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. 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.Aims
Methods
To analyse the prevalence of culture negative periprosthetic joint infections (PJI) when adequate culture techniques are applied, and to evaluate the outcome of patients who were treated with antibiotics for a culture negative PJI versus those in whom treatment was withheld. A multicenter observational study in which acute and chronic PJIs diagnosed between 2013 and 2018 were analyzed. Culture negative PJIs were diagnosed according to the MSIS, ICM and EBJIS definitions.Aim
Method
We aimed to assess the incidence and the outcome of Gram-negative prosthetic-joint infections (PJI) in 3 international tertiary hospital. We included patients with Gram-negative PJI at Humanitas Clinical and Research Hospital (Milan, Italy), Centre Hospitalier Universitaire Vaudois (Lausanne, Switzerland) and Hospital Parc de Salut Mar (Barcelona, Spain) between 2014 and 2018 in a retrospective cohort. We described the treatment's success rate according to Gram-negative species and type of surgical procedure.Aim
Method
There is a constant increase of total joint arthroplasties to improve the quality of life of an aging population. Prosthetic-joint infections are rare, with an incidence of 1–2%, but they represent serious complications in terms of morbidity and mortality. Different therapeutic options exist, but the role of the surgeon's experience has never been investigated. The aim of this retrospective study is to assess the infection eradication success rate depending on the involvement of a septic surgeon. Patients having a prosthetic-joint infection at Lausanne University Hospital (Switzerland) between 2006 and 2018 were included. The success rate depending on type of surgeon (septic vs non-septic) and type of surgical procedure was analyzed.Aim
Method
There is a constant increase of total joint arthroplasties to improve the quality of life of an aging population. Prosthetic-joint infections are rare, with an incidence of 1–2%, but they represent serious complications in terms of morbidity and mortality. Different therapeutic options exist, but their management is still poorly standardized because of the lack of data from randomized trials. The aim of this retrospective study is to assess the infection eradication success rate, over the last ten years, using different patient adapted treatment options. Patients having a prosthetic-joint infection at Lausanne University Hospital (Switzerland) between 2006 and 2016 were included. The success rate depending on age, type of prosthesis, type of infection and type of surgical procedure was analyzed.Aim
Method
There is a constant increase of joint arthroplasties to improve the quality of life of an aging population. Prosthetic-joint infections are rare, with an incidence of 1–2%, but they represent serious complications in terms of morbidity and mortality. The mortality was known to be approaching 8% in the elderly. The aim of this retrospective study is to reassess the two-year mortality rate over the last ten years. Patients having a prosthetic joint infection at Lausanne University Hospital (Switzerland) between 2006 and 2016 were included. The two-year mortality rate depending on sex, age, type of infection and type of surgical therapy was measured.Aim
Method
When treating periprosthetic joint infections with a two-stage procedure, antibiotic-impregnated spacers are used in the interval between removal of prosthesis and reimplantation. The spacer provides local antibiotics; however, it may also act as foreign-body that can be colonized by microorganisms. According to our experience, cultures of sonicated spacers are most often negative. The objective of our study was to investigate whether PCR analysis would improve the detection of bacteria in the spacer sonication fluid. A prospective monocentric study was performed at Lausanne University Hospital from September 2014 until January 2016. Inclusion criteria were two-stage procedure for prosthetic infection and agreement of the patient to participate in the study. For a two-stage procedure the interval before reimplantation ranged between 2 and 8 weeks. Spacers were made of cement impregnated with gentamycin, tobramycin and vancomycin. Cultures of intraoperative deep tissues samples from first and second stage procedures, prosthesis sonication and spacer sonication were analyzed. Multiplex-PCRAim
Method
Different therapeutic options for prosthetic joint infections exist, but surgery remains the key. With a two-stage exchange procedure, a success rate above 90% can be expected. Currently, there is no consensus regarding the optimal duration between explantation and the reimplantation in a two-stage procedure. The aim of this study was to retrospectively compare treatment outcomes between short-interval and long-interval two-stage exchanges. Patients having a two-stage exchange of a hip or knee prosthetic joint infection at Lausanne University Hospital (Switzerland) between 1999 and 2013 were included. The satisfaction of the patient, the function of the articulation and the eradication of infection, were compared between patients having a short (2 to 4 weeks) versus a long (4 weeks and more) interval during a two-stage procedure. Patient satisfaction was defined as good if the patient did not have pain and bad if the patient had pain. Functional outcome was defined good if the patient had a prosthesis in place and could walk, medium if the prosthesis was in place but the patient could not walk, and bad if the prosthesis was no longer in place. Infection outcome was considered good if there had been no re-infection and bad if there had been a re-infection of the prosthesis 145 patients (100 hips, 45 knees) were identified with a median age of 68 years (range 19–103). The median hospital stay was 58 days (range 10–402). The median follow-up was 12.9 months (range 0.5–152). 28 % and 72 % of the patients had a short-interval and long-interval exchange of the prosthesis, respectively. Patient satisfaction, functional outcome and infection outcome for patients having a short versus a long interval are reported in the Table. The patient satisfaction was higher when a long interval was performed whereas the functional and infection outcomes were higher when a short interval was performed. According to this study a short-interval exchange appears preferable to a long interval, especially in the view of treatment effectiveness and functional outcome.
The costs related to the treatment of infected total joint arthroplasties represent an ever groving burden to the society. Different patient-adapted therapeutic options like débridement and retention, 1- or 2-step exchange can be used. If a 2-step exchange is used we have to consider short (2–4 weeks) or long (>4–6 weeks) interval treatment. The Swiss DRG (Diagnose related Groups) determines the reimboursement the hopsital receives for the treatment of an infected total arthroplasty. The review assesses the cost-effectiveness of hospitalisation practices linked to surgical treatment in the two-stage exchange of a prosthetic-joint infection. The aim of this retrospectiv study is to compare the economical impact between a short (2 to 4 weeks) versus a long (6 weeks and above) interval during a two-satge procedure to determine the financial impact. Retrospectiv study of the patients with a two-stage procedure for a hip or knee prosthetic joint infection at CHUV hospital Lausanne (Switzerland) between 2012 and 2013. The review analyses the correlation between the interval length and the length of the hospital stay as well as with the costs and revenues per hospital stay. In average there is a loss of 40′000 Euro per hospitalisation for the treatment of prosthetic joint infection. Revenues never cover all the costs, even with a short interval procedure. This economical loss increases with the length of the hospital stay if a long-term intervall is choosen. The review explores potential for improvement in reimbourement practices and hospitalisation practices in the current Swiss healthcare setting. There should be alternative setups to decrease the burden of medical costs by a) increase the reimboursment for the treatment of infected total joints or by b) splitting the hospital stay with partners (rapid transfer after first operation from center hospital to level 2 hospital and retransfer for second operation to center) in order to increase revenues.
