11
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Intraoperative evaluation of polymorphonuclear leukocyte during second-stage revision surgery promote overdiagnosis of persistent periprosthetic joint infection

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Objective

          The aim of this study was to evaluate whether intraoperative histopathological examination could predict the risk of relapse of infection in periprosthetic joint infections (PJI).

          Methods

          The study included 25 patients (14 women and 11 men, with a mean age of 67.0 years (range, 37–83 years)), who had two-staged revision surgery for a PJI. Following prosthetic removal in the first stage, all patient underwent an intraoperative histopathological examination during the second stage. The patients were divided into PMNs-positive group (≥five PMNs per high-powered field) or -negative group (<five PMNs). A relapse was defined as the occurrence of PJI. Median follow-up was 51 months (range, 32–80 months) following second-stage revision surgery.

          Results

          Intraoperative histopathological revealed that 8.0% of cases were PMNs-positive. Postoperative histopathological examination revealed that 28.0% of cases were PMNs-positive. 28.0% of cases showed discrepancy between the PMNs-positivity. Intraclass correlation coefficient indicates poor reproducibility. Infection relapse after revision surgery occurred in two cases (8.0%); both relapse cases were from the PMNs-negative group. There was no statistical relationship between the presence of PMNs in periprosthetic tissue by intraoperative or postoperative histopathological examination and relapse of infection.

          Conclusions

          Our findings showed that intraoperative histopathological examination could not predict the relapse of infection. Intraoperative histopathological examination promotes overdiagnosis of the requirement for re-implantation of antibiotic-impregnated cement and prolonged treatment periods.

          Level of evidence

          Level III, diagnostic study

          Related collections

          Most cited references 14

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          Utility of intraoperative frozen section histopathology in the diagnosis of periprosthetic joint infection: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

          The accuracy of intraoperative periprosthetic frozen section histologic evaluation in predicting a diagnosis of periprosthetic joint infection prior to microbiologic culture results is unknown. We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis of all longitudinal studies that compared frozen section histologic results with simultaneously obtained microbiologic culture at the time of revision total hip or total knee arthroplasty. The data sources were Ovid MEDLINE, Ovid EMBASE, the Cochrane Library, ISI Web of Science, and SCOPUS, from the inception of each database to January 2010. Twenty-six studies involving 3269 patients undergoing revision hip or knee arthroplasty met the inclusion criteria. A culture-positive periprosthetic joint infection was confirmed in 796 (24.3%) of the patients. Frozen section results, using any of the diagnostic criteria chosen by the investigating pathologist, had a pooled diagnostic odds ratio of 54.7 (95% confidence interval [CI], 31.2 to 95.7), a likelihood ratio of a positive test of 12.0 (95% CI, 8.4 to 17.2), and a likelihood ratio of a negative test of 0.23 (95% CI, 0.15 to 0.35) for the diagnosis of periprosthetic joint infection. Fifteen studies utilizing a threshold of five polymorphonuclear leukocytes (PMNs) per high-power field to define a positive frozen section had a diagnostic odds ratio of 52.6 (95% CI, 23.7 to 116.2), and six studies utilizing a diagnostic threshold of ten PMNs per high-power field had a diagnostic odds ratio of 69.8 (95% CI, 33.6 to 145.0). There was no significant difference between the diagnostic odds ratio or likelihood ratios associated with these thresholds. The moderate to high heterogeneity among the included studies was unexplained by variability in the study design, diagnostic criteria for acute inflammation, reference standard for periprosthetic joint infection, or prevalence of infection. This heterogeneity could be due to differences in the inclusion and exclusion criteria, tissue sampling error, experience or technique of the pathologists, number of microscopic fields visualized, and field diameter examined. Intraoperative frozen sections of periprosthetic tissues performed well in predicting a diagnosis of culture-positive periprosthetic joint infection but had moderate accuracy in ruling out this diagnosis. Frozen section histopathology should therefore be considered a valuable part of the diagnostic work-up for patients undergoing revision arthroplasty, especially when the potential for infection remains after a thorough preoperative evaluation. The optimum diagnostic threshold (number of PMNs per high-power field) required to distinguish periprosthetic joint infection from aseptic failure could not be discerned from the included studies. There was no significant difference between the diagnostic accuracy of frozen section histopathology utilizing the most common thresholds of five or ten PMNs per high-power field.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            Two-stage revision hip arthroplasty for infection: comparison between the interim use of antibiotic-loaded cement beads and a spacer prosthesis.

            A two-stage revision is a well-accepted method for the treatment of a deep infection of a hip with a joint implant. In the present study, the results associated with the interim use of antibiotic-loaded cement beads were compared with those associated with the interim use of an antibiotic-loaded cement prosthesis. One hundred and twenty-eight consecutive patients who were managed with a two-stage revision hip arthroplasty for the treatment of an infection were followed clinically and radiographically for an average of 4.9 years. Cement beads were implanted following resection arthroplasty in the first seventy hips, and a custom cement prosthesis was implanted in the subsequent fifty-eight hips. There was no evidence of recurrent infection in 122 patients (95.3%); the infection-free rates in both groups were similar. The use of a spacer prosthesis was associated with a higher hip score, a shorter hospital stay, and better walking capacity in the interim period; a decreased operative time, less blood loss, and a lower transfusion requirement at the time of reimplantation; and fewer postoperative dislocations. The present study supports the safety and efficacy of the routine use of an antibiotic-loaded cement prosthesis in the interim between the stages of a two-stage revision procedure for the treatment of an infection at the site of a hip arthroplasty.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: found
              Is Open Access

              Re-Infection Outcomes following One- and Two-Stage Surgical Revision of Infected Hip Prosthesis: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

              Background The two-stage revision strategy has been claimed as being the “gold standard” for treating prosthetic joint infection. The one-stage revision strategy remains an attractive alternative option; however, its effectiveness in comparison to the two-stage strategy remains uncertain. Objective To compare the effectiveness of one- and two-stage revision strategies in treating prosthetic hip infection, using re-infection as an outcome. Design Systematic review and meta-analysis. Data Sources MEDLINE, EMBASE, Web of Science, Cochrane Library, manual search of bibliographies to March 2015, and email contact with investigators. Study Selection Cohort studies (prospective or retrospective) conducted in generally unselected patients with prosthetic hip infection treated exclusively by one- or two-stage revision and with re-infection outcomes reported within two years of revision. No clinical trials were identified. Review Methods Data were extracted by two independent investigators and a consensus was reached with involvement of a third. Rates of re-infection from 38 one-stage studies (2,536 participants) and 60 two-stage studies (3,288 participants) were aggregated using random-effect models after arcsine transformation, and were grouped by study and population level characteristics. Results In one-stage studies, the rate (95% confidence intervals) of re-infection was 8.2% (6.0–10.8). The corresponding re-infection rate after two-stage revision was 7.9% (6.2–9.7). Re-infection rates remained generally similar when grouped by several study and population level characteristics. There was no strong evidence of publication bias among contributing studies. Conclusion Evidence from aggregate published data suggest similar re-infection rates after one- or two-stage revision among unselected patients. More detailed analyses under a broader range of circumstances and exploration of other sources of heterogeneity will require collaborative pooling of individual participant data. Systematic Review Registration PROSPERO 2015: CRD42015016559
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Contributors
                Journal
                Acta Orthop Traumatol Turc
                Acta Orthop Traumatol Turc
                Acta Orthopaedica et Traumatologica Turcica
                Turkish Association of Orthopaedics and Traumatology
                1017-995X
                2589-1294
                02 March 2018
                May 2018
                02 March 2018
                : 52
                : 3
                : 191-195
                Affiliations
                [a ]Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Graduate School of Medical and Dental Sciences Kagoshima University, Kagoshima, Japan
                [b ]The Near-Future Locomotor Organ Medicine Creation Course (Kusunoki Kai), Graduate School of Medical and Dental Sciences, Kagoshima University, Kagoshima, Japan
                [c ]Department of Pathology, Graduate School of Medical and Dental Sciences, Kagoshima University, Kagoshima, Japan
                [d ]Department of Pathology, National Center for Child Health and Development, Tokyo, Japan
                [e ]Department of Microbiology, Graduate School of Medical and Dental Sciences, Kagoshima University, Kagoshima, Japan
                Author notes
                []Corresponding author. The Near-Future Locomotor Organ Medicine Creation Course (Kusunoki Kai), Graduate School of Medical and Dental Sciences, Kagoshima University, 8-35-1 Sakuragaoka, Kagoshima 890-8520, Japan. Tel.: +81 99 275 5381, Fax: +81 99 265 4699. setoro@ 123456m2.kufm.kagoshima-u.ac.jp
                [1]

                These two authors contributed equally to this study.

                Article
                S1017-995X(17)30397-8
                10.1016/j.aott.2018.02.002
                6136319
                29503078
                © 2018 Turkish Association of Orthopaedics and Traumatology. Publishing services by Elsevier B.V.

                This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/).

                Categories
                Research Paper

                Comments

                Comment on this article