Method

In this retrospective propensity-score (PS) matched cohort-study we compared the re-revision rate and the microbiological spectrum in rTHA and rTKA treated with (AB-Group; n=70) and without (non-AB-Group; n=70) antibiotic treatment in patients with UPIC. Baseline covariates for PS-matching were type of revision, sex, Body-Mass-Index, age, Surgical-Site-Infection-Score, American-Society-of-Anesthesiologists-Classification, serum C-reactive-protein.

All patients received routine antibiotic prophylaxis, but empiric AB treatment was started only in patients in the AB-Group. Post-operative treatment was decided on an individual basis according to the preference of the surgeon and the infectious disease specialist for a minimum duration of two weeks. In total, 90 rTHA (45 AB-Group, 45 in non-AB-Group) patients with UPICs and 50 rTKA (25 AB-Group, 25 in non-AB-Group) were included in the study. There was no significant variation in patient demographics.

Method

A total of 89 SF samples from 70 patients (43 female; 27 male) who underwent revision arthroplasty (14 hip; 75 knee) were included. Using European and Bone Joint Infection Society (EBJIS) criteria, 82 cases were classified as infected (77 UNC and 5 septic culture-positive controls), five as non-infected (aseptic culture-negative controls), and two as likely infected, but infected by clinical observation. MC was performed and evaluated together with SF parameters. Antibiotic treatment, clinical outcome, patient demographics and surgical details were analysed.

Methods

Five groups representing common microbiological scenarios in hip and knee revision arthroplasty were selected from our arthroplasty registry, prospectively maintained PJI databases, and biobank: 1) unexpected-negative cultures (UNCs), 2) unexpected-positive cultures (UPCs), 3) single-positive intraoperative cultures (SPCs), and 4) clearly septic and 5) aseptic cases. In total, 268 archived synovial fluid samples from 195 patients who underwent acute/chronic revision total hip or knee arthroplasty were included. Cases were classified according to the International Consensus Meeting 2018 criteria. JI panel evaluation of synovial fluid was performed, and the results were compared with cultures.

Methods

Overall, 206 prospectively collected periprosthetic synovial fluid samples from 169 patients (106f/63m; 38 hip/131 knee) who underwent revision surgeries were retrospectively evaluated for calprotectin concentration. The following groups were analyzed: unexpected negative cultures (UNC; 32/206), unexpected positive cultures (UPC; 28/206), and unclear cases (65/206) with conflicting clinical results. In addition, we added a true aseptic (40/206), and true septic (41/206) control groups according to the international consensus meeting (ICM) 2018 PJI classification. Calprotectin concentration was determined by a rapid quantitative LFA (n=206) (Lyfstone®, Norway), and compared to calprotectin ELISA immunoassay (171/206). For the determination of a new calprotectin cut-off value, analysis of the area under the curve (AUC) followed by Youden's J statistic were performed using the calproctectin values from clear septic and aseptic cases. Sensitivity and specificity for calprotectin were calculated. All statistical analyses were performed using IBM-SPSS® version 25 (Armonk, NY, USA).

Method

A retrospective analysis of a prospectively maintained single center spine infection database was performed with a minimum follow-up of 3 years. Between 01/2011 and 12/2018, 103 patients underwent 248 revision surgeries for the treatment of PSII. Overall, 20 patients (6 male/14 female) underwent 82 revisions for PSII (median 3; range 2–12). There were 55/82 (67.1%) procedures with a positive microbiological result. Microbiological analysis was performed on tissue and implant sonication fluid. Changes in microbial spectrum and antibiotic resistance pattern between surgeries were evaluated using Chi-Square and Fisher's exact test.