Cargando…

A retrieval analysis perspective on revision for infection

BACKGROUND: Retrieval analysis has long served the orthopaedic community as a tool for understanding implant failure modes; however, what retrieval studies can reveal about the nature of prosthetic joint infection (PJI) remains unknown. We hypothesize that records from a comprehensive joint retrieva...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Kokko, Michael A., Abdel, Matthew P., Berry, Daniel J., Butler, Rebecca D., Van Citters, Douglas W.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Elsevier 2019
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6728442/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31516983
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.artd.2019.03.007
_version_ 1783449439150538752
author Kokko, Michael A.
Abdel, Matthew P.
Berry, Daniel J.
Butler, Rebecca D.
Van Citters, Douglas W.
author_facet Kokko, Michael A.
Abdel, Matthew P.
Berry, Daniel J.
Butler, Rebecca D.
Van Citters, Douglas W.
author_sort Kokko, Michael A.
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Retrieval analysis has long served the orthopaedic community as a tool for understanding implant failure modes; however, what retrieval studies can reveal about the nature of prosthetic joint infection (PJI) remains unknown. We hypothesize that records from a comprehensive joint retrieval program should corroborate clinically-reported temporal characteristics of prosthesis-related infection. METHODS: We examined 2527 records documenting a decade of explanted hip and knee components to quantify the following: (1) the relative contribution of infection to revision arthroplasty; (2) the effects of joint type, revision status, and reason for retrieval on indwelling time; and (3) whether the temporal distribution of infected explants reflects clinical experience. RESULTS: In this series, 20% (507/2527) of explants were performed for infection, with PJI being more commonly implicated in the retrieval of revision implants than of primaries. Infected prostheses were explanted 23.2 months sooner on average than those retrieved for other causes. Within the subset of infected devices, revision components were explanted 11.2 months sooner than primaries, with no appreciable difference observed between hips and knees. Retrieval-based temporal distributions were most similar to PJI studies with endpoint enrollment or long duration follow-up, suggesting a later average onset of infection than reported in comparable clinical studies with short (<10-year) follow-up. CONCLUSIONS: Infection represents a major cause of revision arthroplasty, and is associated with shorter indwelling times in revision components than in primaries. Studies with less than 10 years of follow-up are likely to under-report late PJI.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-6728442
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2019
publisher Elsevier
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-67284422019-09-12 A retrieval analysis perspective on revision for infection Kokko, Michael A. Abdel, Matthew P. Berry, Daniel J. Butler, Rebecca D. Van Citters, Douglas W. Arthroplast Today Original Research BACKGROUND: Retrieval analysis has long served the orthopaedic community as a tool for understanding implant failure modes; however, what retrieval studies can reveal about the nature of prosthetic joint infection (PJI) remains unknown. We hypothesize that records from a comprehensive joint retrieval program should corroborate clinically-reported temporal characteristics of prosthesis-related infection. METHODS: We examined 2527 records documenting a decade of explanted hip and knee components to quantify the following: (1) the relative contribution of infection to revision arthroplasty; (2) the effects of joint type, revision status, and reason for retrieval on indwelling time; and (3) whether the temporal distribution of infected explants reflects clinical experience. RESULTS: In this series, 20% (507/2527) of explants were performed for infection, with PJI being more commonly implicated in the retrieval of revision implants than of primaries. Infected prostheses were explanted 23.2 months sooner on average than those retrieved for other causes. Within the subset of infected devices, revision components were explanted 11.2 months sooner than primaries, with no appreciable difference observed between hips and knees. Retrieval-based temporal distributions were most similar to PJI studies with endpoint enrollment or long duration follow-up, suggesting a later average onset of infection than reported in comparable clinical studies with short (<10-year) follow-up. CONCLUSIONS: Infection represents a major cause of revision arthroplasty, and is associated with shorter indwelling times in revision components than in primaries. Studies with less than 10 years of follow-up are likely to under-report late PJI. Elsevier 2019-08-06 /pmc/articles/PMC6728442/ /pubmed/31516983 http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.artd.2019.03.007 Text en © 2019 The Authors http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/ This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/).
spellingShingle Original Research
Kokko, Michael A.
Abdel, Matthew P.
Berry, Daniel J.
Butler, Rebecca D.
Van Citters, Douglas W.
A retrieval analysis perspective on revision for infection
title A retrieval analysis perspective on revision for infection
title_full A retrieval analysis perspective on revision for infection
title_fullStr A retrieval analysis perspective on revision for infection
title_full_unstemmed A retrieval analysis perspective on revision for infection
title_short A retrieval analysis perspective on revision for infection
title_sort retrieval analysis perspective on revision for infection
topic Original Research
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6728442/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31516983
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.artd.2019.03.007
work_keys_str_mv AT kokkomichaela aretrievalanalysisperspectiveonrevisionforinfection
AT abdelmatthewp aretrievalanalysisperspectiveonrevisionforinfection
AT berrydanielj aretrievalanalysisperspectiveonrevisionforinfection
AT butlerrebeccad aretrievalanalysisperspectiveonrevisionforinfection
AT vancittersdouglasw aretrievalanalysisperspectiveonrevisionforinfection
AT kokkomichaela retrievalanalysisperspectiveonrevisionforinfection
AT abdelmatthewp retrievalanalysisperspectiveonrevisionforinfection
AT berrydanielj retrievalanalysisperspectiveonrevisionforinfection
AT butlerrebeccad retrievalanalysisperspectiveonrevisionforinfection
AT vancittersdouglasw retrievalanalysisperspectiveonrevisionforinfection