Collection of 4–5 independent peri-prosthetic tissue samples is recommended for microbiological diagnosis of prosthetic joint infections. Sonication of explanted prostheses has also been shown to increase microbiological yield in some centres. We compared sonication with standard tissue sampling for diagnosis of prosthetic joint and other orthopaedic device related infections.

We used standard protocols for sample collection, tissue culture and sonication. Positive tissue culture was defined as isolation of a phenotypically indistinguishable organism from ≥2 samples; and positive sonication culture as isolation of an organism at ≥50 cfu/ml. We compared the diagnostic performance of each method against an established clinical definition of infection (Trampuz 2011), and against a composite clinical and microbiological definition of infection based on international consensus (Gehrke & Parvizi 2013).

350 specimens were received for sonication, including joint prostheses (160), exchangeable components (76), other orthopaedic hardware and cement (104), and bone (10). A median of 5 peri-prosthetic tissue samples were received from each procedure (IQR 4–5). Tissue culture was more sensitive than sonication for diagnosis of prosthetic joint and orthopaedic device related infection using both the clinical definition (66% versus 57%, McNemar's Χ2 test p=0.016) and the composite definition of infection (87% vs 66%, p<0.001). The combination of tissue culture and sonication provided optimum sensitivity: 73% (95% confidence interval 65–79%) against the clinical definition and 92% (86–96%) against the composite definition.

Results were similar when analysis was confined to joint prostheses and exchangeable components; other orthopaedic hardware; and patients who had received antibiotics within 14 days prior to surgery.

Tissue sampling appears to have higher sensitivity than sonication for diagnosis of prosthetic joint and orthopaedic device infection at our centre. This may reflect rigorous collection of multiple peri-prosthetic tissue samples. A combination of methods may offer optimal sensitivity, reflecting the anatomical and biological spectrum of prosthetic joint and other device related infections.

Debridement, antibiotics and implant retention (DAIR) is a surgical option in the treatment of prosthetic joint infection (PJI). It is thought to be most appropriate in the treatment of early (≤6 weeks post-op) PJI. Most studies to-date reporting on DAIRs in hip PJI have been underpowered by reporting on small cohorts (n= <45), or report on registry data with associated biases and limitations. In our, tertiary referral, bone infection unit we consider DAIR to be a suitable option in all cases of PJI with a soundly fixed prosthesis, with early or late presentation, especially in patients who are too elderly or infirm to undergo major surgery.

Aim: To define the 10-year outcome following DAIR in hip PJI and identify factors that influence it.

We retrospectively reviewed all DAIRs performed in our unit between 1997 and 2013 for hip PJI. Only infected cases confirmed by histological and microbiological criteria were included. Data recorded included patient demographics and medical history, type of surgery performed (DAIR or DAIR + exchange of modular components), organism identified and type/duration of antibiotic treatment. Outcome measures included complications, mortality rate, implant survivorship and functional outcome.

121 DAIRs were identified with mean age of 71 years (range: 33–97). 67% followed an index procedure of 1° arthroplasty. 53% included exchange of modular components. 60% of DAIRs were for early onset PJI. Isolated staphylococcus was present in 50% of cases and 25% had polymicrobial infection. At follow-up (mean:7 years, range: 0.3 – 18), 83 patients were alive; 5- and 10- year mortality rates were 15% and 35% respectively. 45% had a complication (persistence of infection: 27%, dislocation: 10%) and 40% required further surgery. Twenty hips have been revised to-date (17%). Performing a DAIR and not exchanging the modular components was associated with an almost 3× risk (risk ratio: 2.9) of subsequent implant failure (p=0.04). 10-yr implant survivorship was 80% (95%CI: 70 – 90%). Improved 10-year implant survivorship was associated with DAIR performed for early PJI (85% Vs 68%, p=0.04). Functional outcome will be discussed.

DAIR is a particularly valuable option in the treatment of hip PJI, especially in the early post-operative period. Whenever possible, exchange of modular implants should be undertaken, however DAIRs are associated with increased morbidity even in early PJI. Factors that predict success of DAIR in late PJI need to be identified.

To propose a national specification for hospitals which offer treatment of complex bone and joint infections to adults.

Patients with bone and joint infections are treated in a wide variety of hospitals in the UK. A few have developed services with infection physicians, microbiology laboratory support and dedicated orthopaedic and plastic surgeons working together to deliver a multidisciplinary care pathway. However, many patients are treated in non-specialist units leading to multiple, often unsuccessful procedures with long hospital stays, high costs and additional pain and disability. Inappropriate antibiotic therapy without adequate surgery risks antibiotic resistance.

A draft specification was written defining the types of patients who should be referred to a specialist unit for treatment. A description of the components which must be available to treat these cases (staffing, expertise, diagnostic support, outcome assessment and governance structure) was proposed. This draft was circulated to infection units in the UK for consideration and agreed with the Health Department in England.

Complex bone and joint infections would be best served nationally by 3–6 networks, each with a single specialist centre. This is similar to national arrangements for bone sarcoma treatment.

Patients to be referred will include those with:

Chronic osteomyelitis (long bone, pelvis, spine)

Specialist units should have:

Orthopaedic surgeons who specialise in infection (joint revision, Ilizarov techniques, etc).

This service specification is a tool for developing regional units. It facilitates the creation of designated centres in a national network (hub and spoke model). This service specification has been agreed and published by NHS England.