Aims. The aim of this meta-analysis is to assess the association between exchange of modular parts in debridement, antibiotics, and implant retention (DAIR) procedure and outcomes for hip and knee periprosthetic joint infection (PJI). Methods. We conducted a systematic search on PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, and Cochrane library from inception until May 2021. Random effects meta-analyses and meta-regression was used to estimate, on a study level, the success rate of DAIR related to component exchange. Risk of bias was appraised using the (AQUILA) checklist. Results. We included 65 studies comprising 6,630 patients. The pooled overall success after DAIR for PJI was 67% (95% confidence interval (CI) 63% to 70%). This was 70% (95% CI 65% to 75%) for DAIR for hip PJI and 63% (95% CI 58% to 69%) for knee PJI. In studies before 2004 (n = 27), our meta-regression analysis showed a 3.5% increase in success rates for each 10% increase in component exchange in DAIR for hip PJI and a 3.1% increase for each 10% increase in component exchange for knee PJI. When restricted to studies after 2004 (n = 37), this association changed: for DAIR for hip PJI a decrease in successful outcome by 0.5% for each 10% increase in component exchange and for DAIR for knee PJI this was a 0.01% increase in successful outcome for each 10% increase in component exchange. Conclusion. This systematic review and meta-regression found no benefit of modular component exchange on reduction of PJI failure. This limited effect should be weighed against the risks for the patient and cost on a case-by-case basis. The association between exchange of modular components and outcome changed before and after 2004. This suggests the effect seen after 2004 may reflect a more rigorous, evidence-based, approach to the infected implant compared to the years before. Level of Evidence: Level III. Cite this article: Bone Jt Open 2021;2(10):806–812

Aims. To compare the functional outcome, health-related quality of life (HRQoL), and satisfaction of patients who underwent primary total hip arthroplasty (THA) and a single debridement, antibiotics and implant retention (DAIR) procedure for deep infection, using either the transgluteal or the posterior surgical approach for both procedures. Methods. The study was registered at clinicaltrials.gov (ID: NCT03161990) on 15 May 2017. Patients treated with a single DAIR procedure for deep infection through the same operative approach as their primary THA (either the transgluteal or the posterior approach) were identified in the Norwegian Arthroplasty Register and given a questionnaire. Median follow-up after DAIR by questionnaire was 5.5 years in the transgluteal group (n = 87) and 2.5 years in the posterior approach group (n = 102). Results. Patients in the posterior approach group were less likely to limp after the DAIR procedure (17% vs 36% limped all the time; p = 0.005), had a higher mean Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC) function score (80 vs 71; p = 0.013), and were more likely to achieve a patient acceptable symptom state for the WOMAC function score (76% vs 55%; p = 0.002). In a multivariable analysis, the point estimate for the increase in WOMAC function score using the posterior approach was 10.2 (95% CI 3.1 to 17.2; p = 0.005), which is above the minimal clinically important improvement. The patients in the posterior approach group also reported better mean HRQoL scores and were more likely to be satisfied with their hip arthroplasty (77% vs 55%; p = 0.001). Conclusion. In patients treated with a single, successful DAIR procedure for deep infection of a primary THA, the use of the posterior approach in both primary surgery and DAIR was associated with less limping, better functional outcome, better HRQoL, and higher patient satisfaction compared with cases where both were performed using the transgluteal approach. The observed differences in functional outcome and patient satisfaction were clinically relevant. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2020;102-B(12):1662–1669

Aim. Success rate of debridement, antimicrobial and implant retention (DAIR) in high suspicion of early PJI after primary arthroplasty is 70–80%. No studies have been performed focusing on outcome of DAIR after revision arthroplasty of the hip (THA) or knee (TKA). The aim of this study is to investigate the outcome of DAIR in suspected early PJI after revision THA or TKA and to identify risk factors for failure. Method. In this retrospective study, we identified early DAIRs after revision THA or TKA performed between January 2012 and August 2019. All patients received empirical antibiotics directly after the DAIR procedure. Antimicrobial treatment was adjusted to the tissue culture results. Success was defined as: 1) implant retention; 2) no repeated revision arthroplasty or supervised neglect after treatment; 3) no persistent or recurrent PJI after treatment and no administration of suppressive antimicrobial therapy; 4) survival of the patient. Infection free success was defined as: 1) no persistent or recurrent PJI after treatment; 2) no administration of suppressive antimicrobial therapy. Results. The overall success rate after one year of 100 cases with early DAIR after revision THA or TKA was 79% and infection free success rate was 85%. In PJI cases, empirical antimicrobial mismatch with causative micro-organisms was associated with lower success rate (70%) than non-mismatch (95%) (p=0.02). No patients from the non-PJI group failed after one year versus 13 failures within the PJI group. A consecutive DAIR within 90 days after the first DAIR was warranted in 24 cases. Only 4 of 20 PJI cases failed despite the consecutive DAIR. Conclusions. In high suspicion of early PJI after revision arthroplasty, DAIR is a good treatment option with comparable outcome with DAIR after primary arthroplasty. A consecutive DAIR should not be avoided when infection control fails within 90 days after the first DAIR to prevent explantation of the prosthesis. Antimicrobial mismatch is associated with failure and should be avoided

Background. Acute soft tissue defects (wound dehiscence or necrosis) after a total knee arthroplasty (TKA) may be the cause of the devasting complication of deep infection. When a medium (4–6cm) defect is present, in patellar or infra-patellar localization, a medial hemi-gastrocnemius flap is widely used to cover it, because of its low morbidity and high functional results. Normally, this coverage is not associated to a debridement, antibiotics and implant retention surgery (DAIR). When facing this situation, we should consider associating to the coverage treatment, like muscle flap, a DAIR procedure, in order to treat the possible acute infection, even when the diagnosis of infection is not clear. We could not find any studies comparing the benefice of this association in the same surgical act to isolated treatment of soft tissue defects. Our hypothesis was that when a TKA surgical wound defect is present, the risk of an acute infection is elevated and the patient would benefit from a muscle flap with DAIR procedure and polyethylene exchange. Methods. We performed a retrospective study to compare TKA infection clearance in patients with DAIR and flap in the same surgical act against those who received an isolated flap procedure for soft tissue coverage after an acute surgical wound defect. Patients were identified from a prospectively collated TKA database. Between 2005 and 2021, 19 patients met our inclusion criteria. A medial hemi-gastrocnemius flap was performed in 15 patients (78%). Healing or TKA infection clearance was defined as the presence of the original prosthesis after soft tissue coverage intervention, no need of DAIR after soft tissue coverage or no suppressive antibiotic treatment. Results. We obtained two groups. The first one, included those patients who had received the association of DAIR with polyethylene exchange and Flap (n=12). The other group included those who had received an isolated flap (n=7). We did not find differences in comorbidities and risk factors between both groups. In the combination treatment group 66,6% patients healed after treatment. In the other group, these favourable results decrease to 42,9%. Even though results were better in the combination treatment group, no significant differences were found. Conclusion. Although no significant statistical differences were found, probably due to small sample, the association of DAIR with polyethylene exchange and muscle flap is recommended in the coverage over an acute dehiscence or necrosis after TKA. More studies, with bigger sample are needed to extrapolate results in general population

Aim. Predicting success of a Debridement, Antibiotics and Implant Retention (DAIR) procedure for Periprosthetic Joint Infection (PJI) remains a challenge. A failed DAIR might adversely affect the outcome of any future revision surgery for PJI. Hence, the ability to identify and optimise factors predictive of DAIR success would help target the procedure to the appropriate patient cohort and avoid unnecessary surgery for patients where a DAIR is unlikely to eradicate infection. Method. A retrospective review of our prospective Bone Infection Group database was performed to identify all patients who underwent a DAIR of their hip or knee arthroplasty. Diagnosis of PJI was confirmed using the Musculoskeletal Infection Society (MSIS) 2013 and the European Bone and Joint Infection Society (EBJIS) 2021 classification systems. DAIR surgery was grouped into “successful” or “unsuccessful” outcomes as per the MSIS working group outcome-reporting tool. Results. Sixty-Four consecutive patients with an acute PJI underwent a DAIR procedure between 2009 and 2020. Treatment was successful in 44 (69%). The chance of a successful DAIR was significantly greater if performed within one week of symptom onset compared to greater than one week duration (adjusted odds ratio (OR 0.11; p=0.027; 95% CI [0.02- 0.78]). The chances of a successful DAIR was not influenced by whether the surgeon was an arthroplasty or non-arthroplasty surgeon (OR 0.28; p=0.13; 95% CI [0.05- 1.48]). Isolated Streptococcus infection had a success rate of 100%; followed by Coagulasenegative Staphylococci 71% and Methicillin-susceptible Staphylococcus Aureus 65%. Polymicrobial infection had the worst outcome with a success rate of 47%. Conclusions. In our experience DAIR surgery performed within one week of symptom onset, significantly increased chances of successful infection eradication. Collaborative work is required to ensure arthroplasty patients access prompt appropriate surgical decision-making, remove barriers to early assessment and minimise delays to surgery

Aim. This is the first study to directly compare the clinical outcome of debridement, antimicrobials and implant retention (DAIR) with stabilization using new internal fixation after debridement, for patients with Fracture-related Infection (FRI). Method. Consecutive patients with FRI Consensus confirmed FRI had single-stage surgery with tissue sampling, debridement, stabilization, antimicrobial therapy and skin closure. All cases had FRIs which were unhealed at surgery. When existing implants were stable, the implant was retained but loose implants or fractures with poor reduction had implant removal and refixation with new implants. All patients had the same empiric and definitive antibiotics, the same diagnostic criteria and outcome assessment at least one year after surgery. Failure was defined as infection recurrence, reoperation or lack of fracture consolidation at one year. Results. Seventy-one patients were studied (40 DAIRs and 31 new implants, including 10 exchange nails). The two groups were well matched for age, duration of infection, BACH complexity, microbiology, bone involved and need for flap coverage. Ten patients (13.7%) died before the endpoint. Mortality was similar in both groups (DAIR 14.1% vs New Metalware 12.9%; p=0.801) but DAIR of IM nails had a higher mortality at 40% (p=0.011). Sixty-one patients were followed-up for a mean of 3.32 years (1.04-9.43). Infection was eradicated in 23/34 (67.6%) DAIR patients and 24/27 (88.9%) with new metalware (p=0.049). Overall rates of infection-free union were similar in both groups (58.8% vs 77.8%; p=0.117). DAIR of plates had significantly fewer infection-free unions compared to removal and implantation of new plates (DAIR 57.1% vs NM 91.7%; p=0.033). Conclusion. Implantation of new metalware had better eradication of infection and a strong trend towards better union rates. Treating FRI with retained or new metalware had a substantial mortality (13.7%). Choosing DAIR did not reduce this mortality and these patients more often required further surgery to treat residual infection and secure union

Aim. To describe the impact of a failed DAIR in the further prognosis of the prosthesis after a PJI. Method. A retrospective multicentrically study was conducted, including 10 institutions from all over the country. PJI-confirmed patients who underwent DAIR clinical records were revised. Age, sex, relevant previous conditions, Charlson comorbidity score, previous surgery, PJI diagnosis and surgical and antibiotic treatment, from the index surgery onwards. DAIR failure was defined as the removal of the prosthesis and/or an antibiotic suppressive treatment. Results. 95 failed DAIR were identified, 43 of whom were treated with another DAIR (70% success rate), 20 with one-stage revision (75% success rate) and 25 with two-stage revision (92% success rate). As risk factors for the failure of a second DAIR, a non-specialized surgical team(p=.0034), mobile components exchange(p=.009) and polymicrobial infections(p=.03) were identified. Regarding to one-stage revisions, no risk factors were identified, and regarding to two-stage revisions, polymicrobial infection were identified (p=.028). Conclusions. A second DAIR could sabe up to 70% of the prosthesis in our series. Furthermore, the outcome of the subsequent one or two-stage revision does not seem to be affected bay the previous failed DAIR. In terms of risk factors of failure, non-specialized surgical team, no mobile components exchange, and polymicrobial infections were identified for the DAIR, and polymicrobial infections for the two-stage revisions

Aim. Haematogenous prosthetic joint infections account for 20-35% of total prosthetic infections. Debridement, antibiotics and implant retention (DAIR) is a well-accepted treatment for these infections and probably the most desired by surgeons, since it tries to maintain a functional and stable implant. However, the risk of DAIR failure is not negligible and some risk factors have been described, and also, different scores, such as CRIME80. Nonetheless, less is known about the impact of positive blood cultures may have on DAIR treatment. The aim of our study is to analyze whether the presence of a positive culture is a risk factor for DAIR failure. Method. A retrospective cohort study of 50 late acute haematogenous TKA infections was performed from 2015 to 2023. DAIR failure was defined as the need of a subsequent intervention either a new DAIR or a revision surgery. So, patients were divided into two groups depending on the surgical outcome: successful (SG) vs failure (FG). Demographic variables including age, gender, affected side and body mass index were collected. Patient's comorbidities were also collected including chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), diabetes, rheumatoid arthritis (RA), cirrhosis and chronic renal failure, etc. Other variables, such as ones included in CRIME80 (C-reactive protein (CRP) >150mg/dl and polyethylene exchange), were also collected. Results. 30 patients had a successful DAIR outcome (60%). Age and sex do not act as risk factors [OR 0.7 (0.2-2.6) and OR 0.4 (0.1-1.3)]. Neither do COPD [OR 3.3 (0.5-2.0), p=0.2]; RA [OR 0.8 (0.2-3.1), p=0.7]; CRP value [3.2 (0.9-11.2), p=0.06]; and polyethylene exchange [OR 0.4 (0.1-2.5), p= 0.3]. Thirty-five blood cultures (70%) were obtained before surgery (20 SG and 15 FG). Nine of the obtained blood cultures were positive (25.7%), being 7 from FG (46.7%) [OR 7.6 (1.3-4.8), p=0.02]. A logistic regression was performed where positive blood cultures were the only significant variable to predict DAIR failure (OR 12, 95% CI 1.1−18, p=0.049), after adjusting for all CRIME80 variables. Skin and soft tissue origin was described in 5 of the nine positive blood cultures (55.6%). Cardiovascular system was the second most common spread (22.2%), and then followed by urogenital and digestive tract. The most common microorganism in FG was Staphylococcus aureus (57.1%) [OR 6.4 (0.2-18.0), p=0.2]. Conclusions. Positive blood cultures may be another risk factor for DAIR failure. This can be important in diagnosis and it may be taken into account in antibiotic and surgical treatment strategies

The optimum indications for debridement, antibiotics and implant retention (DAIR) are unclear. Previous studies have demonstrated higher success rate of DAIR within one year of the primary arthroplasty. This study aimed to compare the success rate of DAIR vs revision in “early” and “late” infections to provide guidance for clinical decision making. The Prosthetic Joint Infection in Australia and New Zealand Observational (PIANO) cohort prospectively recorded PJIs between July 2014 and December 2017 in 27 hospitals. This study included PIANO patients with first time PJIs occurring after primary TKA. Treatment success was defined as the patient being alive, free from further revision and without clinical or microbiological evidence of reinfection at two years follow-up. “Early” and “late” infections were analyzed separately. Univariate analysis compared demographic and disease specific factors between the DAIR and Revision groups. Multivariate binary logistic regression identified whether treatment strategy and other risk factors were associated with treatment success in “early” and “late” infections. In 117 “early” (<1 year) infections, treatment success rate was 56% in the DAIR group and 54% in the revision group (p=0.878). No independent risk factors were associated with treatment outcome on multivariate analysis. In 134 “late” (>1 year) infections, treatment success rate was 34.4% in the DAIR group and 60.5% in the revision group (OR 3.07 p=0.006). On multivariate analysis, revision was associated with 2.47x higher odds of success (p=0.041) when compared to DAIR, patients with at least one significant co-morbidity (OR 2.27, p=0.045) or with Staphylococcus aureus PJIs (OR 2.5, p=0.042) had higher odds of failure. In “late” PJIs occurring >1 year following primary TKA, treatment strategy with revision rather than DAIR was associated with greater success. Patients with significant comorbidities and Staphylococcus aureus PJIs were at higher risk of failure regardless of treatment strategy

Introduction. Debridement, antibiotics irrigation and implant retention (DAIR) is a common management strategy for hip and knee prosthetic joint infections (PJI). However, failure rates remain high, which has led to the development of predictive tools to help determine success. These tools include KLIC and CRIME80 for acute-postoperative (AP) and acute haematogenous (AH) PJI respectively. We investigated whether these tools were applicable to a Waikato cohort. Method. We performed a retrospective cohort study that evaluated patients who underwent DAIR between January 2010 and June 2020 at Waikato Hospital. Pre-operative KLIC and CRIME80 scores were calculated and compared to success of operation. Failure was defined as: (i) need for further surgery, (ii) need for suppressive antibiotics, (iii) death due to the infection. Logistic regression models were used to calculate the area under the curve (AUC). Results. 117 eligible patients underwent DAIR, 53 in the AP cohort and 64 in the AH cohort. Failure rate at 2 years post-op was 43% in the AP cohort and 59% in the AH cohort. In the AP cohort a KLIC score of <4 had a DAIR failure rate of 28.6%, while those who scored ³4 had a failure rate of 72.2% (p=0.002). In the AH cohort a CRIME80 score of <3 had a DAIR failure rate of 48% while those who scored ³3 had a 100% failure rate (p<0.001). Discussion. This study represents the first external validation of the KLIC and CRIME80 scores for predicting DAIR failure in an Australasian population. The results indicate that both KLIC and CRIME80 scoring tools are valuable aids for the clinician seeking to determine the optimal management strategy in patients with AP or AH PJI

Aim. One of the surgical therapeutic options for periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) includes debridement, antibiotics, and implant retention (DAIR). Prognostically favorable criteria for DAIR include short duration of symptoms, stable implant, pathogen susceptible to a ‘biofilm-active’ antimicrobial agent, and intact soft-tissue conditions. Despite this, there is a proportion of failures after DAIR, possibly because the duration of infection is underestimated. With the hypothesis that the duration of infection correlates with the bacterial load, and hence, the bacterial load is associated with failure after DAIR, we aimed to investigate the association of bacterial load in the sonication fluid of mobile parts and clinical outcome after DAIR. Method. From our PJI cohort (2010–2021), patients with DAIR (both palliative and curative approaches) were reviewed retrospectively. Patients with hip, knee or shoulder arthroplasties fulfilling infection definition, available sonication results, and ≥2 years follow-up were included. Sonication results were categorized in ≤ or >1000 cfu/mL. Univariate analysis was performed to identify predictors for DAIR failure. Results. Out of 209 PJIs, we identified 96 patients (100 PJIs, 47.8%) with DAIR. In 67 (69.8%) patients with 71 PJIs, there was a follow-up of ≥2 years. The mean age was 72.7 (SD 12.99) years, 50% were male. The infection affected 36 hips (50.7%), 32 knees (45.1%) and 3 shoulders (4.2%). At follow-up, there were 29 (40.8%) cured and 42 (59.2%) failed cases. When comparing failed and cured cases, we found no difference in comorbidities and previously defined risk factors for PJI, ASA score, Charlson score, anatomic location, no. of previous surgeries, pathogenesis of infection or laboratory values. The proportion of patients with high bacterial load on mobile parts (i.e. >1000 cfu/mL) was significantly higher in the failed DAIR group than it was in the cured group (61.9% vs 20.7%, p<0.001). Conclusions. In this study, a high bacterial load in sonication fluid of mobile parts was associated with failure after DAIR in patients with PJI. Sonication may help to differentiate acute hematogenous seeding to the implant and late reactivation of a previously silent implant-associated infection

Aim. Debridement, antibiotics and implant retention (DAIR) is recommended for acute postoperative and late acute prosthetic joint infection (PJI). There are two recommend scores to predict its outcome, KLIC and CRIME 80 scores respectively. They have not been widely adopted for decision making. We aim to evaluate them in predicting DAIR failure in our cohort. Method. All patients submitted to DAIR after total hip or knee PJI, between 2010 and 2021, with a minimum one-year follow-up, were retrospectively evaluated. We excluded tumoral total joint replacements. KLIC score was applied to acute PJIs and CRIME 80 to late acute (LA) PJI. LA PJI was defined as the development of acute symptoms occurring ≥ 3 months after implantation. Repeat DAIR was performed as needed. Failure was defined as the need for implant removal, amputation, infection related death and suppressive antibiotic therapy. Results. We included 102 patients. The overall failure rate was 35.5% (36/102). There was no significant difference for the rate of failure in patients that had one DAIR and those who repeated DAIR - 32.5% (26/80) vs. 45.5% (10/22) (p=0.26). There were no significant correlations between KLIC or CRIME 80 scores and failure rates (p=0.54 and p=0.93 respectively, figure 1). Focusing specifically on the cohort who underwent repeat DAIR (n=22), KLIC and CRIME-80 score were also not associated with failure (p= 0.44 and p=0.50 respectively, figure 1). No host, pathogen or antibiotic treatment related factors were found to predict failure. Conclusions. In our cohort KLIC- and CRIME-80 scores failed to be predictive of DAIR failure, even in the cohort that needed repeat DAIR. We were unable to find any independent failure risk factors. For any tables or figures, please contact the authors directly

Aim. Debridement, antibiotic, and implant retention (DAIR) is an accepted treatment of early and late acute Total Knee Arthroplasty (TKA) infections. DAIR failure may adversely affect the outcome of a subsequent two-stage exchange arthroplasty. Controversy exists on risk factors that can affect DAIR's results. The aim of the study is to review presurgical, intrasurgical and postsurgical variables that could affect DAIR's result. Method. A retrospective study of 27 DAIRs performed between 2015–2019 to treat late acute TKA infections was carried out. Patients were divided into two groups depending on DAIR's outcome [Healing (H) vs non-healing group (NH)] according on the Delphi-based multidisciplinary consensus criteria on success after treatment of periprosthetic joint infection. We reviewed presurgical variables, including epidemiological variables (Age, Sex, comorbidities, ASA, Charlson, BMI, alcohol dependency), prosthesis variables (prosthesis type, primary cause of operation, primary TKA surgery center), infection variables (concomitant infection, previous antibiotic treatment, c-reactive protein, synovial WBC count, synovial % PMN, pathogen), KLIC score and CRIME 80 score. Surgical variables such as surgery duration and type of surgery (elective vs urgent). Post-surgical variables like antibiotic treatment duration and destination at discharge. Normal distribution was assessed by Shapiro-Wilk test. Mann Whitney U test was used to compare the two independent sample variables. Chi-squared test was used for qualitative variables. P-value was established at 0.05 and statistical power at 80%. Results. Infection Healing was achieved in 63% of patients. In presurgical variables, alcohol dependency, hypertension, liver disease, previous surgery performed in another institution were more frequent in NH group (p< 0.05). KLIC score value equal or greater than 4 had a higher risk of surgical failure (p < 0.05). Regarding surgical variables, the healing group had more negative cultures than de non-healing one (p<0.05). Regarding post-surgical variables, long term antibiotic treatment (six months) achieved more healing after DAIR (p<0.05). Conclusions. Alcohol dependency, hypertension, liver disease and KLIC score values equal or greater than 4, may increases the risk of DAIR failure. Finally, we observed that the long-term antibiotic treatment (6 months) favors healing after DAIR

Aim. Debridement, antibiotics, and implant retention (DAIR) is a viable treatment option for acute periprosthetic joint infections (PJI). The landmark DATIPO trial of Bernard et al. concluded that six weeks is not non-inferior to 12-week antibiotic therapy for DAIR. However, it is unknown if suppressive antibiotic treatment (SAT) would improve patient outcomes. Therefore, our study aims to evaluate the utility of SAT after 12 weeks of therapy. Method. We performed a retrospective study of patients with acute hip or knee PJI managed with DAIR at five institutions; in the U.S. (n=1), Netherlands (n=3), and Spain (n=1) from 2005–2020. We analyzed the effect of SAT using a Cox model among patients after 12 weeks of antibiotic treatment. The primary covariate of interest was whether the patient was on antibiotics after week 12, which was coded as a time-varying covariate. We decided a-priori to control for the clinically important risk factors such as age, sex, type of infection, modular exchange, joint, and presence of bacteremia and Staphylococcus aureus. We excluded patients who died, had treatment failure, or were lost to follow-up before 12 weeks. We defined treatment failure as infection recurrence (same or different organism), unexpected reoperation, or death due to infection. Results. There were 504 patients included in the study. The majority were female (58%, n=292), with a mean age of 70 years ago (SD 11). Hips and knees were equally proportioned. Primary arthroplasties represented 69% of the total cohort (n=349). Treatment failure was 11.9% in the total cohort (n=60). There was no statistically significant association between SAT after 12 weeks and treatment failure (HR 1.25, p=0.45, 95% CI 0.70–2.24). This finding was consistent across different subgroups, including hip or knee joints, early or late acute infections, cohort, and a subgroup of knee joints after 180 days. Conclusions. SAT after 12 weeks of antibiotic treatment for acute PJI managed with DAIR does not appear to improve patient outcomes

Aim. The purpose of this study is to report the overall infection control rate and prognostic factors associated with acute, hematogenous and chronic PJIs treated with DAIR. Methods. All DAIR procedures performed at 2 institutions from 2009 to 2018 (n=104) were reviewed and numerous data were recorded, including demographics, preoperative laboratory tests, Charleston Comorbidity Index, surgical information and organism culture results. Treatment success was defined according to the criteria reported by Diaz-Ledezma. A multivariable analysis was utilized to identify prognostic factors associated with treatment and a Kaplan-Meier survival analysis was used to depict infection control rate as a function of time. Results. The overall treatment success rate in the current cohort of patients was 67.3% at a median 38.6 (23.5–90.7) months follow-up. Patients with a duration of infectious symptoms greater than 10 days were more likely to fail (P=0.035, odds ratio 8.492, 95% confidence interval 1.159–62.212). There was no difference among acute, hematogenous and chronic infections in terms of failure rate even when time was considered (p=0.161). Conclusion. With careful patient selection, DAIR is a reasonable treatment option for PJI and its use in the setting of chronic infection does not appear to be a contraindication. Performing the DAIR procedure within 10 days of the presentation of symptoms had higher rates of treatment success

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. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2024;106-B(12):1377–1384

DAIR procedure is well established for Prosthetic Joint Infection (PJI) in acute setting after total hip and knee replacements. We present our experience of DAIR following hip and knee replacements in a District General Hospital (DGH), where we delivered comparable results to leading tertiary centres in short to mid-term followup. We undertook a retrospective study involving 14 patients, who underwent DAIR in our DGH between August 2012 and December 2015. Patient cohort included primary, complex primary and revision hip and knee replacements. Microbiological support was provided by a Microbiologist with interest in musculoskeletal infections. 14 patients [9 males, 5 females; age 62 to 78 years (Mean 70.7); BMI 22 to 44.2 (Mean 33.8)] with multiple comorbidities underwent DAIR procedure within 3 weeks of onset of symptoms. 12 out of 14 grew positive cultures with two growing Vancomycin resistant Enterococci. Intravenous antibiotics were started after multiple samples intraoperatively and continued in six patients after discharge, while 8 were discharged with oral antibiotics. One patient died of overwhelming intraoperative septic shock in postoperative period. Another patient died of myocardial infarction subsequently. 12 (85.7%) patients were doing well with regular followup (Mean 20 months). With good patient selection, DAIR is a far simpler solution and a safe and reproducible surgical option for early PJI following hip and knee replacements compared to one or two stage revisions. But published data in contemporary literature is predominantly from specialised centres. Our small series provides a perspective of comparable early to mid-term results of DAIR from DGH

Aim. Debridement, antibiotics and implant retention (DAIR) are considered as an optimal curative treatment option for prosthetic joint infection (PJI) when the biofilm is still immature and radical debridement is achievable. There are two main groups of patients suitable for DAIR. Those with an early acute PJI and patients with acute hematogenous PJI. However, there is also a third group of early PJI resulting from a wound healing problem or leaking hematoma. These may be either high or low grade depending on the microorganisms that infected the artificial joint “per continuitatem”. Methods. We retrospectively analysed 100 successive DAIR procedures on prosthetic hip and knee joints performed between January 2010 and January 2022, from total of 21000 primary arthroplasties implanted within the same time period. We only included PJI in primary total replacements with no previous surgeries on the affected joint. Patients data (demographics, biochemical, microbiological, histopathological results, and outcomes) were collected from hospital bone and joint infection registry. The aim of surgery was radical debridement and the mobile parts exchange. The standardized antibiotic regime based on antibiofilm antibiotics. Results. The mean age of patients was 70 years (60% women, 43 hips, 57 knees) with a mean follow-up of 3 years. 45 cases were early acute or related to wound healing problems, 55 were hematogenous PJI. 25 patients received preoperative antibiotics. 6 of these were culture negative. The mean symptom duration was 7 days. Mean age of the prosthesis was 30 days for early, and 1064 days for the hematogenous group. Conclusions. In our cohort the success rate of DAIR is 94% which indicates that the protocol is highly successful in PJI with short-lasting symptoms and “debridable” joints. Antibiotic protocol violation and duration of symptoms may have a role in failures

Aims. Debridement, antibiotics, and implant retention (DAIR) is a widely accepted form of surgical treatment for patients with an early periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) after primary arthroplasty. The outcome of DAIR after revision arthroplasty, however, has not been reported. The aim of this study was to report the success rate of DAIR after revision arthroplasty with a follow-up of two years. Methods. This retrospective study, conducted at the Sint Maartenskliniek, Nijmegen, the Netherlands, included 88 patients who underwent DAIR within 90 days of revision total hip or total knee arthroplasty between 2012 and 2019. Details of the surgical procedures and PJI were collected. Univariate analysis and a subgroup analysis of the culture-positive group were performed. Kaplan-Meier survivorship curves were constructed. Results. The overall success rate of DAIR, with respect to the retention of components and the cure of infection, was 68% after two years. DAIR performed with an interval of > 30 days after the index revision procedure (odds ratio (OR) 0.24 (95% confidence interval (CI) 0.08 to 0.72); p = 0.008), a repeated DAIR within 90 days (OR 0.37 (95% CI 0.14 to 0.97); p = 0.040), and the use of an immunosuppressive agent (OR 0.13 (95% CI 0.02 to 0.67); p = 0.012) were associated with a significantly reduced success rate. In the culture-positive group, a mismatch between the antibiotic treatment and the susceptibility of the organism was associated with a significantly lower success rate (OR 0.13 (95% CI 0.03 to 0.62); p = 0.007). Conclusion. DAIR is an acceptable form of surgical treatment for patients with a suspected early PJI after revision arthroplasty of the hip or knee. DAIRs performed after a prolonged interval, multiple DAIRs, and antibiotic mismatches were significantly associated with an increased risk of failure. Optimization of the host immune response and the prevention of antibiotic mismatch are modifiable factors that may improve the outcome. The high rate of mismatches was an important finding, underlining the need for a review of the local microbiological data, which might improve the outcome. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2022;104-B(4):464–471

Aims. Deep surgical site infection (SSI) remains an unsolved problem after hip fracture. Debridement, antibiotic, and implant retention (DAIR) has become a mainstream treatment in elective periprosthetic joint infection; however, evidence for DAIR after infected hip hemiarthroplaty is limited. Methods. Patients who underwent a hemiarthroplasty between March 2007 and August 2018 were reviewed. Multivariable binary logistic regression was performed to identify and adjust for risk factors for SSI, and to identify factors predicting a successful DAIR at one year. Results. A total of 3,966 patients were identified. The overall rate of SSI was 1.7% (51 patients (1.3%) with deep SSI, and 18 (0.45%) with superficial SSI). In all, 50 patients underwent revision surgery for infection (43 with DAIR, and seven with excision arthroplasty). After adjustment for other variables, only concurrent urinary tract infection (odds ratio (OR) 2.78, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.57 to 4.92; p < 0.001) and increasing delay to theatre for treatment of the fracture (OR 1.31 per day, 95% CI 1.12 to 1.52; p < 0.001) were predictors of developing a SSI, while a cemented arthroplasty was protective (OR 0.54, 95% CI 0.31 to 0.96; p = 0.031). In all, nine patients (20.9%) were alive at one year with a functioning hemiarthroplasty following DAIR, 20 (46.5%) required multiple surgical debridements after an initial DAIR, and 18 were converted to an excision arthroplasty due to persistent infection, with six were alive at one year. The culture of any gram-negative organism reduced success rates to 12.5% (no cases were successful with methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus or Pseudomonas infection). Favourable organisms included Citrobacter and Proteus (100% cure rate). The all-cause mortality at one year after deep SSI was 55.87% versus 24.9% without deep infection. Conclusion. Deep infection remains a devastating complication regardless of the treatment strategy employed. Success rates of DAIR are poor compared to total hip arthroplasty, and should be reserved for favourable organisms in patients able to tolerate multiple surgical procedures. Cite this article: Bone Jt Open 2021;2(11):958–965