Importance of the Algorithm for Diagnosis of Late Deep Periprosthetic Hip Infection

Cover Page

Abstract

Relevance. Late deep periprosthetic infection (PJI) of the hip joint is a serious complication after arthroplasty which takes the lead among the world reasons for revision. Accurate diagnostics allows to achieve good results and select a proper treatment tactics. Purpose of the study — to evaluate the efficiency of diagnostics algorithm for late deep PJI and impact of the microbial landscape on the risk of infection recurrence. Materials and methods. The authors evaluated two groups of patients who underwent revision in the period from 2002 to 2014 and from 2015 to 2018. The first (retrospective) group included 144 patients who were not diagnosed for late deep PJI. The second (prospective) group included 157 patients who underwent detailed diagnostics for late deep PJI based on the algorithm including the analysis of x-rays, pelvic CT, triple evaluation of ESR and CRP, puncturing of affected joint and microbiology examination. The authors assessed the microbial landscape in 51 patients with late deep hip PJI. Results. In the first group 12 patients (8.3%) underwent sanation and spacer insertion during first stage of treatment, 46 patients (59.7%) after revision demonstrated positive intraoperative cultures confirming septic etiology of implant loosening, 19 patients (24.67%) had no flora growth, and no intraoperative microbiological examination was done for remaining 67 patients (46.52%). In the second group after detailed diagnostics 51 patients (32.4%) underwent removal of prosthesis and spacer insertion in the first stage, other 13 patients (8.2%) featured flora growth after revision, remaining 93 patients (59.2%) had no flora growth after revision. Recurrent PJI was observed in 21 patients (14.5%) in the first group, and in 10 patients (6.3%) in the second group. In the second group recurrent PJI was reported in 40% of patients due to microbial associations, in 30% — due to MRSA, in 20% — due to culture negative bacteria and in 10% — due to S. aureus. Conclusion. Triple examination allows to obtain an accurate diagnosis and isolate the pathogen for deep PJI. Application of such diagnostics algorithm allows to reduce 2.1 times the risk of recurrent deep PJI and to scale down 4 times the detection of type IV infection by Coventry–Tsukayama classification.

About the authors

G. A. Kukovenko

Sechenov First Moscow State Medical University (Sechenov University);
Botkin Moscow City Hospital

Email: fake@neicon.ru

Grigorii A. Kukovenko — PhD Student

Orthopaediс Surgeon

Russian Federation

P. M. Elizarov

Sechenov First Moscow State Medical University (Sechenov University);
Botkin Moscow City Hospital

Email: fake@neicon.ru

Pavel M. Elizarov — Cand. Sci. (Med.), Assistant Professor, Department of Traumatology, Orthopaedics and Disaster Surgery

Orthopaediс Surgeon

Russian Federation

S. S. Alekseev

Sechenov First Moscow State Medical University (Sechenov University);
Botkin Moscow City Hospital

Email: fake@neicon.ru

Semen S. Alekseev — PhD Student

Orthopaedic Surgeon

Russian Federation

G. L. Sorokina

Botkin Moscow City Hospital

Email: fake@neicon.ru
Galina L. Sorokina — Orthopaediс Surgeon Russian Federation

L. R. Ivanenko

Sechenov First Moscow State Medical University (Sechenov University)

Email: fake@neicon.ru
Leonid R. Ivanenko — PhD Student Russian Federation

N. E. Erokhin

Sechenov First Moscow State Medical University (Sechenov University)

Email: fake@neicon.ru
Nikolay E. Erokhin — Resident Russian Federation

A. V. Muzychenkov

Sechenov First Moscow State Medical University (Sechenov University);
Botkin Moscow City Hospital

Email: fake@neicon.ru

Aleksey V. Muzychenkov — Cand. Sci. (Med.), Assistant Department of Traumatology, Orthopaedics and Disaster Surgery

Orthopaediс Surgeon

Russian Federation

V. Yu. Murylev

Sechenov First Moscow State Medical University (Sechenov University);
Botkin Moscow City Hospital

Author for correspondence.
Email: nmuril@yandex.ru

Valery Yu. Murylev — Dr. Sci (Med.), Professor, Department of Traumatology, Orthopaedic and Disaster Surgery

Head of Moscow City Arthroplasty Centre

Russian Federation

References

  1. Koenig K., Huddleston J.I. 3rd, Huddleston H., Maloney W.J., Goodman S.B. Advanced age and comorbidity increase the risk for adverse events after revision total hip arthroplasty. J Arthroplasty. 2012;27(7):1402-1407.e1. doi: 10.1016/j.arth.2011.11.013.
  2. Day J.S., Lau E., Ong K.L., Williams G.R., Ramsey M.L., Kurtz S.M. Prevalence and projections of total shoulder and elbow arthroplasty in the United States to 2015. J Shoulder Elbow Surg. 2010;19(8):1115-1120. doi: 10.1016/j.jse.2010.02.009.
  3. Карбышева С.Б., Григоричева Л.Г., Жильцов И.В., Семенов В.М., Золовкина А.Г., Веремей И.С., Трампуш A. D-лактат — маркер бактериального воспаления нативных и протезированных суставов. Травматология и ортопедия России. 2017;23(2):6-14.
  4. Мурылев В.Ю., Куковенко Г.А., Елизаров П.М., Иваненко Л.Р., Сорокина Г.Л., Рукин Я.А. и др. Алгоритм первого этапа лечения поздней глубокой перипротезной инфекции тазобедренного сустава. Травматология и ортопедия России. 2018;24(4):95- 104. doi: 10.21823/2311-2905-2018-24-4-95-104.
  5. Мурылев В.Ю., Елизаров П.М., Рукин Я.А., Рубин Г.Г., Куковенко Г.А. Эндопротезирование тазобедренного сустава как возможность улучшения качества жизни пациентов старческого возраста с ложным суставом шейки бедренной кости. Успехи геронтологии. 2017; 30(5):725-732.
  6. Nishimura S., Matsumae T., Murakami Y., Abe Y., Sasatomi Y., Nagayoshi I. et al. Chronic renal failure due to amyloid nephropathy caused by chronic infection after total hip replacement. CEN Case Rep. 2014;3(2):217-222. doi: 10.1007/s13730-014-0121-6.
  7. Божкова С.А., Новокшонова А.А., Конев В.А. Современные возможности локальной антибиотикотерапии перипротезной инфекции и остеомиелита. Травматология и ортопедия России. 2015;77(3):92- 103. doi: 10.21823/2311-2905-2015-0-3-92-107.
  8. Божкова С.А., Касимова А.Р., Тихилов Р.М., Полякова Е.М., Рукина А.Н., Шабанова В.В., Ливенцов В.Н. Неблагоприятные тенденции в этиологии ортопедической инфекции: результаты 6-летнего мониторинга структуры и резистентности ведущих возбудителей. Травматология и ортопедия России. 2018;24(4):20-31.
  9. Greidanus N.V., Masri B.A., Garbuz D.S., Wilson S.D., McAlinden M.G., Xu M., Duncan C.P. Use of erythrocyte sedimentation rate and C-reactive protein level to diagnose infection before revision total knee arthroplasty. A prospective evaluation. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2007;89(7):1409-1416. doi: 10.2106/JBJS.D.02602.
  10. Мурылев В.Ю., Куковенко Г.А., Елизаров П.М., Рукин Я.А., Цыгин Н.А. Перипротезная инфекция при эндопротезировании тазобедренного сустава. Врач. 2018;29(3):17-22. doi: 10.29296/25877305-2018-03-04.
  11. Ghanem E., Houssock C., Pulido L., Han S., Jaberi F.M., Parvizi J. Determining «true» leukocytosis in bloody joint aspiration. J Arthroplasty. 2008;23(2):182-187. doi: 10.1016/j.arth.2007.08.016.
  12. Springer B.D. The Diagnosis of Periprosthetic Joint Infection. J Arthroplasty. 2015;30(6):908-911. doi: 10.1016/j.arth.2015.03.042.
  13. Parvizi J., Saleh K.J., Ragland P.S., Pour A.E., Mont M.A. Efficacy of antibiotic-impregnated cement in total hip replacement. Acta Orthop. 2008;79(3):335-341. doi: 10.1080/17453670710015229.
  14. Cassar Gheiti A.J., Mulhall K.J. Peri-prosthetic joint infection: prevention, diagnosis and management. In: Arthroplasty — Update. London; 2013. Available from: https://www.intechopen.com/books/arthroplastyupdate/peri-prosthetic-joint-infection-preventiondiagnosis-and-management.
  15. Diaz-Ledezma C., Lichstein P.M., Dolan J.G., Parvizi J. Diagnosis of periprosthetic joint infection in Medicare patients: multicriteria decision analysis. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2014;472(11):3275-3284. doi: 10.1007/s11999-014-3492-2.
  16. Shahi A., Kheir M.M., Tarabichi M., Hosseinzadeh H.R.S., Tan T.L., Parvizi J. Serum D-dimer test is promising for the diagnosis of periprosthetic joint infection and timing of reimplantation. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2017;99(17): 1419-1427. doi: 10.2106/JBJS.16.01395.
  17. Zmistowski B., Fedorka C.J., Sheehan E., Deirmengian G., Austin M.S., Parvizi J. Prosthetic joint infection caused by gram-negative organisms. J Arthroplasty. 2011;26 (6 Suppl):104-108. doi: 10.1016/j.arth.2011.03.044.
  18. Kheir M.M., Tan T.L., Higuera C., George J., Della Valle C.J., Shen M., Parvizi J. Periprosthetic Joint Infections Caused by Enterococci Have Poor Outcomes. J Arthroplasty. 2017;32(3):933-947. doi: 10.1016/j.arth.2016.09.017.
  19. Винклер T., Трампуш A., Ренц H., Перка К., Божкова С.A. Классификация и алгоритм диагностики и лечения перипротезной инфекции тазобедренного сустава. Травматология и ортопедия России. 2016;(1):33- 45. doi: 10.21823/2311-2905-2016-0-1-33-45.
  20. Клюшин Н.М., Ермаков А.М., Науменко З.С., Абабков Ю.В., Тряпичников А.С., Коюшков А.Н. Этиология острой перипротезной инфекции суставов и результаты ее хирургического лечения. Гений ортопедии. 2017;23(4):417-422. doi: 10.18019/1028-4427-2017-23-4-417-422.
  21. Hsieh P.H., Lee M.S., Hsu K.Y., Chang Y.H., Shih H.N., Ueng S.W. Gram-negative prosthetic joint infections: risk factors and outcome of treatment. Clin Infect Dis. 2009;49(7):1036-1043. doi: 10.1086/605593.
  22. Aboltins C.A., Dowsey M.M., Buising K.L., Peel T.N., Daffy J.R., Choong P.F., Stanley P.A. Gram-negative prosthetic joint infection treated with debridement, prosthesis retention and antibiotic regimens including a fluoroquinolone. Clin Microbiol Infect. 2011;17(6):862- 867. doi: 10.1111/j.1469-0691.2010.03361.x.
  23. Материалы второй международной согласительной конференции по скелетно-мышечной инфекции: пер. с англ. под общей ред. Р.М. Тихилова, С.А. Божковой, И.И. Шубнякова. СПб.; 2019. 314 с.
  24. Corvec S., Portillo M.E., Pasticci B.M., Borens O., Trampuz A. Epidemiology and new developments in the diagnosis of prosthetic joint infection. Int J Artif Organs. 2012;35(10):923-934. doi: 10.5301/ijao.5000168.
  25. Aggarwal V., Bakhshi H., Ecker N., 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(05):399-406. doi: 10.1055/с-0033-1364102.
  26. Triffault-Fillit C., Ferry T., Laurent F., Pradat P., Dupieux C., Conrad A. Microbiologic epidemiology depending on time to occurrence of prosthetic joint infection: a prospective cohort study. Clin Microbiol Infect. 2019;25(3):353-358. doi: 10.1016/j.cmi.2018.04.035.
  27. Shohat N., Bauer T., Buttaro M., Budhiparama N., Cashman J., Della Valle C.J. et al. Hip and knee section, what is the definition of a periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) of the knee and the hip? Can the same criteria be used for both joints?: Proceedings of international consensus on orthopedic infections. J Arthroplasty. 2019;34(2S):S325-S327. doi: 10.1016/j. arth.2018.09.045.

Statistics

Views

Abstract: 417

Cited-by

CrossRef: 1

  1. Kazantsev DI, Bozhkova SA, Zolovkina AG, Peleganchuk VA, Batrak YM. Diagnosis of Late Periprosthetic Joint Infection. Which Diagnostic Algorithm to Choose?. Traumatology and Orthopedics of Russia. 2020;26(4):9. doi: 10.21823/2311-2905-2020-26-4-9-20

Dimensions

Article Metrics

Metrics Loading ...

PlumX


Copyright (c)



This website uses cookies

You consent to our cookies if you continue to use our website.

About Cookies