IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pone00/0151537.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Re-Infection Outcomes Following One- And Two-Stage Surgical Revision of Infected Knee Prosthesis: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Author

Listed:
  • Setor K Kunutsor
  • Michael R Whitehouse
  • Erik Lenguerrand
  • Ashley W Blom
  • Andrew D Beswick
  • INFORM Team

Abstract

Background: Periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) is a serious complication of total knee arthroplasty. Two-stage revision is the most widely used technique and considered as the most effective for treating periprosthetic knee infection. The one-stage revision strategy is an emerging alternative option, however, its performance in comparison to the two-stage strategy is unclear. We therefore sought to ask if there was a difference in re-infection rates and other clinical outcomes when comparing the one-stage to the two-stage revision strategy. Objective: Our first objective was to compare re-infection (new and recurrent infections) rates for one- and two-stage revision surgery for periprosthetic knee infection. Our second objective was to compare between the two revision strategies, clinical outcomes as measured by postoperative Knee Society Knee score, Knee Society Function score, Hospital for Special Surgery knee score, WOMAC score, and range of motion. Design: Systematic review and meta-analysis. Data sources: MEDLINE, EMBASE, Web of Science, Cochrane Library, reference lists of relevant studies to August 2015, and correspondence with investigators. Study selection: Longitudinal (prospective or retrospective cohort) studies conducted in generally unselected patients with periprosthetic knee infection treated exclusively by one- or two-stage revision and with re-infection outcomes reported within two years of revision surgery. No clinical trials comparing both revision strategies were identified. Review methods: Two independent investigators extracted data and discrepancies were resolved by consensus with a third investigator. Re-infection rates from 10 one-stage studies (423 participants) and 108 two-stage studies (5,129 participants) were meta-analysed using random-effect models after arcsine transformation. Results: The rate (95% confidence intervals) of re-infection was 7.6% (3.4–13.1) in one-stage studies. The corresponding re-infection rate for two-stage revision was 8.8% (7.2–10.6). In subgroup analyses, re-infection rates remained generally similar for several study-level and clinically relevant characteristics. Postoperative clinical outcomes of knee scores and range of motion were similar for both revision strategies. Limitations: Potential bias owing to the limited number of one-stage revision studies and inability to explore heterogeneity in greater detail. Conclusions: Available evidence from aggregate published data suggest the one-stage revision strategy may be as effective as the two-stage revision strategy in treating infected knee prostheses in generally unselected patients. Further investigation is warranted. Systematic review registration: PROSPERO 2015: CRD42015017327

Suggested Citation

  • Setor K Kunutsor & Michael R Whitehouse & Erik Lenguerrand & Ashley W Blom & Andrew D Beswick & INFORM Team, 2016. "Re-Infection Outcomes Following One- And Two-Stage Surgical Revision of Infected Knee Prosthesis: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 11(3), pages 1-15, March.
    • Handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0151537
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0151537
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0151537
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0151537&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pone.0151537?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Roger M. Harbord & Julian P.T. Higgins, 2008. "Meta-regression in Stata," Stata Journal, StataCorp LP, vol. 8(4), pages 493-519, December.
    2. Sue Duval & Richard Tweedie, 2000. "Trim and Fill: A Simple Funnel-Plot–Based Method of Testing and Adjusting for Publication Bias in Meta-Analysis," Biometrics, The International Biometric Society, vol. 56(2), pages 455-463, June.
    3. Setor K Kunutsor & Michael R Whitehouse & Ashley W Blom & Andrew D Beswick & INFORM Team, 2015. "Re-Infection Outcomes following One- and Two-Stage Surgical Revision of Infected Hip Prosthesis: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 10(9), pages 1-14, September.
    4. David Moher & Alessandro Liberati & Jennifer Tetzlaff & Douglas G Altman & The PRISMA Group, 2009. "Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses: The PRISMA Statement," PLOS Medicine, Public Library of Science, vol. 6(7), pages 1-6, July.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Daniele Zago & Maria Eugênia Andrighetto Canozzi & Júlio Otávio Jardim Barcellos, 2020. "Pregnant beef cow’s nutrition and its effects on postnatal weight and carcass quality of their progeny," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 15(8), pages 1-20, August.
    2. Viktoria Maria Baumeister & Leonie Petra Kuen & Maike Bruckes & Gerhard Schewe, 2021. "The Relationship of Work-Related ICT Use With Well-being, Incorporating the Role of Resources and Demands: A Meta-Analysis," SAGE Open, , vol. 11(4), pages 21582440211, November.
    3. Kate Birnie & Rachel Cooper & Richard M Martin & Diana Kuh & Avan Aihie Sayer & Beatriz E Alvarado & Antony Bayer & Kaare Christensen & Sung-il Cho & Cyrus Cooper & Janie Corley & Leone Craig & Ian J , 2011. "Childhood Socioeconomic Position and Objectively Measured Physical Capability Levels in Adulthood: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 6(1), pages 1-13, January.
    4. Ritchwood, Tiarney D. & Ford, Haley & DeCoster, Jamie & Sutton, Marnie & Lochman, John E., 2015. "Risky sexual behavior and substance use among adolescents: A meta-analysis," Children and Youth Services Review, Elsevier, vol. 52(C), pages 74-88.
    5. Christopher Winchester & Kelsey E. Medeiros, 2023. "In Bounds but Out of the Box: A Meta-Analysis Clarifying the Effect of Ethicality on Creativity," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 183(3), pages 713-743, March.
    6. Lianjie Liu & Zhuo Shao & Hang Yu & Wei Zhang & Hao Wang & Zubing Mei, 2020. "Is the platelet to lymphocyte ratio a promising biomarker to distinguish acute appendicitis? Evidence from a systematic review with meta-analysis," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 15(5), pages 1-15, May.
    7. Fabrizio Sgolastra & Ambra Petrucci & Marco Severino & Roberto Gatto & Annalisa Monaco, 2013. "Relationship between Periodontitis and Pre-Eclampsia: A Meta-Analysis," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 8(8), pages 1-11, August.
    8. Ioana A Cristea & Robin N Kok & Pim Cuijpers, 2016. "The Effectiveness of Cognitive Bias Modification Interventions for Substance Addictions: A Meta-Analysis," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 11(9), pages 1-19, September.
    9. Je-Young Lee & Minkyung Baek, 2023. "Effects of Gamification on Students’ English Language Proficiency: A Meta-Analysis on Research in South Korea," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(14), pages 1-19, July.
    10. Martin Polak & Norbert Tanzer & Per Carlbring, 2022. "PROTOCOL: Effects of virtual reality exposure therapy versus in vivo exposure in treating social anxiety disorder in adults: A systematic review and meta‐analysis," Campbell Systematic Reviews, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 18(3), September.
    11. Muthanna Samara & Bruna Da Silva Nascimento & Aiman El-Asam & Sara Hammuda & Nabil Khattab, 2021. "How Can Bullying Victimisation Lead to Lower Academic Achievement? A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of the Mediating Role of Cognitive-Motivational Factors," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(5), pages 1-21, February.
    12. Xian-Tao Zeng & Wei Luo & Wei Huang & Quan Wang & Yi Guo & Wei-Dong Leng, 2013. "Tooth Loss and Head and Neck Cancer: A Meta-Analysis of Observational Studies," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 8(11), pages 1-8, November.
    13. Zhao-Feng Chen & Lufei Young & Chong Ho Yu & S. Pamela K. Shiao, 2018. "A Meta-Prediction of Methylenetetrahydrofolate-Reductase Polymorphisms and Air Pollution Increased the Risk of Ischemic Heart Diseases Worldwide," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 15(7), pages 1-16, July.
    14. Chun-Yu Chang & Po-Chen Lin & Yung-Jiun Chien & Chien-Sheng Chen & Meng-Yu Wu, 2020. "Analysis of Chest-Compression Depth and Full Recoil in Two Infant Chest-Compression Techniques Performed by a Single Rescuer: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 17(11), pages 1-17, June.
    15. Daniele Nucci & Cristina Fatigoni & Andrea Amerio & Anna Odone & Vincenza Gianfredi, 2020. "Red and Processed Meat Consumption and Risk of Depression: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 17(18), pages 1-20, September.
    16. Mohith M. Varma & Shengzi Zeng & Laura Singh & Emily A. Holmes & Jingyun Huang & Man Hey Chiu & Xiaoqing Hu, 2024. "A systematic review and meta-analysis of experimental methods for modulating intrusive memories following lab-analogue trauma exposure in non-clinical populations," Nature Human Behaviour, Nature, vol. 8(10), pages 1968-1987, October.
    17. Woodley of Menie, Michael A. & Peñaherrera-Aguirre, Mateo & Sarraf, Matthew A., 2022. "Signs of a Flynn effect in rodents? Secular differentiation of the manifold of general cognitive ability in laboratory mice (Mus musculus) and Norwegian rats (Rattus norvegicus) over a century—Results," Intelligence, Elsevier, vol. 95(C).
    18. Teresa Del Giudice & Carla Cavallo & Francesco Caracciolo & Gianni Cicia, 2015. "What attributes of extra virgin olive oil are really important for consumers: a meta-analysis of consumers’ stated preferences," Agricultural and Food Economics, Springer;Italian Society of Agricultural Economics (SIDEA), vol. 3(1), pages 1-15, December.
    19. Panayiotis D Ziakas & Rachana Thapa & Louis B Rice & Eleftherios Mylonakis, 2013. "Trends and Significance of VRE Colonization in the ICU: A Meta-Analysis of Published Studies," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 8(9), pages 1-1, September.
    20. Shuying Chen & Qingyu Shen & Yamei Tang & Lei He & Yi Li & Hui Li & Mei Li & Ying Peng, 2014. "Efficacy and Safety of Adding Clopidogrel to Aspirin on Stroke Prevention among High Vascular Risk Patients: A Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 9(8), pages 1-10, August.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0151537. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: plosone (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.