Rates of Periprosthetic Joint Infection and Revision Increase After Arthroscopic Lysis of Adhesions Subsequent to Primary TKA.

IF 4.3 1区 医学 Q1 ORTHOPEDICS
Kian Niknam, Bradley A Lezak, Nathaniel P Mercer, Joseph X Robin, Erik Hansen, Drew Lansdown, Ran Schwarzkopf
{"title":"Rates of Periprosthetic Joint Infection and Revision Increase After Arthroscopic Lysis of Adhesions Subsequent to Primary TKA.","authors":"Kian Niknam, Bradley A Lezak, Nathaniel P Mercer, Joseph X Robin, Erik Hansen, Drew Lansdown, Ran Schwarzkopf","doi":"10.2106/JBJS.24.00929","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Arthrofibrosis is a debilitating complication of total knee arthroplasty (TKA) and may benefit from arthroscopic lysis of adhesions (LOA) to improve range of motion and decrease pain. However, the rates of periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) and of the need for future revision TKA (rTKA) have only been studied in a limited capacity in the literature. In this study, we aimed to compare PJI and revision outcomes in patients who had undergone TKA between those who subsequently underwent arthroscopic LOA and those who did not undergo arthroscopic LOA.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>The PearlDiver database was utilized to identify patients who had undergone primary TKA between 2016 and 2021. ICD-10 (International Classification of Diseases, Tenth Revision) and CPT (Current Procedural Terminology) codes were then used to identify patients who underwent LOA for arthrofibrosis. The rates of PJI and rTKA were compared between patients who did and did not undergo LOA. Multivariable logistic and Cox regressions, controlling for age, sex, Charlson Comorbidity Index, tobacco use, and a body mass index of >30 kg/m 2 , were performed to compare the rates of PJI and revision between the LOA and no-LOA groups.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of 383,143 patients were identified, of whom 703 had undergone arthroscopic LOA. Patients who underwent LOA had higher overall rates of PJI (2.7% versus 1.3%; p = 0.001) and all-cause revision (9.8% versus 1.8%; p < 0.001) than those who did not. Patients who underwent LOA had significantly higher odds of PJI (odds ratio [OR], 2.00; p < 0.014), aseptic loosening-related revision (OR, 3.31; p = 0.002), and all-cause revision (OR, 5.32; p < 0.001) within 1 year after the initial TKA. There was no significant difference in 1-year PJI-related revisions between the groups (OR, 1.71; p = 0.193). In a time-to-event analysis, patients undergoing LOA had significantly higher risks of PJI (p = 0.003) and all-cause revision (p = 0.001) but not PJI-related revision (p = 0.322) or aseptic loosening-related revision (p = 0.111).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Arthroscopic LOA after primary TKA was associated with higher rates of PJI and subsequent revision surgery. Surgeons should consider the results of these studies when counseling patients on the importance of early rehabilitation and improving modifiable risk factors after TKA.</p><p><strong>Level of evidence: </strong>Therapeutic Level III . See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.</p>","PeriodicalId":15273,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery, American Volume","volume":" ","pages":"e49"},"PeriodicalIF":4.3000,"publicationDate":"2025-05-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery, American Volume","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2106/JBJS.24.00929","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/3/17 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ORTHOPEDICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Arthrofibrosis is a debilitating complication of total knee arthroplasty (TKA) and may benefit from arthroscopic lysis of adhesions (LOA) to improve range of motion and decrease pain. However, the rates of periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) and of the need for future revision TKA (rTKA) have only been studied in a limited capacity in the literature. In this study, we aimed to compare PJI and revision outcomes in patients who had undergone TKA between those who subsequently underwent arthroscopic LOA and those who did not undergo arthroscopic LOA.

Methods: The PearlDiver database was utilized to identify patients who had undergone primary TKA between 2016 and 2021. ICD-10 (International Classification of Diseases, Tenth Revision) and CPT (Current Procedural Terminology) codes were then used to identify patients who underwent LOA for arthrofibrosis. The rates of PJI and rTKA were compared between patients who did and did not undergo LOA. Multivariable logistic and Cox regressions, controlling for age, sex, Charlson Comorbidity Index, tobacco use, and a body mass index of >30 kg/m 2 , were performed to compare the rates of PJI and revision between the LOA and no-LOA groups.

Results: A total of 383,143 patients were identified, of whom 703 had undergone arthroscopic LOA. Patients who underwent LOA had higher overall rates of PJI (2.7% versus 1.3%; p = 0.001) and all-cause revision (9.8% versus 1.8%; p < 0.001) than those who did not. Patients who underwent LOA had significantly higher odds of PJI (odds ratio [OR], 2.00; p < 0.014), aseptic loosening-related revision (OR, 3.31; p = 0.002), and all-cause revision (OR, 5.32; p < 0.001) within 1 year after the initial TKA. There was no significant difference in 1-year PJI-related revisions between the groups (OR, 1.71; p = 0.193). In a time-to-event analysis, patients undergoing LOA had significantly higher risks of PJI (p = 0.003) and all-cause revision (p = 0.001) but not PJI-related revision (p = 0.322) or aseptic loosening-related revision (p = 0.111).

Conclusions: Arthroscopic LOA after primary TKA was associated with higher rates of PJI and subsequent revision surgery. Surgeons should consider the results of these studies when counseling patients on the importance of early rehabilitation and improving modifiable risk factors after TKA.

Level of evidence: Therapeutic Level III . See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

原发性TKA术后关节镜下松解粘连后假体周围关节感染和翻修率增加。
背景:关节纤维化是全膝关节置换术(TKA)的一种使人衰弱的并发症,关节镜下粘连松解术(LOA)可以改善活动范围和减轻疼痛。然而,假体周围关节感染(PJI)的发生率和未来翻修TKA (rTKA)的必要性在文献中只进行了有限的研究。在这项研究中,我们的目的是比较那些随后接受关节镜LOA和未接受关节镜LOA的TKA患者的PJI和翻修结果。方法:利用PearlDiver数据库识别2016年至2021年间接受过原发性TKA的患者。然后使用ICD-10(国际疾病分类,第十版)和CPT(现行程序术语)代码来识别因关节纤维化而接受LOA的患者。比较接受和未接受LOA的患者PJI和rTKA的发生率。采用多变量logistic回归和Cox回归,控制年龄、性别、Charlson合并症指数、吸烟和体重指数bbb30 kg/m2,比较LOA组和无LOA组的PJI和修订率。结果:共发现383,143例患者,其中703例接受了关节镜下LOA。接受LOA的患者有更高的PJI总体发生率(2.7% vs 1.3%;P = 0.001)和全因修正(9.8% vs 1.8%;P < 0.001)。接受LOA的患者发生PJI的几率明显更高(优势比[OR], 2.00;p < 0.014),无菌松动相关修订(OR, 3.31;p = 0.002),全因修正(OR, 5.32;p < 0.001)。两组间1年pji相关修订无显著差异(OR, 1.71;P = 0.193)。在时间-事件分析中,接受LOA的患者发生PJI (p = 0.003)和全因翻修(p = 0.001)的风险显著增加,但PJI相关翻修(p = 0.322)或无菌松动相关翻修(p = 0.111)的风险显著增加。结论:原发性全膝关节置换术后关节镜下LOA与更高的PJI发生率和随后的翻修手术相关。外科医生在咨询患者TKA后早期康复和改善可改变危险因素的重要性时,应考虑这些研究的结果。证据等级:治疗性III级。有关证据水平的完整描述,请参见作者说明。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
8.90
自引率
7.50%
发文量
660
审稿时长
1 months
期刊介绍: The Journal of Bone & Joint Surgery (JBJS) has been the most valued source of information for orthopaedic surgeons and researchers for over 125 years and is the gold standard in peer-reviewed scientific information in the field. A core journal and essential reading for general as well as specialist orthopaedic surgeons worldwide, The Journal publishes evidence-based research to enhance the quality of care for orthopaedic patients. Standards of excellence and high quality are maintained in everything we do, from the science of the content published to the customer service we provide. JBJS is an independent, non-profit journal.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信