Background Prosthetic joint infection (PJI) is a potentially limb-threatening complication of total knee arthroplasty. Phage therapy is a promising strategy to manage such infections including those involving antibiotic-resistant microbes, and to target microbial biofilms. Experience with phage therapy for infections associated with retained hardware is limited. A 62-year-old diabetic man with a history of right total knee arthroplasty 11 years prior who had suffered multiple episodes of prosthetic knee infection despite numerous surgeries and prolonged courses of antibiotics, with progressive clinical worsening and development of severe allergies to antibiotics, had been offered limb amputation for persistent right prosthetic knee infection due to Klebsiella pneumoniae complex. Intravenous phage therapy was initiated as a limb-salvaging intervention. Methods The patient received 40 intravenous doses of a single phage (KpJH46Φ2) targeting his bacterial isolate, alongside continued minocycline (which he had been receiving when he developed increasing pain, swelling, and erythema prior to initiation of phage therapy). Serial cytokine and biomarker measurements were performed before, during, and after treatment. The in vitro anti-biofilm activity of KpJH46Φ2, minocycline and the combination thereof was evaluated against a preformed biofilm of the patient’s isolate and determined by safranin staining. Results Phage therapy resulted in resolution of local symptoms and signs of infection and recovery of function. The patient did not experience treatment-related adverse effects and remained asymptomatic 34 weeks after completing treatment while still receiving minocycline. A trend in biofilm biomass reduction was noted 22 hours after exposure to KpJH46Φ2 (P = .063). The addition of phage was associated with a satisfactory outcome in this case of intractable biofilm-associated prosthetic knee infection. Pending further studies to assess its efficacy and safety, phage therapy holds promise for treatment of device-associated infections.

BACKGROUND: Surgical and host factors predispose patients to periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) after primary total hip arthroplasty (THA) and total knee arthroplasty (TKA). While surgical factors are modifiable, host factors can be challenging, and there are limited data demonstrating that preoperative patient optimization decreases risk of PJI. The goal of this study was to evaluate whether extended oral antibiotic prophylaxis reduces the one-year infection rate in high-risk patients. METHODS: A total of 3855 consecutive primary THAs and TKAs performed between 2011 and 2019 at a suburban academic hospital with modern perioperative and infection-prevention protocols were retrospectively reviewed. Beginning in January 2015, a 7-day oral antibiotic prophylaxis protocol was implemented after discharge for patients at high risk for PJI. The percentage of high-risk patients diagnosed with PJI within 1 year was compared between groups that did and did not receive extended antibiotic prophylaxis. Univariate and logistic regression analyses were performed, with P ≤ .05 denoting statistical significance. RESULTS: Overall 1-year infection rates were 2.26% and 0.85% after THA and TKA, respectively. High-risk patients with extended antibiotic prophylaxis had a significantly lower rate of PJI than high-risk patients without extended antibiotic prophylaxis (0.89% vs 2.64%, respectively; P < .001). There was no difference in the infection rate between high-risk patients who received antibiotics and low-risk patients (0.89% vs 1.29%, respectively; P = .348) with numbers available. CONCLUSION: Extended postoperative oral antibiotic prophylaxis for 7 days led to a statistically significant and clinically meaningful reduction in 1-year infection rates of patients at high risk for infection. In fact, the PJI rate in high-risk patients who received antibiotics was less than the rate seen in low-risk patients. Thus, extended oral antibiotic prophylaxis may be a simple measure to effectively counteract poor host factors. Moreover, the findings of this study may mitigate the incentive to select healthier patients in outcome-based reimbursement models. Further study with a multicenter randomized control trial is needed to further validate this protocol. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Therapeutic level III.

BACKGROUND The management of prosthetic joint infection usually consists of a combination of surgery and antimicrobial therapy. The appropriate duration of antimicrobial therapy for this indication remains unclear. METHODS We performed an open-label, randomized, controlled, noninferiority trial to compare 6 weeks with 12 weeks of antibiotic therapy in patients with microbiologically confirmed prosthetic joint infection that had been managed with an appropriate surgical procedure. The primary outcome was persistent infection (defined as the persistence or recurrence of infection with the initial causative bacteria, with an antibiotic susceptibility pattern that was phenotypically indistinguishable from that at enrollment) within 2 years after the completion of antibiotic therapy. Noninferiority of 6 weeks of therapy to 12 weeks of therapy would be shown if the upper boundary of the 95% confidence interval for the absolute between-group difference (the value in the 6-week group minus the value in the 12-week group) in the percentage of patients with persistent infection within 2 years was not greater than 10 percentage points. RESULTS A total of 410 patients from 28 French centers were randomly assigned to receive antibiotic therapy for 6 weeks (205 patients) or for 12 weeks (205 patients). Six patients who withdrew consent were not included in the analysis. In the main analysis, 20 patients who died during follow-up were excluded, and missing outcomes for 6 patients who were lost to follow-up were considered to be persistent infection. Persistent infection occurred in 35 of 193 patients (18.1%) in the 6-week group and in 18 of 191 patients (9.4%) in the 12-week group (risk difference, 8.7 percentage points; 95% confidence interval, 1.8 to 15.6); thus, noninferiority was not shown. Noninferiority was also not shown in the per-protocol and sensitivity analyses. We found no evidence of between-group differences in the percentage of patients with treatment failure due to a new infection, probable treatment failure, or serious adverse events. CONCLUSIONS Among patients with microbiologically confirmed prosthetic joint infections that were managed with standard surgical procedures, antibiotic therapy for 6 weeks was not shown to be noninferior to antibiotic therapy for 12 weeks and resulted in a higher percentage of patients with unfavorable outcomes.

Study Design. Retrospective hospital-registry study. Objective. To characterize the microbial epidemiology of surgical site infection (SSI) in spinal fusion surgery and the burden of resistance to standard surgical antibiotic prophylaxis. Summary of Background Data. SSI persists as a leading complication of spinal fusion surgery despite the growth of enhanced recovery programs and improvements in other measures of surgical quality. Improved understandings of SSI microbiology and common mechanisms of failure for current prevention strategies are required to inform the development of novel approaches to prevention relevant to modern surgical practice. Methods. Spinal fusion cases performed at a single referral center between January 2011 and June 2019 were reviewed and SSI cases meeting National Healthcare Safety Network criteria were identified. Using microbiologic and procedural data from each case, we analyzed the anatomic distribution of pathogens, their differential time to presentation, and correlation with methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus screening results. Susceptibility of isolates cultured from each infection were compared with the spectrum of surgical antibiotic prophylaxis administered during the index procedure on a per-case basis. Susceptibility to alternate prophylactic agents was also modeled. Results. Among 6727 cases, 351 infections occurred within 90 days. An anatomic gradient in the microbiology of SSI was observed across the length of the back, transitioning from cutaneous (gram-positive) flora in the cervical spine to enteric (gram-negative/anaerobic) flora in the lumbosacral region (correlation coefficient 0.94, P  < 0.001). The majority (57.5%) of infections were resistant to the prophylaxis administered during the procedure. Cephalosporin-resistant gram-negative infection was common at lumbosacral levels and undetected methicillin-resistance was common at cervical levels. Conclusion. Individualized infection prevention strategies tailored to operative level are needed in spine surgery. Endogenous wound contamination with enteric flora may be a common mechanism of infection in lumbosacral fusion. Novel approaches to prophylaxis and prevention should be prioritized in this population. Level of Evidence: 3

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 Periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) is one of the most feared complications of total joint arthroplasty (TJA). Although commonly the result of colonization by Staphylococcal species, a growing number of cases of PJI with fungal pathogens have been reported within the last decade. Although standard treatment with two-stage exchange mirrors that of bacterial PJI, the variability in virulence between fungal species makes for an unpredictable and challenging treatment course. Methods A review of Pubmed and Scopus from years 2009 to 2019 was conducted with the search terms fungal, infection, Candida, arthroplasty, periprosthetic, and prosthesis. Publications were reviewed and screened, yielding data for 286 patients with fungal PJI in the hip, knee, shoulder, and elbow prosthetics. Results Patient comorbidities generally included conditions impairing wound healing and immune response such as diabetes mellitus. Candida species were the most common fungal pathogens identified (85%); 30% had a concomitant bacterial infection. A two-stage exchange was most utilized, with a mean success rate of 65%. Antifungal impregnated spacers were utilized in 82 cases, with a comparatively high success rate (81%). Attempts at debridement with implant retention had substantially lower cure rates (15%). Conclusions Two-stage exchange is the favored approach to treating fungal PJI. Debridement with implant retention does not appear adequate to control infection, and retrieval of implanted materials should be prioritized. The use of antifungal impregnated spacers is an important area of ongoing research, with uncertainty regarding the type and quantity of antifungal agent to incorporate, although recent reports support the use of these agents.

Background Periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) in total knee arthroplasty (TKA) is a challenging problem. The purpose of this study was to outline a novel technique to treat TKA PJI. We define 1.5-stage exchange arthroplasty as placing an articulating spacer with the intent to last for a prolonged time. Methods A retrospective review was performed from 2007 to 2019 to evaluate patients treated with 1.5-stage exchange arthroplasty for TKA PJI. Inclusion criteria included: articulating knee spacer(s) remaining in situ for 12 months and the patient deferring a second-stage reimplantation because the patient had acceptable function with the spacer (28 knees) or not being a surgical candidate (three knees). Thirty-one knees were included with a mean age of 63 years, mean BMI 34.4 kg/m2, 12 were female, with a mean clinical follow-up of 2.7 years. Cobalt-chrome femoral and polyethylene tibial components were used. We evaluated progression to second-stage reimplantation, reinfection, and radiographic outcomes. Results At a mean follow-up of 2.7 years, 25 initial spacers were in situ (81%). Five knees retained their spacer(s) for some time (mean 1.5 years) and then underwent a second-stage reimplantation; one of the five had progressive radiolucent lines but no evidence of component migration. Three knees (10%) had PJI reoccurrence. Four had progressive radiolucent lines, but there was no evidence of component migration in any knees. Conclusions 1.5-stage exchange arthroplasty may be a reasonable method to treat TKA PJI. At a mean follow-up of 2.7 years, there was an acceptable rate of infection recurrence and implant durability.

OBJECTIVE Currently, no consensus exists as to whether patients who develop infection of the surgical site after undergoing instrumented fusion should have their implants removed at the time of wound debridement. Instrumentation removal may eliminate a potential infection nidus, but removal may also destabilize the patient’s spine. The authors sought to summarize the existing evidence by systematically reviewing published studies that compare outcomes between patients undergoing wound washout and instrumentation removal with outcomes of patients undergoing wound washout alone. The primary objectives were to determine 1) whether instrumentation removal from an infected wound facilitates infection clearance and lowers morbidity, and 2) whether the chronicity of the underlying infection affects the decision to remove instrumentation. METHODS PRISMA guidelines were used to review the PubMed/MEDLINE, Embase, Cochrane Library, Scopus, Web of Science, and ClinicalTrials.gov databases to identify studies that compared patients with implants removed and patients with implants retained. Outcomes of interest included mortality, rate of repeat wound washout, and loss of correction. RESULTS Fifteen articles were included. Of 878 patients examined in these studies, 292 (33%) had instrumentation removed. Patient populations were highly heterogeneous, and outcome data were limited. Available data suggested that rates of reoperation, pseudarthrosis, and death were higher in patients who underwent instrumentation removal at the time of initial washout. Three studies recommended that instrumentation be uniformly removed at the time of wound washout. Five studies favored retaining the original instrumentation. Six studies favored retention in early infections but removal in late infections. CONCLUSIONS The data on this topic remain heterogeneous and low in quality. Retention may be preferred in the setting of early infection, when the risk of underlying spine instability is still high and the risk of mature biofilm formation on the implants is low. However, late infections likely favor instrumentation removal. Higher-quality evidence from large, multicenter, prospective studies is needed to reach generalizable conclusions capable of guiding clinical practice.

Background A two-stage prosthesis exchange procedure has been the gold standard in surgical treatment of the chronically infected knee arthroplasty so far. This includes 2 surgeries/hospitalizations and an interim period of 2–3 months between surgeries with impaired health, functional status and quality of life of the patients. A one-stage exchange procedure holds many obvious advantages compared to the two-stage approach, but outcomes of a one-stage versus two-stage procedures have never been investigated in a randomized clinical trial. The purpose of this study is primarily to investigate time-adjusted differences in functional status of patients after one-stage versus two-stage revision. Secondary, to report time-adjusted differences in quality of life, complications (including re-revisions due to infection) and mortality. Methods This study is a pragmatic, multi-center, randomized, non-inferiority trial comparing one-stage versus two-stage revision of the infected knee arthroplasty. Seven Danish hospitals are currently participating in the study, but additional hospitals can enter the study if adhering to protocol. Ninety-six patients will be included prospectively. Follow-up will be with PROM-questionnaires and clinical controls up to 10 years. The patients who are not able to participate in the randomized trial are followed in a parallel cohort study. PROM’s Oxford Knee Score and EQ5D + EQ5D VAS questionnaires are completed preoperatively and sent out to the study participants at 6 weeks, 3, 6, 9, 12, 18 and 24 months as well as 5 and 10 years postoperatively. In addition a tailor made cost questionnaire on the non-treating hospital resource use, community health and social service use, travel costs, time off work and informal care are sent out. Discussion If one of the two treatment alternatives is found superior in both domains of quality of life (both knee-specific and generic) and health economics, that treatment should be promoted. Other outcomes will open informed discussions about treatment strategies for periprosthetic knee infections. Trial registration The randomized trial is registered on ClinicalTrials.gov with ID NCT03435679, initial release date January 31, 2018 and the cohort study is registered with ID NCT04427943, submitted January 8, 2020 and posted June 11, 2020.

Background: Prosthetic joint infection (PJI) is a significant cause of morbidity and mortality following knee replacement surgery. The diagnosis can be challenging and is based on a combination of clinical suspicion, radiographic findings and also biochemical/ microbiological investigations. Our Aim was to review the role of aspiration and biopsy in the diagnosis of PJI in Total Knee Arthroplasty (TKA). Method/results: Aspirated synovial fluid should be analysed by direct culture, via blood culture bottles, EDTA bottles for cell count and ‘point of care’ testing such as leucocyte esterase or alpha defensin. Synovial WCC and PMN cell percentage are important steps in diagnosis of both acute and chronic PJI. A minimum of 5 deep samples using a 5 clean instrument technique should be obtained and sent for tissue culture done either blind or arthroscopic. Formal fluoroscopic guided interface biopsy has also been described with excellent results. In a recent series of 86 TKRs preoperative arthroscopic biopsy group had a sensitivity of 100%, specificity of 94.7%, positive predictive value of 87.4% and a negative predictive value of 100%. Conclusion: In the presence of clinical suspicion with raised biomarkers, it is recommended that aspiration +/- biopsy with synovial fluid testing is performed. Direct culture and cell count are recommended. ‘Point of care tests’ such as Leucocyte Esterase testing should be considered. Duration of culture, including pathogen and host factors, should be discussed with a local microbiology/ID department in the context of a formal multidisciplinary team.

Background Total joint arthroplasty (TJA) is considered one of the most successful surgical procedures ever developed. It can successfully provide pain relief, restore joint function, and improve mobility and quality of life. Prosthetic joint infection (PJI) presents with a wide variety and severity of signs and symptoms. It remains a major threat to the outcome of TJA procedures and usually necessitates surgical intervention and prolonged courses of antibiotics. Inappropriate treatment of an unrecognized PJI usually ends with unacceptable and sometimes catastrophic results. The aim The understanding and evaluation of diagnostic investigations are extremely important to properly diagnose PJI, including frequently unrecognized low-grade infections, and to provide healthcare professionals with needed information for the care of patients affected by this condition. This article aims to review most of the methods available in PJI diagnostics, to emphasize the strengths and the weaknesses of each of them, and to provide a guideline on how to select the surgical treatment strategy based on the level of diagnostic certainty during the evaluation period. To safely accomplish this, it is crucial to be aware of the limitations of each diagnostic modality. The focus The emphasis will be on the use and interpretation of the core criteria for PJI diagnosis, including the pathognomonic sinus tract communicating with the implant, purulent synovial fluid, inflammation in the periprosthetic tissue, cell count with differential, microbial growth in the synovial fluid culture, tissue sample cultures, and sonication samples.

BACKGROUND: Ratios of established inflammatory markers, erythrocyte sedimentation rate (ESR) and C-reactive protein (CRP), have been used for diagnostic purposes in the surgical field; however, the ESR:CRP ratio (ECR) has not been evaluated as a marker for predicting infection resolution in patients with periprosthetic joint infections (PJIs). This study aimed to evaluate the diagnostic accuracy of ECR in predicting postoperative reinfection in patients who underwent debridement, antibiotics, and implant retention (DAIR). METHODS: This is a retrospective review of 179 consecutive patients who underwent DAIR revision total joint arthroplasty for PJI. Patients were stratified by acuity of their infection: acute PJI, acute hematogenous PJI, and chronic PJI. The area under the receiver operating characteristic curve was calculated to evaluate ECR as diagnostic marker for predicting postoperative reinfection in patients who underwent DAIR. RESULTS: Statistically significant differences in ECR were found in patients who underwent DAIR revision total joint arthroplasty for chronic infection (1.23 vs 2.33; P = .04). There was no significant difference in ECR in patients who underwent DAIR for acute infection (P = .70) and acute hematogenous infection (P = .56). In patients who underwent DAIR for chronic PJI, ECR demonstrated a sensitivity and specificity of 75% and 84%, respectively, for the prediction of postoperative reinfection, which was significantly higher than that of ESR (sensitivity, 67%; specificity, 47%; P < .001) and CRP (sensitivity, 50%; specificity, 26%; P < .001). CONCLUSION: Elevated ECR was associated with an increased reinfection risk in patients who underwent DAIR for chronic PJI, suggesting that preoperative ECR may be a useful predictor to identify patients at increased risk of reinfection after DAIR for chronic PJIs.

Periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) is a potentially devastating complication after total elbow arthroplasty (TEA) that can lead to significant morbidity for the patient as well as increased health care–related costs. Despite the potential morbidity associated with TEA PJI, evidence is limited regarding an optimal treatment algorithm. Initial management typically consists of either irrigation and debridement or 2-stage revision. A stable implant, a functioning triceps, and an intact soft tissue envelope are necessary to perform irrigation and debridement. Irrigation and debridement is associated with a relatively high risk of infection recurrence especially in chronic infections. Two-stage revision offers a lower recurrence risk, although there is a 25% chance of not completing the second stage. Resection arthroplasty, arthrodesis, and amputation are salvage options, whereas medical treatment, in the form of antibiotics alone, is reserved for poor surgical candidates. Further multicenter prospective study and retrospective review of registry data focusing on different treatment algorithms, prevention strategies, and functional outcomes would be helpful to elucidate the ideal management of elbow PJI.

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.

Background One percent to 8% of patients undergoing spinal instrumentation surgeries develop infections. There is no consensus on the medical and surgical management of these infections. Methods We conducted a retrospective chart review based on International Classification of Diseases, Ninth Revision, and Common Procedural Terminology codes relevant to spinal infections with hardware within Emory Healthcare over a 10-year period. Extracted data included patient demographics, clinical presentation, laboratory and microbiologic results, and surgical and medical management including choice and duration of suppressive therapy. Multivariable logistic regression was used to assess the association of length of use of suppressive antibiotics with treatment success and to identify predictors of use of suppressive antibiotics. Results Of 869 records, 124 met inclusion criteria. Fifty patients (40.3%) had an infection that occurred after hardware placement, mostly within 3 months postsurgery, while the remainder had vertebral osteomyelitis that required hardware placement. After initial intravenous antibiotic treatment for ≥4 weeks, 72 patients (64.5%) were given suppressive antibiotics. The overall treatment success rate was 78.2%. In spinal infections involving hardware with gram-negative rods, patients were less likely to receive suppressive antibiotics, less likely to have hardware removed, and less likely to have treatment success compared with patients with infections with Staphylococcus species. Conclusions Management of spinal infections involving hardware should be tailored to the timing of onset of infection and causative organism. Further studies are needed to determine best management practices, particularly for gram-negative rod infections where the role of further suppressive antibiotics and hardware removal may be warranted.

Abstract. Background: Fungal prosthetic joint infections (PJIs) are rare and often associated with poor outcome; however, risk factors are not well described.Methods: This was a retrospective case control study among all patients with PJIs from 2006-2016 at two major academic centers. Each fungal PJI case was matched 1:1 with a bacterial PJI control by joint (hip, knee, shoulder) and year of diagnosis. We compared demographics, comorbidities, and clinical characteristics between cases and controls using chi square/Fisher's exact or Wilcoxon rank sum test. Independent risk factors were identified with multivariable logistic regression.Results: Forty-one fungal PJIs occurred over the study and 61% were due to Candida albicans. The hip was involved in 51.2% of cases, followed by the knee (46.3%). Compared to bacterial PJI, fungal PJI cases were more likely to have received antibiotics within the previous 3 months (70.7% vs 34%, P=.001), wound drainage lasting >5 days (48% vs 9%, P=.0002), had a lower median CRP (2.95 mg/dl vs 5.99, P=.013) and synovial fluid white blood cell count (13,953 cells/mm3 vs 33,198, P=.007), and a higher proportion of prior two-stage exchanges (82.9% vs 53.6%, P=.008). After controlling for center, prolonged wound drainage (OR, 7.3; 95% CI, 2.02-26.95) and recent antibiotics (OR, 3.4; 95% CI, 1.2-9.3) were significantly associated with fungal PJI.Conclusion: In our study, Candida albicans was the most common species in fungal PJIs and prolonged wound drainage and recent antibiotics were independent risk factors. These clinical characteristics may help providers anticipate fungal PJI and adjust management strategies.

Background Serum C-reactive protein (CRP) is an important test in the initial diagnosis of prosthetic joint infection (PJI). There is no widely accepted algorithm for the resolution of PJI. Surgeons have traditionally used CRP to determine if the infection has resolved. However, this practice is not currently supported by significant data.  Methods A retrospective analysis of our departmental arthroplasty database was conducted to determine mean values of CRP pre and postoperatively for PJI treated with the debridement, antibiotics and implant retention (DAIR) procedure, single-stage revision and two-stage revision. Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves were calculated to determine the sensitivity and specificity of CRP testing in diagnosing persistent infection. Results Of the 121 patients who had undergone treatment (75 hip replacements and 48 knee replacements), there were 26 cases of persistent infection. There was no statistical significance in the mean CRP values between successful and unsuccessful treatment groups. The areas under ROCs (AUCs) for CRP values predicting outcomes ranged from 0.46 to 0.73. Conclusion Our study does not support the use of serial CRP monitoring as an indicator of the successful eradication of PJI.

BACKGROUND: Total knee arthroplasty (TKA) periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) can be managed with debridement, antibiotic therapy, and implant retention (DAIR). Oral antibiotics can be used after DAIR for an extended time period to improve outcomes. The objective of this study was to compare DAIR failure rates and adverse events between an initial course of intravenous antibiotic therapy and the addition of extended treatment with oral antibiotics. METHODS: A multicenter observational study of patients diagnosed with a TKA PJI who underwent DAIR was performed. The primary outcome of interest was the failure rate derived from the survival time between the DAIR procedure and future treatment failure. RESULTS: One hundred eight patients met inclusion criteria; 47% (n = 51) received an extended course of oral antibiotics. These patients had a statistically significant lower failure rate compared to those who received only intravenous antibiotics (hazard ratio, 2.47; P = .009). Multivariable analysis demonstrated that extended antibiotics independently predicted treatment success, controlling for other variables. There was no significant difference in failure rates between an extended course of oral antibiotics less or more than 12 months (P = .23). No significant difference in the rates of adverse events was observed between patients who received an initial course of antibiotics alone and those who received a combination of initial and extended antibiotic therapy (P = .59). CONCLUSIONS: Extending therapy with oral antibiotics had superior infection-free survival for TKA PJI managed with DAIR. There was no increase in adverse events, demonstrating safety. After 1 year, there appears to be no significant benefit associated with continued antibiotic therapy.