» Articles » PMID: 38529130

Contemporary Outcomes of Debridement, Antibiotics and Implant Retention in Knee Arthroplasty

Overview
Journal Ann Jt
Date 2024 Mar 26
PMID 38529130
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

Periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) is a major complication after knee arthroplasty, with approximately a quarter of knee arthroplasty revisions citing PJI as an indication. With the demand for knee arthroplasty predicted to increase, coupled with a lack of evidence for decreasing PJI risk, an appreciation of the burdens of PJI on both patients and health care systems is vital. Patients with PJI can experience a reduced quality of life as well as increased morbidity, whilst the management of PJI has significant economic implications. Surgical options include debridement, antibiotics and implant retention (DAIR), single-stage revision, two-stage revision and salvage procedures. DAIR involves the systematic debridement of all infected and unhealthy tissues coupled with directed antibiotic therapy, with definitive infection clearance the objective. In contrast to single- and two-stage revision procedures for PJI, DAIR does not involve the removal of fixed implants, with only modular components exchanged. Potential benefits of DAIR include reduced tissue destruction, reduced morbidity and reduced healthcare burdens, but with a higher reinfection risk compared to staged revision techniques, and utility largely restricted to acute bacterial PJI. A review of contemporary DAIR outcomes is of value given advances in the understanding of PJI biology; the development of consensus-based definitions for PJI diagnosis and treatment outcomes; and evolution of DAIR indications and technique. This review discusses outcomes of DAIR for knee PJI, published over the last two decades.

References
1.
Son W, Shon O, Lee D, Park S, Yang H . Efficacy of Open Debridement and Polyethylene Exchange in Strictly Selected Patients with Infection after Total Knee Arthroplasty. Knee Surg Relat Res. 2017; 29(3):172-179. PMC: 5596396. DOI: 10.5792/ksrr.16.040. View

2.
Ottesen C, Troelsen A, Sandholdt H, Jacobsen S, Husted H, Gromov K . Acceptable Success Rate in Patients With Periprosthetic Knee Joint Infection Treated With Debridement, Antibiotics, and Implant Retention. J Arthroplasty. 2018; 34(2):365-368. DOI: 10.1016/j.arth.2018.09.088. View

3.
Lenguerrand E, Whitehouse M, Beswick A, Kunutsor S, Burston B, Porter M . Risk factors associated with revision for prosthetic joint infection after hip replacement: a prospective observational cohort study. Lancet Infect Dis. 2018; 18(9):1004-1014. PMC: 6105575. DOI: 10.1016/S1473-3099(18)30345-1. View

4.
Lenguerrand E, Whitehouse M, Beswick A, Toms A, Porter M, Blom A . Description of the rates, trends and surgical burden associated with revision for prosthetic joint infection following primary and revision knee replacements in England and Wales: an analysis of the National Joint Registry for England, Wales,.... BMJ Open. 2017; 7(7):e014056. PMC: 5541502. DOI: 10.1136/bmjopen-2016-014056. View

5.
Shoji M, Chen A . Biofilms in Periprosthetic Joint Infections: A Review of Diagnostic Modalities, Current Treatments, and Future Directions. J Knee Surg. 2020; 33(2):119-131. DOI: 10.1055/s-0040-1701214. View