Increasing risk of revision due to infection after primary total hip arthroplasty: results from the Nordic Arthroplasty Register Association
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.2340/17453674.2023.13648Keywords:
Arthroplasty, Hip, Infection, Nordic Arthroplasty Register Association, PJI, Revision for infection, SSI, Statistics, Time trendAbstract
Background and purpose: The incidence of periprosthetic joint infection after total hip arthroplasty (THA) may be increasing. We performed time-trend analyses of risk, rates, and timing of revision due to infection after primary THAs in the Nordic countries from the period 2004–2018.
Patients and methods: 569,463 primary THAs reported to the Nordic Arthroplasty Register Association from 2004 to 2018 were studied. Absolute risk estimates were calculated by Kaplan–Meier and cumulative incidence function methods, whereas adjusted hazard ratios (aHR) were assessed by Cox regression with the first revision due to infection after primary THA as primary endpoint. In addition, we explored changes in the time span from primary THA to revision due to infection.
Results: 5,653 (1.0%) primary THAs were revised due to infection during a median follow-up time of 5.4 (IQR 2.5–8.9) years after surgery. Compared with the period 2004–2008, the aHRs for revision were 1.4 (95% confidence interval [CI] 1.3–1.5) for 2009–2013, and 1.9 (CI 1.7–2.0) for 2014–2018. The absolute 5-year rates of revision due to infection were 0.7% (CI 0.7–0.7), 1.0% (CI 0.9–1.0), and 1.2% (CI 1.2–1.3) for the 3 time periods respectively. We found changes in the time span from primary THA to revision due to infection. Compared with 2004–2008, the aHR for revision within 30 days after THA was 2.5 (CI 2.1–2.9) for 2009–2013, and 3.4 (CI 3.0–3.9) for 2013–2018. The aHR for revision within 31–90 days after THA was 1.5 (CI 1.3–1.9) for 2009–2013, and 2.5 (CI 2.1–3.0) for 2013–2018, compared with 2004–2008.
Conclusion: The risk of revision due to infection after primary THA almost doubled, both in absolute cumulative incidence and in relative risk, throughout the period 2004–2018. This increase was mainly due to an increased risk of revision within 90 days of THA. This may reflect a “true” increase (i.e., frailer patients or more use of uncemented implants) and/or an “apparent” increase (i.e., improved diagnostics, changed revision strategy, or completeness of reporting) in incidence of periprosthetic joint infection. It is not possible to disclose such changes in the present study, and this warrants further research.
Downloads
References
Li K, Cuadra M, Scarola G, Odum S, Otero J, Griffin W, et al. Complications in the treatment of periprosthetic joint infection of the hip: when do they occur? J Bone Jt Infect 2021; 6(7): 295-303. doi: 10.5194/jbji-6-295-2021. DOI: https://doi.org/10.5194/jbji-6-295-2021
Premkumar A, Kolin D A, Farley K X, Wilson J M, McLawhorn A S, Cross M B, et al. Projected economic burden of periprosthetic joint infection of the hip and knee in the United States. J Arthroplasty 2021; 36(5): 1484-9.e3. doi: 10.1016/j.arth.2020.12.005. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.arth.2020.12.005
Brochin R L, Phan K, Poeran J, Zubizarreta N, Galatz L M, Moucha C S. Trends in periprosthetic hip infection and associated costs: a population-based study assessing the impact of hospital factors using national data. J Arthroplasty 2018; 33(7s): S233-s8. doi: 10.1016/j.arth.2018.02.062. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.arth.2018.02.062
Kurtz S M, Lau E C, Son M S, Chang E T, Zimmerli W, Parvizi J. Are we winning or losing the battle with periprosthetic joint infection: trends in periprosthetic joint infection and mortality risk for the Medicare population. J Arthroplasty 2018; 33(10): 3238-45. doi: 10.1016/j.arth.2018.05.042. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.arth.2018.05.042
Lenguerrand E, Whitehouse M R, Beswick A D, Jones S A, Porter M L, Blom A W. Revision for prosthetic joint infection following hip arthroplasty: evidence from the National Joint Registry. Bone J Res 2017; 6(6): 391-8. doi: 10.1302/2046-3758.66.Bjr-2017-0003.R1. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1302/2046-3758.66.BJR-2017-0003.R1
Dale H, Fenstad A M, Hallan G, Havelin L I, Furnes O, Overgaard S, et al. Increasing risk of prosthetic joint infection after total hip arthroplasty. Acta Orthop 2012; 83(5): 449-58. doi: 10.3109/17453674.2012.733918. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3109/17453674.2012.733918
Dale H, Høvding P, Tveit S M, Graff J B, Lutro O, Schrama J C, et al. Increasing but levelling out risk of revision due to infection after total hip arthroplasty: a study on 108,854 primary THAs in the Norwegian Arthroplasty Register from 2005 to 2019. Acta Orthop 2021; 92(2): 208-14. doi: 10.1080/17453674.2020.1851533. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/17453674.2020.1851533
Mäkelä K T, Furnes O, Hallan G, Fenstad A M, Rolfson O, Kärrholm J, et al. The benefits of collaboration: the Nordic Arthroplasty Register Association. EFORT Open Rev 2019; 4(6): 391-400. doi: 10.1302/2058-5241.4.180058. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1302/2058-5241.4.180058
The Norwegian Arthroplasty Register Annual Report 2019. Available from: http://nrlweb.ihelse.net/eng/Rapporter/Report2019_english.pdf.
Gundtoft P H, Pedersen A B, Schonheyder H C, Overgaard S. Validation of the diagnosis “prosthetic joint infection” in the Danish Hip Arthroplasty Register. Bone Joint J 2016; 98-b(3): 320-5. doi: 10.1302/0301-620x.98b3.36705. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1302/0301-620X.98B3.36705
Lindgren J V, Gordon M, Wretenberg P, Kärrholm J, Garellick G. Validation of reoperations due to infection in the Swedish Hip Arthroplasty Register. BMC Musculoskelet Disord 2014; 15: 384. doi: 10.1186/1471-2474-15-384. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/1471-2474-15-384
The Swedish Arthroplasty Register’s Annual Report 2019. Available from: https://registercentrum.blob.core.windows.net/shpr/r/VGR_Annual-report_SHAR_2019_EN_Digital-pages_FINAL-ryxaM-BUWZ_.pdf.
Ranstam J, Kärrholm J, Pulkkinen P, Mäkelä K, Espehaug B, Pedersen A B, et al. Statistical analysis of arthroplasty data, II: Guidelines. Acta Orthop 2011; 82(3): 258-67. doi: 10.3109/17453674.2011.588863. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3109/17453674.2011.588863
McNally M, Sousa R, Wouthuyzen-Bakker M, Chen A F, Soriano A, Vogely H C, et al. The EBJIS definition of periprosthetic joint infection. Bone Joint J 2021; 103-b(1): 18-25. doi: 10.1302/0301-620x.103b1.Bjj-2020-1381.R1. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1302/0301-620X.103B1.BJJ-2020-1381.R1
Lie S A, Fenstad A M, Lygre S H L, Kroken G, Dybvik E, Gjertsen J E, et al. Kaplan–Meier and Cox regression are preferable for the analysis of time to revision of joint arthroplasty: thirty-one years of follow-up for cemented and uncemented THAs inserted from 1987 to 2000 in the Norwegian Arthroplasty Register. JBJS Open Access 2022; 7(1): e21.00108. doi: 10.2106/jbjs.Oa.21.00108. DOI: https://doi.org/10.2106/JBJS.OA.21.00108
Cnudde P H J, Nemes S, Bülow E, Timperley A J, Whitehouse S L, Kärrholm J, et al. Risk of further surgery on the same or opposite side and mortality after primary total hip arthroplasty: a multi-state analysis of 133,654 patients from the Swedish Hip Arthroplasty Register. Acta Orthop 2018; 89(4): 386-93. doi: 10.1080/17453674.2018.1475179. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/17453674.2018.1475179
Hastie T J, Tibshirani R J. Generalized additive models. London: Chapman & Hall; 1990.
Ranstam J, Kärrholm J, Pulkkinen P, Mäkelä K, Espehaug B, Pedersen A B, et al. Statistical analysis of arthroplasty data, I: Introduction and background. Acta Orthop 2011; 82(3): 253-7. doi: 10.3109/17453674.2011.588862. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3109/17453674.2011.588862
Perfetti D C, Boylan M R, Naziri Q, Paulino C B, Kurtz S M, Mont M A. Have periprosthetic hip infection rates plateaued? J Arthroplasty 2017; 32(7): 2244-7. doi: 10.1016/j.arth.2017.02.027. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.arth.2017.02.027
Choi H J, Adiyani L, Sung J, Choi J Y, Kim H B, Kim Y K, et al. Five-year decreased incidence of surgical site infections following gastrectomy and prosthetic joint replacement surgery through active surveillance by the Korean Nosocomial Infection Surveillance System. J Hosp Infect 2016; 93(4): 339-46. doi: 10.1016/j.jhin.2015.12.021. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhin.2015.12.021
Sodhi N, Anis H K, Garbarino L J, Gold P A, Kurtz S M, Higuera C A, et al. Have we actually reduced our 30-day short-term surgical site infection rates in primary total hip arthroplasty in the United States? J Arthroplasty 2019; 34(9): 2102-6. doi: 10.1016/j.arth.2019.04.045. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.arth.2019.04.045
ECDC Healthcare-associated infections: surgical site infections Annual Epidemiological Report 2017. Available from: https://www.ecdc.europa.eu/sites/default/files/documents/AER_for_2017-SSI.pdf.
Engesæter L B, Dale H, Schrama J C, Hallan G, Lie S A. Surgical procedures in the treatment of 784 infected THAs reported to the Norwegian Arthroplasty Register. Acta Orthop 2011; 82(5): 530-7. doi: 10.3109/17453674.2011.623572. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3109/17453674.2011.623572
Scheper H, Mahdad R, Elzer B, Löwik C, Zijlstra W, Gosens T, et al. Wound drainage after arthroplasty and prediction of acute prosthetic joint infection: prospective data from a multicentre cohort study using a telemonitoring app. J Bone Jt Infect 2023; 8(1): 59-70. doi: 10.5194/jbji-8-59-2023. DOI: https://doi.org/10.5194/jbji-8-59-2023
Zhu Y, Zhang F, Chen W, Liu S, Zhang Q, Zhang Y. Risk factors for periprosthetic joint infection after total joint arthroplasty: a systematic review and meta-analysis. J Hosp Infect 2015; 89(2): 82-9. doi: 10.1016/j.jhin.2014.10.008. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhin.2014.10.008
Dudareva M, Barrett L, Figtree M, Scarborough M, Watanabe M, Newnham R, et al. Sonication versus tissue sampling for diagnosis of prosthetic joint and other orthopedic device-related infections. J Clin Microbiol 2018; 56(12). doi: 10.1128/jcm.00688-18. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1128/JCM.00688-18
Sigmund I K, Yeghiazaryan L, Luger M, Windhager R, Sulzbacher I, McNally M A. Three to six tissue specimens for histopathological analysis are most accurate for diagnosing periprosthetic joint infection. Bone Joint J 2023; 105-b(2): 158-65. doi: 10.1302/0301-620x.105b2.Bjj-2022-0859.R1. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1302/0301-620X.105B2.BJJ-2022-0859.R1
Patel R. Periprosthetic joint infection. N Engl J Med 2023; 388(3): 251-62. doi: 10.1056/NEJMra2203477. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJMra2203477
Kamp M C, Liu W Y, Goosen J H M, Rijnen W H C, van Steenbergen L N, van der Weegen W. Mismatch in capture of periprosthetic joint infections between the Dutch Arthroplasty Register (LROI) and a detailed regional periprosthetic joint infection registry. J Arthroplasty 2022; 37(1): 126-31. doi: 10.1016/j.arth.2021.09.001. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.arth.2021.09.001
Springer B D, Cahue S, Etkin C D, Lewallen D G, McGrory B J. Infection burden in total hip and knee arthroplasties: an international registry-based perspective. Arthroplast Today 2017; 3(2): 137-40. doi: 10.1016/j.artd.2017.05.003. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.artd.2017.05.003
Gundtoft P H, Overgaard S, Schonheyder H C, Moller J K, Kjaersgaard-Andersen P, Pedersen A B. The “true” incidence of surgically treated deep prosthetic joint infection after 32,896 primary total hip arthroplasties. Acta Orthop 2015: 1-9. doi: 10.3109/17453674.2015.1011983. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3109/17453674.2015.1011983
Jämsen E, Nevalainen P, Eskelinen A, Huotari K, Kalliovalkama J, Moilanen T. Obesity, diabetes, and preoperative hyperglycemia as predictors of periprosthetic joint infection: a single-center analysis of 7181 primary hip and knee replacements for osteoarthritis. J Bone Joint Surg Am 2012; 94(14): e1011-e9. doi: 10.2106/JBJS.J.01935. DOI: https://doi.org/10.2106/JBJS.J.01935
Pedersen A B, Mehnert F, Johnsen S P, Sørensen H T. Risk of revision of a total hip replacement in patients with diabetes mellitus: a population-based follow up study. J Bone Joint Surg Br 2010; 92(7): 929-34. doi: 10.1302/0301-620X.92B7.24461. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1302/0301-620X.92B7.24461
Varnum C, Pedersen A B, Gundtoft P H, Overgaard S. The what, when and how of orthopaedic registers: an introduction into register-based research. EFORT Open Rev 2019; 4(6): 337-43. doi: 10.1302/2058-5241.4.180097. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1302/2058-5241.4.180097
Additional Files
Published
How to Cite
License
Copyright (c) 2023 Håvard Dale, Anne Marie Fenstad, Geir Hallan, Søren Overgaard, Alma B Pedersen, Nils P Hailer, Johan Kärrholm, Ola Rolfson, Antti Eskelinen, Keijo T Mäkelä, Ove Furnes
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.
