20
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      How good are surgeons at disclosing periprosthetic joint infection at the time of revision, based on pre- and intra-operative assessment? A study on 16,922 primary total hip arthroplasties reported to the Norwegian Arthroplasty Register

      research-article

      Read this article at

      ScienceOpenPublisherPMC
          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

          Background and purpose

          Revision due to infection, as reported to the Norwegian Arthroplasty Register (NAR), is a surrogate endpoint to periprosthetic joint infection (PJI). We aimed to find the accuracy of the reported causes of revision after primary total hip arthroplasty (THA) compared with PJI to see how good surgeons were at disclosing infection, based on pre- and intraoperative assessment.

          Patients and methods

          We investigated the reasons for revision potentially caused by PJI following primary THA: infection, aseptic loosening, prolonged wound drainage, and pain only, reported to the NAR from surgeons in the region of Western Norway during the period 2010–2020. The electronic patient charts were investigated for information on clinical assessment, treatment, biochemistry, and microbiological findings. PJI was defined in accordance with the Musculoskeletal Infection Society (MSIS) definition. Sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy were calculated.

          Results

          363 revisions in the NAR were eligible for analyses. Causes of revision were (reported/validated): infection (153/177), aseptic loosening (139/133), prolonged wound drainage (37/13), and pain only (34/40). The sensitivity for reported revision due to infection compared with PJI was 80%, specificity was 94%, and accuracy—the surgeons’ ability to disclose PJI or non-septic revision at time of revision—was 87%. The accuracy for the specific revision causes was highest for revision due to aseptic loosening (95%) and pain only (95%), and lowest for revision due to prolonged wound drainage (86%).

          Conclusion

          The accuracy of surgeon-reported revisions due to infection as representing PJI was 87% in the NAR. Our study shows the importance of systematic correction of the reported cause of revision in arthroplasty registers, after results from adequately taken bacterial samples.

          Related collections

          Most cited references24

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

          The 2018 Definition of Periprosthetic Hip and Knee Infection: An Evidence-Based and Validated Criteria

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

            Sonication of removed hip and knee prostheses for diagnosis of infection.

            Culturing of samples of periprosthetic tissue is the standard method used for the microbiologic diagnosis of prosthetic-joint infection, but this method is neither sensitive nor specific. In prosthetic-joint infection, microorganisms are typically present in a biofilm on the surface of the prosthesis. We hypothesized that culturing of samples obtained from the prosthesis would improve the microbiologic diagnosis of prosthetic-joint infection. We performed a prospective trial comparing culture of samples obtained by sonication of explanted hip and knee prostheses to dislodge adherent bacteria from the prosthesis with conventional culture of periprosthetic tissue for the microbiologic diagnosis of prosthetic-joint infection among patients undergoing hip or knee revision or resection arthroplasty. We studied 331 patients with total knee prostheses (207 patients) or hip prostheses (124 patients); 252 patients had aseptic failure, and 79 had prosthetic-joint infection. With the use of standardized nonmicrobiologic criteria to define prosthetic-joint infection, the sensitivities of periprosthetic-tissue and sonicate-fluid cultures were 60.8% and 78.5% (P<0.001), respectively, and the specificities were 99.2% and 98.8%, respectively. Fourteen cases of prosthetic-joint infection were detected by sonicate-fluid culture but not by prosthetic-tissue culture. In patients receiving antimicrobial therapy within 14 days before surgery, the sensitivities of periprosthetic tissue and sonicate-fluid culture were 45.0% and 75.0% (P<0.001), respectively. In this study, culture of samples obtained by sonication of prostheses was more sensitive than conventional periprosthetic-tissue culture for the microbiologic diagnosis of prosthetic hip and knee infection, especially in patients who had received antimicrobial therapy within 14 days before surgery. Copyright 2007 Massachusetts Medical Society.
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: found
              Is Open Access

              The EBJIS definition of periprosthetic joint infection

              Aims The diagnosis of periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) can be difficult. All current diagnostic tests have problems with accuracy and interpretation of results. Many new tests have been proposed, but there is no consensus on the place of many of these in the diagnostic pathway. Previous attempts to develop a definition of PJI have not been universally accepted and there remains no reference standard definition. Methods This paper reports the outcome of a project developed by the European Bone and Joint Infection Society (EBJIS), and supported by the Musculoskeletal Infection Society (MSIS) and the European Society of Clinical Microbiology and Infectious Diseases (ESCMID) Study Group for Implant-Associated Infections (ESGIAI). It comprised a comprehensive review of the literature, open discussion with Society members and conference delegates, and an expert panel assessment of the results to produce the final guidance. Results This process evolved a three-level approach to the diagnostic continuum, resulting in a definition set and guidance, which has been fully endorsed by EBJIS, MSIS, and ESGIAI. Conclusion The definition presents a novel three-level approach to diagnosis, based on the most robust evidence, which will be useful to clinicians in daily practice. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2021;103-B(1):18–25.

                Author and article information

                Journal
                Acta Orthop
                Acta Orthop
                ActaO
                Acta Orthopaedica
                Medical Journals Sweden, on behalf of the Nordic Orthopedic Federation
                1745-3674
                1745-3682
                30 January 2024
                2024
                : 95
                : 67-72
                Affiliations
                [1 ]Department of Medicine, Stavanger University Hospital, Stavanger
                [2 ]The Norwegian Arthroplasty Register, Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Haukeland University Hospital, Bergen
                [3 ]Department of Medicine, Haukeland University Hospital, Bergen
                [4 ]Department of Clinical Science, University of Bergen, Bergen
                [5 ]Department of Clinical Medicine, University of Bergen, Bergen
                [6 ]VID Specialized University, Bergen, Norway
                Author notes
                Article
                ActaO-95-39914
                10.2340/17453674.2024.39914
                10826841
                38288989
                37af4bff-325e-4d63-a463-62249301ad5d
                © 2024 The Author(s)

                This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License ( https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/), allowing third parties to copy and redistribute the material in any medium or format and to remix, transform, and build upon the material for non-commercial purposes, provided proper attribution to the original work.

                History
                : 28 September 2023
                : 14 December 2023
                Categories
                Article

                Orthopedics
                Orthopedics

                Comments

                Comment on this article

                Related Documents Log