increase reimplantation and success rates, while decreasing mortality. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2020;102-B(12):1682–1688

Joint replacement is a highly effective intervention to treat osteoarthritis of the hip, relieving pain and improving mobility and quality of life.(1) Periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) is a devastating complication after arthroplasty. Debridement, antibiotics and implant retention are treatment of first choice in case of early infection after total hip arthroplasty (THA).(2) In case of persisting infection, one- or two-stage revision needs to be performed.(3) The use of different kinds of spacers has been widely debated in the past years.(4)

The aim of this study was to determine which type of spacer should be used during the interval of two-stage revision of an infected THA.

A search term with Boolean operators was constructed. We extracted all information regarding study and patient characteristics and baseline clinical and laboratory findings. Data regarding type of spacer and antibiotics used, timing of second stage surgery, tissue culture results, postoperative regimen, functional outcome and patient satisfaction were extracted.

A total of twenty-six studies met our inclusion criteria and were included for data analysis. Ten studies described various preformed spacers, six studies described functional spacers and eleven studies described custom made spacers. See Table 1 for results.

Research should focus on finding the preferred type of treatment and type of spacer to combine a high success rate of infection treatment with a good functional and patient reported outcome. There is a need for a prospective study evaluating patient satisfaction and functional outcome after two-stage revision THA comparing various spacers. Secondly, research should focus on the optimal timing of the second stage procedure.

Functional spacers achieve a comparable rate of infection eradication in the treatment of periprosthetic hip joint infections as compared to preformed spacers. There is insufficient evidence concerning rehabilitation and functional outcome after two-stage revisionTHA to advocate or discourage the use of either kind of interval spacer.

We report the outcome at ten to 15 years of two-stage revision for hip infection in 99 patients using the Prostalac articulated hip spacer system.

All the patients were contacted to determine their current functional and infection status using the Oxford-12, Short form-12, and Western Ontario and McMaster University Osteoarthritis Index questionnaires. A total of 11 of the 99 patients had a further infection, of whom seven responded to repeat surgery with no further sequelae. The mean interval between the stages was five months (1 to 36). We were able to review 48 living patients, with a mean age of 72 years (46 to 86), 34 (71%) of whom provided health-related quality-of-life outcome scores.

The mean follow-up was 12 years (10 to 15). The long-term success rate was 89% and with additional surgery this rose to 96%. The mean global Western Ontario and McMaster University Osteoarthritis Index score was 80.6 (sd 18.3). The mean Oxford-12 score was 74.0 (sd 22.3), and the mean Short form-12 score was 53.1 (sd 9.4) (mental) and 33.5 (sd 13.5) (physical). The mean satisfaction score was 90.5 (sd 15.3).

Two-stage revision for hip infection using a Prostalac interim spacer offers a predictable and lasting solution for patients with this difficult problem.

Aims. Treatment outcomes for methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) using systemic vancomycin and antibacterial cement spacers during two-stage revision arthroplasty remain unsatisfactory. This study explored the efficacy and safety of intra-articular vancomycin injections for PJI control after debridement and cement spacer implantation in a rat model. Methods. Total knee arthroplasty (TKA), MRSA inoculation, debridement, and vancomycin-spacer implantation were performed successively in rats to mimic first-stage PJI during the two-stage revision arthroplasty procedure. Vancomycin was administered intraperitoneally or intra-articularly for two weeks to control the infection after debridement and spacer implantation. Results. Rats receiving intra-articular vancomycin showed the best outcomes among the four treatment groups, with negative bacterial cultures, increased weight gain, increased capacity for weightbearing activities, increased residual bone volume preservation, and reduced inflammatory reactions in the joint tissues, indicating MRSA eradication in the knee. The vancomycin-spacer and/or systemic vancomycin failed to eliminate the MRSA infections following a two-week antibiotic course. Serum vancomycin levels did not reach nephrotoxic levels in any group. Mild renal histopathological changes, without changes in serum creatinine levels, were observed in the intraperitoneal vancomycin group compared with the intra-articular vancomycin group, but no changes in hepatic structure or serum alanine aminotransferase or aspartate aminotransferase levels were observed. No local complications were observed, such as sinus tract or non-healing surgical incisions. Conclusion. Intra-articular vancomycin injection was effective and safe for PJI control following debridement and spacer implantation in a rat model during two-stage revision arthroplasties, with better outcomes than systemic vancomycin administration. Cite this article: Bone Joint Res 2022;11(6):371–385

Aims. Fungal periprosthetic joint infections (PJIs) are rare, but their diagnosis and treatment are highly challenging. The purpose of this study was to investigate the clinical outcomes of patients with fungal PJIs treated with two-stage exchange knee arthroplasty combined with prolonged antifungal therapy. Methods. We reviewed our institutional joint arthroplasty database and identified 41 patients diagnosed with fungal PJIs and treated with two-stage exchange arthroplasty after primary total knee arthroplasty (TKA) between January 2001 and December 2020, and compared them with those who had non-fungal PJIs during the same period. After propensity score matching based on age, sex, BMI, American Society of Anesthesiologists grade, and Charlson Comorbidity Index, 40 patients in each group were successfully matched. The surgical and antimicrobial treatment, patient demographic and clinical characteristics, recurrent infections, survival rates, and relevant risk factors that affected joint survivorship were analyzed. We defined treatment success as a well-functioning arthroplasty without any signs of a PJI, and without antimicrobial suppression, at a minimum follow-up of two years from the time of reimplantation. Results. The fungal PJI group demonstrated a significantly worse treatment success rate at the final follow-up than the non-fungal PJI group (65.0% (26/40) vs 85.0% (34/40); p < 0.001). The mean prosthesis-free interval was longer in the fungal PJI group than in the non-fungal PJI group (6.7 weeks (SD 5.8) vs 4.1 weeks (SD 2.5); p = 0.020). The rate of survivorship free from reinfection was worse in the fungal PJI group (83.4% (95% confidence interval (CI) 64.1 to 92.9) at one year and 76.4% (95% CI 52.4 to 89.4) at two years) than in the non-fungal PJI group (97.4% (95% CI 82.7 to 99.6) at one year and 90.3% (95% CI 72.2 to 96.9) at two years), but the differences were not significant (p = 0.270). Cox proportional hazard regression analysis identified the duration of the prosthesis-free interval as a potential risk factor for failure (hazard ratio 1.128 (95% CI 1.003 to 1.268); p = 0.043). Conclusion. Fungal PJIs had a lower treatment success rate than non-fungal PJIs despite two-stage revision arthroplasty and appropriate antifungal treatment. Our findings highlight the need for further developments in treating fungal PJIs. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2023;105-B(12):1286–1293

Prosthetic joint infection (PJI) is an uncommon but serious complication of hip replacement. Over 1,000 operations are performed annually in the United Kingdom for PJI following hip replacement, using either one- or two-stage revision arthroplasty. It is unclear which is preferred by patients and which has the best long-term outcome. This qualitative study aims to describe patient experiences of treatment and recovery following one- and two-stage revision arthroplasty for PJI within the context of a pragmatic randomised controlled trial comparing these two approaches. Semi-structured interviews were conducted with 32 patients undergoing one- or two-stage revision treatment for PJI as part of a UK multi-centre randomised controlled trial. Patients were recruited from 12 participating National Health Service (NHS) Orthopaedic Departments and were interviewed 2–4 months after their first revision surgery and again approximately 18 months later. Final sample size was justified on the basis of thematic saturation. All patients consented to the interview being audio-recorded, transcribed, anonymised and analysed using an inductive thematic approach. Ethical approval was provided by NRES Committee South-West Frenchay, 14/SW/116. Patients in both the one- and two-stage treatment groups described prolonged hospital stays, with burdensome antibiotics and brief physiotherapy treatment. However, following discharge home and during recovery, participants undergoing two-stage revision with an ‘empty hip' or with a spacer reported being physically restricted in almost every aspect of their daily life, resulting in inactivity and confinement to home. Mobility aids were not sufficiently available through the health service for these patients. A key difference is that those with a spacer reported more pain than those without. Approximately one year following their second-stage revision, participants described being more independent and active, but two directly attributed muscle weakness to the lengthy period without a hip and described resulting falls or dislocations that had complicated their recovery. In contrast, those undergoing one-stage revision and CUMARS appeared to be more alike, reporting better mobility, functionality and independence, although still limited. Participants in these groups also reported minimal or no pain following their revision. A key difference between CUMARS and one-stage revision was the uncertainty of whether a second operation was necessary, which participants described as “hanging over them”, while those in the two-stage empty hip or spacer group described a more positive anticipation of a second definitive operation as it marked an end to what was described as a detachment from life. Our findings highlight the differences between patient experiences of recovery following revision arthroplasty, and how this is influenced by the surgical approach and presence or lack of spacers. An understanding of lived experiences following one- and two-stage surgical interventions will complement knowledge about the clinical effectiveness of these different types of revision surgery

Aim. Identification of the causal pathogen is crucial in the management of periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) of the hip. Unfortunately, it was often difficult and negative culture could be a common findings. This situation made the treatment of PJI of the hip became more challenging. The negative culture finding resulted in a doubtful diagnosis of infection, and poses difficulty in choosing the appropriate antibiotics. Here we compared the treatment outcome of two-stage revision arthroplasty for culture-negative versus culture-positive PJI of the hip. Method. We retrospectively reviewed patients who received two-stage revision for PJI of the hip between January 2010 to June 2015. All patients was planned to received articulated antibiotic cement-spacer as the first stage and revision total hip arthroplasty (THA) as the second stage of the procedure. Out of total 94 patients, 10 patients was loss to follow-up and excluded from the study. We devided the rest of 84 patients into two groups: culture-negative group (n: 27) and culture-positive group (n: 57). We compared all relevant medical records and the treatment outcome between the two groups. Results. The mean of follow-up was 29.5 months (range, 12–78) in culture-negative group and 30.9 months (range, 12–71) in culture-positive group (p = 0.74). The overall negative culture finding rate was 30.8%. There was no significant difference on baseline data between the two groups including: age, gender, body mass index, preoperative C-reactive protein (CRP), preoperative erythrocyte sedimentation rate and preoperative white blood count, type of hip arthroplasty, previous history of irrigation and debridement (I & D), and preoperative Harris hip score (HHS). However, culture-negative group has significantly higher number on history of preoperative antibiotic use (p = 0.003). The reimplantation rate was 96.3% and 91.2% in culture-negative and culture-positive group, respectively (p= 0.39). The infection recurrency rate after reimplantation was 7.7% and 15.4% in culture-negative and culture-positive group, respectively (p= 0.33). The overall infection control rate was 92.6% (25/27) and 82.4% (47/57) in culture-negative and culture-positive group, respectively (p = 0.21). We also observed no significant difference on the time interval between stage, time to normal CRP, time to recurrency and complications rate between the two groups. A higher postoperative HHS was obtained in culture-negative group (p = 0.04). Conclusions. Negative culture finding was not resulted in an inferior treatment outcome compared to culture-positive group in periprosthetic joint infection of the hip which treated with two-stage revision arthroplasty

Aims. To investigate the outcomes of treatment of streptococcal periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) involving total knee and hip arthroplasties. Patients and Methods. Streptococcal PJI episodes which occurred between January 2009 and December 2015 were identified from clinical databases. Presentation and clinical outcomes for 30 streptococcal PJIs in 30 patients (12 hip and 18 knee arthroplasties) following treatment were evaluated from the medical notes and at review. The Kaplan-Meier survival method was used to estimate the probability of infection-free survival. The influence of the biofilm active antibiotic rifampin was also assessed. Results. The infection was thought to have been acquired haematogenously in 16 patients and peri-operatively in 14. The median follow-up time for successfully treated cases was 39.2 months (12 to 75), whereas failure of the treatment occurred within the first year following treatment on every occasion. The infection-free survival at three years with 12 patients at risk was 59% (95% confidence interval 39% to 75%). Failure of the treatment was observed in ten of 22 PJIs (45%) treated with a two-stage revision arthroplasty, two of six (33%) treated by debridement and prosthesis retention, and in neither of the two PJIs treated with one-stage revision arthroplasty. Streptococcal PJI treated with or without rifampin included in the antibiotic regime showed no difference in treatment outcome (p = 0.175). Conclusion. The success of treatment of streptococcal PJI in our patient cohort was poor (18 of 30 cases, 59%). New therapeutic approaches for treating streptococcal PJI are needed. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2017;99-B:653–9

Introduction: The current gold standard for the treatment of the infected total knee arthroplasty is a two-stage revision. The purpose of this study is to present our results with two-stage revision arthroplasty in a series of 48 infected TKAs. Materials and Methods: Over a 10-year period (1996–2005) we have performed 2140 TKAs. Of them 48 (48 patients) were infected and required a two-stage revision arthroplasty (2.2% infection rate). In 43 patients of these patients we used LCCK prostheses (Zimmer, USA) and in 5 (with severe instability) a rotating hinge prosthesis (Waldemar Link, Germany). In 26 occasions antibiotics-loaded cement (Palacos with gentamicine) was used and in 22 we used articulated spacers. The average age of patients was 67 years (range, 59–82) and the average follow-up was 5.5 years (range: 1–10). The results were assessed according to the Knee Society scores. Results: Four knees were re-infected. Results were excellent in 28 knees, good in 13, fair in 3 and poor in 4 (the four re-infected prostheses). The four infected prostheses had been treated by static spacers. The survival rate taking as end-point removal of components for infection is 91.6% (results at average of 5.5 years). Conclusion: Our results confirm that two-stage revision TKA is a reproducible procedure in the infected primary TKA. Also that articulated antibiotic-loaded spacers seem to be better than static spacers

The results of primary total knee replacement performed on a group of haemophiliac patients in a single institution by the same surgeon using the same surgical technique and prosthesis are reported. A total of 35 primary replacements in 30 patients were carried out between 1996 and 2005 and were reviewed retrospectively. The mean age of the patients was 31 years (24 to 42) and the mean follow-up was for 7.5 years (1 to 10). There were 25 patients with haemophilia A and five with haemophilia B. The HIV status and CD4 count were recorded, and Knee Society scores determined. Two patients had inhibitors to the deficient coagulation factor. There were no early wound infections and only one late deep infection which required a two-stage revision arthroplasty, with a good final result. The incidence of infection in HIV-positive and negative patients was thus similar. One knee in a patient with inhibitor had excessive bleeding due to a pseudoaneurysm which required embolisation. The results were excellent in 27 knees (77%), good in six (17%) and fair in two (6%). The survival rate at 7.5 years taking removal of the prosthesis for loosening or infection as the end-point was 97%. The mechanical survival of total knee replacements in haemophiliacs is very good. Our results confirm that this is a reproducible procedure in haemophilia, even in HIV-positive patients with a CD4 count > 200 mm. 3. and those with inhibitors. Our rate of infection was lower than previously reported. This could be due to better control of the HIV status with highly active anti-retroviral therapy and the use of antibiotic-loaded cement

Periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) remains a challenging complication following Total Hip Arthroplasty (THA). It is associated with high levels of morbidity, mortality and is time consuming and expensive to treat. Our management generally relies on identification of the infecting organism(s) in order to define the appropriate treatment strategy. Patients with culture-negative PJI poses a greater challenge to surgeons and to the wider multidisciplinary team. This study compares the outcomes of 50 consecutive complex culture-positive (deemed unsuitable for single stage exchange) and 50 culture-negative THAs managed with two-stage revision arthroplasty with a minimum of five years follow-up. Culture-negative PJIs were associated with older age, smoking, external referral source and greater use of preoperative antibiotics. There was however no significant difference in outcome between these groups of patients with a similar complication rates and reinfection rates of 6% at 5 years. Culture negative periprosthetic sepsis generates concern, and is often considered a poor prognostic indicator. This study suggests that a strict 2 stage protocol is associated with satisfactory outcomes in such cases

We have carried out in 24 patients, a two-stage revision arthroplasty of the hip for infection with massive bone loss. We used a custom-made, antibiotic-loaded cement prosthesis as an interim spacer. Fifteen patients had acetabular deficiencies, eight had segmental femoral bone loss and one had a combined defect. There was no recurrence of infection at a mean follow-up of 4.2 years (2 to 7). A total of 21 patients remained mobile in the interim period. The mean Merle D’Aubigné and Postel hip score improved from 7.3 points before operation to 13.2 between stages and to 15.8 at the final follow-up. The allograft appeared to have incorporated into the host bone in all patients. Complications included two fractures and one dislocation of the cement prosthesis. The use of a temporary spacer maintains the function of the joint between stages even when there is extensive loss of bone. Allograft used in revision surgery after septic conditions restores bone stock without the risk of recurrent infection

Aims. The aim of this study was to identify the incidence of positive cultures during the second stage of a two-stage revision arthroplasty and to analyse the association between positive cultures and an infection-free outcome. Patients and Methods. This single-centre retrospective review of prospectively collected data included patients with a periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) of either the hip or the knee between 2013 and 2015, who were treated using a standardised diagnostic and therapeutic algorithm with two-stage exchange. Failure of treatment was assessed according to a definition determined by a Delphi-based consensus. Logistic regression analysis was performed to assess the predictors of positive culture and risk factors for failure. The mean follow-up was 33 months (24 to 48). Results. A total of 163 two-stage revision arthroplasties involving 84 total hip arthroplasties (THAs) and 79 total knee arthroplasties (TKAs) were reviewed. In 27 patients (16.6%), ≥ 1 positive culture was identified at re-implantation and eight (29.6%) of these subsequently failed compared with 20 (14.7%) patients who were culture-negative. The same initially infecting organism was isolated at re-implantation in nine of 27 patients (33.3%). The organism causing re-infection in none of the patients was the same as that isolated at re-implantation. The risk of the failure of treatment was significantly higher in patients with a positive culture (odds ratio (OR) 1.7; 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.0 to 3.0; p = 0.049) and in patients with a higher Charlson Comorbidity Index (OR 1.5; 95% CI 1.6 to 1.8; p = 0.001). Conclusion. Positive culture at re-implantation was independently associated with subsequent failure. Surgeons need to be aware of this association and should consider the medical optimisation of patients with severe comorbidities both before and during treatment. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2017;99-B:1490–5

Aims. Tissue responses to debris formed by abrasion of polymethylmethacrylate (PMMA) spacers at two-stage revision arthroplasty for prosthetic joint infection are not well described. We hypothesised that PMMA debris induces immunomodulation in periprosthetic tissues. Patients and Methods. Samples of tissue were taken during 35 two-stage revision arthroplasties (nine total hip and 26 total knee arthroplasties) in patients whose mean age was 67 years (44 to 85). Fourier transform infrared microscopy was used to confirm the presence of PMMA particles. Histomorphometry was performed using Sudan Red and Haematoxylin-Eosin staining. CD-68, CD-20, CD-11(c), CD-3 and IL-17 antibodies were used to immunophenotype the inflammatory cells. All slides were scored semi-quantitatively using the modified Willert scoring system. Results. The mean CD-68 scores did not show any significant change during the six weeks between the stages. Perivascular and diffuse scores showed significant difference in CD-3, CD-20, CD-11(c) and IL-17. At the time of re-implantation, a shift in the pattern of the expression of dendritic cells towards a perivascular arrangement and towards the periphery of PMMA particles was observed. Positive microbiological cultures were found at the time of re-implantation in three patients. Five further revisions were required for other reasons. Conclusion. Our results represent a biological reaction of the synovial tissues to spacers with a less diffuse expression of dendritic cells and an increased expression of perivascular lymphocytes. The use of spacers in two-stage revision for infection probably induces an immunomodulation of synovial tissues. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2016;98-B:1062–8

INTRO. Two-stage revision arthroplasty for PJI may make use of an antibiotic-loaded cement spacer (ACS), as successful long- term prevention of reinfection have been reported using this technique.[i] However, there is little data on systemic complications of high-dose antibiotic spacers. Acute kidney injury (AKI) is of clinical significance, as the drugs most commonly utilized, vancomycin and aminoglycosides, can be nephrotoxic. We intended to determine the incidence of AKI in patients that underwent staged revision arthroplasty with an ACS, as well as to identify potential predisposing risk factors for the disease. METHODS. Local databases of six different orthopaedic surgeons were retrospectively reviewed for insertion of either a static or articulating antibiotic cement spacer by from 2007–2017. Dose of antibiotic powder implanted, as well as IV antibiotic used, was collected from operative records. Demographics, comorbidities, and preoperative and postoperative creatinine and hemoglobin values were recorded from the EHR. AKI was defined by a more than 50% rise in serum creatinine from preoperative baseline to at least 1.4 mg/dL, as described by Menge et al.[ii] Variables were analyzed for the primary outcome of AKI within the same hospital stay as insertion of the ACS. Categorical variables were analyzed with Chi-Square test, and continuous variables with univariate logistic regression. RESULTS. 75 patients (39 M, 36 F) receiving an ACS were identified, with a mean age of 70.0 (SD=10.6) and a mean BMI of 31.3 (SD=7.3). Incidence of in-hospital AKI was 13.3%. Patients reached AKI at a mean 6.7 days (SD=4.5), during a median length of stay of 13.5 days (IQR=21.8). No significant correlation was found between AKI and the variables of age (p=.430), BMI (p=.569) or gender (p=.181). AKI was also not associated with increased dose of vancomycin (p=.416), tobramycin (p=.440), or gentamycin (p=.846) within the cement spacer, or the comorbidities of hypertension (p=.094), diabetes (p=.146), coronary artery disease (p=1.00) and renal disease (p=.521). However, decreased baseline hemoglobin showed significantly increased risk for AKI (OR=1.67, p =.049), and increased creatinine showed a trend (OR=2.9, p=.059). Percentage of hemoglobin decrease (preoperative to postoperative) did not increase odds for AKI (p=.700). CONCLUSION. The incidence of acute kidney injury in patients that receive antibiotic cement spacers is relatively high when compared to the data reported in primary TKA. ii,[iii]. Our results suggest that patient related risk factors, such as low preoperative hemoglobin, may be involved in the etiology of AKI in this population. Therefore, it may be clinically appropriate to monitor anemic patients for AKI when implanting an ACS

Two-stage revision arthroplasty is the gold standard for treatment of infection after total hip Arthroplasty and end stage septic arthritis of the hip. In the first stage we used a modified technique to insert an inexpensive modular femoral component coated with antibiotic-impregnated polymethylmethacrylate articulating with a polyethylene liner. The construct was used in 8 patients with infected arthroplasty, and 6 patients with septic arthritis of the hip. Two patients were excluded (no second stage). Of the remaining 12 patients, only one patient had persistent infection after the first stage; 11 patients received a successful re-implantation at the second-stage. The technique provide a construct that can be used safely and successfully in the awaiting period between the two stages of revision arthroplasty

The June 2024 Knee Roundup³⁶⁰ looks at: The estimated lifetime risk of revision after primary knee arthroplasty influenced by age, sex, and indication; Should high-risk patients seek out care from high-volume surgeons?; Stability and fracture rates in medial unicondylar knee arthroplasties; Rethinking antibiotic prophylaxis for dental procedures post-arthroplasty; Evaluating DAIR: a viable alternative for acute periprosthetic joint infection; The characteristics and predictors of mortality in periprosthetic fractures around the knee; Patient health-related quality of life deteriorates significantly while waiting six to 12 months for total hip or knee arthroplasty; The importance of looking for diversity in knee implants.

Deep infection following total knee arthroplasty (TKA) is a devastating complication for the patient and a costly one for patients, surgeons, hospitals and payers. The aim of this study is to compare revision TKA for infection, revision TKA for aseptic loosening and primary TKA with respect to their impact on hospital and surgeon resource utilisation. The evaluation of hospital cost was carried out on a microeconomic basis in order to best evaluate the true cost. Demographic, clinical and economic data were obtained for 25 consecutive patients with an infection after TKA who underwent a two-stage revision arthroplasty (Group 1), 25 consecutive patients who underwent revision of both components because of aseptic loosening (Group 2) and 25 consecutive patients who underwent a primary TKA (Group 3), all of which where admitted at our institution between January 2000 and December 2005. The economic evaluation included both surgical treatment and hospitalisation cost. Because fixed charges do not depict accurately real resource consumption, total cost was calculated through direct cost analysis. All direct health sector costs such as medical supplies, drugs, implants, laboratory and radiology tests, salaries and wages and overhead expenses, including equipment and plant depreciation were calculated. All patients were followed up for a twelve-month period. Revision procedures for infection were associated with longer operative time, more blood loss and a higher total number of operations compared with both revisions for aseptic loosening and primary TKA. Furthermore, revisions for infection compared to revisions due to aseptic loosening and primary TKAs were associated with twofold and 2.6 times higher total number of hospitalisations, 2.5 and 5.6 times higher total number of inpatient days, 10.2 and 53.8 times higher cost of inpatient drugs and 1.2 and 2.37 times higher cost of implants, respectively. The costing evaluation of the three operative techniques is still on progress. Patients’ treatment with an infection after TKA is associated with significantly greater hospital and physician resource utilisation compared with that used for patients with a revision due to aseptic loosening or a primary TKA

Antibiotic-loaded PMMA spacers are used with increased frequency in two-stage revision arthroplasty. The release of aminoglycosides and vancomycin, the most commonly used antibiotics, is prompt, and concentrations are inhibitory. The release kinetic from PMMA bone cement shows a biphasic profile, consisting in an initially high and rapid drug release followed by a slower but sustained phase. However, this general profile of drug release kinetics from PMMA spacers in vitro may have great variability in terms of drug amount, modality, and duration of elution. Initial drug concentration, cement surface area and porosity are essential and well-known factors in determining the drug release. Moreover, viscosity, vacuum-preparation and the different technical characteristics of commercially available spacers are additional factors of variability. Industrial preformed spacers are considered superior to custom-made devices because of uniform mixing and standardized procedures. Spacers produced by different manufacturers vary in their mechanical properties and antibiotic elution characteristics. Small changes in the formulation of a bone cement can also affect these properties. Similar bone cements produced by various brands release different amount of drugs. Gentamicin diffuses from Palacos in a larger amount and for a longer period than from Simplex and CMV. Spacers produced in France (Synicem™) and in Argentina (Subiton™) elute less total amount of gentamicin than those produced in Italy (Spacer G™) and show a delayed peak drug release. The low initial release of antibiotic can contribute to unsatisfactory antimicrobial effect and to the risk of selection of resistant bacteria. Some spacers release gentamicin for longtime (months), while others release antibiotic for only two weeks. In the last years an evolution of PMMA spacers production occurred and modifications in the polimerization process of cement can increase cement porosity and antibiotic elution from spacers. The current commercial preformed spacers for 10 days elution (Spacer G™, prepared with Cemex HP) release more gentamicin (34.1 mg) than previous models, which were prepared with Cemex SP (16.4 mg). Furthermore, they maintain a high elution rate (1.4–1.6 mg/day after one month). The combination of Gentamicin and Vancomycin mantains an elution pharmacokinetic profile that is superimposable to that of Gentamicin and Vancomycin alone, with synergistic effects against multiresistant bacteria in prosthetic infection site. In conclusion, the antibiotic release from PMMA spacers of various brands is not equivalent. The old elution data are no longer valid for new preparations. Consequently, this additional factor of variability should be considered in clinical practice and literature data utilisation