Health Care Needs and Support for Patients Undergoing Treatment for Prosthetic Joint Infection following Hip or Knee Arthroplasty: A Systematic Review.
ABSTRACT: BACKGROUND:Hip and knee arthroplasty are common interventions for the treatment of joint conditions, most notably osteoarthritis. Although many patients benefit from surgery, approximately 1% of patients develop infection afterwards known as deep prosthetic joint infection (PJI), which often requires further major surgery. OBJECTIVE:To assess support needs of patients undergoing treatment for PJI following hip or knee arthroplasty and to identify and evaluate what interventions are routinely offered to support such patients. DESIGN:Systematic review. DATA SOURCES:MEDLINE, EMBASE, Web of Science, PsycINFO, Cinahl, Social Science Citation Index, The Cochrane Library, and reference lists of relevant studies from January 01, 1980 to October 05, 2016. SELECTION CRITERIA:Observational (prospective or retrospective cohort, nested case-control or case-control) studies, qualitative studies, or clinical trials conducted in patients treated for PJI and/or other major adverse occurrences following hip or knee arthroplasty. REVIEW METHODS:Data were extracted by two independent investigators and consensus was reached with involvement of a third. Given the heterogeneous nature of study designs, methods, and limited number of studies, a narrative synthesis is presented. RESULTS:Of 4,213 potentially relevant citations, we identified one case-control, one prospective cohort and two qualitative studies for inclusion in the synthesis. Patients report that PJI and treatment had a profoundly negative impact affecting physical, emotional, social and economic aspects of their lives. No study evaluated support interventions. CONCLUSION:The findings demonstrate that patients undergoing treatment for PJI have extensive physical, psychological, social and economic support needs. The interpretation of study results is limited by variation in study design, outcome measures and the small number of relevant eligible studies. However, our review highlights a lack of evidence about support strategies for patients undergoing treatment for PJI and other adverse occurrences following hip or knee arthroplasty. There is a need to design, implement and evaluate interventions to support these patients. SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION:PROSPERO 2015: CRD42015027175.
Project description:PURPOSE: The purpose of this hospital-based case-control study was to evaluate the risk factors for periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) of total hip arthroplasty (THA) and total knee arthroplasty (TKA) in Chinese patients. METHOD: From January 2000 to December 2012, 45 patients undergoing THA and TKA who developed PJI were recruited for case subjects; controls were 252 without PJI, matched by year of index for surgery and type of surgery. Conditional logistic regressions were run to compute odds ratios (ORs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs). RESULTS: Demographic factors and comorbid conditions associated with an increased adjusted risk of PJI (in decreasing order of significance) were diabetes (OR?=?5.47, 95% CI: 1.77-16.97; p?=?0.003), age (65-75 vs. 45-65 years) (OR?=?3.36, 95% CI: 1.30-8.69; p?=?0.013), BMI (?28 vs. 18.5-28 kg/m2) (OR?=?2.77, 95% CI: 1.20-6.40; p?=?0.017), place of residence (rural) (OR?=?2.63, 95% CI: 1.13-6.10; p?=?0.025) and alcohol abuse (OR?=?2.95, 95% CI: 1.06-8.23; p?=?0.039). CONCLUSION: Patients with diabetes, older age, BMI of ?28 kg/m2 and alcohol abuse or living in rural areas, had increased PJI risk. Additional systematic large-scale studies are needed to verify these results.
Project description:Background:Prosthetic joint infection (PJI) is the most serious total joint arthroplasty (TJA) complication despite several aseptic and antiseptic preventive measures. There is no clear evidence or even consensus, whether antibiotic-loaded bone cement (ALBC) should be used, in addition to systemic short-term routine antibiotic prophylaxis, to reduce the risk of PJI in primary TJA. We aimed to analyze the efficacy of ALBC for prevention of PJI in patients undergoing primary TJA. Methods:We searched systematically for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) in PubMed, Scopus, Embase, Web of Science and Cochrane library. Two reviewers independently screened potentially eligible studies according to predefined selection criteria and assessed the risk of bias using a modified version of the Cochrane risk of bias tool. PJI was prespecified as the primary outcome of interest. The meta-analyses were based on risk ratios using random-effects model per default. For the purpose of sensitivity, the corresponding fixed effects model odds ratios were calculated with the use of the Peto method as well. To evaluate a potential difference in effect sizes using different types (subgroups) of antibiotics used in bone cement, and at different follow-up periods, we performed stratified meta-analyses. Results:Thirty-seven studies were eligible for the systematic review and qualitative synthesis, and 9 trials (6507 total joint arthroplasties) were included in this meta-analysis. Overall ALBC significantly reduced the risk of PJI following primary TJAs (RRs, 0.36; 95% CIs, 0.16 to 0.80; P = 0.01) with a moderate degree of inconsistency (I2 = 47%). Based on stratified meta-analyses the use of gentamicin appeared to have a better effect (P = 0.0005) in the total hip arthroplasty. Pooled data of different antibiotics used in knee arthroplasties showed a significant association of cefuroxime (RRs, 0.08; 95% CIs, 0.01 to 0.63; P = 0.02). Further, ALBCs significantly reduced the PJI at one and two years of follow-up (P = 0.03 and P = 0.005 respectively). Conclusions:The evidence suggests that ALBCs are effective in reducing the PJI following primary TJA; i.e. between 20 and 84% reduced risk. However, the clear limitations of the available trial evidence highlight the need for joint-specific confirmatory trials, that will need to be designed as cluster-randomized trials of clinics in countries with well-functioning arthroplasty registries.The translational potential of this article: This meta-analysis highlights the prophylactic potential of ALBCs in lowering the risk of infection following primary hip or knee arthroplasties but emphasizes the need for more recent confirmatory trials.
Project description:Background and purpose - Periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) remains a devastating complication following total knee or total hip arthroplasty (TKA/THA). Nowadays, many studies focus on preventive strategies regarding PJI; however, the potential role of anesthesia in the development of PJI remains unclear.Patients and methods - All consecutive patients undergoing elective primary unilateral TKA or THA from January 2014 through December 2017 were included. Exclusion criteria included femoral fractures as the indication for surgery and previously performed osteosynthesis or hardware removal on the affected joint. Age, sex, BMI, ASA classification, type of arthroplasty surgery, type of anesthesia, duration of surgery, smoking status, and intraoperative hypothermia were recorded. Propensity score-matched univariable logistic regression analysis was used to control for allocation bias.Results - 3,909 procedures consisting of 54% THAs and 46% TKAs were available for analysis. 42% arthroplasties were performed under general anesthesia and 58% under spinal anesthesia. Early PJIs were observed in 1.7% of the general anesthesia group and in 0.8% in the spinal anesthesia group. The multivariable logistic regression model demonstrated an odds ratio for PJI of 2.0 (95% CI 1.0-3.7) after general anesthesia relative to the propensity score-matched patients who received spinal anesthesia.Interpretation - These results suggest a potential association between general anesthesia and early PJI. Future research using large-scale data is required to further elucidate this clinically relevant association.
Project description:Introduction:This systematic literature review evaluates (1) frailty in older adults as a risk factor for short-term adverse events and suboptimal clinical outcomes after total joint arthroplasty and (2) interventions to improve arthroplasty outcomes in these frail patients. Methods:PubMed, EMBASE, Cochrane Register of Controlled Trials, SCOPUS, AgeLine, and Web of Science were searched from database inception to November 22, 2017; gray literature and references were also searched. Studies including adults ≥65 years of age undergoing hip or knee arthroplasty and measuring preoperative frailty and postoperative adverse events or clinical outcomes within 90 days of surgery were included. Two investigators independently screened all abstracts and extracted data; disagreements were adjudicated by a third reviewer. Risk of bias was assessed using the Newcastle-Ottawa scale for cohort studies and the Cochrane Risk of Bias tool for randomized controlled trials. Study quality was assessed using a 5-point scale modified from the Oxford Centre for Evidence-Based Medicine tool. Results:Of 1913 abstracts identified, 82 full texts were reviewed, and 13 met inclusion criteria: 5 prospective cohort studies, 6 retrospective cohort studies, and 2 randomized controlled trials covering 382 763 total patients. These studies used 13 frailty instruments and assessed 32 distinct outcomes. Substantial heterogeneity precluded valid meta-analysis; results were qualitatively summarized by study design, frailty instrument, and outcome type. Of the 11 cohort studies, 10 found significant associations between frailty and poor postoperative outcomes. Trials of preoperative frailty-modifying interventions found no association between interventions and improved outcomes. Discussion:Standardizing frailty measurement would improve generalizability, permitting the assessment of associations with patient-reported and functional outcome measures, as well as the efficacy of interventions to improve outcomes, in frail patients undergoing arthroplasty. Conclusions:Frailty is associated with higher rates of short-term adverse events and worse clinical outcomes after elective hip and knee arthroplasty.
Project description:<h4>Introduction</h4>Hip and knee replacement represents a significant burden to the UK healthcare system. 'Enhanced recovery' pathways have been introduced in the National Health Service (NHS) for patients undergoing hip and knee replacement, with the aim of improving outcomes and timely recovery after surgery. To support policymaking, there is a need to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of enhanced recovery pathways across jurisdictions. Our aim is to systematically summarise the published cost-effectiveness evidence on enhanced recovery in hip and knee replacement, both as a whole and for each of the various components of enhanced recovery pathways.<h4>Methods and analysis</h4>A systematic review will be conducted using MEDLINE, EMBASE, Econlit and the National Health Service Economic Evaluations Database. Separate search strategies were developed for each database including terms relating to hip and knee replacement/arthroplasty, economic evaluations, decision modelling and quality of life measures.We will extract peer-reviewed studies published between 2000 and 2017 reporting economic evaluations of preoperative, perioperative or postoperative enhanced recovery interventions within hip or knee replacement. Economic evaluations alongside cohort studies or based on decision models will be included. Only studies with patients undergoing elective replacement surgery of the hip or knee will be included. Data will be extracted using a predefined pro forma following best practice guidelines for economic evaluation, decision modelling and model validation.Our primary outcome will be the cost-effectiveness of enhanced recovery (entire pathway and individual components) in terms of incremental cost per quality-adjusted life year. A narrative synthesis of all studies will be presented, focussing on cost-effectiveness results, study design, quality and validation status.<h4>Ethics and dissemination</h4>This systematic review is exempted from ethics approval because the work is carried out on published documents. The results of the review will be disseminated in a peer-reviewed academic journal and at conferences.<h4>Prospero registration number</h4>CRD42017059473.
Project description:BACKGROUND: Controversies still exist regarding the optimal diagnostic and therapeutic strategies in patients with prosthetic joint infections (PJI). QUESTIONS/PURPOSES: How effective are preoperative and intraoperative cultures in isolating organisms and how do these culture results compare to one another? What are the results of surgical treatment of PJI in the hip and knee in an international, tertiary referral center cohort? PATIENTS AND METHODS: One hundred sixteen patients (N?=?59 hip PJI, N?=?57 knee PJI) were recruited prospectively to registries at three international, tertiary referral centers between December 2008 to November 2011. Retrospective review of prospective registry data including demographics, microbiology results, and operative reports was performed. RESULTS: Preoperative synovial fluid aspiration yielded an organism in only 45.2% and 44.4% of cases, respectively, for knee and hip PJI. False-negative rates of preoperative aspiration relative to intraoperative culture were 56% and 46% in hip and knee PJI, respectively, with discordance rates of 25% and 21.4%, respectively. Rates of negative intraoperative cultures were 15% in hip PJI and 20.7% in knee PJI. Open debridement with prosthetic retention was the most common initial revision procedure performed (48.3% of hip PJI and 63.8% of knee PJI). This method of revision was successful in 41.3% of hip PJI and 59.4% of knee PJI. Initial failure rates for prosthetic revision was lower than debridement with prosthetic retention but remained substantial in both hip PJI (initial success of one-stage exchange 60% and two-stage exchange 70%) and knee PJI (initial success of one-stage exchange 80% and two-stage exchange 75%). CONCLUSION: Diagnosis and treatment of PJI remains challenging with difficulty in isolating the offending organism and with high rates of prosthetic revision and initial treatment failures. Future advances in organism isolation and international standardization of treatment protocols may improve patient outcomes.
Project description:BACKGROUND:Since a "gold-standard" is missing, diagnosing periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) remains a challenge in orthopedic surgery. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the accuracy of serum and synovial fluid Procalcitonin (S-PCT and SF-PCT) as a diagnostic parameter and to compare it to the biomarkers recommended in the 2018 Definition of periprosthetic hip and knee infection. METHODS:Between August 2018 and July 2019, a prospective cohort study was conducted in 70 patients with painful hip, shoulder and knee arthroplasty. Besides medical history, clinical and laboratory data was gathered. PJI was diagnosed based on the 2018 Definition of periprosthetic hip and knee infection. Preoperative blood and synovial joint fluid were taken for PCT measurement. S-PCT and SF-PCT levels were measured using standard quantitative PCT enzyme immunoassays. RESULTS:Twenty three patients (33%) were classified as the PJI group and fourty seven patient (67%) as the aseptic group. The mean levels of S-PCT were significantly (p?<? 0.001) higher in the PJI group than those in the aseptic group (PJI 0.05?±?0.21?ng/mL (0.0-1.03) vs. aseptic 0.02?±?0.03?ng/mL (0.0-0.18)). In synovial fluid, the mean PCT values in the aseptic group were significantly higher (p?<? 0.001) than those of PJI group (PJI 2.7?±?1.4?ng/mL (0.53-9.7) vs. aseptic 8.7?±?2.5?ng/mL (0.25-87.9)). S- PCT, with a cut-off level of 0.5?ng/mL, had a sensitivity of 13.0% and a specificity of 91.0%. SF-PCT, with a cut-off level of 5.0?ng/mL, had a sensitivity of 13.0% and a specificity of 52.0%. CONCLUSION:S-PCT and SF-PCT appeared to be no reliable biomarkers in the differential diagnosis of PJI from aseptic loosening in total joint arthroplasty.
Project description:BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Late prosthetic joint infections (PJIs) are a growing medical challenge as more and more joint replacements are being performed and the expected lifespan of patients is increasing. We analyzed the incidence rate of late PJI and its temporal trends in a nationwide population. PATIENTS AND METHODS: 112,708 primary hip and knee replacements performed due to primary osteoarthritis (OA) between 1998 and 2009 were followed for a median time of 5 (1-13) years, using data from nationwide Finnish health registries. Late PJI was detected > 2 years postoperatively, and very late PJI was detected > 5 years postoperatively. RESULTS: During the follow-up, involving 619,299 prosthesis-years, 1,345 PJIs were registered: cumulative incidence 1.20% (95% CI: 1.13-1.26) (for knees, 1.41%; for hips, 0.92%). The incidence rate of late PJI was 0.069% per prosthesis-year (CI: 0.061-0.078), and it was greater after knee replacement than after hip replacement (0.080% vs. 0.057%, p = 0.006). The incidence rate of very late PJI was 0.051% per prosthesis-year (CI: 0.042-0.063), 0.058% for knees and 0.044% for hips (p = 0.2). The incidence rate of late PJI varied between 0.041% and 0.107% during the years of observation without any temporal trend (incidence rate ratio (IRR) = 0.98, 95% CI: 0.93-1.03). Very late PJI increased from 0.026% in 2004 to 0.056% in 2010 (IRR = 1.11, 95% CI: 1.02-1.20). INTERPRETATION: In our nationwide study, the incidence rate of late PJI after hip or knee arthroplasty was approximately 0.07% per prosthesis-year. The incidence of very late PJI appeared to increase.
Project description:<h4>Objective</h4>The optimal timing of tumor necrosis factor antagonists before elective surgery is unknown. This study evaluated the association between infliximab timing and serious infection after elective hip or knee arthroplasty.<h4>Methods</h4>A retrospective cohort study evaluated US Medicare patients with rheumatoid arthritis, inflammatory bowel disease, psoriasis, psoriatic arthritis, or ankylosing spondylitis who received infliximab within 6 months of elective knee or hip arthroplasty from 2007 to 2013. Propensity-adjusted analyses examined whether infliximab stop timing (time between the most recent infusion and surgery) was associated with hospitalized infection within 30 days or prosthetic joint infection (PJI) within 1 year.<h4>Results</h4>Hospitalized infection within 30 days occurred after 270 of 4,288 surgeries (6.3%). Infliximab stop timing <4 weeks versus 8-12 weeks was not associated with an increase in infection within 30 days (propensity-adjusted odds ratio [OR] 0.90 [95% confidence interval (95% CI) 0.60-1.34]). The rate of PJI was 2.9 per 100 person-years and was not increased in patients with stop timing <4 weeks versus 8-12 weeks (hazard ratio [HR] 0.98 [95% CI 0.52-1.87]). Glucocorticoid dosage >10 mg/day was associated with increased risk of 30-day infection (OR 2.11 [95% CI 1.30-3.40]) and PJI (HR 2.70 [95% CI 1.30-5.60]). Other risk factors for infection included elderly age, comorbidities, revision surgery, and previous hospitalized infection.<h4>Conclusion</h4>Administering infliximab within 4 weeks of elective knee or hip arthroplasty was not associated with a higher risk of short- or long-term serious infection compared to withholding infliximab for longer time periods. Glucocorticoid use, especially >10 mg/day, was associated with an increased infection risk.
Project description:BackgroundThe use of megaprostheses in nononcologic patients has been associated with complication rates greater than 50%. In patients with prior periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) with subsequent two-stage reimplantation, this complication rate may be even higher. This study was to investigate the outcomes of megaprostheses in nononcologic patients undergoing revision hip/knee arthroplasty.MethodsWe retrospectively studied patients who underwent megaprosthesis replacements from 1999 to 2017 at 5 hospitals with minimum 24 months of follow-up. Patients were stratified based on history of prior PJI (septic vs aseptic) and location of the megaprosthesis (the hip or knee). Postoperative complications were classified as soft-tissue failure, aseptic loosening, structural failure, and infection.ResultsOf the 42 patients, 19 were in the septic cohort and 23 were in the aseptic cohort. The overall complication rate was 28.6%. Complication rates for the septic and aseptic cohorts were 32% and 26%, respectively (P = .74). By anatomic location, there were 2 of 13 (15%) and 10 of 29 (34%) complications in the hip and knee groups, respectively (P = .28). In the septic cohort, there were no (0%) complications in the hip group and 6 of 14 (43%) complications in the knee group (P = .13), all due to infection. In the aseptic cohort, there were 2 of 8 (25%) and 4 of 15 (27%) complications in the hip and knee groups, respectively (P = 1.0).ConclusionsThere is no difference in the postoperative complication rates between the septic or aseptic cohorts undergoing revision hip or knee megaprosthesis replacements. In patients with prior PJI, proximal femoral replacements have improved short-term survivorship compared with distal femoral or proximal tibial replacements.