Aims. Serum inflammatory parameters are widely used to aid in diagnosing a periprosthetic joint infection (PJI). Due to their limited performances in the literature, novel and more accurate biomarkers are needed. Serum albumin-to-globulin ratio (AGR) and serum CRP-to-albumin ratio (CAR) have previously been proposed as potential new parameters, but results were mixed. The aim of this study was to assess the diagnostic accuracy of AGR and CAR in diagnosing PJI and to compare them to the established and widely used marker CRP. Methods. From 2015 to 2022, a consecutive series of 275 cases of revision total hip (n = 129) and knee arthroplasty (n = 146) were included in this retrospective cohort study. Based on the 2021 European Bone and Joint Infection Society (EBJIS) definition, 144 arthroplasties were classified as septic. Using receiver operating characteristic curve (ROC) analysis, the ideal thresholds and diagnostic performances were calculated. The areas under the curve (AUCs) were compared using the z-test. Results. AGR, CAR, and CRP were associated with PJI (p < 0.001). Sensitivities were 62.5% (95% CI 54.3 to 70.0), 73.6% (95% CI 65.8 to 80.1), and 71.5% (95% CI 63.6 to 78.3), respectively. Specificities were calculated with 84.7% (95% CI 77.5 to 89.9), 86.3% (95% CI 79.2 to 91.2), and 87.8% (95% CI 80.9 to 92.4), respectively. The AUC of CRP (0.797 (95% CI 0.750 to 0.843)) was significantly higher than the AUC of AGR (0.736 (95% CI 0.686 to 0.786), p < 0.001), and similar to AUC of CAR (0.799 (95% CI 0.753 to 0.846), p = 0.832). Decreased sensitivities were observed in PJIs caused by low-virulence organisms (AGR: 60%, CAR: 78%) compared to high-virulence pathogens (AGR: 80%, p = 0.042; CAR: 88%, p = 0.158). Higher sensitivities were seen in acute haematogenous (AGR: 83%, CAR: 96%) compared to chronic PJIs (AGR: 54%, p = 0.001; CAR: 65%, p < 0.001). Conclusion. Serum AGR and CAR showed limited diagnostic accuracy (especially in low-grade and chronic infections) and did not outperform the established marker CRP in our study. Hence, neither parameter can be recommended as an additional tool for diagnosing PJI. Cite this article: Bone Joint Res 2024;13(8):372–382

Aims

This study aimed to evaluate the BioFire Joint Infection (JI) Panel in cases of hip and knee periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) where conventional microbiology is unclear, and to assess its role as a complementary intraoperative diagnostic tool.

Aims. To explore the clinical efficacy of using two different types of articulating spacers in two-stage revision for chronic knee periprosthetic joint infection (kPJI). Methods. A retrospective cohort study of 50 chronic kPJI patients treated with two types of articulating spacers between January 2014 and March 2022 was conducted. The clinical outcomes and functional status of the different articulating spacers were compared. Overall, 17 patients were treated with prosthetic spacers (prosthetic group (PG)), and 33 patients were treated with cement spacers (cement group (CG)). The CG had a longer mean follow-up period (46.67 months (SD 26.61)) than the PG (24.82 months (SD 16.46); p = 0.001). Results. Infection was eradicated in 45 patients overall (90%). The PG had a better knee range of motion (ROM) and Knee Society Score (KSS) after the first-stage revision (p = 0.004; p = 0.002), while both groups had similar ROMs and KSSs at the last follow-up (p = 0.136; p = 0.895). The KSS in the CG was significantly better at the last follow-up (p = 0.013), while a larger percentage (10 in 17, 58.82%) of patients in the PG chose to retain the spacer (p = 0.008). Conclusion. Prosthetic spacers and cement spacers are both effective at treating chronic kPJI because they encourage infection control, and the former improved knee function status between stages. For some patients, prosthetic spacers may not require reimplantation. Cite this article: Bone Joint Res 2024;13(6):306–314

Aims

This study aimed to explore the diagnostic value of synovial fluid neutrophil extracellular traps (SF-NETs) in periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) diagnosis, and compare it with that of microbial culture, serum ESR and CRP, synovial white blood cell (WBC) count, and polymorphonuclear neutrophil percentage (PMN%).

Aims. This study explores the reported rate of surgical site infection (SSI) after hip fracture surgery in published studies concerning patients treated in the UK. Methods. Studies were included if they reported on SSI after any type of surgical treatment for hip fracture. Each study required a minimum of 30 days follow-up and 100 patients. Meta-analysis was undertaken using a random effects model. Heterogeneity was expressed using the I. 2. statistic. Risk of bias was assessed using a modified Newcastle-Ottawa Scale (NOS) system. Results. There were 20 studies reporting data from 88,615 patients. Most were retrospective cohort studies from single centres. The pooled incidence was 2.1% (95% confidence interval (CI) 1.54% to 2.62%) across ‘all types’ of hip fracture surgery. When analyzed by operation type, the SSI incidences were: hemiarthroplasty 2.87% (95% CI 1.99% to 3.75%) and sliding hip screw 1.35% (95% CI 0.78% to 1.93%). There was considerable variation in definition of infection used, as well as considerable risk of bias, particularly as few studies actively screened participants for SSI. Conclusion. Synthesis of published estimates of infection yield a rate higher than that seen in national surveillance procedures. Biases noted in all studies would trend towards an underestimate, largely due to inadequate follow-up

Objectives. The optimal protocol for antibiotic loading in the articulating cement spacers for the treatment of prosthetic joint infection (PJI) remains controversial. The objective of the present study was to investigate the effectiveness of articulating cement spacers loaded with a new combination of antibiotics. Methods. A retrospective cohort study involving 114 PJI cases treated with implantation of an articulating cement spacer between 2005 and 2016 was performed. The treatment outcomes of the conventional protocol (i.e. gentamicin and vancomycin (GV protocol)) were compared with those reported using the sophisticated antibiotic-loading protocol (i.e. vancomycin, meropenem, and amphotericin (VMA protocol)). Results. There were 62 and 52 PJI cases treated with the GV and VMA protocols, respectively. Antimicrobial susceptibility testing revealed that 22/78 of all isolates (28.2%) in this series were resistant to gentamicin, whereas there were no vancomycin-, meropenem-, or amphotericin-resistant strains. The overall infection recurrence rates were 17.7% (11/62) and 1.9% (1/52), respectively (p = 0.006). In patients with a negative preoperative culture, there was no infection recurrence reported in the VMA cohort (0/45 (0%) vs 10/54 (18.5%) in the GV cohort; p = 0.002). Multivariate analysis indicated that the VMA protocol correlated with a decreased risk of infection recurrence compared with the GV protocol (p = 0.025). Conclusion. The sophisticated VMA protocol for the loading of antibiotics in articulating cement spacers, as part of a two-stage exchange, was associated with a reduced rate of infection recurrence. This proposed protocol appears to be safe and effective, especially in patients with negative culture results prior to the first-stage operation. Cite this article: Bone Joint Res 2019;8:526–534

Objectives. The optimal protocol for antibiotic loading in the articulating cement spacers for the treatment of prosthetic joint infection (PJI) remains controversial. The objective of the present study was to investigate the effectiveness of articulating cement spacers loaded with a new combination of antibiotics. Methods. A retrospective cohort study involving 114 PJI cases treated with implantation of an articulating cement spacer between 2005 and 2016 was performed. The treatment outcomes of the conventional protocol (i.e. gentamicin and vancomycin (GV protocol)) were compared with those reported using the sophisticated antibiotic-loading protocol (i.e. vancomycin, meropenem, and amphotericin (VMA protocol)). Results. There were 62 and 52 PJI cases treated with the GV and VMA protocols, respectively. Antimicrobial susceptibility testing revealed that 22/78 of all isolates (28.2%) in this series were resistant to gentamicin, whereas there were no vancomycin-, meropenem-, or amphotericin-resistant strains. The overall infection recurrence rates were 17.7% (11/62) and 1.9% (1/52), respectively (p = 0.006). In patients with a negative preoperative culture, there was no infection recurrence reported in the VMA cohort (0/45 (0%) vs 10/54 (18.5%) in the GV cohort; p = 0.002). Multivariate analysis indicated that the VMA protocol correlated with a decreased risk of infection recurrence compared with the GV protocol (p = 0.025). Conclusion. The sophisticated VMA protocol for the loading of antibiotics in articulating cement spacers, as part of a two-stage exchange, was associated with a reduced rate of infection recurrence. This proposed protocol appears to be safe and effective, especially in patients with negative culture results prior to the first-stage operation. Cite this article: Bone Joint Res 2019;8:526–534

Objectives

As well as debridement and irrigation, soft-tissue coverage, and osseous stabilization, systemic antibiotic prophylaxis is considered the benchmark in the management of open fractures and considerably reduces the risk of subsequent fracture-related infections (FRI). The direct application of antibiotics in the surgical field (local antibiotics) has been used for decades as additional prophylaxis in open fractures, although definitive evidence confirming a beneficial effect is scarce. The purpose of the present study was to review the clinical evidence regarding the effect of prophylactic application of local antibiotics in open limb fractures.