Skip to main content
Top
Published in: Journal of Orthopaedics and Traumatology 1/2024

Open Access 01-12-2024 | Joint Infection | Original article

Evaluation of time to reimplantation as a risk factor in two-stage revision with static spacers for periprosthetic knee joint infection

Authors: Jan Puetzler, Marc Hofschneider, Georg Gosheger, Christoph Theil, Martin Schulze, Jan Schwarze, Raphael Koch, Burkhard Moellenbeck

Published in: Journal of Orthopaedics and Traumatology | Issue 1/2024

Login to get access

Abstract

Introduction

We investigated the time to reimplantation (TTR) during two-stage revision using static spacers with regard to treatment success and function in patients with chronic periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) of the knee.

Methods

163 patients (median age 72 years, 72 women) who underwent two-stage exchange for chronic knee PJI between 2012 and 2020 were retrospectively analyzed (based on the 2011 Musculoskeletal Infection Society criteria). A cutoff TTR for increased risk of reinfection was identified using the maximally selected log-rank statistic. Infection control, aseptic revisions and overall survival were analyzed using Kaplan–Meier survival estimates. Adjustment for confounding factors—the Charlson Comorbidity Index (CCI) and C-reactive protein (CRP)—was done with a Cox proportional hazards model.

Results

When TTR exceeded 94 days, the adjusted hazard of reinfection was increased 2.8-fold (95% CI 1.4–5.7; p = 0.0036). The reinfection-free rate was 67% (95% CI 52-79%) after 2 years and 33% (95% CI 11–57%) after 5 years for a longer TTR compared to 89% (95% CI 81–94%) and 80% (95% CI 69–87%) at 2 and 5 years, respectively, for a shorter TTR. Adjusted overall survival and number of aseptic revisions did not differ between the longer TTR and shorter TTR groups. Maximum knee flexion was 90° (IQR 84–100) for a longer TTR and 95° (IQR 90–100) for a shorter TTR (p = 0.0431), with no difference between the groups in Oxford Knee Score. Baseline characteristics were similar (body mass index, age, previous surgeries, microorganisms) for the two groups, except that there was a higher CCI (median 4 vs. 3) and higher CRP (median 3.7 vs 2.6 mg/dl) in the longer TTR group.

Conclusion

A long TTR is sometimes unavoidable in clinical practice, but surgeons should be aware of a potentially higher risk of reinfection.
Level of evidence: III, retrospective comparative study.
Literature
1.
go back to reference Kamath AF et al (2015) Quantifying the burden of revision total joint arthroplasty for periprosthetic infection. J Arthroplasty 30(9):1492–1497CrossRefPubMed Kamath AF et al (2015) Quantifying the burden of revision total joint arthroplasty for periprosthetic infection. J Arthroplasty 30(9):1492–1497CrossRefPubMed
2.
go back to reference Kurtz SM et al (2018) Are we winning or losing the battle with periprosthetic joint infection: trends in periprosthetic joint infection and mortality risk for the Medicare population. J Arthroplasty 33(10):3238–3245 Kurtz SM et al (2018) Are we winning or losing the battle with periprosthetic joint infection: trends in periprosthetic joint infection and mortality risk for the Medicare population. J Arthroplasty 33(10):3238–3245
3.
go back to reference Theil C et al (2020) Gastrocnemius muscle flaps for soft tissue coverage in periprosthetic knee joint infection. J Arthroplasty 35(12):3730–3736CrossRefPubMed Theil C et al (2020) Gastrocnemius muscle flaps for soft tissue coverage in periprosthetic knee joint infection. J Arthroplasty 35(12):3730–3736CrossRefPubMed
5.
go back to reference Parvizi J et al (2007) Proximal femoral replacement in patients with non-neoplastic conditions. J Bone Joint Surg Am 89(5):1036–1043CrossRefPubMed Parvizi J et al (2007) Proximal femoral replacement in patients with non-neoplastic conditions. J Bone Joint Surg Am 89(5):1036–1043CrossRefPubMed
6.
go back to reference Theil C et al (2022) Revision TKA with a distal femoral replacement is at high risk of reinfection after two-stage exchange for periprosthetic knee joint infection. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 30(3):899–906CrossRefPubMed Theil C et al (2022) Revision TKA with a distal femoral replacement is at high risk of reinfection after two-stage exchange for periprosthetic knee joint infection. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 30(3):899–906CrossRefPubMed
7.
go back to reference Gomez MM et al (2015) The fate of spacers in the treatment of periprosthetic joint infection. J Bone Joint Surg Am 97(18):1495–1502CrossRefPubMed Gomez MM et al (2015) The fate of spacers in the treatment of periprosthetic joint infection. J Bone Joint Surg Am 97(18):1495–1502CrossRefPubMed
8.
go back to reference Petis SM et al (2017) Retained antibiotic spacers after total hip and knee arthroplasty resections: high complication rates. J Arthroplasty 32(11):3510–3518CrossRefPubMed Petis SM et al (2017) Retained antibiotic spacers after total hip and knee arthroplasty resections: high complication rates. J Arthroplasty 32(11):3510–3518CrossRefPubMed
10.
go back to reference Voleti PB, Baldwin KD, Lee GC (2013) Use of static or articulating spacers for infection following total knee arthroplasty: a systematic literature review. J Bone Joint Surg Am 95(17):1594–1599CrossRefPubMed Voleti PB, Baldwin KD, Lee GC (2013) Use of static or articulating spacers for infection following total knee arthroplasty: a systematic literature review. J Bone Joint Surg Am 95(17):1594–1599CrossRefPubMed
11.
go back to reference Nahhas CR et al (2020) A randomized trial of static and articulating spacers for the treatment of infection following total knee arthroplasty. J Bone Joint Surg Am 102(9):778–787CrossRefPubMed Nahhas CR et al (2020) A randomized trial of static and articulating spacers for the treatment of infection following total knee arthroplasty. J Bone Joint Surg Am 102(9):778–787CrossRefPubMed
12.
go back to reference Vasarhelyi E et al (2022) Static vs articulating spacers for two-stage revision total knee arthroplasty: minimum five-year review. Arthroplasty Today 13:171–175CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Vasarhelyi E et al (2022) Static vs articulating spacers for two-stage revision total knee arthroplasty: minimum five-year review. Arthroplasty Today 13:171–175CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
13.
go back to reference Ghanem E et al (2009) Staged revision for knee arthroplasty infection: what is the role of serologic tests before reimplantation? Clin Orthop Relat Res 467(7):1699–1705CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Ghanem E et al (2009) Staged revision for knee arthroplasty infection: what is the role of serologic tests before reimplantation? Clin Orthop Relat Res 467(7):1699–1705CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
14.
go back to reference Trampuz A, Zimmerli W (2008) Diagnosis and treatment of implant-associated septic arthritis and osteomyelitis. Curr Infect Dis Rep 10(5):394–403CrossRefPubMed Trampuz A, Zimmerli W (2008) Diagnosis and treatment of implant-associated septic arthritis and osteomyelitis. Curr Infect Dis Rep 10(5):394–403CrossRefPubMed
15.
go back to reference Warth LC, Hadley CJ, Grossman EL (2020) Two-stage treatment for total knee arthroplasty infection utilizing an articulating prefabricated antibiotic spacer. J Arthroplasty 35(3s):S57-s62 Warth LC, Hadley CJ, Grossman EL (2020) Two-stage treatment for total knee arthroplasty infection utilizing an articulating prefabricated antibiotic spacer. J Arthroplasty 35(3s):S57-s62
17.
go back to reference Winkler T et al (2019) Outcome of short versus long interval in two-stage exchange for periprosthetic joint infection: a prospective cohort study. Arch Orthop Trauma Surg 139(3):295–303CrossRefPubMed Winkler T et al (2019) Outcome of short versus long interval in two-stage exchange for periprosthetic joint infection: a prospective cohort study. Arch Orthop Trauma Surg 139(3):295–303CrossRefPubMed
18.
go back to reference Aali Rezaie A et al (2018) Time to reimplantation: waiting longer confers no added benefit. J Arthroplasty 33(6):1850–1854CrossRefPubMed Aali Rezaie A et al (2018) Time to reimplantation: waiting longer confers no added benefit. J Arthroplasty 33(6):1850–1854CrossRefPubMed
19.
go back to reference Sabry FY et al (2014) Preoperative prediction of failure following two-stage revision for knee prosthetic joint infections. J Arthroplasty 29(1):115–121CrossRefPubMed Sabry FY et al (2014) Preoperative prediction of failure following two-stage revision for knee prosthetic joint infections. J Arthroplasty 29(1):115–121CrossRefPubMed
20.
go back to reference Hart WJ, Jones RS (2006) Two-stage revision of infected total knee replacements using articulating cement spacers and short-term antibiotic therapy. J Bone Joint Surg Br 88(8):1011–1015CrossRefPubMed Hart WJ, Jones RS (2006) Two-stage revision of infected total knee replacements using articulating cement spacers and short-term antibiotic therapy. J Bone Joint Surg Br 88(8):1011–1015CrossRefPubMed
21.
go back to reference Babis GC et al (2015) Two-stage revision protocol in multidrug resistant periprosthetic infection following total hip arthroplasty using a long interval between stages. J Arthroplasty 30(9):1602–1606CrossRefPubMed Babis GC et al (2015) Two-stage revision protocol in multidrug resistant periprosthetic infection following total hip arthroplasty using a long interval between stages. J Arthroplasty 30(9):1602–1606CrossRefPubMed
22.
go back to reference Choi HR et al (2011) Can implant retention be recommended for treatment of infected TKA? Clin Orthop Relat Res 469(4):961–969CrossRefPubMed Choi HR et al (2011) Can implant retention be recommended for treatment of infected TKA? Clin Orthop Relat Res 469(4):961–969CrossRefPubMed
24.
go back to reference Fillingham YA et al (2019) Definition of successful infection management and guidelines for reporting of outcomes after surgical treatment of periprosthetic joint infection: from the Workgroup of the Musculoskeletal Infection Society (MSIS). J Bone Joint Surg Am 101(14):e69 Fillingham YA et al (2019) Definition of successful infection management and guidelines for reporting of outcomes after surgical treatment of periprosthetic joint infection: from the Workgroup of the Musculoskeletal Infection Society (MSIS). J Bone Joint Surg Am 101(14):e69
25.
go back to reference Charlson ME et al (1987) A new method of classifying prognostic comorbidity in longitudinal studies: development and validation. J Chronic Dis 40(5):373–383CrossRefPubMed Charlson ME et al (1987) A new method of classifying prognostic comorbidity in longitudinal studies: development and validation. J Chronic Dis 40(5):373–383CrossRefPubMed
26.
go back to reference Tande A et al (2017) Risk factors for early hip or knee prosthetic joint infection (PJI): analysis of a nationwide American insurance claims dataset. Open Forum Infect Dis 4(Suppl 1):S5CrossRefPubMedCentral Tande A et al (2017) Risk factors for early hip or knee prosthetic joint infection (PJI): analysis of a nationwide American insurance claims dataset. Open Forum Infect Dis 4(Suppl 1):S5CrossRefPubMedCentral
27.
go back to reference Kurtz SM et al (2010) Prosthetic joint infection risk after TKA in the Medicare population. Clin Orthop Relat Res 468(1):52–56CrossRefPubMed Kurtz SM et al (2010) Prosthetic joint infection risk after TKA in the Medicare population. Clin Orthop Relat Res 468(1):52–56CrossRefPubMed
28.
go back to reference Parvizi J et al (2011) New definition for periprosthetic joint infection: from the Workgroup of the Musculoskeletal Infection Society. Clin Orthop Relat Res 469(11):2992–2994 Parvizi J et al (2011) New definition for periprosthetic joint infection: from the Workgroup of the Musculoskeletal Infection Society. Clin Orthop Relat Res 469(11):2992–2994
29.
go back to reference Diaz-Ledezma C, Higuera CA, Parvizi J (2013) Success after treatment of periprosthetic joint infection: a Delphi-based international multidisciplinary consensus. Clin Orthop Relat Res 471(7):2374–2382CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Diaz-Ledezma C, Higuera CA, Parvizi J (2013) Success after treatment of periprosthetic joint infection: a Delphi-based international multidisciplinary consensus. Clin Orthop Relat Res 471(7):2374–2382CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
30.
go back to reference Dunbar MJ et al (2001) Appropriate questionnaires for knee arthroplasty. Results of a survey of 3600 patients from The Swedish Knee Arthroplasty Registry. J Bone Joint Surg Br 83(3):339–44CrossRefPubMed Dunbar MJ et al (2001) Appropriate questionnaires for knee arthroplasty. Results of a survey of 3600 patients from The Swedish Knee Arthroplasty Registry. J Bone Joint Surg Br 83(3):339–44CrossRefPubMed
33.
go back to reference Kubista B et al (2012) Reinfection after two-stage revision for periprosthetic infection of total knee arthroplasty. Int Orthop 36(1):65–71CrossRefPubMed Kubista B et al (2012) Reinfection after two-stage revision for periprosthetic infection of total knee arthroplasty. Int Orthop 36(1):65–71CrossRefPubMed
35.
go back to reference Borsinger TM et al (2022) Does time to reimplantation after explant for prosthetic joint infection influence the likelihood of successful outcomes at 2 years? J Arthroplasty 37(6):1173–1179 Borsinger TM et al (2022) Does time to reimplantation after explant for prosthetic joint infection influence the likelihood of successful outcomes at 2 years? J Arthroplasty 37(6):1173–1179
36.
go back to reference Rowe PJ et al (2000) Knee joint kinematics in gait and other functional activities measured using flexible electrogoniometry: how much knee motion is sufficient for normal daily life? Gait Posture 12(2):143–155CrossRefPubMed Rowe PJ et al (2000) Knee joint kinematics in gait and other functional activities measured using flexible electrogoniometry: how much knee motion is sufficient for normal daily life? Gait Posture 12(2):143–155CrossRefPubMed
37.
go back to reference Sabah SA et al (2022) Minimal important changes and differences were estimated for Oxford hip and knee scores following primary and revision arthroplasty. J Clin Epidemiol 143:159–168CrossRefPubMed Sabah SA et al (2022) Minimal important changes and differences were estimated for Oxford hip and knee scores following primary and revision arthroplasty. J Clin Epidemiol 143:159–168CrossRefPubMed
38.
go back to reference Khow YZ et al (2021) The Oxford knee score minimal clinically important difference for revision total knee arthroplasty. Knee 32:211–217 Khow YZ et al (2021) The Oxford knee score minimal clinically important difference for revision total knee arthroplasty. Knee 32:211–217
Metadata
Title
Evaluation of time to reimplantation as a risk factor in two-stage revision with static spacers for periprosthetic knee joint infection
Authors
Jan Puetzler
Marc Hofschneider
Georg Gosheger
Christoph Theil
Martin Schulze
Jan Schwarze
Raphael Koch
Burkhard Moellenbeck
Publication date
01-12-2024
Publisher
Springer International Publishing
Keyword
Joint Infection
Published in
Journal of Orthopaedics and Traumatology / Issue 1/2024
Print ISSN: 1590-9921
Electronic ISSN: 1590-9999
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1186/s10195-024-00745-7

Other articles of this Issue 1/2024

Journal of Orthopaedics and Traumatology 1/2024 Go to the issue