Aim. In recent years, many studies on revision for infection after arthroplasty have been published. In national arthroplasty registers, revision for infection is defined as surgical debridement, with or without removal or exchange of the entire or parts of the prosthesis due to deep infection, and should be reported to the register immediately after surgery. The diagnosis of infection is made at the surgeon's discretion, based on pre- and perioperative assessment and evaluation, and is not to be corrected to the register based on peroperative bacterial cultures. Due to this lack of validation, the rate of revision for infection will only be an approximation of the true rate of periprosthetic joint infection (PJI). Our aim was to validate the reporting of infection after total hip arthroplasty, and to assess if revisions for infection actually represented true PJI. Methods. We investigated the reported revisions for infection and aseptic loosening after total hip arthroplasty from 12 hospitals, representing one region of the country, reported during the period 2010–2020. The electronic patient charts were investigated for information on surgical treatment, use of antibiotics, biochemistry and microbiology findings. PJI was defined as growth of at least two phenotypically identical microbes in perioperative tissue samples. Sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, negative predictive value and accuracy were calculated. Results. 145 revisions for infection and 137 revisions for aseptic loosening were reported. Of the reported infections, there were 141/145 true positives and 4/145 false positives. Of the reported aseptic loosenings, there were 126/137 true negatives and 11/137 false negatives. This gives a positive predictive value of 0.97, negative predictive value of 0.92, sensitivity of 0.93, specificity of 0.97 and accuracy of 0.95. Interpretation. We found the reporting revision for infection after total hip arthroplasty to the national register accurate. There was high correlation between reported revision for infection and PJI. Studies on revision for infection from arthroplasty registers may therefore be considered as reliable as studies of true PJI

Aim. There is controversy regarding the use of Antibiotic-loaded cement (ALBC) as compared to non-antibiotic-loaded cement (NALBC) to reduce the overall infection rate without affecting implant survival or adding additional risks on fixation for primary total knee arthroplasty (TKA). Method. To conduct the analysis, we utilized the Catalan Arthroplasty Registry (RACat) for the TKAs implanted between 2005 and 2017. The primary variable recorded was the use of cement with or without antibiotics. Other recorded variables included were age, sex, diabetes mellitus, obesity, Charlson index and type of hospital. We analyzed the effect of ALBC vs. NALBC in reducing the risk of prosthetic infection at 3, 6, 12, and 24 months as well as prosthetic survival due to mechanical causes at 1, 5, and 10 years. Univariate and multivariable analyses of risk factors were conducted. Thereby, an interactive predictive model that determines the risk of prosthetic infection based on each patient's characteristics was created. Results. A total of 28,287 TKAs from the RACat were analyzed. In that total, there were 19,788 NALBC and 8,499 ALBC. The infection rates for TKAs with NALBC vs. those with ALBC at 3, 6, 12, and 24 months were respectively: 1.69% vs. 1.39% (p=0.132); 1.81% vs. 1.56% (p=0.147); 2.14% vs. 1.73% (p=0.030); 2.51% vs. 1.86% (p=0.001). A statistically significant reduction in periprosthetic infection rate was observed in the ALBC group at 12 and 24 months. No differences were observed between the two groups in terms of prosthetic mechanical survival. Being younger, male and having had previous knee surgery or having a high comorbidity index all led to a higher risk of prosthetic revision due to infection. Conclusions. The use of ALBC as a fixation method for TKA leads to a reduction in the risk of prosthetic infection without altering the mechanical survival of the implant. The creation of a predictive model helps determine the individualized risk of prosthetic infection based on the patient's characteristics

Aim. The aim of this investigation was to compare risk of infection in both cemented and cementless hemiarthroplasty (HA) as well as total hip arthroplasty (THA) following femoral neck fracture. Methods. Data collection was performed using the German Arthroplasty Registry (EPRD) In HA and THA following femoral neck fracture fixation method was divided into cemented and cementless protheses and paired according to age, sex, body mass index (BMI), and the Elixhauser score using Mahalanobis distance matching. Results. Overall in 13,612 cases of intracapsular femoral neck fracture, with 9,110 (66.9 %) HAs and 4502 (33.1 %) THAs were analyzed. Infection rate in HA was significantly reduced in cases with use of antibiotic-loaded cement compared to cementless fixated prosthesis (p=0.013). In patients with THA no statistical difference between cemented and cementless prothesis was registered, however after one year 2.4 % of infections were detected in cementless and 2.1 % in cemented THA. In the subpopulation of HA after one year 1.9 % of infections were registered in cemented and 2.8 % in cementless HA. BMI (p=0.001) and Elixhauser-Comorbidity-Score (p<0.003) were identified as risk factors of PJI, while in THA also cemented prosthesis demonstrated within the first 30 days an increased risk (HR=2.728; p=0.010). Conclusion. The rate of infection after intracapsular femoral neck fracture was significantly reduced in patients treated by antibiotic-loaded cemented hemiarthroplasty. In particular for patients with multiple risk factors for the development of a PJI the usage of antibiotic-loaded bone cement seems to be a reasonable procedure for prevention of infection

Aim. National Joint Replacement Registries, which are important sources for periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) data, report an average PJI incidence ranging from 0.5 to 2.0%. Unfortunately, national registries including the Dutch Arthroplasty Register (LROI), are not specifically designed to register PJI. In the Netherlands, the LROI is a nationwide population-based registry with an overall completeness of more than 95%. 3. To ensure usability and reliability of PJI data from the LROI, it is important to evaluate the quality and completeness of these data. From 2013 onwards, eight hospitals in the South-East of the Netherlands, collected their PJI data in a detailed regional infection cohort (RIC), specifically designed for this purpose. This study aimed to determine the accuracy and completeness of PJI registration (hip and knee arthroplasty) in the LROI, by comparing the LROI with the RIC. Method. All patients registered with an acute PJI in the RIC between 2014–2018 were selected for the study and were matched with the LROI. According to the Workgroup of American Musculoskeletal Infections Society (MSIS), an acute PJI was defined as at least two phenotypically identical pathogens, isolated in cultures from at least two separate tissues, obtained from the affected peri-prosthetic tissue during the DAIR treatment (debridement, antibiotics, irrigation, and retention). Only PJI occurring within 90 days after primary hip or knee arthroplasty were included. The LROI data and completeness was based on the entered procedures and documented reason for revision infection, which was not specially based on the MSIS criteria. After checks on missing and incorrectly data, the completeness of registration in the LROI was calculated by comparing the number of registrations in the LROI with data from the RIC (gold standard). Results. Of the 639 primary total hip and knee arthroplasty with a suspected PJI registered in the RIC between 2014–2018, 352 cases met the definition of acute PJI. The overall incidence was 1%. When compared with the LROI, 164 of these cases were also registered in the LROI as PJI revision, resulting in a 53% underestimation of PJI for the LROI. Conclusions. LROI data on acute PJI shows a significant underestimation, which is comparable to scarce other literature sources. To ensure reliability and usability of national PJI data, a specifically part of the LROI has to be designed for registering PJI similar to the regional cohort

Introduction. This community Arthroplasty Register is an individual initiative to document arthroplasty procedures performed from 2007 to date in a sample area in Cairo, Egypt. Currently, there is no published study or official documentation of the indications for arthroplasty, types of implants or the rate of total hip and knee arthroplasty (THA & TKA). Although the population of Egypt reached 80,394,000, the unofficial estimate of the rate of joint replacement is less than 10,000 per year. This rate is less than 10% of what is currently done in UK, a country with similar or even less population than Egypt. This indicates the unmet need for TKA in Egypt, where the knee OA is prevailing and there is a call for documentation and a registry. Methods. The registry sheet is 3 pages; pre-, intra- and post-operative. It is available in printed format and online as demonstrated below . www.knee-hip.com. During the registry period, there were 282 cases collected prospectively and 206 collected retrospectively. This initial analysis included only prospectively collected data of 157 TKA and 125 THA. Results. For THA, the mean age was 48 years ranging from (19–86). Female to male ratio was 1.15:1. The rate of uncemented THA was 84.8%, Cemented was 10.2% and hybrid THA was 5%. We have observed significant growth in the uncemented type of fixation. The rate of primary was 54.4 % (complex primary 26.4%), Conventional THA techniques were done for 56.15%, while computer assisted surgery was used in 43.85% of cases. For TKA, there was 71.33% primary and 19.7% complex primary, 8.97% revision arthroplasty. A female to male ratio was 2.92:1. The main indication for TKA was OA in 87.26%. Preoperative radiographic evaluation showed that 47% had severe varus and 15% had significant bone defect. Conventional TKA techniques were done for 73.2%, while computer assisted surgery was sued in 26.8 % of cases

Aim. The aim of this study was to assess the influence of the true operating room (OR) ventilation on the risk of revision due to infection after primary total hip arthroplasty (THA) reported to the Norwegian Arthroplasty Register (NAR). Method. 40 orthopedic units were included during the period 2005 – 2015. The Unidirectional airflow (UDAF) systems were subdivided into small-area, low-volume, vertical UDAF (lvUDAF) (volume flow rate (VFR) (m. 3. /hour) <=10,000 and diffuser array size (DAS) (m. 2. ) <=10); large-area, high-volume, vertical UDAF (hvUDAF) (VFR >=10,000 and DAS >=10) and Horizontal UDAF (H-UDAF). The systems were compared to conventional, turbulent ventilation (CV) systems. The association between revision due to infection and OR ventilation was assessed using Cox regression models, with adjustments for sex, age, indication for surgery, ASA-classification, method of fixation, modularity of the components, duration of surgery, in addition to year of primary THA. All included THAs received systemic, antibiotic prophylaxis. Results. 51,292 primary THAs were eligible for assessment. 575 (1.1%) of these THAs had been revised due to infection. Compared to CV, there was similar risk of revision due to infection after THA performed in ORs with lvUDAF (RR=0.9, 95 % CI: 0.7–1.1) and with H-UDAF (RR=1.3, 95 % CI: 0.9–1.8). The risk of revision due to infection after THA performed in ORs with large-area hvUDAF-systems was lower (RR=0.8, 95% CI: 0.6–0.9, p=0.01) compared to CV. Conclusions. This study indicates that large-area, high-volume, vertical UDAF systems may be superior to conventional ventilation systems as a prophylactic measure against THA infection. This emphasizes the importance of assessing the big diversity of different ventilation systems when studying effect measures

It is established good practice that hip and knee replacements should have regular follow-up and for the past seven years at the North Hampshire Hospital a local joint register has been used for this purpose and we compare this with results of the Swedish and UK national and the Trent Regional registries.

Since March 1999, all primary and revision hip and knee arthroplasties performed at North Hampshire Hospital, Basingstoke have been prospectively recorded onto a database set up by one of the senior authors (JMB). Data from patients entered in the first five years of the register were analysed. All patients have at least one year clinical and radiological review then a minimum of yearly postal follow-up. 3266 operations (1524 hips and 1742 knees) were performed under the care of 13 consultants. Osteoarthritis was the most common primary diagnosis in over 75% of hips and knees. Our revision burden was 7.5% (10.2% hips and 3.5% knees). As of 31/12/2006 6.2% of patients had died and 5.5% were lost to follow-up.

Revision rates were 1.5% and 1.4% for primary total hip and knee replacements respectively.

Our data analysis of revisions and patello-femoral replacements has allowed us to change our practice following local audit which is ongoing. Oxford scores at 2 years had improved from a mean of 19 and 21 pre-operatively to 40 and 39 for primary hips and knees respectively. Our costs are estimated at approximately £35 per patient for their lifetime on the register.

Compared to other registries:

Our dataset is more complete and comprehensive

Use of anticoagulants for thromboembolic prophylaxis is strongly supported by evidence. However, the use of these medications beyond the prophylactic period is poorly understood. We identified anticoagulant naïve patients that underwent hip or knee replacement between 2012 and 2019 from an arthroplasty registry and probabilistically linked 3,018 surgeries with nationwide pharmaceutical claims data. Rates of anticoagulation use were examined during the early (<= 60 days post-discharge), mid-term (61–180 days post-discharge) and long-term (181–360 days post-discharge) periods. Multivariable logistic regression analysis was performed to identify patient- and surgery-related factors associated with long-term anticoagulant use. Anticoagulants were supplied to 20% of arthroplasties within 60 days of discharge, 7% between 61–180 days, and 10% between 181–360 days. Older age, obesity, increased comorbidity burden, a longer length of stay, occurrence of a complication necessitating anticoagulation and dispensation of an anticoagulant within 60 days of discharge were all risk factors for long-term anticoagulant use. Given the risks associated with unnecessary use of these medications, certain patients who are prescribed anticoagulants beyond prophylactic period may benefit from specialist medication review in the months following surgery

We compared the rate of revision of two classes of primary anatomic shoulder arthroplasty, stemmed (aTSA) and stemless (sTSA) undertaken with cemented all polyethylene glenoid components. A large national arthroplasty registry identified two cohort groups for comparison, aTSA and sTSA between 1. st. January 2011 and 31. st. December 2020. A sub-analysis from 1 January 2017 captured additional patient demographics. The cumulative percentage revision (CPR) was determined using Kaplan-Meier estimates of survivorship and hazard ratios (HR) from Cox proportional hazard models adjusted for age and gender. Of the 7,533 aTSA procedures, the CPR at 8 years was 5.3% and for 2,567 sTSA procedures was 4.0%. There was no difference in the risk of revision between study groups (p=0.128). There was an increased risk of revision for aTSA and sTSA undertaken with humeral head sizes <44mm (p=0.006 and p=0.002 respectively). Low mean surgeon volume (MSV) (<10 cases per annum) was a revision risk for aTSA (p=0.033) but not sTSA (p=0.926). For primary diagnosis osteoarthritis since 2017, low MSV was associated with an increased revision risk for aTSA vs sTSA in the first year (p=0.048). Conversely, low MSV was associated with a decreased revision risk for sTSA in the first 6 months (p<0.001). Predominantly aTSA was revised for loosening (28.8%) and sTSA for instability/dislocation (40.6%). Revision risk of aTSA and sTSA was associated with humeral head size and mean surgeon volume but not patient characteristics. Inexperienced shoulder arthroplasty surgeons experience lower early revision rates with sTSA in the setting of osteoarthritis. Revision of aTSA and sTSA occurred for differing reasons

This study aimed to evaluate the month-to-month prevalence of antibiotic dispensation in the 12 months before and after total knee arthroplasty (TKA) and total hip arthroplasty (THA) and to identify factors associated with antibiotic dispensation in the month immediately following the surgical procedure. In total, 4,115 THAs and TKAs performed between April 2013 and June 2019 from a state-wide arthroplasty referral centre were analysed. A cross-sectional study used data from an institutional arthroplasty registry, which was linked probabilistically to administrative dispensing data from the Australian Pharmaceutical Benefits Scheme. Multivariable logistic regression was carried out to identify patient and surgical risk factors for oral antibiotic dispensation. Oral antibiotics were dispensed in 18.3% of patients following primary TKA and 12.0% of patients following THA in the 30 days following discharge. During the year after discharge, 66.7% of TKA patients and 58.2% of THA patients were dispensed an antibiotic at some point. Patients with poor preoperative health status were more likely to have antibiotics dispensed in the month following THA or TKA. Older age, undergoing TKA rather than THA, obesity, inflammatory arthritis, and experiencing an in-hospital wound-related or other infectious complications were associated with increased antibiotic dispensation in the 30 days following discharge. A high rate of antibiotic dispensation in the 30 days following THA and TKA has been observed. Although resource constraints may limit routine wound review for all patients by a surgeon, a select cohort may benefit from timely specialist review postoperatively. Several risk factors identified in this study may aid in identifying appropriate candidates for such changes to follow-up care

The 2021 Australian Orthopaedic Association National Joint Replacement Registry report indicated that total shoulder replacement using both mid head (TMH) length humeral components and reverse arthroplasty (RTSA) had a lower revision rate than stemmed humeral components in anatomical total shoulder arthroplasty (aTSA) - for all prosthesis types and diagnoses. The aim of this study was to assess the impact of component variables in the various primary total arthroplasty alternatives for osteoarthritis in the shoulder. Data from a large national arthroplasty registry were analysed for the period April 2004 to December 2020. The study population included all primary aTSA, RTSA, and TMH shoulder arthroplasty procedures undertaken for osteoarthritis (OA) using either cross-linked polyethylene (XLPE) or non-cross-linked polyethylene (non XLPE). Due to the previously documented and reported higher revision rate compared to other anatomical total shoulder replacement options, those using a cementless metal backed glenoid components were excluded. The rate of revision was determined by Kaplan-Meir estimates, with comparisons by Cox proportional hazard models. Reasons for revision were also assessed. For a primary diagnosis of OA, aTSA with a cemented XLPE glenoid component had the lowest revision rate with a 12-year cumulative revision rate of 4.7%, compared to aTSA with cemented non-XLPE glenoid component of 8.7%, and RTSA of 6.8%. The revision rate for TMH was lower than aTSA with cemented non-XLPE, but was similar to the other implants at the same length of follow-up. The reason for revision for cemented aTSR was most commonly component loosening, not rotator cuff deficiency. Long stem humeral components matched with XLPE in aTSA achieve a lower revision rate compared to shorter stems, long stems with conventional polyethylene, and RTSA when used to treat shoulder OA. In all these cohorts, loosening, not rotator cuff failure was the most common diagnosis for revision

Aim. Two types of national registers surveil infections after primary total hip arthroplasty (THA) in Norway: The National surveillance system for surgical site infections (NOIS) that surveil all primary THAs 30 days postoperatively for surgical site infections (SSI), and the Norwegian Arthroplasty Register (NAR) that follow all THAs until any surgical reoperation/revision or the death of the patient. Since these registers report on the same THAs we assessed correspondence between and time trends for the two registers in period 2013 to 2022. All reported THAs were included. Method. The THAs were matched on a group level according to sex, age and ASA-class. In addition to descriptive statistics, adjusted Cox regression analyses were performed with adjustment for sex, age group (<45, 45-54, 55-64, 65-74, 75-84, >85 years) and ASA-class (1, 2, 3, 4 and missing). Changes in annual incidence and adjusted hazard rate (aHR) was calculated. Endpoints in the NOIS were 30-Days SSI and 30-Days reoperation for SSI. Endpoints in the NAR were 30-Days and 1-Year reoperation for periprosthetic joint infection (PJI). Results. The NOIS had registered 87,923 THAs with 1,393 (1.58%) SSIs and 765 (0.87%) reoperations for SSI within 30 postoperatively. The NAR had registered 91,194 THAs with 725 (0.80%) reoperations for infection after 30 days, and 1,019 (1.21%) reoperations for infections after one year. The distribution of sex, age and ASA-class was near identical in the two registers. There was a mean annual reduction in risk of both SSI (aHR 0.92 (95% CI 0.90-0.93)) and reoperation for SSI (0.95(0.92-0.97)) and PJI (30-Days: 0.96 (0.94-0.99), 1-Year: 0.95-0.99)) over the period 2013-2022. Conclusions. The NOIS and the NAR have excellent completeness and the registrations in both registers may be considered representative for the Norwegian population. Not all SSI are reoperated. The incidence and risk of SSI (NOIS) and reoperation for PJI (NAR) is declining and may reflect a true reduction in incidence of PJI after primary THA

Background and purpose. Previous publications have reported an increased but levelling out risk of revision for infection after total hip arthroplasty (THA) in Norway. We assessed the changes in risk of major (cup and/or stem, 1- or 2-stage) and minor revisions (debridement, exchange of modular parts, antibiotics and implant retention (DAIR)) for infection after primary THAs reported to the Norwegian Arthroplasty Register (NAR) over the period 2005-2022. Patients and methods. Primary THAs reported to the NAR from 2005 to 2022 were included. Time was stratified into time periods (2005-2009, 2010-2018, 2019-2022) based on a previous publication. Cox regression analyses, adjusted for sex, age and ASA-classification, with the first revision for infection were performed. Results. 140,338 primary THAs met the inclusion criteria. 1.3% (1,785) were revised for infection during the study period. 0.5% (638) had major revisions, whereas 0.8% (1,147) had DAIRs for infection. The risk of revision for infection was 1.2 (95%CI 1.1-1.4) for 2010-2018 and 1.0 (0.8-1.1) for 2019-2022 compared to 2005-2009. Compared to 2010-2018, the risk of revision for infection was 0.8 (0.7-0.9) for 2019-2022. The risk of DAIR for infection was 1.5 (1.3-1.9) for 2010-2018 and 1.2 (1.0-1.4) for 2019-2022 compared to 2005-2009. Compared to 2010-2018, the risk of DAIR for infection was 0.8 (0.7-0.9) for 2019-2022. The risk of major revision for infection was 0.8 (0.7-1.0) for 2010-2018 and 0.8 (0.6-1.0) for 2019-2022 compared to 2005-2009. Interpretation. The overall risk of revision for infection after THA, in Norway, has decreased in the period 2019-2022. The risk for DAIR initially increased in the period 2005-2009, levelled out 2010-2018 before starting to decrease in 2019-2022. The risk of major revision for infection was reduced in the period 2005-2009 before levelling out. This shows changes in revision strategies, but may also reflect a true decrease in periprosthetic joint infection

Aim. Previous publications have suggested that the incidence of revisions due to infection after THA is increasing. We performed updated time-trend analyses of risk and timing of revision due to infection after primary THAs in the Nordic countries during the period 2004–2018. Methods. 569,463 primary THAs reported to the Nordic Arthroplasty Register Association from 2004 through 2018 were studied. We estimated adjusted hazard ratios (aHR) with 95% confidence interval by Cox regression with the first revision due to infection after primary THA as endpoint. The risk of revision was investigated. In addition, we explored changes in the time span from primary THA to revision due to infection. Results. 5,653 (1.0%) were revised due to infection. The risk of revision due to infection increased through the study period. Compared to the period 2004–2008, the aHRs were 1.4 (95%CI 1.3–1.5) for 2009–2013, and 1.9 (1.7–2.0) for 2014–2018. We found an increased risk in all four Nordic countries. Compared to 2004–2008, the aHR due to infection 0–30 days after THA was 2.5 (2.1–2.9) for 2009–2013 and 3.4 (3.0–3.9) for 2013–2018. The aHR of revision due to infection 31–90 days after THA was 1.5 (1.3–1.9) for 2009–2013 and 2.5 (2.1–3.0) for 2013–2018, compared to 2004–2008. Beyond 91 days after THA, the risk of revision due to infection was stable over the whole study period. Interpretation. The risk of revision due to deep infection after THA nearly doubled throughout the period 2004–2018. This increase was mainly due to an increased risk of early revisions. The cause for these changes may be multifactorial (patient selection, diagnostics, revision strategy, completeness of reporting, etc.), are not possible to disclose in the present study, and warrants further research

Aim. The current recommendation in Norway is to use four doses of a first-generation cephalosporin (cefazolin or cephalotin) as systemic antibiotic prophylaxis (SAP) the day of surgery in primary joint arthroplasty. Due to shortage of supply, scientific development, changed courses of treatment and improved antibiotic stewardship, this recommendation has been disputed. We therefore wanted to assess if one dose of SAP was non-inferior to four doses in preventing periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) in primary joint arthroplasty. Method. We included patients with primary hip- and knee arthroplasties from the Norwegian Arthroplasty Register and the Norwegian Hip Fracture Register for the period 2005-2023. We included the most used SAPs (cephalotin, cefazolin, cefuroxime, cloxacillin and clindamycin), administered as the only SAP in 1-4 doses, starting preoperatively. Risk of revision (Hazard rate ratio; HRR) for PJI was estimated by Cox regression analyses with adjustment for sex, age, ASA class, duration of surgery, reason for- and type of arthroplasty, and year of primary arthroplasty. The outcome was 1-year reoperation or revision for PJI. Non-inferiority margins were calculated for 1, 2 and 3 doses versus reference of 4 doses of SAP at the day of surgery, against a predetermined limit of 15% increased risk of PJI. Results. In total 274,188 primary arthroplasties (total hip 133,985, hemi hip 51,442, and total knee 88,761) were included. Of these primary arthroplasties, 2,996 (1.1%) had subsequent revisions for PJI during the first postoperative year. One dose of SAP was given in 9,603 arthroplasties, two doses in 10,068, three doses in 18,351, and four doses in 236,166 arthroplasties. With the recommended four doses as reference, the HRR (95% CI) for 1-year revision for infection was 0.9 (0.7-1.1) for one dose, 1.0 (0.8-1.2) for two doses, and 0.9 (0.8-1.1) for three doses. The corresponding adjusted 1-year revision incidences for PJI was 0.9 (0.7-1.1), 1.0 (0.8-1.2), 0.9 (0. 8-1.1) and 1.0 (1.0-1.1) for one, two, three and four doses respectively, and less than four doses was found to be non-inferior. Conclusions. One preoperative dose of SAP in primary joint arthroplasty surgery seems to be non-inferior to the current recommendation of four doses of a first-generation cephalosporin as PJI-prophylaxis. This finding may simplify the course of treatment for arthroplasty patients, save costs, and improve antibiotic stewardship

Aims. The aim of this study was to assess the incidence the microbiological spectrum and clinical outcome of hip and knee revision arthroplasties with unexpected-positive-intraoperative-cultures (UPIC) at a single center with minimum follow up of 2 years. Methods. We retrospectively analyzed our prospectively maintained institutional arthroplasty registry. Between 2011 and 2020 we performed presumably aseptic rTHA (n=939) and rTKA (n= 1,058). Clinical outcome, re-revision rates and causes as well as the microbiological spectrum were evaluated. Results. In total, 219/939 (23.3%) rTHA and 114/ 1,058 (10.8%) rTKA had a UPIC (p<0.001). Single positive intraoperative cultures were found in 173/219 (78.9%) in rTHA and 99/114 (86.8%) in rTKA, whereas 46/219 (21.0%) rTHA and 15/114 (13.2%) rTKA had positive results in ≥2 intraoperative cultures. A total of 390 microorganisms were found among the 333 cases. Staphylococcus epidermidis 30.9%, CoNS (21.9%), Cutibacterium acnes 21.1%, and Bacillus spp. 7.3% were the most common microorganisms. Overall, detected microorganisms showed high sensitivity to daptomycin (96.6%), vancomycin (97.3%) and linezolid (98.0%). After a minimum follow up of 2 years (rTHA 1,470 (735; 3,738) days; rTKA 1,474 (749; 4,055) days). During the 2-year follow-up, 8 patients died and 5 were lost to follow-up. There were 54/219 (24.7%) re-revision in rTHa and 20/114 (17.5%) in rTKA. Overall, there were 23 (10.5%) septic re-rTHA and 9 (7.9%) septic re-rTKA as well as 31 (14.2%) aseptic re-rTHA and 11 (9.6%) aseptic re-rTKA. Patients with previous septic revisions bevor UPIC procedure showed a significant higher risk for septic re-revision (p<0.05). Moreover, there were less septic re-revisions after single culture positive UPIC (rTHA: 16/173 (9.2%); rTKA 6/99 (6.1%)) compared to ≥2 positive intraoperative cultures UPIC (rTHA: 7/46 (15.2%); rTKA 3/15 (20.0%)). The most common reason for re-revision in the rTHA-group was aseptic loosening of the cup (34.2%) or of the stem (23.3%), dislocation (18.3%) and periprosthetic-fractures (7.8%). In the rTKA-group it was aseptic loosening (40.4%), instability (24.6%) and secondary patella resurfacing (7.9%). There was a higher septic re-revision rate in consecutive revisions than in planned revisions 17.3% vs. 8.5% in the rTHA-group and 14.3% vs. 7.5% in the rTKA-group, p<0.001. Conclusion. UPICs are common in rTJA. The rate was higher in hips which may partly explained by the easier pre op joint aspiration in the knee. UPIC may lead to an increase in subsequent re-revisions

Aim. Culture-based conventional methods are still the gold standard to identify microorganisms in hip and knee PJIs diagnosis. However, such approach presents some limitations due to prior antimicrobial treatment or the presence of unusual and fastidious organisms. Molecular techniques, in particular specific real-time and broad-range polymerase chain reaction (PCR), are available for diagnostic use in a suspected PJI. However, limited data is available on their sensitivity and specificity. This study aimed to evaluate the performance of a rapid and simple Investigational Use Only (IUO) version of the BioFire® JI multiplex PCR panel when compared to traditional microbiological procedures. Method. Fifty-eight native synovial fluid samples were recovered from 49 patients (female n=26; male =23) who underwent one or multiple septic or aseptic revision arthroplasties of the hip (n=12) and knee (n=46). The JI panel methodology was used either on specimens freshly collected (n=6) or stored at −80°C in our Musculoskeletal Biobank (n=52). The JI panel performance was evaluated by comparison with culture reference methods. Patient's medical records were retrieved from our institutional arthroplasty registry as well as our prospectively maintained PJI infection database. Results. The JI panel identified additional microorganisms in 3/39 (7.7%) positive cases, and a different microorganism in 1/39 (2.6%) sample. Out of 9/58 (15.5%) culture negative samples, two (22%) were positively detected by the JI panel. In total 49/58 (84%) native synovial fluid specimens were positive by culture methods, versus 39/58 (81.2%) with the JI panel. Ten samples are currently under investigation for confirmatory results. Out of 39 positive detections with the JI panel, 35 (89.7%) were concordant with the identified microorganism (n=29 same species; n=6 same genus). The combined information from the JI panel results and clinical records revealed the existence of 6/58 (10.3%) PJIs’ cases which would have required a different antibiotic therapeutic approach. Conclusions. The work presented, provides additional value for the clinical use of the JI panel to the improvement of PJI management in terms of rapid and successful treatment decisions, patient outcome, and healthcare costs. This technique shows high sensitivity to detect PJIs specific microorganisms in both fresh as well frozen native synovial fluid samples, thus emphasizing its use for retrospective studies analysis

Aim. Dalbavancin is a novel second-generation lipoglycopeptide antibiotic with strong activity against many gram-positive bacteria and a prolonged half-life of 6–11 days. This allows a once-a-week intravenous application and therefore an outpatient intravenous therapy. Currently, only little is known about the use of Dalbavancin in Periprosthetic joint infection (PJI). The aim of this retrospective study, was to compare the outcome of hip and knee periprosthetic joint infections (PJI) in patients who received dalbavancin (DAL) with patients which was treated by standard of care antimicrobial agents (SoC). Methods. Between 02/2017 and 02/2020 a total of 89 (42 male/47 female) patients with PJI of the hip 56/89 (62.9%) and knee 33/89 (37.1%) who received at least one dosage of Dalbavancin were included. A 1:1 propensity-score (PS) matching between the DAL-group (n=89) and the SoC-group (n=89) was performed, using defined demographic covariates such as body-mass-index, age, sex, causative pathogens, knee or hip joint and infection after primary or revision surgery, surgical site infections, Charlson-comorbidity index and the types of infection (acute, late acute and chronic). Patient's demographics were analysed by our prospectively maintained institutional arthroplasty registry and PJI database. We analysed the outcome of the included patients evaluate the re-infection and re-revision rate and gave details about surgical management and the type of PJI with a minimum follow-up of one year. Results. Microbiological and clinical successes were achieved in 69 (77.5%) patients of the DAL-group and in 66 (74.2%) patients of the SoC-group. In the DAL-group 13 (14.6%) and in the SoC-group 12 (13.5%) patients had an infection related re-revision. Median follow-up was 706 (369; 1310) days in the DAL-group and 1329 (9; 3,549) days in the SoC-group. Overall, polymicrobial infections were found in 20 procedures (DAL-group: 10; SoC-group: 10) and monomicrobial infections in 154 (DAL-group: 75; SoC-group: 79). Polymicrobial infections were found in 20 patients and monomicrobial infections in 154. The most common microorganisms were Staphylococcus epidermidis n=63 (32.3%), Staphylococcus aureus n=27 (13.8%) and Cutibacterium spp. n=22 (11.3%). There are significantly less Gram-positive microorganisms (p=0.034) after re-revisions in patients with DAL treatment. Conclusions. Dalbavancin has excellent safety and high clinical effectiveness for Gram-positive PJIs

The Canadian Institute for Health Information (CIHI) and the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) have partnered to advance international patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) collection and reporting standards for hip and knee arthroplasty. This project is part of the OECD's Patient-Reported Indicator Survey (PaRIS) initiative, which aims to address the need for internationally comparable patient-reported outcome and experience measures in order to better monitor health system performance and drive continuous improvement. PROMs are in varying stages of implementation across OECD health systems, with differences in collection and reporting practices across existing programs. CIHI and the OECD are leading an international working group for PROMs in hip and knee replacement surgery in order to build consensus on PROMs data collection standards and develop indicators for international reporting. Working group members include patient representatives, clinicians, national arthroplasty registries, the International Society of Arthroplasty Registries (ISAR), experts in PROMs measurement, and government representatives of several OECD member countries. Activities of the working group focus on two main priorities: 1) Use existing PROMs programs to maximize pilot comparable reporting in OECD's Health at a Glance 2019 report, and 2) Advance new PROMs standards and data collection to maximize comparable reporting beyond Health at a Glance 2019. An environmental scan of PROMs in hip and knee arthroplasty found that a number of countries are collecting this data, however, there are variations in survey instruments as well as administration and reporting methods within and across countries. As part of priority 1, the working group has achieved consensus on a number of aspects around pilot reporting. The project is compiling data from existing PROMs programs in order to report results in the Health at a Glance 2019 publication. For priority 2, the most notable challenge is establishing an agreement across countries on common survey tools, as well as a minimum data set that works for all, given the disparities of existing collection across countries. Many international programs lack the flexibility to change PROMs tools or collections methods, and have concerns regarding the break in trend for PROMs data within their own countries if they were to change methods. The project is exploring the use of crosswalks and other opportunities for comparable reporting, such as the use of single-item anchor questions. To date, the working group continues to develop consensus on international standards for PROMs collection and reporting. Results of the international consensus building and work to date will be shared. PROMs incorporate the patient's perspective into the delivery of treatments and care – such as hip and knee arthroplasty – that aim to improve a patient's quality of life. Alignment of standards in PROMs collection across countries will make comparable data available for reporting, in order to inform quality improvement initiatives within health systems to provide better care for patients. CIHI and the OECD will continue to work with member countries to develop international data collection and reporting standards for PROMs, and encourage the adoption of common approaches across countries

Background and aim. Since the market withdrawal of the ASR hip resurfacing in August 2010 because of a higher than expected revision rate as reported in the Australian Joint Replacement Registry (AOAJRR), metal-on-metal hip resurfacing arthroplasty (MoMHRA) has become a controversial procedure for hip replacement. Failures related to destructive adverse local tissue reactions to metal wear debris have further discredited MoMHRA. Longer term series from experienced resurfacing specialists however, demonstrated good outcomes with excellent 10-to-15-year survivorship in young and active men. These results have recently been confirmed for some MoMHRA designs in the AOAJRR. Besides, all hip replacement registries report significantly worse survivorship of total hip arthroplasty (THA) in patients under 50 compared to older ages. The aim of this study was to review MoMHRA survivorship from the national registries reporting on hip resurfacing and determine the risk factors for revision in the different registries. Methods. The latest annual reports from the AOAJRR, the National Joint Registry of England and Wales (NJR), the Swedish Hip Registry (SHR), the Finnish Arthroplasty Registry, the New Zealand Joint Registry and the Arthroplasty Registry of the Emilia-Romagna Region in Italy (RIPO) were reviewed for 10-year survivorship of MoMHRA in general and specific designs in particular. Other registries did not have enough hip resurfacing data or long term data yet. The survivorship data were compared to conventional THA in comparable age groups and determinants for success/failure such as gender, age, diagnosis, implant design and size and surgical experience were reviewed. Results. All registries showed a significant decline of the use of MoMHRA. The AOAJRR reported a cumulative revision rate of 9.5% (95%CI: 8.9–10.1%) at 10 years for all hip resurfacings. Female gender, developmental dysplasia and femoral head sizes <49mm were significant risk factors with revision rates twice as high for head sizes <49mm compared to >55mm. In males, cumulative revision rate for all MoMHRA was 6.6% at 10 years and 7.8% at 13years with no difference in the age groups. ASR had significantly higher revision rates (23.9% at 7 years) compared to other designs. The Adept and the Mitch had the lowest revision rates at 7 years (3.6%). Cumulative revision rates for 10,750 BHR (males and females pooled) were 5.0% at 7 years, 6.9% at 10years and 8.4% at 13 years. Cumulative revision rates of THA in patients <55 years was 6.0% at 10 years and 9.4% at 13 years. Similar survivorship results were found in the Finnish, Swedish, New Zealand and RIPO registry. In the SHR, 10-year survivorship of THA in patients <50 was only around 87%. In the NJR, cumulative revision rates for all MoMHRA pooled were much less favourable (13% at 10 years – 22% in patients<50) but the revision probability of ASR was 30.4% compared to 9.0% for BHR. Surgical experience was also identified as an important determinant of success/failure. Discussion. Registries are now confirming good 10-year survivorship of certain MoMHRA designs with excellent results in males. Risk factors for revision are female gender, small head size, dysplasia and certain implant designs