Dataset Information

Do prior intra-articular injections impact on the risk of periprosthetic joint infection in patients undergoing total hip arthroplasty? A meta-analysis of the current evidences with a focus on the timing of injection before surgery.

ABSTRACT:

Purpose

Intra-articular injection is a well-established and increasingly used treatment for the patient with mild-to-moderate hip osteoarthritis. The objectives of this literature review and meta-analysis are to evaluate the effect of prior intra-articular injections on the risk of periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) in patients undergoing total hip arthroplasty (THA) and to try to identify which is the minimum waiting time between hip injection and replacement in order to reduce the risk of infection.

Methods

The database of PubMed, Embase, Google Scholar and Cochrane Library was systematically and independently searched, according to Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. To assess the potential risk of bias and the applicability of the evidence found in the primary studies to the review, the Newcastle-Ottawa scale (NOS) was used. The statistical analysis was performed by using the software 'R' version 4.2.2.

Results

The pooling of data revealed an increased risk of PJI in the injection group that was statistically significative (P = 0.0427). In the attempt to identify a 'safe time interval' between the injection and the elective surgery, we conducted a further subgroup analysis: in the subgroup 0-3 months, we noted an increased risk of PJI after injection.

Conclusions

Intra-articular injection is a procedure that may increase the risk of developing periprosthetic infection. This risk is higher if the injection is performed less than 3 months before hip replacement.

SUBMITTER: Saracco M

PROVIDER: S-EPMC10300843 | biostudies-literature | 2023 Jun

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Do prior intra-articular injections impact on the risk of periprosthetic joint infection in patients undergoing total hip arthroplasty? A meta-analysis of the current evidences with a focus on the timing of injection before surgery.

Saracco Michela M Ciriello Vincenzo V D'Angelo Fabio F Zagra Luigi L Solarino Giuseppe G Logroscino Giandomenico G

EFORT open reviews 20230608 6

<h4>Purpose</h4>Intra-articular injection is a well-established and increasingly used treatment for the patient with mild-to-moderate hip osteoarthritis. The objectives of this literature review and meta-analysis are to evaluate the effect of prior intra-articular injections on the risk of periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) in patients undergoing total hip arthroplasty (THA) and to try to identify which is the minimum waiting time between hip injection and replacement in order to reduce the ri ...[more]

PMID: 37289047

Similar Datasets

Project description:Objective: The current review was designed to assess the impact of prior intra-articular injections on the risk of prosthetic joint infection (PJI) in patients undergoing total joint arthroplasty (TJA) with a focus on the timing of injection before surgery. Methods: The databases of PubMed, Embase and Google Scholar were searched up to 15th June 2021. All studies comparing the incidence of PJI with and without prior intra-articular injections were included. Risk ratios (RR) with 95% confidence intervals were calculated for PJI. Results: Nineteen studies were included. Both corticosteroids and hyaluronic acid injections were used before TJA in the included studies. Overall, comparing 127,163 patients with prior intra-articular injections and 394,104 patients without any injections, we noted a statistically significant increased risk of PJI in the injection group (RR 1.24 95% CI: 1.11, 1.38 I2 = 48% p = 0.002). On subgroup analysis, there was a statistically significant increased risk of PJI in the injection group in studies where intra-articular injections were administered <12 months before surgery (RR 1.18 95% CI: 1.10, 1.27 I2 = 7% p < 0.00001). Furthermore, on meta-analysis, we noted non-significant but increased risk of PJI when injections were administered 1 month (RR 1.47 95% CI: 0.88, 2.46 I2 = 77% p = 0.14), 0-3 months (RR 1.22 95% CI: 0.96, 1.56 I2 = 84% p = 0.11), and 3-6 months (RR 1.16 95% CI: 0.99, 1.35 I2 = 49% p = 0.06) before surgery. Conclusion: Our results indicate that patients with prior intra-articular injections have a small but statistically significant increased risk of PJI after TJA. Considering that PJI is a catastrophic complication with huge financial burden, morbidity and mortality; the clinical significance of this small risk cannot be dismissed. The question of the timing of injections and the risk of PJI still remains and can have a significant impact on the decision making. Systematic Review Registration: PROSPERO: CRD42021258297.

Project description:BackgroundIntra-articular injections containing a corticosteroid are used frequently, and periprosthetic joint infection is a serious complication after total joint arthroplasty. There is debate regarding whether intra-articular corticosteroid injections before arthroplasty increase periprosthetic joint infection after surgery.Questions/purposes(1) Does a previous intra-articular corticosteroid injection increase the odds of infection after subsequent hip or knee arthroplasty? (2) Does this risk vary based on how soon before the arthroplasty (such as less than 3 months before surgery) the injection is administered?MethodsUsing the PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, and Web of Science databases from inception to July 2021, we searched for comparative studies in English on patients who received intra-articular corticosteroid injections before arthroplasty and that tracked the frequency of infection after arthroplasty. We extracted data on the risk of infection after subsequent joint arthroplasty. The keywords included "corticosteroid," "steroid," "arthroplasty," "knee replacement," and "hip replacement." Eleven retrospective, comparative studies from four countries were included, of which 10 reported the specific diagnosis criteria and one did not. These articles included data on 173,465 arthroplasties in the hip or knee, as well as of 73,049 injections and 100,416 control patients. The methodologic quality of the included studies was evaluated according to the Newcastle-Ottawa Quality Assessment Scale; the articles' scores ranged from 6 to 7 (the score itself spans 0 to 9, with higher scores representing better study quality). We found no evidence of publication bias based on the Egger test, and tests of heterogeneity generally found heterogeneity, so a random-effects model was used of our meta-analyses. A meta-analysis was performed with Review Manager 5.3 software and Stata version 12.0 software.ResultsOverall, there were no differences in the odds of periprosthetic joint infection between the injection group and the control group among patients who received any kind of injection (odds ratio 1.22 [95% CI 0.95 to 1.58]; p = 0.12). However, in a subgroup analysis, there was a higher OR for postoperative PJI in patients with an intra-articular corticosteroid injection in the knee or hip within 3 months (OR 1.39 [95% CI 1.04 to 1.87]; p = 0.03). There were no differences in the infection risk in patients who had injections between 3 and 6 months before arthroplasty (OR 1.19 [95% CI 0.95 to 1.48]; p = 0.13) or between 6 and 12 months before arthroplasty.ConclusionThe current evidence suggests ipsilateral intra-articular corticosteroid injections within 3 months before arthroplasty were associated with an increased risk of periprosthetic joint infection during subsequent joint arthroplasty. We recommend against performing total joint arthroplasty on a patient who has received an intra-articular corticosteroid injection within 3 months. Further high-quality studies on this topic from registries, national databases, or insurance company data are still required to confirm and extend our findings.Level of evidenceLevel III, therapeutic study.

Project description:BackgroundAs an essential component of multimodal analgesia approaches after total knee arthroplasty (TKA), local infiltration analgesia (LIA) can be classified into peri-articular injection (PAI) and intra-articular injection (IAI) according to administration techniques. Currently, there is no definite answer to the optimal choice between the two techniques. Our study aims to investigate analgesic efficacy and safety of PAI versus IAI in patients receiving simultaneous bilateral TKA.MethodsThis randomized controlled trial was conducted from February 2017 and finished in July 2018. Sixty patients eligible for simultaneous bilateral total knee arthroplasty were randomly assigned to receive PAI on one side and IAI on another. Primary outcomes included numerical rating scale (NRS) pain score at rest or during activity at 3 h, 6 h, 12 h, 24 h, 48 h, and 72 h following surgery. Secondary outcomes contained active or passive range of motion (ROM) at 1, 2, and 3 days after surgery, time to perform straight leg raise, wound drainage, operation time, and wound complications.ResultsPatients experienced lower NRS pain scores of the knee receiving PAI compared with that with PAI during the first 48 h after surgery. The largest difference of NRS pain score at rest occurred at 48 h (PAI: 0.68, 95%CI[0.37, 0.98]; IAI: 2.63, 95%CI [2.16, 3.09]; P < 0.001); and the largest difference of NRS pain score during activity also took place at 48 h (PAI: 2.46, 95%CI [2.07, 2.85]; IAI: 3.90, 95%CI [3.27, 4.52]; P = 0.001). PAI group had better results of range of motion and time to perform straight leg raise when compared with IAI group. There were no differences in operation time, wound drainage, and wound complication.ConclusionPAI had the superior performance of pain relief and improvement of range of motion to IAI. Therefore, the administration technique of peri-articular injection is recommended when performing local infiltration analgesia after total knee arthroplasty.Trial registrationThe trial was retrospectively registered in the Chinese Clinical Trial Registry as ChiCTR1800020420 on 29th December, 2018.Level of evidenceTherapeutic Level I.

Project description:BackgroundIntra-articular (IA) corticosteroid (CS) injections are the mainstay of treatment for symptomatic management in knee osteoarthritis (OA), particularly in the UK. IA platelet-rich plasma (PRP) injections are a promising alternative, but no systematic reviews to date have compared them to the current standard of care, IA CS injections. We aim to investigate the effect of IA PRP injections versus IA corticosteroid injections for the symptomatic management of knee OA.MethodsAll published trials comparing IA PRP and CS injections for knee OA were included. MEDLINE, EMBASE, Scopus and Web of Science were searched through June 2020. Risk of bias was assessed using the Cochrane Risk of Bias tool. A random effects model was used to calculate standardized mean difference with 95% confidence interval in WOMAC/VAS score (or subscores), comparing IA PRP to CS injections across studies.ResultsIncluded were eight studies and 648 patients, 443 (68%) were female, mean age 59 years, with a mean BMI of 28.4. Overall, the studies were considered at low risk of bias. Compared with CS injections, PRP was significantly better in reducing OA symptoms (pain, stiffness, functionality) at 3, 6 and 9 months post-intervention (P < 0.01). The greatest effect was observed at 6 and 9 months (- 0.78 (- 1.34 to - 0.23) standard mean deviations (SMD) and - 1.63 (- 2.14 to - 1.12) SMD respectively). At 6 months, this equates to an additional reduction of 9.51 in WOMAC or 0.97 on the VAS pain scales. At 6 months PRP allowed greater return to sporting activities than CS, measured by the KOOS subscale for sporting activity, of magnitude 9.7 (- 0.45 to 19.85) (P = 0.06). Triple injections of PRP, generally separated by a week, were superior to single injections over 12 months follow-up (P < 0.01).ConclusionsIA-PRP injections produce superior outcomes when compared with CS injections for symptomatic management of knee OA, including improved pain management, less joint stiffness and better participation in exercise/sporting activity at 12 months follow-up. Giving three IA-PRP, with injections separated by a week, appears more effective than 1 IA-PRP injection.Prospero trial registration numberCRD42020181928 .

Project description:Background: Osteoarthritis (OA) is the most common joint disorder, lacking disease-modifying treatments. Adipose-derived mesenchymal stem cells (ADSCs) are adult multipotent stromal cells obtained from fat tissue, which holds great potential in treating OA. This study aimed to evaluate the anti-OA efficacy of ADSCs from preclinical and clinical facets and explore the underlying mechanism of action. Methods: In vivo, a single dose of 5 × 105 ADSCs was injected into the knee joints of monoiodoacetate-induced OA rat model. The levels of metabolic and hypertrophic molecules (MMP13, Collagen II, Collagen X) of chondrocytes were measured by immunohistochemistry. In vitro, cell viability assay was conducted to detect the proliferation ability of chondrocytes treated with ADSCs conditioned medium (ADSCs-CM). Quantitative real-time polymerase chain reaction and Western blot assays were applied to explore the mechanism of action of ADSCs. Moreover, a retrospective analysis was conducted to determine the clinical efficacy and safety of ADSCs on OA patients. Results: The animal study showed that ADSCs significantly alleviated OA cartilage lesions in rats, as was confirmed by downregulation of the MMP13 and Collagen X and upregulation of the Collagen II. In vitro data showed that ADSCs-CM promoted the proliferation of chondrocytes, and significantly restored the IL-1β-induced abnormal expressions of molecular markers IL-6, Aggrecan, MMP3, MMP13, Collagen II, Collagen X, ADAMTS5, ADAMTS9, SOX6, and SOX9 in chondrocytes. Such regulatory effects of ADSCs-CM on the proliferation and these anabolic, catabolic, and hypertrophic markers of chondrocytes suggested a paracrine-based mode of action of ADSCs. Furthermore, the clinical data showed that ADSCs reduced pain and repaired cartilage damage in OA patients, with no adverse events. Conclusion: This study demonstrated the anti-OA efficacy, safety, and a paracrine-based mechanism of ADSCs, providing a promising cell-based therapeutic option for OA treatment.

Dataset Information

Do prior intra-articular injections impact on the risk of periprosthetic joint infection in patients undergoing total hip arthroplasty? A meta-analysis of the current evidences with a focus on the timing of injection before surgery.

Purpose

Methods

Results

Conclusions

Publications

Do prior intra-articular injections impact on the risk of periprosthetic joint infection in patients undergoing total hip arthroplasty? A meta-analysis of the current evidences with a focus on the timing of injection before surgery.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets