Aims The diagnosis of periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) can be difficult. All current diagnostic tests have problems with accuracy and interpretation of results. Many new tests have been proposed, but there is no consensus on the place of many of these in the diagnostic pathway. Previous attempts to develop a definition of PJI have not been universally accepted and there remains no reference standard definition. Methods This paper reports the outcome of a project developed by the European Bone and Joint Infection Society (EBJIS), and supported by the Musculoskeletal Infection Society (MSIS) and the European Society of Clinical Microbiology and Infectious Diseases (ESCMID) Study Group for Implant-Associated Infections (ESGIAI). It comprised a comprehensive review of the literature, open discussion with Society members and conference delegates, and an expert panel assessment of the results to produce the final guidance. Results This process evolved a three-level approach to the diagnostic continuum, resulting in a definition set and guidance, which EBJIS, MSIS, and ESGIAI have fully endorsed. Conclusion The definition presents a novel three-level approach to diagnosis, based on the most robust evidence, which will be useful to clinicians in daily practice. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2021;103-B(1):18–25.

Background Debridement, antibiotics, irrigation, and implant retention (DAIR) is the first-line management strategy for acute periprosthetic joint infections (PJI). Suppressive antibiotic therapy (SAT) after DAIR is proposed to improve outcomes, yet its efficacy remains under scrutiny. Methods We conducted a multicenter retrospective study in patients with acute PJI of the hip or knee and treated with DAIR in centers from Europe and the USA. We analyzed the effect of SAT using a Cox model landmarked at 12 weeks. The primary covariate of interest was SAT, which was analyzed as a time-varying covariate. Patients who experienced treatment failure or lost to follow-up within 12 weeks were excluded from the analysis. Results The study included 510 patients with 66 treatment failures with a median follow-up of 801 days. We did not find a statistically significant association between SAT and treatment failure (HR 1.37, 95% CI 0.79-2.39, p=0.27). Subgroup analyses for joint, country cohort, and type of infection (early or late acute) did not show benefit for SAT. Secondary analysis of country cohorts showed a trend toward benefit for the USA cohort (HR 0.36, 95% CI 0.11-1.15, p=0.09) which also had the highest risk of treatment failure. Conclusion The utility of routine SAT as a strategy for enhancing DAIR's success in acute PJI remains uncertain. Our results suggest that SAT's benefits might be restricted to specific groups of patients, underscoring the need for randomized controlled trials. Identifying patients most likely to benefit from SAT should be a priority in future studies.

Abstract Background Rifampin is generally advised in the treatment of acute staphylococcal periprosthetic joint infections (PJI). However, if, when, and how to use rifampin remains a matter of debate. We evaluated the outcome of patients treated with and without rifampin, and analyzed the influence of timing, dose and co-antibiotic. Methods Acute staphylococcal PJIs treated with surgical debridement between 1999 and 2017, and a minimal follow-up of 1 year were evaluated. Treatment failure was defined as the need for any further surgical procedure related to infection, PJI-related death or the need for suppressive antimicrobial treatment. Results A total of 669 patients were analyzed. Treatment failure was 32.2% (131/407) in patients treated with rifampin and 54.2% (142/262) in whom rifampin was withheld (P < .001). The most prominent effect of rifampin was observed in knees (treatment failure 28.6% versus 63.9%, respectively, P < .001). The use of rifampin was an independent predictor of treatment success in the multi-variate analysis (OR 0.30, 95% CI 0.20 – 0.45). In the rifampin group, the use of a co-antibiotic other than a fluoroquinolone or clindamycin (OR 10.1, 95% CI 5.65 – 18.2) and the start of rifampin within 5 days after surgical debridement (OR 1.96, 95% CI 1.08 – 3.65) were predictors of treatment failure. The dosing of rifampin had no effect on outcome. Conclusions Our data supports the use of rifampin in acute staphylococcal PJIs treated with surgical debridement, particularly in knees. Immediate start of rifampin after surgical debridement should probably be discouraged, but requires further investigation.

Background Previous studies demonstrated the efficacy of a rifampicin-based regimen in the treatment of acute staphylococcal periprosthetic joint infections (PJIs) treated with surgical debridement. However, evidence is lacking to support the use of rifampicin in cases where the implant is exchanged during revision. Methods We included all consecutive cases of staphylococcal PJIs treated from January 2013 to December 2018 with revision surgery in this international, retrospective, multicenter observational cohort study. PJI was defined according to the European Bone and Joint Infection Society diagnostic criteria. A relapse or reinfection during follow-up, the need for antibiotic suppressive therapy, the need for implant removal, and PJI-related death were defined as clinical failure. Cases without reimplantation or with follow-up <12 months were excluded. Results A total of 375 cases were included in the final analysis, including 124 1-stage exchanges (33.1%) and 251 2-stage exchanges (66.9%). Of those, 101 cases failed (26.9%). There was no statistically significant difference in failure of patients receiving rifampicin (22.5%, 42/187) and those not receiving rifampicin (31.4%, 59/188; P = .051). A subanalysis of chronic PJIs treated by 2-stage exchange arthroplasty demonstrated a lower failure rate in cases treated with rifampicin (15%) compared with the no-rifampicin group (35.5%; P = .005). In this subgroup, the use of rifampicin and an antibiotic holiday of >2 weeks were independent predictors of clinical success (odds ratio [OR], 0.36; 95% CI, 0.15–0.88; and OR, 0.19; 95% CI, 0.04–0.90; respectively). Conclusions Combination treatment with rifampicin increases treatment success in patients with chronic staphylococcal PJI treated with 2-stage exchange arthroplasty.

Background The success of debridement, antibiotics, and implant retention (DAIR) in early periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) largely depends on the presence of a mature biofilm. At what time point DAIR should be disrecommended is unknown. This multicenter study evaluated the outcome of DAIR in relation to the time after index arthroplasty. Methods We retrospectively evaluated PJIs occurring within 90 days after surgery and treated with DAIR. Patients with bacteremia, arthroscopic debridements, and a follow-up &lt;1 year were excluded. Treatment failure was defined as (1) any further surgical procedure related to infection; (2) PJI-related death; or (3) use of long-term suppressive antibiotics. Results We included 769 patients. Treatment failure occurred in 294 patients (38%) and was similar between time intervals from index arthroplasty to DAIR: the failure rate for Week 1–2 was 42% (95/226), the rate for Week 3–4 was 38% (143/378), the rate for Week 5–6 was 29% (29/100), and the rate for Week 7–12 was 42% (27/65). An exchange of modular components was performed to a lesser extent in the early post-surgical course compared with the late course (41% vs 63%, respectively; P &lt; .001). The causative microorganisms, comorbidities, and durations of symptoms were comparable between time intervals. Conclusions DAIR is a viable option in patients with early PJI presenting more than 4 weeks after index surgery, as long as DAIR is performed within at least 1 week after the onset of symptoms and modular components can be exchanged.

Objectives The aim of this study was to investigate the clinical relevance of an isolated positive sonication fluid culture (SFC) in patients who underwent revision surgery of a prosthetic joint. We hypothesized that cases with a positive SFC have a higher rate of infection during follow-up compared with controls with a negative SFC. Methods This retrospective multicentre observational study was performed within the European Study Group of Implant-Associated Infections. All patients who underwent revision surgery of a prosthetic joint between 2013 and 2019 and had a minimum follow-up of 1 year were included. Patients with positive tissue cultures or synovial fluid cultures were excluded from the study. Results A total of 95 cases (positive SFC) and 201 controls (negative SFC) were included. Infection during follow-up occurred in 12 of 95 cases (12.6%) versus 14 of 201 controls (7.0%) (p = 0.125). In all, 79.8% of cases were with treated with antibiotics (76/95). Of the non-treated cases, 89% (17/19) had a positive SFC with a low virulent microorganism. When solely analysing patients who were not treated with antibiotics, 16% of the cases (3/19) had an infection during follow-up versus 5% of the controls (9/173) (p = 0.08). Discussion Although not statistically significant, infections were almost twice as frequent in patients with an isolated positive SFC. These findings require further exploration in larger trials and to conclude about the potential benefit of antibiotic treatment in these cases.