LOWER RATES OF REOPERATION FOLLOWING SINGLE-STAGE OR PARTIAL EXCHANGE COMPARED TO DEBRIDEMENT, ANTIBIOTICS, AND IMPLANT RETENTION FOR ACUTE PERIPROSTHETIC JOINT INFECTION FOLLOWING TOTAL HIP ARTHROPLASTY
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study aims to (1) compare treatment outcome of debridement, antibiotics, and implant retention (DAIR) compared to single-stage revision arthroplasty (SSRA) for early postoperative (≤6 weeks from surgery) and acute hematogenous (<4 weeks of symptoms) total hip arthroplasty (THA) periprosthetic joint injection (PJI), and (2) identify factors associated with treatment outcome. A retrospective cohort study of patients who underwent revision surgery for PJI between 2004–2021 with a minimum 1-year follow-up. Treatment success was defined as treatment eradication as per Delphi-based International Multidisciplinary Consensus at a minimum of 1-year, with or without suppressive antibiotics. The effect of different factors on treatment outcome was determined. One hundred and two patients (mean age of 66.76 ± 13.5 years) served as the study population. Seventy-six patients (74.5%) underwent DAIR while 26 patients (25.5%) underwent a partial or complete SSRA. At a mean follow-up of 8.2 ± 5.7 years, significantly more patients initially treated with DAIR failed treatment (DAIR, 50 [65.8%]; SSRA, 10 [40%]; p=0.015). Bivariate regression analysis showed that performing a SSRA was associated with a higher likelihood of treatment success (OR 4.499, 95% CI 1.600 to 12.647, p = 0.004) while higher BMI was associated with treatment failure (OR 0.934, 95% CI 0.878 to 0.994, p = 0.032). To reduce the rate of recalcitrant infection after revision arthroplasty for early postoperative or acute hematogenous THA PJI, surgeons should attempt a single-stage revision whenever feasible. High-quality evidence validating the potential benefit of SSRA over DAIR is urgently needed to guide patients, physicians, and health policy experts.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".