Skip main navigation
Close Drawer MenuOpen Drawer Menu

We use cookies to give you the best experience on our website. To find out more about how we use cookies and how to change your settings, see our Privacy Policy.

Accept
Arthroplasty

One-stage revision is as effective as two-stage revision for chronic culture-negative periprosthetic joint infection after total hip and knee arthroplasty

a retrospective cohort study
CrossMark LogoCrossMark
    Published Online:18 Jan 2021https://doi.org/10.1302/0301-620X.103B.BJJ-2020-1480.R2

    Abstract

    Aims

    Removal of infected components and culture-directed antibiotics are important for the successful treatment of chronic periprosthetic joint infection (PJI). However, as many as 27% of chronic PJI patients yield negative culture results. Although culture negativity has been thought of as a contraindication to one-stage revision, data supporting this assertion are limited. The aim of our study was to report on the clinical outcomes for one-stage and two-stage exchange arthroplasty performed in patients with chronic culture-negative PJI.

    Methods

    A total of 105 consecutive patients who underwent revision arthroplasty for chronic culture-negative PJI were retrospectively evaluated. One-stage revision arthroplasty was performed in 30 patients, while 75 patients underwent two-stage exchange, with a minimum of one year's follow-up. Reinfection, re-revision for septic and aseptic reasons, amputation, readmission, mortality, and length of stay were compared between the two treatment strategies.

    Results

    The patient demographic characteristics did not differ significantly between the groups. At a mean follow-up of 4.2 years, the treatment failure for reinfection for one-stage and two-stage revision was five (16.7%) and 15 patients (20.0%) (p = 0.691), and for septic re-revision was four (13.3%) and 11 patients (14.7%) (p = 0.863), respectively. No significant differences were observed between one-stage and two-stage revision for 30- 60- and 90-day readmissions (10.0% vs 8.0%; p = 0.714; 16.7% vs 9.3%; p = 0.325; and 26.7% vs 10.7%; p = 0.074), one-year mortality (3.3% vs 4.0%; p > 0.999), and amputation (3.3% vs 1.3%; p = 0.496).

    Conclusion

    In this non-randomized study, one-stage revision arthroplasty demonstrated similar outcomes including reinfection, re-revision, and readmission rates for the treatment of chronic culture-negative PJI after TKA and THA compared to two-stage revision. This suggests culture negativity may not be a contraindication to one-stage revision arthroplasty for chronic culture-negative PJI in selected patients.

    Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2021;103-B(3):515–521.

    References

    • 1. Kurtz SM, Lau E, Schmier J, Ong KL, Zhao K, Parvizi J. Infection burden for hip and knee arthroplasty in the United States. J Arthroplasty. 2008;23(7):984–991. Crossref, Medline, ISI, Google Scholar
    • 2. Shahi A, Tan TL, Chen AF, Maltenfort MG, Parvizi J. In-Hospital mortality in patients with periprosthetic joint infection. J Arthroplasty. 2017;32(3):948–952. Crossref, Medline, ISI, Google Scholar
    • 3. Zmistowski B, Karam JA, Durinka JB, Casper DS, Parvizi J. Periprosthetic joint infection increases the risk of one-year mortality. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2013;95-A(24):2177–2184. Crossref, Google Scholar
    • 4. Bozic KJ, Kurtz SM, Lau E, et al. The epidemiology of revision total knee arthroplasty in the United States. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2010;468(1):45–51. Crossref, Medline, ISI, Google Scholar
    • 5. Vanhegan IS, Morgan-Jones R, Barrett DS, Haddad FS. Developing a strategy to treat established infection in total knee replacement: a review of the latest evidence and clinical practice. J Bone Joint Surg Br. 2012;94-B(7):875–881. Link, ISI, Google Scholar
    • 6. Klemt C, Tirumala V, Smith EJ, Padmanabha A, Kwon Y-M. Development of a preoperative risk calculator for reinfection following revision surgery for periprosthetic joint infection. J Arthroplasty. 2020. Crossref, ISI, Google Scholar
    • 7. Bozic KJ, Kurtz SM, Lau E, Ong K, Vail DTP, Berry DJ. The epidemiology of revision total hip arthroplasty in the United States. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2009;91-A(1):128–133. Crossref, Google Scholar
    • 8. Izakovicova P, Borens O, Trampuz A. Periprosthetic joint infection: current concepts and outlook. EFORT Open Rev. 2019;4(7):482–494. Link, ISI, Google Scholar
    • 9. Parvizi J, Zmistowski B, Berbari EF, et al. New definition for periprosthetic joint infection: from the Workgroup of the musculoskeletal infection Society. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2011;469(11):2992–2994. Crossref, Medline, ISI, Google Scholar
    • 10. Parvizi J, Tan TL, Goswami K, et al. The 2018 definition of periprosthetic hip and knee infection: an evidence-based and validated criteria. J Arthroplasty. 2018;33(5):1309–1314. Crossref, Medline, ISI, Google Scholar
    • 11. Berbari EF, Marculescu C, Sia I, et al. Culture-Negative prosthetic joint infection. Clin Infect Dis. 2007;45(9):1113–1119. Crossref, Medline, ISI, Google Scholar
    • 12. Malekzadeh D, Osmon DR, Lahr BD, Hanssen AD, Berbari EF. Prior use of antimicrobial therapy is a risk factor for culture-negative prosthetic joint infection. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2010;468(8):2039–2045. Crossref, Medline, ISI, Google Scholar
    • 13. Aggarwal VK, Bakhshi H, Ecker NU, Parvizi J, Gehrke T, Kendoff D. Organism profile in periprosthetic joint infection: pathogens differ at two arthroplasty infection referral centers in Europe and in the United States. J Knee Surg. 2014;27(5):399–406. Crossref, Medline, ISI, Google Scholar
    • 14. Li H, Ni M, Li X, Zhang Q, Li X, Chen J. Two-Stage revisions for culture-negative infected total knee arthroplasties: a five-year outcome in comparison with one-stage and two-stage revisions for culture-positive cases. J Orthop Sci. 2017;22(2):306–312. Crossref, Medline, ISI, Google Scholar
    • 15. Choi H-R, Kwon Y-M, Freiberg AA, Nelson SB, Malchau H. Periprosthetic joint infection with negative culture results: clinical characteristics and treatment outcome. J Arthroplasty. 2013;28(6):899–903. Crossref, Medline, ISI, Google Scholar
    • 16. Ibrahim MS, Twaij H, Haddad FS. Two-stage revision for the culture-negative infected total hip arthroplasty : A comparative study. Bone Joint J. 2018;100-B(1 Supple A):3–8. Link, Google Scholar
    • 17. Maier SP, Klemt C, Tirumala V, Oganesyan R, van den Kieboom J, Kwon Y-M. Elevated ESR/CRP ratio is associated with reinfection after debridement, antibiotics, and implant retention in chronic periprosthetic joint infections. J Arthroplasty. 2020. Crossref, Medline, ISI, Google Scholar
    • 18. Tirumala V, Klemt C, Xiong L, Chen W, van den Kieboom J, Kwon Y-M. Diagnostic utility of platelet Count/Lymphocyte count ratio and platelet Count/Mean platelet volume ratio in periprosthetic joint infection following total knee arthroplasty. J Arthroplasty. 2020. Crossref, Google Scholar
    • 19. Kang J-S, Shin E-H, Roh T-H, Na Y, Moon KH, Park J-H. Long-Term clinical outcome of two-stage revision surgery for infected hip arthroplasty using cement spacer: culture negative versus culture positive. J Orthop Surg. 2018;26(1):230949901775409. Crossref, Google Scholar
    • 20. Yang J, Parvizi J, Hansen EN, et al. 2020 Mark Coventry Award: Microorganism-directed oral antibiotics reduce the rate of failure due to further infection after two-stage revision hip or knee arthroplasty for chronic infection: a multicentre randomized controlled trial at a minimum of two years. Bone Joint J. 2020;102-B(6_Supple_A):3–9. Link, Google Scholar
    • 21. Berend KR, Lombardi AV, Morris MJ, Bergeson AG, Adams JB, Sneller MA. Two-Stage treatment of hip periprosthetic joint infection is associated with a high rate of infection control but high mortality. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2013;471(2):510–518. Crossref, Medline, ISI, Google Scholar
    • 22. Ibrahim MS, Raja S, Khan MA, Haddad FS. A multidisciplinary team approach to two-stage revision for the infected hip replacement: a minimum five-year follow-up study. Bone Joint J. 2014;96-B(10):1312–1318. Link, ISI, Google Scholar
    • 23. Gomez MM, Tan TL, Manrique J, Deirmengian GK, Parvizi J. The fate of spacers in the treatment of periprosthetic joint infection. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2015;97-A(18):1495–1502. Crossref, ISI, Google Scholar
    • 24. Pangaud C, Ollivier M, Argenson J-N. Outcome of single-stage versus two-stage exchange for revision knee arthroplasty for chronic periprosthetic infection. EFORT Open Reviews. 2019;4(8):495–502. Link, ISI, Google Scholar
    • 25. Kunutsor SK, Whitehouse MR, Blom AW. One-and two-stage surgical revision of peri-prosthetic joint infection of the hip: a pooled individual participant data analysis of 44 cohort studies the global infection orthopaedic management collaboration. Euro J Epidemiol. 2018;33(10):933–946. Crossref, Medline, ISI, Google Scholar
    • 26. Oussedik SIS, Dodd MB, Haddad FS. Outcomes of revision total hip replacement for infection after grading according to a standard protocol. J Bone Joint Surg Br. 2010;92-B(9):1222–1226. Link, ISI, Google Scholar
    • 27. Gulhane S, Vanhegan IS, Haddad FS. Single stage revision: regaining momentum. J Bone Joint Surg Br. 2012;94(11 Suppl A):120–122. Link, Google Scholar
    • 28. Kalore NV, Gioe TJ, Singh JA. Diagnosis and management of infected total knee arthroplasty. Open Orthop J. 2011;5(1):86–91. Crossref, Medline, Google Scholar
    • 29. Lange J, Troelsen A, Solgaard S, Otte KS, Jensen NK, Søballe K, CORIHA Research Group Cementless one-stage revision in chronic periprosthetic hip joint infection: ninety-one percent infection free survival in 56 patients at minimum 2-year follow-up. J Arthroplasty. 2018;33(4):1160–1165. Crossref, Medline, ISI, Google Scholar
    • 30. Ilchmann T, Zimmerli W, Ochsner PE, et al. One-stage revision of infected hip arthroplasty: outcome of 39 consecutive hips. Int Orthop. 2016;40(5):913–918. Crossref, Medline, ISI, Google Scholar
    • 31. Thakrar RR, Horriat S, Kayani B, Haddad FS. Indications for a single-stage exchange arthroplasty for chronic prosthetic joint infection: a systematic review. Bone Joint J. 2019;101-B(1_Supple_A):19–24. Link, ISI, Google Scholar
    • 32. Ji B, Wahafu T, Li G, et al. Single-Stage treatment of chronically infected total hip arthroplasty with cementless reconstruction. Bone Joint J. 2019;101-B(4):396–402. Link, ISI, Google Scholar
    • 33. Huang R, Hu C-C, Adeli B, Mortazavi J, Parvizi J. Culture-negative periprosthetic joint infection does not preclude infection control. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2012;470(10):2717–2723. Crossref, Medline, ISI, Google Scholar
    • 34. Parvizi J, Gehrke T, Chen AF. Proceedings of the International consensus on periprosthetic joint infection. Bone Joint J. 2013;95-B(11):1450–1452. Link, ISI, Google Scholar
    • 35. Fehring KA, Abdel MP, Ollivier M, Mabry TM, Hanssen AD. Repeat two-stage exchange arthroplasty for periprosthetic knee infection is dependent on host grade. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2017;99-A(1):19–24. Crossref, ISI, Google Scholar
    • 36. Jenny J-Y, Barbe B, Gaudias J, Boeri C, Argenson J-N. High infection control rate and function after routine one-stage exchange for chronically infected TKA. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2013;471(1):238–243. Crossref, Medline, ISI, Google Scholar
    • 37. Saklad M. Grading of patients for surgical procedures. Anesthesiology. 1941;2(3):281–284. Crossref, Google Scholar
    • 38. Trampuz A, Piper KE, Jacobson MJ, et al. Sonication of removed hip and knee prostheses for diagnosis of infection. N Engl J Med. 2007;357(7):654–663. Crossref, Medline, ISI, Google Scholar
    • 39. Tan TL, Kheir MM, Shohat N, et al. Culture-Negative Periprosthetic Joint Infection: An Update on What to Expect. JB JS Open Access. 2018;3(3):e0060. Medline, Google Scholar
    • 40. Nosrati M, Dey D, Mehrani A, et al. Functionally critical residues in the aminoglycoside resistance-associated methyltransferase rMTC play distinct roles in 30S substrate recognition. J Biol Chem. 2019;294(46):17642–17653. Crossref, Medline, ISI, Google Scholar
    • 41. Ji B, Li G, Zhang X, Wang Y, Mu W, Cao L. Effective treatment of single-stage revision using intra-articular antibiotic infusion for culture-negative prosthetic joint infection. Bone Joint J. 2020;102-B(3):336–344. Link, Google Scholar
    • 42. Klemt C, Tirumala V, Oganesyan R, Xiong L, van den Kieboom J, Kwon Y-M. Single-stage revision of the infected total knee arthroplasty is associated with improved functional outcomes: a propensity score-matched cohort study. J Arthroplasty. 2020. Google Scholar
    • 43. Rowan FE, Donaldson MJ, Pietrzak JR, Haddad FS. The role of one-stage exchange for prosthetic joint infection. Curr Rev Musculoskelet Med. 2018;11(3):370–379. Crossref, Medline, ISI, Google Scholar
    • 44. Haddad FS, SukeikM, Alazzawi S. Is single-stage revision according to a strict protocol effective in treatment of chronic knee arthroplasty infections? Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2015;473(1):8–14. Crossref, Medline, ISI, Google Scholar
    • 45. Jenny J-Y, Barbe B, Cazenave A, Roche O, Massin P, French Society for Hip and Knee Surgery (SFHG) Patient selection does not improve the success rate of infected TKA one stage exchange. Knee. 2016;23(6):1012–1015. Crossref, Medline, ISI, Google Scholar
    • 46. Bori G, Muñoz-Mahamud E, Cuñé J, Gallart X, Fuster D, Soriano A. One-stage revision arthroplasty using cementless stem for infected hip arthroplasties. J Arthroplasty. 2014;29(5):1076–1081. Crossref, Medline, ISI, Google Scholar
    • 47. Cochran AR, Ong KL, Lau E, Mont MA, Malkani AL. Risk of reinfection after treatment of infected total knee arthroplasty. J Arthroplasty. 2016;31(9 Suppl):156–161. Crossref, Medline, ISI, Google Scholar
    • 48. Cha MS, Cho SH, Kim DH, et al. Two-stage total knee arthroplasty for prosthetic joint infection. Knee Surg Relat Res. 2015;27(2):82–89. Crossref, Medline, Google Scholar

    Submit a Letter to the Editor about this article