Scientific Articles   |    
Risk Factors for Infection After Knee ArthroplastyA Register-Based Analysis of 43,149 Cases
Esa Jämsen, BM1; Heini Huhtala, MSc2; Timo Puolakka, MD, PhD1; Teemu Moilanen, MD, PhD1
1 Coxa, Hospital for Joint Replacement, P.O. Box 652, FIN-33101 Tampere, Finland. E-mail address for E. Jämsen: esa.jamsen@uta.fi
2 Tampere School of Public Health, University of Tampere, FIN-33014 Tampere, Finland
View Disclosures and Other Information
Disclosure: In support of their research for or preparation of this work, one or more of the authors received, in any one year, outside funding or grants of less than $10,000 from the Finnish Medical Society Duodecim, the Research Foundation for Orthopaedics and Traumatology, Finland, and the competitive research funding of Pirkanmaa Hospital District, Finland. Neither they nor a member of their immediate families received payments or other benefits or a commitment or agreement to provide such benefits from a commercial entity. No commercial entity paid or directed, or agreed to pay or direct, any benefits to any research fund, foundation, division, center, clinical practice, or other charitable or nonprofit organization with which the authors, or a member of their immediate families, are affiliated or associated.
Investigation performed at Coxa, Hospital for Joint Replacement, Tampere, Finland

The Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery, Inc.
J Bone Joint Surg Am, 2009 Jan 01;91(1):38-47. doi: 10.2106/JBJS.G.01686
5 Recommendations (Recommend) | 3 Comments | Saved by 3 Users Save Case


Background: Clinical studies have revealed a number of important risk factors for postoperative infection following total knee arthroplasty. Because of the small numbers of cases in those studies, there is a risk of obtaining false-negative results in statistical analyses. The purpose of the present study was to determine the risk factors for infection following primary and revision knee replacement in a large register-based series.

Methods: A total of 43,149 primary and revision knee arthroplasties, registered in the Finnish Arthroplasty Register, were followed for a median of three years. The Finnish Arthroplasty Register and the Finnish Hospital Discharge Register were searched for surgical interventions that were performed for the treatment of deep postoperative infections. Cox regression analysis with any reoperation performed for the treatment of infection as the end point was performed to determine the risk factors for this adverse outcome.

Results: Three hundred and eighty-seven reoperations were performed because of infection. Both partial and complete revision total knee arthroplasty increased the risk of infection as compared with the risk following primary knee replacement. Male patients, patients with seropositive rheumatoid arthritis or with a previous fracture around the knee, and patients with constrained and hinged prostheses had increased rates of infection after primary arthroplasty. Wound-related complications increased the risk of deep infection. The rate of septic failure was lower after unicondylar than after total condylar primary knee arthroplasty, but the difference was not significant. The combination of parenteral antibiotic prophylaxis and prosthetic fixation with antibiotic-impregnated cement protected against septic failure, especially after revision knee arthroplasty. Following revision total knee arthroplasty, diagnosis and prosthesis type had no effect, but previous revision for the treatment of infection and wound-healing problems predisposed to repeat revision for the treatment of infection.

Conclusions: There was an increased risk of deep postoperative infection in male patients and in patients with rheumatoid arthritis or a fracture around the knee as the underlying diagnosis for knee replacement. The results of the present study suggest that the infection rate is similar after partial revision and complete revision total knee arthroplasties. Combining intravenous antibiotic prophylaxis with antibiotic-impregnated cement seems advisable in revision arthroplasty.

Level of Evidence: Prognostic Level II. See Instructions to Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

Figures in this Article
    Sign In to Your Personal ProfileSign In To Access Full Content
    Not a Subscriber?
    Get online access for 30 days for $35
    New to JBJS?
    Sign up for a full subscription to both the print and online editions
    Register for a FREE limited account to get full access to all CME activities, to comment on public articles, or to sign up for alerts.
    Register for a FREE limited account to get full access to all CME activities
    Have a subscription to the print edition?
    Current subscribers to The Journal of Bone & Joint Surgery in either the print or quarterly DVD formats receive free online access to JBJS.org.
    Forgot your password?
    Enter your username and email address. We'll send you a reminder to the email address on record.

    Forgot your username or need assistance? Please contact customer service at subs@jbjs.org. If your access is provided
    by your institution, please contact you librarian or administrator for username and password information. Institutional
    administrators, to reset your institution's master username or password, please contact subs@jbjs.org


    Accreditation Statement
    These activities have been planned and implemented in accordance with the Essential Areas and policies of the Accreditation Council for Continuing Medical Education (ACCME) through the joint sponsorship of the American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons and The Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery, Inc. The American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons is accredited by the ACCME to provide continuing medical education for physicians.
    CME Activities Associated with This Article
    Submit a Comment
    Please read the other comments before you post yours. Contributors must reveal any conflict of interest.
    Comments are moderated and will appear on the site at the discretion of JBJS editorial staff.

    * = Required Field
    (if multiple authors, separate names by comma)
    Example: John Doe

    Related Content
    The Journal of Bone & Joint Surgery
    JBJS Case Connector
    Topic Collections
    Related Audio and Videos
    PubMed Articles
    One-stage versus two-stage exchange. J Orthop Res 2014;32 Suppl 1():S141-6.
    Results provided by:
    Clinical Trials
    Readers of This Also Read...
    JBJS Jobs
    OR - The Center - Orthopedic and Neurosurgical Care and Research