Pier Francesco Indelli1, F Iannotti2, A Ferretti2, R Valtanen3, P Prati4, D Pérez Prieto5, N P Kort6, B Violante7, N R Tandogan8, A Schiavone Panni9, G Pipino10, M T Hirschmann11. 1. Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Stanford University School of Medicine, PAVAHCS-Surgical Services, 1801 Miranda Ave, Palo Alto, CA, 94304, USA. pindelli@stanford.edu. 2. Sapienza University of Rome, Rome, Italy. 3. Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Stanford University School of Medicine, PAVAHCS-Surgical Services, 1801 Miranda Ave, Palo Alto, CA, 94304, USA. 4. ASST Bergamo Ovest, Ospedale Treviglio, Treviglio, Italy. 5. Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Parc de Salut Mar, Barcelona, Spain. 6. CortoClinics, Schijndel, The Netherlands. 7. Orthopaedic Department, Istituto Clinico Sant'Ambrogio IRCCS Galeazzi, Milan, Italy. 8. Cankaya Orthopedics, Ankara, Turkey. 9. Department of Medical and Surgical Specialties and Dentistry, University of Campania "Luigi Vanvitelli", Naples, Italy. 10. Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Universita' Vita-Salute San Raffaele, Milan, Italy. 11. Department of Orthopaedic Surgery and Traumatology, Kantonsspital Baselland (Bruderholz, Liestal, 4101, Bruderholz, Laufen), Switzerland.
Abstract
PURPOSE: Periprosthetic joint infections (PJIs) represent a devastating consequence of total joint arthroplasty. The European Knee Associates (EKA), the American Association of Hip and Knee Surgeons (AAHKS) International Committee, and the Arthroplasty Society in Asia (ASIA) board members were interested in quantifying differences in arthroplasty surgeons' use of various PJI prevention measures to provide clinical recommendations to reduce PJI incidence. METHODS: A prospective Microsoft Forms online survey was distributed among EKA, AAHKS International Committee, and ASIA members and their affiliated arthroplasty surgeons. The survey consisted of 20 single and multiple response questions focused on PJI prevention strategies at three perioperative periods: preoperatively, intraoperatively, and postoperatively. RESULTS: Three hundred and ninety-four arthroplasty surgeons from 6 different continents completed the survey. Preoperative: (A) PJI Risk Stratification: 40.6% routinely set thresholds (e.g., BMI, HgbA1C) to be met to qualify for surgery, 36.5% only review past medical history; 9.1% use machine learning to personalize PJI risk; (B) BMI limit: 36% no limit; 15.4% BMI < 35; 30.9% BMI < 40; 17.2% BMI < 45; (C) Nutritional status: 55.3% do not screen; among those who screen their patients (44.7%), albumin is the single most used marker (86.3%); (D) Hyperglycemia/Diabetes: 83.3% check this comorbidity; 88.1% use HgbA1C as single best screening test; (E) MRSA nasal colonization: 63.7% do not test; 28.9% test all patients; 7.4% test selectively. Intraoperative: (A) Antibiotic prophylaxis in high-risk patients: 43.4% use single antibiotic for 24 h; 21.3% use double antibiotic for 24 h; 14.2% use single/double antibiotic for 7 days postoperatively; (B) Skin-cleansing: 68.7% at home (45.6% chlorhexidine sponge; 11.9% clippers); (C) Intraoperative skin disinfection: 46.9% single chlorhexidine; 25% double chlorhexidine-povidone-iodine;15.4% single povidone-iodine; (D) Tranexamic acid (TXA) to reduce bleeding/SSI: 96% yes (51% double IV dose, 35.2% single IV dose, 23.6% intra-articular injection); (E) Surgical suction drain: 52% do not use drains; 19.7% use a drain < 24 h; (F) Intra-articular lavage: 64.9% use only saline; 28.1% use dilute povidone-iodine; (G) Antibiotic local delivery to prevent PJI: 82.4% use antibiotic-added cement. Postoperative: (A) Routine monitoring of PJI serologic markers: 42% only in symptomatic patients; 34.2% do not; 20.8% in all patients; (B) Serologic markers to rule in/out PJI: 95.9% CRP; 71% SEDRATE; 60.6% WBC; (C) Synovial fluid test to rule in/out PJI: 79.6% culture/sensitivity; 69.5% WBC count; 31.4% CRP. CONCLUSIONS: This survey demonstrated that notable differences still exist in the application of PJI preventive measures across different geographic areas: Optimizing the patient preoperatively and applying multimodal intraoperative strategies represent newer, clinically relevant steps in the effort to reduce the burden of PJI. More uniform guidelines still need to be produced from international scientific societies in order facilitate a more comprehensive approach to this devastating complication. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: IV.
PURPOSE: Periprosthetic joint infections (PJIs) represent a devastating consequence of total joint arthroplasty. The European Knee Associates (EKA), the American Association of Hip and Knee Surgeons (AAHKS) International Committee, and the Arthroplasty Society in Asia (ASIA) board members were interested in quantifying differences in arthroplasty surgeons' use of various PJI prevention measures to provide clinical recommendations to reduce PJI incidence. METHODS: A prospective Microsoft Forms online survey was distributed among EKA, AAHKS International Committee, and ASIA members and their affiliated arthroplasty surgeons. The survey consisted of 20 single and multiple response questions focused on PJI prevention strategies at three perioperative periods: preoperatively, intraoperatively, and postoperatively. RESULTS: Three hundred and ninety-four arthroplasty surgeons from 6 different continents completed the survey. Preoperative: (A) PJI Risk Stratification: 40.6% routinely set thresholds (e.g., BMI, HgbA1C) to be met to qualify for surgery, 36.5% only review past medical history; 9.1% use machine learning to personalize PJI risk; (B) BMI limit: 36% no limit; 15.4% BMI < 35; 30.9% BMI < 40; 17.2% BMI < 45; (C) Nutritional status: 55.3% do not screen; among those who screen their patients (44.7%), albumin is the single most used marker (86.3%); (D) Hyperglycemia/Diabetes: 83.3% check this comorbidity; 88.1% use HgbA1C as single best screening test; (E) MRSA nasal colonization: 63.7% do not test; 28.9% test all patients; 7.4% test selectively. Intraoperative: (A) Antibiotic prophylaxis in high-risk patients: 43.4% use single antibiotic for 24 h; 21.3% use double antibiotic for 24 h; 14.2% use single/double antibiotic for 7 days postoperatively; (B) Skin-cleansing: 68.7% at home (45.6% chlorhexidine sponge; 11.9% clippers); (C) Intraoperative skin disinfection: 46.9% single chlorhexidine; 25% double chlorhexidine-povidone-iodine;15.4% single povidone-iodine; (D) Tranexamic acid (TXA) to reduce bleeding/SSI: 96% yes (51% double IV dose, 35.2% single IV dose, 23.6% intra-articular injection); (E) Surgical suction drain: 52% do not use drains; 19.7% use a drain < 24 h; (F) Intra-articular lavage: 64.9% use only saline; 28.1% use dilute povidone-iodine; (G) Antibiotic local delivery to prevent PJI: 82.4% use antibiotic-added cement. Postoperative: (A) Routine monitoring of PJI serologic markers: 42% only in symptomatic patients; 34.2% do not; 20.8% in all patients; (B) Serologic markers to rule in/out PJI: 95.9% CRP; 71% SEDRATE; 60.6% WBC; (C) Synovial fluid test to rule in/out PJI: 79.6% culture/sensitivity; 69.5% WBC count; 31.4% CRP. CONCLUSIONS: This survey demonstrated that notable differences still exist in the application of PJI preventive measures across different geographic areas: Optimizing the patient preoperatively and applying multimodal intraoperative strategies represent newer, clinically relevant steps in the effort to reduce the burden of PJI. More uniform guidelines still need to be produced from international scientific societies in order facilitate a more comprehensive approach to this devastating complication. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: IV.
Authors: Hiba K Anis; Nipun Sodhi; Mhamad Faour; Alison K Klika; Michael A Mont; Wael K Barsoum; Carlos A Higuera; Robert M Molloy Journal: J Arthroplasty Date: 2019-04-22 Impact factor: 4.757
Authors: Reema K Al-Houraibi; Arash Aalirezaie; Farshad Adib; Afshin Anoushiravani; Abhiram Bhashyam; Ruwais Binlaksar; Kier Blevins; Tommaso Bonanzinga; Feng Chih-Kuo; Mauricio Cordova; Gregory K Deirmengian; Yale Fillingham; Tal Frenkel; José Gomez; Per Gundtoft; Michael A Harris; Mitch Harris; Snir Heller; Jessica Amber Jennings; Carlos Jiménez-Garrido; Joseph A Karam; Anton Khlopas; Mitchell R Klement; Georgios Komnos; Viktor Krebs; Paul Lachiewicz; Andy O Miller; Michael A Mont; Elvira Montañez; Carlos Arturo Romero; Ran Schwarzkopf; Andre Shaffer; Peter F Sharkey; Brian M Smith; Nipun Sodhi; Emmanuel Thienpont; Andres Orlando Villanueva; Hamidreza Yazdi Journal: J Arthroplasty Date: 2018-10-22 Impact factor: 4.757
Authors: Craig A Aboltins; Jan Erik Berdal; Francisco Casas; Pablo S Corona; Daniel Cuellar; Matteo Carlo Ferrari; Edward Hendershot; Wei Huang; Feng-Chih Kuo; Arthur Malkani; Francisco Reyes; Sergio Rudelli; Oleg Safir; Thorsten Seyler; Timothy L Tan; Robert Townsend; Ibrahim Tuncay; David Turner; Heinz Winkler; Marjan Wouthuyzen-Bakker; Adolph J Yates; Akos Zahar Journal: J Arthroplasty Date: 2018-10-19 Impact factor: 4.757
Authors: Ibrahim Azboy; Hany Bedair; Abdullah Demirtas; Edmundo Ford; Aydin Gahramanov; Mitchell R Klement; Joris Ploegmakers; Edward Schwarz; Ismail Turkmen Journal: J Arthroplasty Date: 2018-10-19 Impact factor: 4.757
Authors: Karl Y Bilimoria; Yaoming Liu; Jennifer L Paruch; Lynn Zhou; Thomas E Kmiecik; Clifford Y Ko; Mark E Cohen Journal: J Am Coll Surg Date: 2013-09-18 Impact factor: 6.113
Authors: Kevin J Bozic; Edmund Lau; Steven Kurtz; Kevin Ong; Harry Rubash; Thomas P Vail; Daniel J Berry Journal: J Bone Joint Surg Am Date: 2012-05-02 Impact factor: 5.284
Authors: Jesse Chrastil; Mike B Anderson; Vanessa Stevens; Rahul Anand; Christopher L Peters; Christopher E Pelt Journal: J Arthroplasty Date: 2015-01-31 Impact factor: 4.757
Authors: Imran Ahmed; Adam Jonathan Boulton; Sana Rizvi; William Carlos; Edward Dickenson; N A Smith; Mike Reed Journal: BMJ Open Date: 2019-09-03 Impact factor: 2.692
Authors: Antonio Benjumea; Marta Díaz-Navarro; Rama Hafian; Emilia Cercenado; Mar Sánchez-Somolinos; Javier Vaquero; Francisco Chana; Patricia Muñoz; María Guembe Journal: Front Microbiol Date: 2022-06-30 Impact factor: 6.064