Douglas R. Osmon

Diagnosis and Management of Prosthetic Joint Infection: Clinical Practice Guidelines by the Infectious Diseases Society of America

These guidelines are intended for use by infectious disease specialists, orthopedists, and other healthcare professionals who care for patients with prosthetic joint infection (PJI). They include evidence-based and opinion-based recommendations for the diagnosis and management of patients with PJI treated with debridement and retention of the prosthesis, resection arthroplasty with or without subsequent staged reimplantation, 1-stage reimplantation, and amputation.

Risk Factors for Prosthetic Joint Infection: Case-Control Study

We conducted a matched case-control study to determine risk factors for the development of prosthetic joint infection. Cases were patients with prosthetic hip or knee joint infection. Controls were patients who underwent total hip or knee arthroplasty and did not develop prosthetic joint infection. A multiple logistic regression model indicated that risk factors for prosthetic joint infection were the development of a surgical site infection not involving the prosthesis (odds ratio [OR], 35.9; 95% confidence interval [CI], 8.3-154.6), a National Nosocomial Infections Surveillance (NNIS) System surgical patient risk index score of 1 (OR, 1.7; 95% CI, 1.2-2.3) or 2 (OR, 3.9; 95% CI, 2.0-7.5), the presence of a malignancy (OR, 3.1; 95% CI, 1.3-7.2), and a history of joint arthroplasty (OR, 2.0; 95% CI, 1.4-3.0). Our findings suggest that a surgical site infection not involving the joint prosthesis, an NNIS System surgical patient risk index score of 1 or 2, the presence of a malignancy, and a history of a joint arthroplasty are associated with an increased risk of prosthetic joint infection.

Outcome of Prosthetic Joint Infections Treated with Debridement and Retention of Components

BACKGROUND Debridement and retention of the prosthesis represents an attractive surgical modality for treatment of prosthetic joint infection, but risk factors for treatment failure require clarification. METHODS We conducted a retrospective cohort analysis of all patients with a prosthetic joint infection who were treated with debridement and retention of the prosthesis at the Mayo Clinic (Rochester, Minnesota) between 1995 and 1999. RESULTS Debridement and retention of the prosthesis was the initial treatment modality for 99 episodes of prosthetic joint infection that occurred in 91 patients who presented to the Mayo Clinic during 1995-1999. A total of 32% and 23% of all episodes were due to Staphylococcus aureus and coagulase-negative staphylococci, respectively. The median duration of intravenous antimicrobial therapy was 28 days (range, 1-90 days). Oral antimicrobial suppression was used in 89% of the episodes, for a median duration of 541 days (range, 5-2673 days). Treatment failure occurred in 53 episodes during a median follow-up period of 700 days (range, 1-2779 days). The 2-year survival rate free of treatment failure was 60% (95% confidence interval [CI], 50%-71%). Variables associated with an increased risk of treatment failure in multivariable analysis included the presence of a sinus tract (hazard ratio, 2.84; 95% CI, 1.48-5.44; P = .002) and a duration of symptoms prior to debridement of > or = 8 days (hazard ratio, 1.77; 95% CI, 1.02-3.07; P = .04). CONCLUSIONS Debridement and retention of the prosthesis is a common surgical modality at our institution to treat prosthetic joint infection. Risk factors independently associated with treatment failure include the presence of a sinus tract and duration of symptoms prior to debridement of > or = 8 days.

Executive Summary: Diagnosis and Management of Prosthetic Joint Infection: Clinical Practice Guidelines by the Infectious Diseases Society of America

These guidelines are intended for use by infectious disease specialists, orthopedists, and other healthcare professionals who care for patients with prosthetic joint infection (PJI). They include evidence-based and opinion-based recommendations for the diagnosis and management of patients with PJI treated with debridement and retention of the prosthesis, resection arthroplasty with or without subsequent staged reimplantation, 1-stage reimplantation, and amputation.

Treatment of Infection with Débridement and Retention of the Components following Hip Arthroplasty

Forty-two patients (forty-two hips) who had an infection following a hip arthroplasty were managed with open débridement, retention of the prosthetic components, and antibiotic therapy. After a mean duration of follow-up of 6.3 years (range, 0.14 to twenty-two years), only six patients (14 per cent)—four of nineteen who had had an early postoperative infection and two of four who had had an acute hematogenous infection—had been managed successfully. Of the remaining thirty-six patients, three (7 per cent of the entire group) were being managed with chronic suppression with oral administration of antibiotics and thirty-three (79 per cent of the entire group) had had a failure of treatment. All nineteen patients who had a late chronic infection were deemed to have had a failure of treatment. Débridement had been performed at a mean of six days (range, two to fourteen days) after the onset of symptoms in the patients who had been managed successfully and at a mean of twenty-three days (range, three to ninety-three days) in those for whom treatment had failed. Débridement with retention of the prosthesis is a potentially successful treatment for early postoperative infection or acute hematogenous infection, provided that it is performed in the first two weeks after the onset of symptoms and that the prosthesis previously had been functioning well. In our experience, this procedure has not been successful when it has been performed more than two weeks after the onset of symptoms. Retention of the prosthesis should not be attempted in patients who have a chronic infection at the site of a hip arthroplasty as this approach universally fails.

Culture-Negative Prosthetic Joint Infection

BACKGROUND Culture-negative (CN) prosthetic joint infection (PJI) has not been well studied. We performed a retrospective cohort study to define the demographic characteristics and determine the outcome of patients with CN PJI. METHODS All cases of CN total hip arthroplasty and total knee arthroplasty infections (using a strict case definition) treated at our institution from January 1990 through December 1999 were analyzed. Kaplan-Meier survival methods were used to determine the cumulative probability of success. RESULTS Of 897 episodes of PJI during the study period, 60 (7%) occurred in patients for whom this was the initial episode of CN PJI. The median age of the cohort was 69 years (range, 36-87 years). Patients had received a prior course of antimicrobial therapy in 32 (53%) of 60 episodes. Of the 60 episodes, 34 (57%), 12 (20%), and 8 (13%) were treated with 2-stage exchange, debridement and retention, and permanent resection arthroplasty, respectively. The median duration of parenteral antimicrobial therapy was 28 days (range, 0-88 days). Forty-nine (82%) of 60 episodes were treated with a cephalosporin. The 5-year estimate of survival free of treatment failure was 94% (95% confidence interval, 85%-100%) for patients treated with 2-stage exchange and 71% (95% confidence interval, 44%-100%) for patients treated with debridement and retention. CONCLUSIONS CN PJI occurs infrequently at our institution. Prior use of antimicrobial therapy is common among patients with CN PJI. CN PJI treated at our institution is associated with a rate of favorable outcome that is comparable to that associated with PJI due to known bacterial pathogens.

Inflammatory blood laboratory levels as markers of prosthetic joint infection: A systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND The preoperative diagnosis of prosthetic joint infection in patients with a total hip or knee arthroplasty may rely in part on the use of systemic inflammation markers. These markers have unclear accuracy. The objective of this review was to summarize the evidence on the accuracy of the peripheral white blood-cell count, the erythrocyte sedimentation rate, serum C-reactive protein levels, and serum interleukin-6 levels for the diagnosis of prosthetic joint infection. METHODS We searched electronic databases (MEDLINE, EMBASE, Cochrane Library, Web of Science, and Scopus) from 1950 through 2009. Eligible studies evaluated the accuracy of white blood-cell count, erythrocyte sedimentation rate, serum C-reactive protein level, and serum interleukin-6 level for the intraoperative diagnosis of prosthetic joint infection at the time of revision arthroplasty. Two reviewers working independently extracted study characteristics and data to estimate the diagnostic odds ratio and 95% confidence interval for each result. RESULTS We included thirty eligible studies that included 3909 revision total hip or knee arthroplasties. The prevalence of prosthetic joint infection was 32.5% (1270 of 3909). The accuracy of assessed inflammation markers, represented with a diagnostic odds ratio, was 314.7 (95% confidence interval, 113.0 to 876.8) for interleukin-6 (three studies), 13.1 (95% confidence interval, 7.9 to 21.7) for C-reactive protein level (twenty-three studies), 7.2 (95% confidence interval, 4.7 to 10.9) for erythrocyte sedimentation rate (twenty-five studies), and 4.4 (95% confidence interval, 2.9 to 6.6) for white blood-cell count (fifteen studies). CONCLUSIONS The diagnostic accuracy for prosthetic joint infection was best for interleukin-6, followed by C-reactive protein level, erythrocyte sedimentation rate, and white blood-cell count. Given the limited numbers of studies assessing interleukin-6 levels, further investigations assessing the accuracy of interleukin-6 for the diagnosis of prosthetic joint infection are warranted.

Incidence and Risk Factors of Prosthetic Joint Infection After Total Hip or Knee Replacement in Patients With Rheumatoid Arthritis

OBJECTIVE Prosthetic joint infection is one of the most dreaded complications after total joint arthroplasty, a common procedure in patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA). We conducted a study to evaluate potential risk factors of prosthetic joint infection and to clarify if RA is an independent predictor of this complication. METHODS This study included all patients with RA who underwent total hip or knee replacement at the Mayo Clinic Rochester between January 1996 and June 2004. The association of potential risk factors with prosthetic joint infection was examined using Cox models. A matched cohort of patients with osteoarthritis (OA) was assembled to determine whether RA is an independent risk factor for prosthetic joint infection. RESULTS We identified 462 patients with RA who underwent a total of 657 hip or knee replacements. Overall, 23 (3.7%) joint arthroplasties were complicated by an infection during a mean +/- SD followup of 4.3 +/- 2.4 years. Revision arthroplasty (hazard ratio [HR] 2.99, 95% confidence interval [95% CI] 1.02-8.75) and a previous prosthetic joint infection of the replaced joint (HR 5.49, 95% CI 1.87-16.14) were significant predictors of postoperative prosthetic joint infection. Comparison of RA patients with a matched cohort of OA patients identified an increased risk of prosthetic joint infections (HR 4.08, 95% CI 1.35-12.33) in patients with RA. CONCLUSION Patients with RA who undergo total hip or knee replacement are at increased risk of prosthetic joint infection, which is further increased in the setting of revision arthroplasty and a previous prosthetic joint infection. These findings highlight the importance of perioperative prophylactic measures and vigilance during the postoperative period.

Systemic safety of high-dose antibiotic-loaded cement spacers after resection of an infected total knee arthroplasty

The purpose of this study was to assess the systemic safety and potential adverse effects of using a high-dose antibiotic-impregnated cement spacer after resection arthroplasty of an infected total knee replacement. Between October 2000 and December 2002, 36 knees (34 patients) had a resection arthroplasty of an infected total knee prosthesis with placement of a high-dose antibiotic impregnated cement spacer. There were 24 men and 10 women with a mean age of 66.5 years (range, 48–84 years). All spacers placed contained an average of 3.4 batches of cement with an average total dose of 10.5 g of vancomycin (range, 3–16 g) and 12.5 g of gentamicin (range, 3.6–19.2 g). All patients were followed up postoperatively until reimplantation for evidence of renal failure. The preoperative creatinine ranged from 0.7 to 1.8 mg/dL. All patients were concomitantly treated with 6 weeks of intravenous organism-specific antibiotics. One patient with normal preoperative renal function (Cr 0.7 mg/dL) had a perioperative 1-day transient rise in serum creatinine (1.7 mg/dL) postoperatively that subsequently normalized. No patients showed any clinical evidence of acute renal insufficiency, failure, or other systemic side effects of the antibiotics. Treatment of patients with an infected total knee arthroplasty with high-dose vancomycin and gentamicin antibiotic spacers seems to be clinically safe.

Lack of Effect of Lactobacillus GG on Antibiotic-Associated Diarrhea: A Randomized, Placebo-Controlled Trial

OBJECTIVES To assess the efficacy of Lactobacillus GG in preventing antibiotic-associated diarrhea (AAD) in adults and, secondarily, to assess the effect of coadministered Lactobacillus GG on the number of tests performed to determine the cause of diarrhea. PATIENTS AND METHODS In this prospective, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial conducted from July 1998 to October 1999, 302 hospitalized patients receiving antibiotics were randomized to receive Lactobacillus GG, 20 x 10(9) CFU/d, or placebo for 14 days. Subjects recorded the number of stools and their consistency daily for 21 days. The primary outcome was the proportion of patients who developed diarrhea in the first 21 days after enrollment. Weekly telephone follow-up was also performed. Results were analyzed in an intention-to-treat fashion. RESULTS Diarrhea developed in 39 (29.3%) of 133 patients randomized to receive Lactobacillus GG and in 40 (29.9%) of 134 patients randomized to receive placebo (P=.93). No additional difference in the rate of occurrence of diarrhea was found between treatment and placebo patients in a subgroup analysis of those treated with beta-lactam vs non-beta-lactam antibiotics. Too few patients had stool cultures, additional laboratory tests for diarrhea, or a positive diagnosis of Clostridium difficile infection to assess between-group differences. CONCLUSION Lactobacillus GG in a dose of 20 x 10(9) CFU/d did not reduce the rate of occurrence of diarrhea in this sample of 267 adult patients taking antibiotics initially administered in the hospital setting.