Background: Infection after shoulder arthroplasty can be a devastating complication, and subacute and chronic low-grade infections have proven difficult to diagnose. Serum marker analyses commonly used to diagnose periprosthetic infection are often inconclusive. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the effectiveness of serum interleukin-6 (IL-6) as a marker of periprosthetic shoulder infection. Methods: A prospective cohort study of thirty-four patients who had previously undergone shoulder arthroplasty and required revision surgery was conducted. The serum levels of IL-6 and C-reactive protein (CRP), the erythrocyte sedimentation rate (ESR), and the white blood-cell count (WBC) were measured. The definitive diagnosis of an infection was determined by growth of bacteria on culture of intraoperative specimens. Two-sample Wilcoxon rank-sum (Mann-Whitney) tests were used to determine the presence of a significant difference in the ESR and WBC between patients with and those without infection, while the Fisher exact test was used to assess differences in IL-6 and CRP levels between those groups. The sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, negative predictive value, and accuracy of each marker were also calculated. Results: There was no significant difference in the IL-6 level, WBC, ESR, or CRP level between patients with and those without infection. With a normal serum IL-6 level defined as <10 pg/mL, this test had a sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, negative predictive value, and accuracy of 0.14, 0.95, 0.67, 0.61, and 0.62, respectively. Conclusions: IL-6 analysis may have utility as a confirmatory test but is not an effective screening tool for periprosthetic shoulder infection. This finding is in contrast to the observation, in previous studies, that IL-6 is more sensitive than traditional serum markers for periprosthetic infection.

Background: The perioperative diagnosis of infection in the setting of revision elbow arthroplasty may be difficult to establish. Intraoperative pathology with histology for identification of acute inflammatory changes has been reported to be of value in revision surgery after failed hip or knee arthroplasty. The purpose of this study was to study the role of intraoperative histology in the diagnosis of infection in patients undergoing revision elbow arthroplasty. Methods: From 2000 to 2007, 296 consecutive revision elbow procedures were performed at our institution. Both intraoperative histology and operative samples for culture were obtained at the time of 227 of these procedures, which form the basis of this study. Results: Histology was read as consistent with acute inflammation in patients undergoing thirty-three procedures (14.5%). Intraoperative cultures were positive in thirty-nine procedures (17.2%). Intraoperative histology was considered true positive (both histology and cultures positive) in twenty arthroplasties (8.8%), true negative (both histology and cultures were negative) in 175 arthroplasties (77.1%), false positive (the histology was positive but the culture was negative) in thirteen arthroplasties (5.7%), and false negative (the histology was negative but the culture was positive) in nineteen arthroplasties (8.4%). With regard to intraoperative histology, the sensitivity was 51.3%, the specificity was 93.1%, and the accuracy was 85.9%. The positive predictive value was 60.6% and the negative predictive value was 90.2%. Conclusions: In our study, intraoperative histology had a high specificity and negative predictive value, but a low sensitivity and positive predictive value for predicting infection in the setting of revision elbow arthroplasty. Intraoperative histology should be used in conjunction with other studies to definitively establish the diagnosis of infection in the setting of revision elbow arthroplasty.

Abstract These guidelines are intended for use by infectious disease specialists, orthopedists, and other healthcare professionals who care for patients with prosthetic joint infection (PJI). They include evidence-based and opinion-based recommendations for the diagnosis and management of patients with PJI treated with debridement and retention of the prosthesis, resection arthroplasty with or without subsequent staged reimplantation, 1-stage reimplantation, and amputation.

Negative culture result is frequently encountered in periprosthetic joint infection, but its clinical feature has not been well studied. In this study, clinical characteristics and treatment outcome were compared in two patient groups: (1) 40 periprosthetic joint infections with negative culture results (culture-negative group) and (2) 135 patients with positive culture results (culture-positive group). In comparison of two groups, the culture-negative group showed significantly higher incidence of prior antibiotic use (p = 0.005), higher incidence of prior resection surgery (p < 0.001) and lower ESR (p = 0.02) than the culture-positive group. The success rate of infection control was higher in the culture-negative group (p = 0.006), which suggests that culture negativity may not necessarily be a negative prognostic factor for periprosthetic joint infection.

Background: An intraoperative culture sample obtained during revision elbow arthroplasty that is unexpectedly positive poses a dilemma for the surgeon. The purpose of our study was to determine the prevalence of positive cultures during revision elbow arthroplasty when infection is not suspected preoperatively, and the long-term implications of these positive cultures. Methods: Two hundred and thirteen consecutive revision elbow arthroplasties were performed at our institution between 2000 and 2007. Of these, sixteen patients had unexpected positive intraoperative cultures. Results: The majority of cultures grew either Staphylococcus epidermidis or Propionibacterium acnes. Twelve patients had more than two years of follow-up. One of the twelve patients was treated as for an infection because of unexplained early implant loosening and the isolation of Staphylococcus epidermidis. Ten of the twelve elbows were treated as “contaminants” and did not receive long-term antibiotic treatment. Nine of these ten remained infection-free at the time of the final follow-up, while the remaining one developed an infection with a different organism. Conclusions: In our series, there was a 7.5% chance of encountering an unexpected positive result on intraoperative culture at the time of revision elbow arthroplasty. The majority of patients were successfully treated without antibiotics with a low rate of failure. A minority were considered as infections, typically presenting with unexplained early loosening and isolation of an organism on solid culture medium.

BACKGROUND: Up to 2% of THAs are complicated by infection, leading to dissatisfied patients with poor function and major social and economic consequences. The challenges are control of infection, restoration of full function, and prevention of recurrence. Irrigation and débridement with or without exchange of modular components remains an attractive alternative to two-stage reimplantation in acutely infected THAs but with variable results from previous studies. QUESTIONS/PURPOSES: We therefore determined the rate at which aggressive early débridement with exchange of modular components controlled acutely infected cemented THAs. METHODS: We retrospectively studied all 26 patients presenting with acutely infected cemented THAs (16 primaries, 10 revisions) occurring within 6 weeks of the index operation or of hematogenous spread from a confirmed source of infection elsewhere between 1999 and 2006. Microbiology confirmed bacterial colonization in all patients, with 18 early postoperative infections and eight acute hematogenous infections. Patients underwent aggressive débridement with open complete synovectomy, exchange of all mobile parts, débridement of all aspects of the joint, irrigation with antiseptic solutions, and pulsatile lavage. Minimum followup was 5 years (mean, 6.6 years; range, 5-11 years). RESULTS: Eight patients had multiple washouts with control of infection in four at latest followup. Five patients underwent two-stage revisions and one patient was placed on long-term antibiotic suppression. Twenty patients returned to their expected functional level with no radiographic evidence of prosthetic failure. At minimum 5-year followup, we had a 77% infection control rate. CONCLUSIONS: Our data confirm current literature and suggest there may be a role for aggressive early débridement in controlling acute postoperative and hematogenous infections after cemented THA. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level IV, therapeutic study. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

Background Clinical characteristics and control of the infection of patients with culture-negative (CN) prosthetic joint infection (PJI) have not been well assessed. Prior use of antimicrobial therapy has been speculated but not proven as a risk factor for CNPJI. Questions/purposes We therefore determined whether prior use of antimicrobial therapy, prior PJI, and postoperative wound healing complications were associated with CN PJI. Methods We performed a retrospective case-control study of 135 patients with CN PJI treated between January 1, 1985, and December 31, 2000 matched with 135 patients with culture-positive (CP) PJIs (control patients) during the study period. The time to failure of therapy compared between cases and control patients using a Kaplan-Meier analysis. Results The use of prior antimicrobial therapy and postoperative wound drainage after index arthroplasty were associated with increased odds of PJI being culture-negative (odds ratio, 4.7; 95% CI, 2.8-8.1 and odds ratio, 3.5; 95% CI, 1.5-8.1, respectively). The percent (± SE) cumulative incidence free of treatment failure at 2 years followup was similar for CN and CP PJI: 75% (± 4%) and 79% (± 4%), respectively. Conclusions Prior antimicrobial therapy and postoperative wound drainage were associated with an increased risk of negative cultures among patients with PJI. Physicians should critically evaluate the need for antimicrobial therapy before establishing a microbiologic diagnosis of PJI in patients with suspected PJI.

Background. Culture-negative (CN) prosthetic joint infection (PJI) has not been well studied. We performed a retrospective cohort study to define the demographic characteristics and determine the outcome of patients with CN PJI. Methods. All cases of CN total hip arthroplasty and total knee arthroplasty infections (using a strict case definition) treated at our institution from January 1990 through December 1999 were analyzed. Kaplan-Meier survival methods were used to determine the cumulative probability of success. Results. Of 897 episodes of PJI during the study period, 60 (7%) occurred in patients for whom this was the initial episode of CN PJI. The median age of the cohort was 69 years (range, 36–87 years). Patients had received a prior course of antimicrobial therapy in 32 (53%) of 60 episodes. Of the 60 episodes, 34 (57%), 12 (20%), and 8 (13%) were treated with 2-stage exchange, debridement and retention, and permanent resection arthroplasty, respectively. The median duration of parenteral antimicrobial therapy was 28 days (range, 0–88 days). Forty-nine (82%) of 60 episodes were treated with a cephalosporin. The 5-year estimate of survival free of treatment failure was 94% (95% confidence interval, 85%–100%) for patients treated with 2-stage exchange and 71% (95% confidence interval, 44%–100%) for patients treated with debridement and retention. Conclusions. CN PJI occurs infrequently at our institution. Prior use of antimicrobial therapy is common among patients with CN PJI. CN PJI treated at our institution is associated with a rate of favorable outcome that is comparable to that associated with PJI due to known bacterial pathogens.

Eight patients with shoulder sepsis were treated with staged exchange arthroplasty using antibiotic-impregnated polymethyl methacrylate spacers shaped and fitted to the patient's anatomy after extensive joint débridement. Intravenous antibiotic therapy followed for a minimum of 3 months. At the end of 6 months, the patients were evaluated for any clinical or laboratory signs of infection; none were encountered. Exchange prosthetic reconstructions were performed using standard implants fixed with antibiotic-impregnated polymethyl methacrylate cement. Three patients underwent a revision to total shoulder arthroplasty, whereas 5 underwent hemiarthroplasty of the humerus with local capsular flap covering of the glenoid. All patients experienced substantial pain relief and improvement in function despite limited total overhead motion, showing this technique to be a satisfactory salvage procedure for managing sepsis of the glenohumeral joint primarily and after total shoulder arthroplasty.