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.

In this study, culture of samples obtained by sonication of prostheses was more sensitive than conventional periprosthetic-tissue culture for the microbiologic diagnosis of prosthetic hip and knee infection, especially in patients who had received antimicrobial therapy within 14 days before surgery.

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.

We conducted a matched case-control study to determine risk factors for the development of prosthetic joint infection. Cases were patients with prosthetic hip or knee joint infection. Controls were patients who underwent total hip or knee arthroplasty and did not develop prosthetic joint infection. A multiple logistic regression model indicated that risk factors for prosthetic joint infection were the development of a surgical site infection not involving the prosthesis (odds ratio [OR], 35.9; 95% confidence interval [CI], 8.3 -154.6), a National Nosocomial Infections Surveillance (NNIS) System surgical patient risk index score of 1 (OR, 1.7; 95% CI, 1.2 -2.3) or 2 (OR, 3.9; 95% CI, 2.0 -7.5), the presence of a malignancy (OR, 3.1; 95% CI, 1.3 -7.2), and a history of joint arthroplasty (OR, 2.0; 95% CI, 1.4 -3.0). Our findings suggest that a surgical site infection not involving the joint prosthesis, an NNIS System surgical patient risk index score of 1 or 2, the presence of a malignancy, and a history of a joint arthroplasty are associated with an increased risk of prosthetic joint infection.

Background Numerous factors influence total hip arthroplasty (THA) stability including surgical approach and soft tissue tension, patient compliance, and component position. One long-held tenet regarding component position is that cup inclination and anteversion of 40°± 10°a nd 15°± 10°, respectively, represent a ''safe zone'' as defined by Lewinnek that minimizes dislocation after primary THA; however, it is clear that components positioned in this zone can and do dislocate. Questions/purposes We sought to determine if these classic radiographic targets for cup inclination and anteversion accurately predicted a safe zone limiting dislocation in a contemporary THA practice.Methods From a cohort of 9784 primary THAs performed between 2003 and 2012 at one institution, we retrospectively identified 206 THAs (2%) that subsequently dislocated. Radiographic parameters including inclination, anteversion, center of rotation, and limb length discrepancy were analyzed. Mean followup was 27 months (range, 0-133 months). Results The majority (58% [120 of 206]) of dislocated THAs had a socket within the Lewinnek safe zone. Mean cup inclination was 44°± 8°with 84% within the safe zone for inclination. Mean anteversion was 15°± 9°with 69% within the safe zone for anteversion. Sixty-five percent of dislocated THAs that were performed through a posterior approach had an acetabular component within the combined acetabular safe zones, whereas this was true for only 33% performed through an anterolateral approach. An acetabular component performed through a posterior approach was three times as likely to be within the combined acetabular safe zones (odds ratio [OR], 1.3; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.1-1.6) than after an anterolateral approach (OR, 0.4; 95% CI, 0.2-0.7; p \ 0.0001). In contrast, acetabular components performed through a posterior approach (OR, 1.6; 95% CI, 1.2-1.9) had an increased risk of dislocation compared with those performed through an anterolateral approach (OR, 0.8; 95% CI, 0.7-0.