Dataset Information

Are patients being evaluated for periprosthetic joint infection prior to referral to a tertiary care center?

ABSTRACT: Background:Patients with a painful or failed total joint arthroplasties should be evaluated for periprosthetic joint infection (PJI). The purpose of this study is to determine if patients referred to a tertiary care center had been evaluated for PJI according to the American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons (AAOS) clinical practice guidelines. Methods:One hundred thirteen patients with painful hip (43) or knee (70) arthroplasties were referred to a single provider by orthopaedic surgeons outside our practice between 2012 and 2014. We retrospectively evaluated the workup by referring physicians, including measurement of serum erythrocyte sedimentation rate and C-reactive protein, performance of a joint aspiration if these values were abnormal, and obtainment of synovial fluid white blood cell count, differential, and cultures. Results:Sixty-two of 113 patients (55%) did not have a workup that followed AAOS guidelines. Serum erythrocyte sedimentation rate and C-reactive protein were ordered for 64 of the 113 patients (57%). Of 25 patients with elevated inflammatory markers warranting aspiration, 15 (60%) had an aspiration attempted, with synovial fluid white blood cell, differential, and cultures obtained in 9 of 12 (75%) aspirations that yielded fluid. Of the 62 patients with an incomplete infection workup, 11 (18%) had a bone scan, 6 (10%) a computed tomography scan, and 3 (5%) a magnetic resonance imaging. Twelve of the 113 patients (11%) were ultimately diagnosed with PJI, with 5 undiagnosed prior to referral. Conclusions:The AAOS guidelines to evaluate for PJI are frequently not being followed. Improving awareness of these guidelines may avoid unnecessary and costly evaluations and delay in the diagnosis of PJI.

SUBMITTER: Tetreault MW

PROVIDER: S-EPMC5994562 | biostudies-literature | 2018 Jun

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Are patients being evaluated for periprosthetic joint infection prior to referral to a tertiary care center?

Tetreault Matthew W MW Estrera Kenneth A KA Kayupov Erdan E Brander Caroline C Della Valle Craig J CJ

Arthroplasty today 20171110 2

<h4>Background</h4>Patients with a painful or failed total joint arthroplasties should be evaluated for periprosthetic joint infection (PJI). The purpose of this study is to determine if patients referred to a tertiary care center had been evaluated for PJI according to the American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons (AAOS) clinical practice guidelines.<h4>Methods</h4>One hundred thirteen patients with painful hip (43) or knee (70) arthroplasties were referred to a single provider by orthopaedic su ...[more]

PMID: 29896556

Similar Datasets

Project description:Periprosthetic joint infection (PJI), a devastating complication of total joint replacement, is of incompletely understood pathogenesis and may sometimes be challenging to clinically distinguish from other causes of arthroplasty failure. We characterized human gene expression in 93 specimens derived from surfaces of resected arthroplasties, comparing transcriptomes of subjects with infection- versus non-infection-associated arthroplasty failure. Differential gene expression analysis confirmed 28 previously reported potential biomarkers of PJI, including bactericidal/permeability increasing protein (BPI), cathelicidin antimicrobial peptide (CAMP), C-C-motif chemokine ligand 3 (CCL3), 4(CCL4), and C-X-C-motif chemokine ligand 2 (CXCL2), colony stimulating factor 2 receptor beta (CSF2RB), colony stimulating factor 3 (CSF3), alpha-defensin (DEFA4), Fc fragment of IgG receptor 1B (CD64B), intercellular adhesion molecule 1 (ICAM1), interferon gamma (IFNG), interleukin 13 receptor subunit alpha 2 (IL13RA2), interleukin 17D (IL17D), interleukin 1 (IL1A, IL1B, IL1RN), interleukin 2 receptors (IL2RA, IL2RG), interleukin 5 receptor (IL5RA), interleukin 6 (IL6), interleukin 8 (IL8), lipopolysaccharide binding protein (LBP), lipocalin (LCN2), lactate dehydrogenase C (LDHC), lactotransferrin (LTF), matrix metallopeptidase 3 (MMP3), peptidase inhibitor 3 (PI3), and vascular endothelial growth factor A (VEGFA), and identified three novel molecules of potential diagnostic use for detection of PJI, namely C-C-motif chemokine ligand CCL20, coagulation factor VII (F7), and B cell receptor FCRL4. Comparative analysis of infections caused by staphylococci versus bacteria other than staphylococci and Staphylococcus aureus versus Staphylococcus epidermidis showed elevated expression of interleukin 13 (IL13), IL17D, and MMP3 in staphylococcal infections, and of IL1B, IL8, and platelet factor PF4V1 in S. aureus compared to S. epidermidis infections. Pathway analysis of over-represented genes suggested activation of host immune response and cellular maintenance and repair functions in response to invasion of infectious agents. The data presented provides new potential targets for diagnosis of PJI and for differentiation of PJI caused by different infectious agents.

Project description:The volume of joint replacement surgery has risen steadily in recent years, because the population is aging and increasingly wishes to reserve a high functional status onward into old age. Infection is among the more common complications of joint replacement surgery, arising in 0.2% to 2% of patients, or as many as 9% in special situations such as the implantation of megaprostheses. The associated morbidity and mortality are high. It is thus very important to minimize risk factors for infection and to optimize the relevant diagnostic and therapeutic strategies.This review is based on pertinent publications retrieved by a selective search in PubMed, including current guidelines and expert recommendations.The crucial diagnostic step is joint biopsy for the identification of the pathogenic organism, which succeeds with over 90% sensitivity and specificity. If the prosthesis is firmly anchored in bone, the pathogen is of a type that responds well to treatment, and symptomatic infection has been present only for a short time, then rapidly initiated treatment can save the prosthesis in 35-90% of cases. The pillars of treatment are thorough surgical care (radical débridement) and targeted antibiotic therapy. On the other hand, if the prosthesis is loose or the pathogen is of a poorly treatable type, the infection can generally only be cured by a change of the prosthesis. This can be performed in either one or two procedures, always in conjunction with systemic antibiotic therapy tailored to the specific sensitivity and resistance pattern of the pathogen.The risk of infection of an artificial joint is low, but the overall prevalence of such infections is significant, as the number of implanted joints is steadily rising. Artificial joint infections should be treated by a standardized algorithm oriented toward the recommendations of current guidelines. Many of these recommendations, however, are based only on expert opinion, as informative studies providing high-grade evidence are lacking. Thus, for any particular clinical situation, there may now be multiple therapeutic approaches with apparently comparable efficacy. Randomized trials are urgently needed.

Dataset Information

Are patients being evaluated for periprosthetic joint infection prior to referral to a tertiary care center?

Publications

Are patients being evaluated for periprosthetic joint infection prior to referral to a tertiary care center?

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets