Aims. The aim of this study was to analyze the prevalence of culture-negative periprosthetic joint infections (PJIs) when adequate methods of culture are used, and to evaluate the outcome in patients who were treated with antibiotics for a culture-negative PJI compared with those in whom antibiotics were withheld. Methods. A multicentre observational study was undertaken: 1,553 acute and 1,556 chronic PJIs, diagnosed between 2013 and 2018, were retrospectively analyzed. Culture-negative PJIs were diagnosed according to the Muskuloskeletal Infection Society (MSIS), International Consensus Meeting (ICM), and European Bone and Joint Society (EBJIS) definitions. The primary outcome was recurrent infection, and the secondary outcome was removal of the prosthetic components for any indication, both during a follow-up period of two years. Results. None of the acute PJIs and 70 of the chronic PJIs (4.7%) were culture-negative; a total of 36 culture-negative PJIs (51%) were treated with antibiotics, particularly those with histological signs of infection. After two years of follow-up, no recurrent infections occurred in patients in whom antibiotics were withheld. The requirement for removal of the components for any indication during follow-up was not significantly different in those who received antibiotics compared with those in whom antibiotics were withheld (7.1% vs 2.9%; p = 0.431). Conclusion. When adequate methods of culture are used, the incidence of culture-negative PJIs is low. In patients with culture-negative PJI, antibiotic treatment can probably be withheld if there are no histological signs of infection. In all other patients, diagnostic efforts should be made to identify the causative microorganism by means of serology or molecular techniques. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2022;104-B(1):183–188

Background. Increasing evidence suggests a link between the bearing surface used in total hip arthroplasty (THA) and the occurrence of infection. It is postulated that polyethylene has immunomodulatory effects and may influence bacterial function and survival, thereby impacting the development of periprosthetic joint infection (PJI). This study aimed to investigate the association between polyethylene type and revision surgery for PJI in THA using data from the Australian Orthopaedic Association National Joint Replacement Registry (AOANJRR). We hypothesized that the use of XLPE would demonstrate a statistically significant reduction in revision rates due to PJI compared to N-XLPE. Methods. Data from the Australian Orthopaedic Association National Joint Replacement Registry (AOANJRR) spanning September 1, 1999, to December 31, 2021, were used to compare the infection revision rates between THA using N-XLPE and XLPE. We calculated the Cumulative Percentage Revision rate (CPR) and Hazard Ratio (HR) while controlling for factors like age, sex, body mass index (BMI), American Society of Anesthesiologists’ (ASA) grade, and head size. Results. From the total 361,083 primary THAs, 26,827 used N-XLPE and 334,256 used XLPE. Excluding data from the first 6 months post-surgery, 220 revisions occurred in the N-XLPE group and 1,055 in the XLPE group for PJI. The HR for infection revision was significantly higher in N-XLPE compared to XLPE, at 1.64 (95% CI, 1.41–1.90, p<0.001). Conclusions. This analysis provides evidence of an association between N-XLPE and revision for infection in THA. We suspect that polyethylene wear particles contribute to the susceptibility of THA to PJI, resulting in a significantly higher risk of revision for infection in N-XLPE hips compared to those with XLPE. Level of Evidence. Therapeutic Level III

Aims. Despite numerous studies on periprosthetic joint infections (PJI), there are no robust data on the risk factors and timing of metachronous infections. This study was performed to answer the following questions: 1) Is there any difference of manifestation time of metachronous PJIs between different localizations of multiple artificial joints? 2) Can we identify any specific risk factor for metachronous PJIs for different localizations of multiple artificial joints?. Methods. Between January 2010 and December 2018, 661 patients with more than one prosthetic joint at the time of PJI surgical treatment were recruited. Seventy-one developed metachronous PJI after a mean time interval of 101.4 months (range 37.5 to 161.5 months). The remaining patients were chosen as control group. The diagnosis of the PJI, including the metachronous PJI, was made according to the Muscoloskeletal Infection Society (MSIS) criteria. The metachronous infections were divided in group 1: metachronous infections in the same extremity (e.g. right hip and right knee); group 2: metachronous infections of the other extremity (e.g. right knee and left hip); group 3: metachronous infections of the lower extremity and upper extremity (e.g. right knee and left shoulder). Results. We identified 32 PJI cases in group 1, 38 in group 2 and 1 in group 3. Diabetes mellitus was found higher in the metachronous infections (p<0.05). Rate of same side infection was significantly higher compared to contralateral and upper and lower infection (p<0.05). Time interval of metachrononous infection development was faster in same-side infections. Same bacteria sample rate between primary PJI and metachronous PJI in same side infections (21/32) was significantly higher than in the contralateral PJI group (13/38, p<0.05). Conclusions. The current study underlined that the risk of metachronous infections are relatively high, particularly in the cases of prostheses on the same side

Aim. As the populations of patients who have multiple prosthetic joints increase these years, the fate of a single joint periprosthetic joint infection in these patients is still unknown. Risk factors leading to a subsequent infection in another prosthetic joint are unclear. Our goal is to identify the risk factors of developing a subsequent infection in another prosthetic joint and describe the organism profile to the second prosthetic infection. Method. We performed a retrospective cohort study of all PJI cases underwent surgical intervention at our institute, a tertiary care referral center over 11 years, during January 2006 to December 2016. We identified 96 patients with periprosthetic joint infection who had another prosthetic joint in place at the time of presentation. The comorbidity, number of prosthetic joints, date and type of each arthroplasty, times of recurrent infection at each prosthetic joint with subsequent debridement or 2-stage resection arthroplasty, organisms from every infection episode, the outcome of each periprosthetic joint infection in these patients were analyzed. Results. During January 2006 to May 2017, we retrospective collected 294 PJI cases (159 hips, 135 knees) in our institute. Patients with single prosthetic joint were excluded and finally 96 patients were included. Of the 96 patients, 19 (19.79%) developed a periprosthetic joint infection in a second joint. The type of organism was the same as the first infection in 12 (63.16%) of 19 patients. The time to developing a second infection averaged 2.16 years (range, 0–9.3 years). The risk factors leading to a subsequent infection in another prosthetic joint are albumin level (< 3.5 mg/dl), long-term steroid usage (> 5mg/day, > 3 months), history of necrotizing fasciitis, history of invasive dental procedure (> Grade IV procedure), 3-stage resection arthroplasty or more, and PJI caused by vacomycin-resistent enterococcus (VRE). Conclusions. A PJI might predispose patients to subsequent PJI in another prosthesis. Patients and surgeons must be aware of the risk factors contribute to this devastating complication. Most organisms in the second PJI are identical to the first one, and we believe the bacteremia may be the pathogenesis, but need further proved. The preventive policy may be needed in the future for this population who has multiple prosthetic joints

Aim. Diagnosing periprosthetic joint infection after total joint arthroplasty is often challenging. The alpha defensin test has been recently reported as a promising diagnostic test for periprosthetic joint infection. The goal of this study was to determine the diagnostic accuracy of alpha defensin testing. Method. One hundred and eighty-three synovial alpha defensin and synovial fluid C-reactive protein (CRP) tests performed in 183 patients undergoing evaluation for periprosthetic joint infection were reviewed. Results were compared with the Musculoskeletal Infection Society (MSIS) criteria for periprosthetic joint infection. Results. Alpha defensin tests were performed prior to surgical treatment for infection, and 37 of these patients who had these tests were diagnosed by MSIS criteria as having infections. Among this group, the alpha defensin test had a sensitivity of 81.1% (95% confidence interval [CI], 64.8% to 92.0%) and a specificity of 95.9% (95% CI, 91.3% to 98.5%). There were 6 false-positive results, 4 of which were associated with metallosis. There were 7 false negatives, all of which were associated with either draining sinuses (n = 3) or low-virulence organisms (n = 4). A combined analysis of alpha defensin and synovial fluid CRP tests was performed in which a positive result was represented by a positive alpha defensin test and a positive synovial fluid CRP test (n = 28). Among this group, the sensitivity was calculated to be 73.0% (95% CI, 55.9% to 86.2%) and the specificity was calculated to be 99.3% (95% CI, 96.2% to 99.9%). An additional combined analysis was performed where a positive result was represented by a positive alpha defensin test or positive synovial fluid CRP test (n = 64). Among this group, the sensitivity was calculated tobe91.9%(95%CI, 78.1%to98.3%) andthe specificitywas calculated tobe79.5%(95%CI, 72.0%to85.7%). Conclusions. Alpha defensin in combination with synovial fluid CRP demonstrates very high sensitivity for diagnosing periprosthetic joint infection, but may yield false-positive results in the presence of metallosis or false-negative results in the presence of low-virulence organisms. When both alpha defensin and synovial fluid CRP tests are positive, there is a very high specificity for diagnosing periprosthetic joint infection

Background. The diagnosis of periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) remains a challenge in clinical practice and the analysis of synovial fluid (SF) is a useful diagnostic tool. Recently, two synovial biomarkers (leukocyte esterase (LE) strip test, alpha-defensin (AD)) have been introduced into the MSIS (MusculoSkeletal Infection Society) algorithm for the diagnosis of PJI. AD, although promising with high sensitivity and specificity, remains expensive. Calprotectin is another protein released upon activation of articular neutrophils. The determination of calprotectin and joint CRP is feasible in a routine laboratory practice with low cost. Purpose. Our objective was to evaluate different synovial biomarkers (calprotectin, LE, CRP) for the diagnosis of PJI. Methods. In this monocentric study, we collected SF from hip, knee, ankle and shoulder joints of 42 patients who underwent revision or puncture for diagnostic purposes. Exclusion criteria included a joint surgery in the previous 3 months and a diagnosis of a systemic inflammatory disease. PJI was diagnosed in a multidisciplinary consultation meeting (RCP) of the Reference Centers for Osteoarticular Infections of the Great West (CRIOGO). SF was analysed for LE, CRP and calprotectin. The cut-off values used were 50 mg/L for calprotectin, 8.8 mg/L for CRP and 125 WBC/µL for LE. The overall sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value (PPV) and negative predictive value (NPV) were calculated for these different synovial markers. Results. Of the 42 patients included, 28 were considered as infected and 14 uninfected. The statistical parameters are presented in Table 1. Conclusion. The present study shows that the synovial calprotectin assay has an excellent sensitivity and a 100% NPV for the diagnosis of PJI, suggesting that a result < 50 mg/L could exclude PJI. This promising study suggests that calprotectin should be included with synovial CRP in a new decision algorithm for the diagnosis of PJI. For any tables or figures, please contact the authors directly

Background. Fungal infection at an arthroplasty site is rare and poses a therapeutic challenge. To the best of our knowledge, no reports have been published thus far on the success rate of prosthesis reimplantation after fungal prosthetic joint infections. Questions/purposes. We asked: (1) What is the success rate in terms of infection eradication using a two-stage exchange arthroplasty in patients with hip or knee fungal periprosthetic joint infections, particularly focusing on Candida infections? (2) What patient-, infection-, and treatment-related variables are associated with the success or failure of treatment?. Methods. From January 2000 to December 2010, 16 patients with hip or knee candidal periprosthetic joint infections were treated with two-stage exchange arthroplasty at our institute. Treatment success was defined as a well-functioning joint without relapse of candidal infection after prosthesis reimplantation, while treatment failure was defined as uncontrolled or a relapse of candidal infection or mortality. Variables, including age, sex, comorbidities, microbiology, antimicrobial agents used, and operative methods, were analyzed. Minimum followup was 28 months (mean, 41 months; range, 28–90 months). Results. At latest followup, the treatment failed to eradicate the infection in eight of the 16 patients, and there were four deaths related to fungemia. Four patients required permanent resection arthroplasty owing to uncontrolled or recurrent candidal infections. All eight patients (50% successful rate) who had their infections eradicated and successful prosthesis reimplantation had prolonged treatment with oral fluconazole before (mean, 8 months) and after (mean, 2.2 months) prosthesis reimplantation. The antifungal therapy correlated with successful treatment. Renal insufficiency, hypoalbuminemia, anemia, and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease were significantly more prevalent in the treatment-failure group than in the treatment-success group. Conclusions. Half of the patients treated with two-stage exchange arthroplasty for fungal periprosthetic joint infections had recurrence or lack of control of the infection. A prolonged antifungal therapy appeared to be essential for successful treatment of candidal periprosthetic joint infections. The presence of renal insufficiency, hypoalbuminemia, anemia, or chronic obstructive pulmonary disease might be associated with a poor outcome

Aim. Serum parameters continue to be a focus of research in diagnosing periprosthetic joint infections (PJI). Several workgroups have recently proposed serum Albumin-Globulin-Ratio (AGR) as a potential new biomarker. Due to controversies in the literature, its usability in clinical practice remains uncertain. The aim of this study was to assess the value of serum AGR in diagnosing PJI preoperatively, especially in comparison with the well-established marker C-reactive Protein (CRP). Method. From January 2015 to June 2022, patients with indicated revision hip (rTHA) and knee (rTKA) arthroplasty were included in this retrospective cohort study of prospectively collected data. A standardized diagnostic workup was performed using the 2021 European Bone and Joint Infection Society (EBJIS) definition of PJI, excluding CRP. Diagnostic accuracies of serum AGR and CRP were calculated by receiver operating characteristic curve (ROC) analysis. A z-test was used to compare the area under the curves (AUC). Results. A total of 275 patients with rTHA and rTKA were included, 144 joints (52.4%) were identified as septic. Decreased AGR and elevated CRP were strongly associated with PJI, optimal diagnostic thresholds were calculated with 1.253 and 9.4 mg/L, respectively. Sensitivities were 62.5% (95%-confidence interval: 54.3–70.0) and 73.6% (65.8–80.1), and specificities 84.7% (77.5–89.9) and 87.8% (80.9–92.4), respectively. CRP showed a significantly higher AUC than AGR (0.807 (0.761–0.853) and 0.736 (0.686–0.786); p<0.0001). Subgroup analysis of acute versus chronic infections yielded significantly higher diagnostic accuracies in acute PJI for both parameters (p<0.0001). Similar results were observed when focusing on the causative microorganism; a better diagnostic performance was observed in high-virulence PJI compared to low-virulence PJI (p≤0.005). Furthermore, higher AUCs were calculated in knee PJI compared with hip PJI, with a significant difference for AGR (p=0.043). Conclusions. Due to its limited diagnostic accuracy, serum AGR cannot be recommended as an additional marker for diagnosing PJI. Serum parameters are generally unspecific and can be influenced by comorbidities and other foci of infection. Additionally, parameters may remain within normal levels in low-grade PJI. Evaluating AGR, further possible pitfalls must be considered, for example an increased latency until bottom values are reached and the impact of malnutrition

INTRODUCTION. Total joint arthroplasty continues to gain acceptance as the standard of care for the treatment of severe degenerative joint disease, and is considered one of the most successful surgical interventions in the history of medicine. However, infection of these implants, called Periprosthetic Joint Infection (PJI), remains one of the biggest challenges facing orthopaedics today. PJI can lead to additional surgeries, revision, fusion and amputation. Diagnosis of PJI. It is important to accurately diagnose PJI because its management differs from that of other causes of arthroplasty failure. In acute infection, the local signs and symptoms (e.g., severe pain, swelling, erythema, and warmth at the infected joint) of inflammation are generally present. On the other hand, chronic infection usually has a more subtle presentation, with pain alone, and is often accompanied by loosening of the prosthesis at the bone-implant interface. The diagnosis of PJI has proven quite challenging, as both acute and chronic infections can be difficult to differentiate from other forms of inflammation. The reported literature on the diagnosis of PJI has focused on evaluated laboratory tests that were never developed specifically for the diagnosis of PJI. These include the erythrocyte sedimentation rate (ESR), the serum C-reactive protein (CRP), the synovial fluid white blood cell count and the leukocyte differential. Because these tests were not made for the purpose of diagnosing PJI, it has been the responsibility of the orthopaedic community to evaluate and recommend their interpretation. This has resulted in significant confusion regarding the appropriate thresholds and optimal combination of these tests. These difficulties were the motivation for the development of a specific test for the detection of PJI. The Synovasure® Test for Periprosthetic Joint Infection (PJI). The promising diagnostic capabilities of synovial fluid biomarkers for PJI have already been reported in the literature. These biomarkers include inflammatory proteins, cytokines, and microbicidal peptides / proteins that are known to be involved in the host response to infection. Studies have demonstrated that the alpha-defensin microbicidal peptide present in human neutrophils is an ideal biomarker for PJI due to the distinct separation it achieves between positive and negative results. A specific test allowing to measure the concentration of the alpha-defensin in the synovial fluid has been developed. The specificity and the sensitivity of this test for the detection of a PJI are respectively 96% and 97%. This test has been proven to have also a high reproducibility, its results not being influenced by antibiotics. DISCUSSION. A lateral flow version of this test (Synovasure PJI, distributed exclusively in Europe by Zimmer GmbH) has been recently developed. It allows reading the results in 10 minutes and it doesn't require any laboratories for its interpretation. Currently, this test device is in clinical evaluation in more than 200 European hospitals. CONCLUSIONS. In case that the clinical evaluation of this test device is positive, this method will be a new paradigm for the diagnosis of periprosthetic joint infection

Aim. Patients with late acute periprosthetic joint infections (PJI) and treated with surgical debridement have a high failure rate. Previous studies have shown that rheumatoid arthritis (RA) is an independent risk factor for treatment failure. We conducted a case-control study to identify predictors for failure in late acute PJI treatment in RA patients. We hypothesize that patients with RA have a higher failure rate compared to controls due to the use of immunosuppressive drugs. Method. Data of an international multicenter retrospective observational study was used. Late acute PJI was defined as a sudden onset of symptoms and signs of a PJI, more than 3 months after implantation. Failure of treatment was defined as persistent signs of infection, relapse with the same or reinfection with a different micro-organism, need for prosthesis removal or death. Cases with RA were matched with cases without RA based on the affected joint. A Cox survival analyses, stratified for RA, was used to calculate hazard ratio's (HR) for failure. Subgroup analyses were used to explore other predictors for treatment failure in RA patients. Results. A total of 40 patients with RA and 80 controls without RA were included. Treatment failure occurred in 65% patients with RA compared to 45% for controls (p= .052). 68% of patients with RA used immunosuppressive drugs at time of PJI diagnosis. The use or continuation of immunosuppressive drugs in PJI was not associated with a higher failure rate; neither were the duration of symptoms and causative microorganism. The time between implantation of the prosthetic joint and diagnosis of infection was longer in RA patients: median 110 (IQR 41-171) vs 29 months (IQR 7.5–101.25). Exchange of mobile components was associated with a lower risk of treatment failure (HR 0.489, 95% CI 0.242–0.989, p-value .047). Conclusions. The use of immunosuppressive drugs does not seem to be associated with a higher failure rate in patients with RA. Mobile exchange in RA patients is associated with a lower risk of failure. This might be due to the significantly older age of the prosthesis in RA patients. Future studies are needed to explore these associations and its underlying pathogenesis

Aim. Periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) is a devastating complication of total joint arthroplasty. While research has focused on developing better tests for disease diagnosis, treatment options have stayed relatively constant over the years with high failure rates ranging from 30%–50% and are due in part to the protective biofilm produced by some bacterial species. Current treatment options are compromised by the presence of biofilm, emphasizing the need for novel treatment strategies to be developed. Our group has developed a novel treatment (PhotothermAA) which has demonstrated in vitro its ability to target bacterial biofilm. The purpose of this study was to test this PhotothermAA technology in vivo in a rabbit model of PJI for its efficacy in eradicating biofilm. Method. Rabbits were fitted with a titanium implant into the tibial plateau and inoculated with 5×10. 6. CFU Xen36 (luminescent Staphylococcus aureus). At two weeks, rabbits underwent irrigation and debridement and treatment with PhotothermAA gel for two hours and subsequently laser heated using an 808 nm laser for 10 minutes. Gel was washed out and implant was removed for quantitative biofilm coverage analysis via scanning electron microscopy (SEM, n=3 for control and n=2 for PhotothermAA treated). Periprosthetic tissue was collected before and after treatment for toxicity studies via hemotoxylin and eosin (H&E) staining and scored for necrosis by three blinded reviewers (n=5 per group). Student's t-test was used for statistical analysis. Results. Implants isolated after PhotothermAA gel treatment had less biofilm coverage on the surface of the implant compared to non-treated control via SEM analysis (36.9% vs. 55.2%, p<0.14). PhotothermAA gel treatment and subsequent laser treatment was not harmful to surrounding tissue as no increase in necrotic tissue was observed. Conclusions. PhotothermAA gel and laser treatment safely decreases biofilm coverage on infected knee implants in a rabbit PJI model

Aim. Periprosthetic joint infections (PJI) are severe complications after total joint arthroplasty (TJA). Up to now, a gold standard in the diagnostics of PJI is missing. Small extracellular vesicles (sEVs) are secreted by all types of cells and play a key role in immune response in presence of infection (1). In this prospective study, the diagnostic accuracy of sEVs in the synovial fluid to detect PJI of knee, hip and shoulder joints was investigated. We hypothesized increased surface markers of sEVs in PJI compared to aseptic complications (e.g. implant loosening, stress shielding related pain). Method. Synovial fluid from 48 patients with painful arthroplasty was examined. The distinction between aseptic and infectious cases was made on the basis of the 2018 Definition of Periprosthetic Hip and Knee Infection (2). 35 (72,9%) probands assigned to aseptic and 13 patients (27,1%) to PJI group. Immuno-fluorescence flow cytometry served to document the concentrations of CD9, CD63, CD66b, CD82 and HLA-DR on sEVs. Results. The concentration of CD9 surface marker on sEVs in synovial fluid was significantly lower (p=0.002) in PJI group than in aseptic group. In contrast, the levels of CD82 on sEVs in synovial fluid was significantly higher (p<0.0001) in the PJI group than in aseptic group. The concentrations of CD63, CD66b and HLA-DR on sEVs in synovial fluid did not differ significantly between the two cohorts (CD63: p=0.372; CD66b: p=0.634; HLA-DR: p=0.558). Conclusions. Overall, the significance of sEVs in the diagnostics of PJI is not well enough understood and the subject of current research and scientific discussion. Our data suggest, that CD82 and CD9 on sEVs in synovial fluid are promising biomarkers to differentiate between PJI and aseptic complications

Aim. The aim of this study was to investigate the metabolomic profile of synovial fluid in periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) cases regarding a possible diagnostic approach. Also, further information about the metabolic composition of synovial fluid in PJI may point to future diagnostic and therapeutic approaches. Method. Patients with a clinical suspicion of a prosthesis infection who underwent a joint puncture in our outpatient department or ward were included. After sample preparation, the nuclear magnetic resonance (NMR) experiments were performed at 310 K on an AVANCE™ NeoBruker Ultrashield 600 MHz spectrometer. Bruker Topspin version 4.0.2 was used for NMR data acquisition. The spectra for all samples were automatically processed (exponential line broadening of 0.3 Hz), phased, and referenced using TSP at 0.0 ppm. In total, 37 metabolites were analysed using a volume of 200 µl per synovial sample. The PJI and aseptic cases were assigned according to the EBJIS criteria. Results. In total, 76 samples were included in the final analysis with 48 PJI cases and 28 aseptic cases. Five measured metabolites have shown an area under the curve (AUC) over 0.8, with Taurine (AUC 0.8558, p<0.0001) and Glutamine (AUC 0.8333, p<0.0001) showing the best diagnostic performance. When combining two metabolites, the AUC indicated even higher diagnostic performance: Glucose/Glycogen (AUC 0.9073, p<0.0001), Taurine/Mannose (AUC 0.9073, p<0.0001), Mannose/Glycogen (AUC 0.8992, p<0.0001) and Taurine/Glucose (AUC 0.8956, p<0.0001). Conclusions. While NMR as a method in PJI diagnostics is currently not broadly available for daily clinical work, our results indicate that certain synovial metabolites and their combinations can be used for PJI diagnosis

Aim. A large body of evidence is emerging to implicate that dysregulation of the gut microbiome (dysbiosis) increases the risk of surgical site infections. Gut dysbiosis is known to occur in patients with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD), allowing for translocation of bacteria across the inflamed and highly permeable intestinal mucosal wall. The null hypothesis was that IBD was not associated with increased risk of periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) after primary total hip and knee arthroplasty. Our aim was to investigate whether a prior diagnosis of IBD was associated with a higher risk of PJI following primary total hip and knee arthroplasty. Method. A matched cohort study was designed. Primary endpoint was the occurrence of PJI at 2-year. Secondary endpoints were aseptic revisions, as well as discharge to rehab facility, complications up to 30 days, and readmission up to 90 days after TJA. ICD-9 and −10 codes were used to identify patients with IBD and the control cohort. A chart review was performed to confirm diagnosis of IBD. Using our institutional database, 154 patients with IBD were identified and matched (3 to 1) for age, sex, body mass index (BMI), year of surgery, and joint affected with 462 individuals without IBD undergoing TJA. Results. The cumulative incidence of PJI was 4.55% among patients with IBD versus 1.32% among the control cohort (p=0.024). When bivariate logistic regression was performed, a diagnosis of IBD was found to be an independent risk factor for PJI (OR 3.56 95% C.I. 1.17 – 11.23; p=0.024) and aseptic revisions (OR 3.47, 95% C.I. 1.30 – 3.47; p=0.012). The rate of postoperative complications was also higher in patients with IBD. Conclusions. Based on the findings of this study, it appears that patients with IBD are at higher risk for failure due to PJI or aseptic loosening after TJA. The exact reason for this finding is not known but could be related to the bacterial translocation from the inflamed intestinal mucosa, the dysregulated inflammatory status of these patients, malnutrition, and potentially other factors. Some of the so-called aseptic failures maybe also as a result of infection that may have escaped detection and/or recognition

Aim. Rifampicin as a biofilm-active antibiotic drug has a significant role in the treatment of periprosthetic joint infection (PJI). However, rifampicin resistance is an increasing threat to PJI treatment. This study aimed to evaluate the prevalence of rifampicin resistant staphylococci over time and its association with infection-free survival after PJI in a single centre in Sweden. Methods. We included 238 PJIs in 238 patients who had undergone PJI revision surgery from 2001 to 2020 on whom the causative bacteria were staphylococci, and the agent was tested for rifampicin resistance. Data regarding agents, rifampicin resistance, treatment and outcome was obtained. Kaplan-Meier survival analysis and a Cox regression model with adjustment for age, sex, localisation (hip or knee) and type of prosthesis (primary or revision) were used to calculate infection-free survival rates and adjusted risk ratios (HRs) of the risk of treatment failure. Treatment failure was defined as any reoperation or suppression treatment with antibiotics due to prolonged infection. Results. Among the included 238 PJIs, 40 rifampicin-resistant staphylococci [93% Coagulase Negative Staphylococci (CoNS)] and 29 treatment failures were identified. The proportion of rifampicin resistant agents decreased from 25% in 2010–2015 to 12% in 2016–2020. The 2-year infection-free survival rates were 79.0% (95% CI 0.66–0.92) for the rifampicin resistant and 90% (95% CI 0.86–0.94) for the rifampicin sensitive group. Patients with PJI caused by rifampicin resistant bacteria had a significantly higher risk of treatment failure than those caused by sensitive bacteria (HR 2.5; 95% CI 1.0–6.2). Conclusions. The incidence of PJI caused by rifampicin resistant staphylococci decreased in Uppsala, Sweden over the past 20 years. PJI caused by rifampicin-resistant staphylococci has a two-fold risk for treatment failure compared to PJI caused by rifampicin-sensitive staphylococci, which stresses the importance of retaining rifampicin resistance low. Additionally, the increased risk of treatment failure when PJI is caused by a rifampicin-resistant bacteria warrants consideration of a more conservative treatment strategy

Aim. It is traditionally stated that around 80% of all periprosthetic joint infections (PJI) are caused by well-known gram-positive organisms such as Staphylococcus aureus. With the advances in diagnostic modalities and improved abilities to isolate infective organisms, we believe the organism profile causing PJI has changed over time and includes numerous other organisms that were either not recognized as pathogens and/or considered as contaminants. Method. We retrospectively reviewed the medical records of 1,363 patients with confirmed PJI (559 THA and 804 TKA) who received treatment at our institution between 2000 and 2019. Pertinent data related to demographics, microbiological findings, and outcome of treatment were collected. Organisms were differentiated using culture or confirmed by Matrix-Assisted Laser Desorption Ionization-time of flight (MALDI-tof) mass spectrometry. Statistical analysis included logistic regressions. Results. There was a total of 26 different species of organisms that resulted in PJI in our cohort. The rate of PJI caused by slow growing organisms, that are catalase negative, such as Streptococcal viridans (OR 1.244; 95% CI 1.036–1.494), Streptococcus agalactiae (OR 1.513; 95% CI 1.207–1.898), and Staphylococcus epidermidis (OR 1.321; 95% CI 1.191–1.466) has been increasing over time. In contrast, the incidence of PJI caused by coagulase-negative Staphylococcus (OR 0.954; 95% CI 0.927–0.981); resistant species (OR 0.962, 95% CI 0.931–0.995), and Gram-positive species (OR 0.94, 95% CI 0.914–0.966) decreased over time. Notably, there was a higher prevalence of Streptococcal PJI (OR 0.551, 95% CI 0.374–0.812) and culture-negative PJI (OR 0.652, 95% CI 0.478–0.890) seen in knees versus hips. The rate of culture negative PJI also increased from 20% in 2000 to 28% in 2019. In the latter years of the study, very unusual list of organisms causing PJI were also identified. Conclusions. This study reveals that the list of organisms causing PJI has expanded in recent years. The study also finds that some the slow growing organisms that were previously believed to be “contaminants” can and do cause PJI in a considerable number of patients. The number of culture negative cases of PJI has also increased at our institution over the years. There are a number of explanations for the latter finding, perhaps with the most important reason being liberal use of antibiotics that interferes with isolation of the infective organism

Aim. We aimed to evaluate the impact of knee periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) by assessing the patients’ long-term quality of life and explicitly their psychological wellbeing after successful treatment. Method. Thirty-six patients with achieved eradication of infection after knee PJI were included. Quality of life was evaluated with the EQ-5D and SF-36 outcome instruments as well as with an ICD-10 based symptom rating (ISR) and compared to normative data. Results. At a follow-up of 4.9± 3.5 years the mean SF-36 score was 24.82± 10.0 regarding the physical health component and 46.16± 13.3 regarding the mental health component compared to German normative values of 48.36± 9.4 (p< .001) and 50.87± 8.8 (p= .003). The mean EQ-5D index reached 0.55± 0.33 with an EQ-5D VAS rating of 52.14± 19.9 compared to reference scores of 0.891 (p< .001) and 68.6± 1.1 (p< .001). Mean scores of the ISR revealed psychological symptom burden on the depression scale. Conclusions. PJI patients still suffer from significant lower quality of life compared to normative data even years after surgically successful treatment. Future clinical studies should focus on patient-related outcome measures. Newly emerging treatment strategies, prevention methods and interdisciplinary approaches should be implemented to improve the quality of life of PJI patients

Total joint arthroplasty continues to gain acceptance as the standard of care for the treatment of severe degenerative joint disease. However, the Periprosthetic Joint Infection (PJI) remains one of the biggest challenges facing orthopaedics today. It is important to accurately diagnose PJI because its management differs from that of other causes of arthroplasty failure. The most common symptom of PJI is pain. In acute infection, the local signs and symptoms (e.g., severe pain, swelling, erythema, and warmth at the infected joint) of inflammation are generally present. On the other hand, chronic infection usually has a more subtle presentation, with pain alone, and is often accompanied by loosening of the prosthesis at the bone-implant interface. The diagnosis of PJI has proven quite challenging, as both acute and chronic infections can be difficult to differentiate from other forms of inflammation. The reported literature on the diagnosis of PJI has focused on evaluated laboratory tests that were never developed specifically for the diagnosis of PJI. Because these tests were not made for the purpose of diagnosing PJI, it has been the responsibility of the orthopaedic community to evaluate and recommend their interpretation. This has resulted in significant confusion regarding the appropriate thresholds and optimal combination of these tests. These difficulties were the motivation for the development of a specific test for the detection of PJI. The promising diagnostic capabilities of synovial fluid biomarkers for PJI have already been reported in the literature. Studies have demonstrated that the alpha-defensin microbicidal peptide present in human neutrophils is an ideal biomarker for PJI due to the distinct separation it achieves between positive and negative results. A specific test allowing to measure the concentration of the alpha-defensin in the synovial fluid has been developed. The specificity and the sensitivity of this test for the detection of a PJI are respectively 96% and 97%. This test has been proven to have also a high reproducibility, its results not being influenced by antibiotics. A lateral flow version of this test (Synovasure PJI, distributed exclusively in Europe by Zimmer GmbH) has been recently developed. It allows reading the results in 10 minutes and it doesn't require any laboratories for its interpretation. Currently, this test device is in clinical evaluation in more than 200 European hospitals. In case that the clinical evaluation of this test device is positive, this method will be a new paradigm for the diagnosis of periprosthetic joint infection

Aims. Delayed postoperative inoculation of orthopaedic implants with persistent wound drainage or bacterial seeding of a haematoma can result in periprosthetic joint infection (PJI). The aim of this in vivo study was to compare the efficacy of vancomycin powder with vancomycin-eluting calcium sulphate beads in preventing PJI due to delayed inoculation. Methods. A mouse model of PJI of the knee was used. Mice were randomized into groups with intervention at the time of surgery (postoperative day (POD) 0): a sterile control (SC; n = 6); infected control (IC; n = 15); systemic vancomycin (SV; n = 9); vancomycin powder (VP; n = 21); and vancomycin bead (VB; n = 19) groups. Delayed inoculation was introduced during an arthrotomy on POD 7 with 1 × 10. 5. colony-forming units (CFUs) of a bioluminescent strain of Staphylococcus aureus. The bacterial burden was monitored using bioluminescence in vivo. All mice were killed on POD 21. Implants and soft-tissue were harvested and sonicated for analysis of the CFUs. Results. The mean in vivo bioluminescence in the VB group was significantly lower on POD 8 and POD 10 compared with the other groups. There was a significant 1.3-log. 10. (95%) and 1.5-log. 10. (97%) reduction in mean soft-tissue CFUs in the VB group compared with the VP and IC groups (3.6 × 10. 3. vs 7.0 × 10. 4. ; p = 0.022; 3.6 × 10. 3. vs 1.0 × 10. 5. ; p = 0.007, respectively) at POD 21. There was a significant 1.6-log. 10. (98%) reduction in mean implant CFUs in the VB group compared with the IC group (1.3 × 10. 0. vs 4.7 × 10. 1. , respectively; p = 0.038). Combined soft-tissue and implant infection was prevented in 10 of 19 mice (53%) in the VB group as opposed to 5 of 21 (24%) in the VP group, 3 of 15 (20%) in the IC group, and 0% in the SV group. Conclusion. In our in vivo mouse model, antibiotic-releasing calcium sulphate beads appeared to outperform vancomycin powder alone in lowering the bacterial burden and preventing soft-tissue and implant infections. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2024;106-B(6):632–638

Aim. Several options to standardize the definition of periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) have been created including the 2013 Musculoskeletal Infection Society (MSIS), 2018 Intentional Consensus Meeting (ICM), and the 2019 proposed European Bone and Joint Infection Society (EBJIS) criteria. Synovial fluid biomarkers have been investigated in an effort to simplify and improve the diagnosis of PJI. The aim of this study was to test the sensitivity, specificity, positive, and negative predicted values (PPV and NPV, respectively) of a calprotectin point of care (POC) test for diagnosing PJI in revision total knee arthroplasty (TKA) patients comparing different sets of criteria (2013 MSIS, 2018 ICM, and 2019 EBJIS criteria) used to define patients as with or without infection. Method. From October 2018 to January 2020 and under IRB approval 123 intraoperative samples of synovial fluid were prospectively collected at two academic hospitals in the same institution from revision TKA patients. All patients underwent standard clinical and laboratory evaluation for PJI at our institution, allowing for categorization using the 3 criteria. Patients were adjudicated by 2 blinded and independent reviewers for the 3 sets of criteria. The 3 criteria agreed 91.8% of the time. Four likely cases by the 2019 proposed EBJIS were considered unlikely and 1 inconclusive case by the 2018 ICM was considered not infected for the purposes of analysis. Calprotectin POC testing followed manufacturer's instructions using a threshold of >50 mg/L to indicate PJI. Sensitivities, specificities, PPV, NPV, and areas under the curve (AUC) were calculated for the 3 sets of criteria. Results. Using 2013 MSIS criteria the calprotectin POC test demonstrated a sensitivity, specificity, PPV, NPV AUC of 98.1%, 95.7%, 94.5%, 98.5%, and 0.969, respectively. Using 2018 ICM the POC test demonstrated a sensitivity, specificity, PPV, NPV and (AUC) of 98.2%, 98.5%, 98.2%, 98.5%, and 0.984, respectively. Using the 2019 proposed EBJIS criteria the POC test demonstrated a sensitivity, specificity, PPV, NPV and area under the curve (AUC) of 93.2%, 100.0%, 100.0%, 94.2%, and 0.966, respectively. Conclusions. The calprotectin lateral flow POC test has an excellent sensitivity and specificity regardless of the set of criteria used to define PJI. These results are promising and suggest that the calprotectin lateral flow test may be used as a rule out test in a cost-conscious health care model or when conventional diagnostic tools may not be available. Further investigations of the calprotectin PCO test must be completed to validate these results