The European Bone and Joint Infection Society definition of periprosthetic joint infection is meaningful in clinical practice: a multicentric validation study with comparison with previous definitions
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.2340/17453674.2023.5670Keywords:
Arthroplasty, Definition, Diagnosis, Hip, Infection, Knee, Prosthetic Joint Infection, Revision ArthroplastyAbstract
Background and purpose: A new periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) definition has recently been proposed by the European Bone and Joint Infection Society (EBJIS). The goals of this paper are to evaluate its diagnostic accuracy and compare it with previous definitions and to assess its accuracy in preoperative diagnosis.
Patients and methods: We retrospectively evaluated a multicenter cohort of consecutive revision total hip and knee arthroplasties. Cases with minimum required diagnostic workup were classified according to EBJIS, 2018 International Consensus Meeting (ICM 2018), Infectious Diseases Society of America (IDSA), and modified 2013 Musculoskeletal Infection Society (MSIS) definitions. 2 years’ minimum follow-up was required to assess clinical outcome.
Results: Of the 472 cases included, PJI was diagnosed in 195 (41%) cases using EBJIS; 188 (40%) cases using IDSA; 172 (36%) using ICM 2018; and 145 (31%) cases using MSIS. EBJIS defined fewer cases as intermediate (5% vs. 9%; p = 0.01) compared with ICM 2018. Specificity was determined by comparing risk of subsequent PJI after revision surgery. Infected cases were associated with higher risk of subsequent PJI in every definition. Cases classified as likely/confirmed infections using EBJIS among those classified as not infected in other definitions showed a significantly higher risk of subsequent PJI compared with concordant non-infected cases using MSIS (RR = 3, 95% CI 1–6), but not using ICM 2018 (RR = 2, CI 1–6) or IDSA (RR = 2, CI 1–5). EBJIS showed the highest agreement between pre-operative and definitive classification (k = 0.9, CI 0.8–0.9) and was better at ruling out PJI with an infection unlikely result (sensitivity 89% [84–93], negative predictive value 90% [85–93]).
Conclusion: The newly proposed EBJIS definition emerged as the most sensitive of all major definitions. Cases classified as PJI according to the EBJIS criteria and not by other definitions seem to have increased risk of subsequent PJI compared with concordant non-infected cases. EBJIS classification is accurate in ruling out infection preoperatively.
Downloads
References
Patel A, Pavlou G, Mujica-Mota R E, Toms A D. The epidemiology of revision total knee and hip arthroplasty in England and Wales: a comparative analysis with projections for the United States. A study using the National Joint Registry dataset. Bone Joint J 2015; 97-B: 1076-81. doi: 10.1302/0301-620X.97B8.35170. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1302/0301-620X.97B8.35170
Portillo M E, Salvado M, Alier A, Sorli L, Martinez S, Horcajada J P, et al. Prosthesis failure within 2 years of implantation is highly predictive of infection. Clin Orthop Relat Res 2013; 471(11): 3672-8. doi: 10.1007/s11999-013-3200-7. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11999-013-3200-7
Ribera A, Morata L, Moranas J, Agullo J L, Martinez J C, Lopez Y, et al. Clinical and microbiological findings in prosthetic joint replacement due to aseptic loosening. J Infect 2014; 69(3): 235-43. doi: 10.1016/j.jinf.2014.05.003. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jinf.2014.05.003
Hipfl C, Mooij W, Perka C, Hardt S, Wassilew G I. Unexpected low-grade infections in revision hip arthroplasty for aseptic loosening: a single-institution experience of 274 hips. Bone Joint J 2021; 103-B: 1070-7. doi: 10.1302/0301-620X.103B6.BJJ-2020-2002.R1. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1302/0301-620X.103B6.BJJ-2020-2002.R1
Jacobs A M E, Benard M, Meis J F, van Hellemondt G, Goosen J H M. The unsuspected prosthetic joint infection: incidence and consequences of positive intra-operative cultures in presumed aseptic knee and hip revisions. Bone Joint J 2017; 99-B: 1482-9. doi: 10.1302/0301-620X.99B11.BJJ-2016-0655.R2. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1302/0301-620X.99B11.BJJ-2016-0655.R2
Parvizi J, Zmistowski B, Berbari E F, Bauer T W, Springer B D, Della Valle C J, et al. New definition for periprosthetic joint infection: from the Workgroup of the Musculoskeletal Infection Society. Clin Orthop Relat Res 2011; 469(11): 2992-4. doi: 10.1007/s11999-011-2102-9. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11999-011-2102-9
Parvizi J, Gehrke T, International Consensus Group on Periprosthetic Joint Infection: Definition of periprosthetic joint infection. J Arthroplasty 2014; 29: 1331. doi: 10.1016/j.arth.2014.03.009. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.arth.2014.03.009
Osmon D R, Berbari E F, Berendt A R, Lew D, Zimmerli W, Steckelberg J M, et al. Diagnosis and management of prosthetic joint infection: clinical practice guidelines by the Infectious Diseases Society of America. Clin Infect Dis 2013; 56(1): e1-e25. doi: 10.1093/cid/cis803. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/cid/cis803
Parvizi J, Tan T L, Goswami K, Higuera C, Della Valle C, Chen A F, et al. The 2018 definition of periprosthetic hip and knee infection: an evidence-based and validated criteria. J Arthroplasty 2018; 33(5): 1309-14. doi: 10.1016/j.arth.2018.02.078. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.arth.2018.02.078
Shohat N, Bauer T, Buttaro M, Budhiparama N, Cashman J, Della Valle C J, et al. Hip and knee section, what is the definition of a periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) of the knee and the hip? Can the same criteria be used for both joints? Proceedings of International
Consensus on Orthopedic Infections. J Arthroplasty 2019; 34: S325-7. doi: 10.1016/j.arth.2018.09.045. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.arth.2018.09.045
Li M, Zeng Y, Wu Y, Si H, Bao X, Shen B. Performance of sequencing assays in diagnosis of prosthetic joint infection: a systematic review and meta-analysis. J Arthroplasty 2019; 34: 1514-22. doi: 10.1016/j.arth.2019.02.044. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.arth.2019.02.044
Kheir M M, Tan T L, Shohat N, Foltz C, Parvizi J. Routine diagnostic tests for periprosthetic joint infection demonstrate a high false-negative rate and are influenced by the infecting organism. J Bone Joint Surg Am 2018; 100(23): 2057-65. doi: 10.2106/JBJS.17.01429. DOI: https://doi.org/10.2106/JBJS.17.01429
Staats K, Kolbitsch P, Sigmund I K, Hobusch G M, Holinka J, Windhager R. Outcome of total hip and total knee revision arthroplasty with minor infection criteria: a retrospective matched-pair analysis. J Arthroplasty 2017; 32(4): 1266-71. doi: 10.1016/j.arth.2016.11.016. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.arth.2016.11.016
Milandt N R, Gundtoft P H, Overgaard S. A single positive tissue culture increases the risk of rerevision of clinically aseptic THA: a national register study. Clin Orthop Relat Res 2019; 477: 1372-81. doi: 10.1097/CORR.0000000000000609. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1097/CORR.0000000000000609
Vargas-Reveron C, Soriano A, Fernandez-Valencia J A, Martinez-Pastor J C, Morata L, Munoz-Mahamud E. Prevalence and impact of positive intraoperative cultures in partial hip or knee revision. J Arthroplasty 2020; 35: 1912-16. doi: 10.1016/j.arth.2020.02.025. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.arth.2020.02.025
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: 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
Sigmund I K, Luger M, Windhager R, McNally M A. Diagnosing periprosthetic joint infections: a comparison of infection definitions: EBJIS 2021, ICM 2018, and IDSA 2013. Bone Joint Res 2022; 11: 608-18. doi: 10.1302/2046-3758.119.BJR-2022-0078.R1. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1302/2046-3758.119.BJR-2022-0078.R1
Guan H, Fu J, Li X, Chai W, Hao L, Li R, et al. The 2018 new definition of periprosthetic joint infection improves the diagnostic efficiency in the Chinese population. J Orthop Surg Res 2019; 14: 151. doi: 10.1186/s13018-019-1185-y. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/s13018-019-1185-y
Saleh A, Guirguis A, Klika A K, Johnson L, Higuera C A, Barsoum W K. Unexpected positive intraoperative cultures in aseptic revision arthroplasty. J Arthroplasty 2014; 29: 2181-6. doi: 10.1016/j.arth.2014.07.010. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.arth.2014.07.010
Published
How to Cite
License
Copyright (c) 2023 Ricardo Sousa, Ana Ribau, Pedro Alfaro, Marc-Antoine Burch, Joris Ploegmakers, Martin McNally, Martin Clauss, Marjan Wouthuyzen-Bakker, Alex Soriano
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.
