根据术前和术中评估,外科医生在翻修时披露假体周围关节感染的能力如何?一项针对挪威关节成形术登记册上报告的 16,922 例初次全髋关节成形术的研究。

IF 2.5 2区 医学 Q1 ORTHOPEDICS
Olav Lutro, Synnøve Mo, Marianne Bollestad Tjørhom, Anne Marie Fenstad, Tesfaye Hordofa Leta, Trond Bruun, Geir Hallan, Ove Furnes, Håvard Dale
{"title":"根据术前和术中评估,外科医生在翻修时披露假体周围关节感染的能力如何?一项针对挪威关节成形术登记册上报告的 16,922 例初次全髋关节成形术的研究。","authors":"Olav Lutro, Synnøve Mo, Marianne Bollestad Tjørhom, Anne Marie Fenstad, Tesfaye Hordofa Leta, Trond Bruun, Geir Hallan, Ove Furnes, Håvard Dale","doi":"10.2340/17453674.2024.39914","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background and purpose: </strong>Revision due to infection, as reported to the Norwegian Arthroplasty Register (NAR), is a surrogate endpoint to periprosthetic joint infection (PJI). We aimed to find the accuracy of the reported causes of revision after primary total hip arthroplasty (THA) compared with PJI to see how good surgeons were at disclosing infection, based on pre- and intraoperative assessment.</p><p><strong>Patients and methods: </strong>We investigated the reasons for revision potentially caused by PJI following primary THA: infection, aseptic loosening, prolonged wound drainage, and pain only, reported to the NAR from surgeons in the region of Western Norway during the period 2010-2020. The electronic patient charts were investigated for information on clinical assessment, treatment, biochemistry, and microbiological findings. PJI was defined in accordance with the Musculoskeletal Infection Society (MSIS) definition. Sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy were calculated.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>363 revisions in the NAR were eligible for analyses. Causes of revision were (reported/validated): infection (153/177), aseptic loosening (139/133), prolonged wound drainage (37/13), and pain only (34/40). The sensitivity for reported revision due to infection compared with PJI was 80%, specificity was 94%, and accuracy-the surgeons' ability to disclose PJI or non-septic revision at time of revision-was 87%. The accuracy for the specific revision causes was highest for revision due to aseptic loosening (95%) and pain only (95%), and lowest for revision due to prolonged wound drainage (86%).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>The accuracy of surgeon-reported revisions due to infection as representing PJI was 87% in the NAR. Our study shows the importance of systematic correction of the reported cause of revision in arthroplasty registers, after results from adequately taken bacterial samples.</p>","PeriodicalId":6916,"journal":{"name":"Acta Orthopaedica","volume":"95 ","pages":"67-72"},"PeriodicalIF":2.5000,"publicationDate":"2024-01-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10826841/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"How good are surgeons at disclosing periprosthetic joint infection at the time of revision, based on pre- and intra-operative assessment? A study on 16,922 primary total hip arthroplasties reported to the Norwegian Arthroplasty Register.\",\"authors\":\"Olav Lutro, Synnøve Mo, Marianne Bollestad Tjørhom, Anne Marie Fenstad, Tesfaye Hordofa Leta, Trond Bruun, Geir Hallan, Ove Furnes, Håvard Dale\",\"doi\":\"10.2340/17453674.2024.39914\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background and purpose: </strong>Revision due to infection, as reported to the Norwegian Arthroplasty Register (NAR), is a surrogate endpoint to periprosthetic joint infection (PJI). We aimed to find the accuracy of the reported causes of revision after primary total hip arthroplasty (THA) compared with PJI to see how good surgeons were at disclosing infection, based on pre- and intraoperative assessment.</p><p><strong>Patients and methods: </strong>We investigated the reasons for revision potentially caused by PJI following primary THA: infection, aseptic loosening, prolonged wound drainage, and pain only, reported to the NAR from surgeons in the region of Western Norway during the period 2010-2020. The electronic patient charts were investigated for information on clinical assessment, treatment, biochemistry, and microbiological findings. PJI was defined in accordance with the Musculoskeletal Infection Society (MSIS) definition. Sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy were calculated.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>363 revisions in the NAR were eligible for analyses. Causes of revision were (reported/validated): infection (153/177), aseptic loosening (139/133), prolonged wound drainage (37/13), and pain only (34/40). The sensitivity for reported revision due to infection compared with PJI was 80%, specificity was 94%, and accuracy-the surgeons' ability to disclose PJI or non-septic revision at time of revision-was 87%. The accuracy for the specific revision causes was highest for revision due to aseptic loosening (95%) and pain only (95%), and lowest for revision due to prolonged wound drainage (86%).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>The accuracy of surgeon-reported revisions due to infection as representing PJI was 87% in the NAR. Our study shows the importance of systematic correction of the reported cause of revision in arthroplasty registers, after results from adequately taken bacterial samples.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":6916,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Acta Orthopaedica\",\"volume\":\"95 \",\"pages\":\"67-72\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.5000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-01-30\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10826841/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Acta Orthopaedica\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.2340/17453674.2024.39914\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"ORTHOPEDICS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Acta Orthopaedica","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2340/17453674.2024.39914","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ORTHOPEDICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景和目的:向挪威关节成形术登记处(NAR)报告的感染导致的翻修是假体周围关节感染(PJI)的替代终点。我们的目的是根据术前和术中评估结果,找出初级全髋关节置换术(THA)后翻修原因报告的准确性与PJI的比较,以了解外科医生在披露感染方面的能力:我们调查了挪威西部地区的外科医生在 2010-2020 年期间向挪威国家外科医生协会(NAR)报告的原发性全髋关节置换术后 PJI 可能导致的翻修原因:感染、无菌性松动、伤口引流时间过长以及疼痛。我们对电子病历进行了调查,以了解临床评估、治疗、生化和微生物学结果等信息。PJI根据肌肉骨骼感染学会(MSIS)的定义进行界定。计算敏感性、特异性和准确性:结果:NAR中的363例翻修符合分析条件。翻修的原因有(报告/验证):感染(153/177)、无菌性松动(139/133)、伤口引流时间过长(37/13)和仅疼痛(34/40)。与 PJI 相比,因感染而报告翻修的敏感性为 80%,特异性为 94%,准确性(外科医生在翻修时披露 PJI 或非无菌性翻修的能力)为 87%。具体翻修原因的准确率最高的是无菌性松动(95%)和仅疼痛(95%)导致的翻修,最低的是伤口长期引流导致的翻修(86%):结论:在NAR中,外科医生报告的因感染导致的翻修代表PJI的准确率为87%。我们的研究表明,在充分采集细菌样本得出结果后,对关节成形术登记册中报告的翻修原因进行系统校正非常重要。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
How good are surgeons at disclosing periprosthetic joint infection at the time of revision, based on pre- and intra-operative assessment? A study on 16,922 primary total hip arthroplasties reported to the Norwegian Arthroplasty Register.

Background and purpose: Revision due to infection, as reported to the Norwegian Arthroplasty Register (NAR), is a surrogate endpoint to periprosthetic joint infection (PJI). We aimed to find the accuracy of the reported causes of revision after primary total hip arthroplasty (THA) compared with PJI to see how good surgeons were at disclosing infection, based on pre- and intraoperative assessment.

Patients and methods: We investigated the reasons for revision potentially caused by PJI following primary THA: infection, aseptic loosening, prolonged wound drainage, and pain only, reported to the NAR from surgeons in the region of Western Norway during the period 2010-2020. The electronic patient charts were investigated for information on clinical assessment, treatment, biochemistry, and microbiological findings. PJI was defined in accordance with the Musculoskeletal Infection Society (MSIS) definition. Sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy were calculated.

Results: 363 revisions in the NAR were eligible for analyses. Causes of revision were (reported/validated): infection (153/177), aseptic loosening (139/133), prolonged wound drainage (37/13), and pain only (34/40). The sensitivity for reported revision due to infection compared with PJI was 80%, specificity was 94%, and accuracy-the surgeons' ability to disclose PJI or non-septic revision at time of revision-was 87%. The accuracy for the specific revision causes was highest for revision due to aseptic loosening (95%) and pain only (95%), and lowest for revision due to prolonged wound drainage (86%).

Conclusion: The accuracy of surgeon-reported revisions due to infection as representing PJI was 87% in the NAR. Our study shows the importance of systematic correction of the reported cause of revision in arthroplasty registers, after results from adequately taken bacterial samples.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Acta Orthopaedica
Acta Orthopaedica 医学-整形外科
CiteScore
6.40
自引率
8.10%
发文量
105
审稿时长
4-8 weeks
期刊介绍: Acta Orthopaedica (previously Acta Orthopaedica Scandinavica) presents original articles of basic research interest, as well as clinical studies in the field of orthopedics and related sub disciplines. Ever since the journal was founded in 1930, by a group of Scandinavian orthopedic surgeons, the journal has been published for an international audience. Acta Orthopaedica is owned by the Nordic Orthopaedic Federation and is the official publication of this federation.
×
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:481959085
Book学术官方微信