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?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 LLC, 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. 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.
    2. 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.
    3. 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.
    4. 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.
    5. repec:plo:pone00:0074699 is not listed on IDEAS
    6. 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.
    7. 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.
    8. 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.
    9. 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.
    10. 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.
    11. 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).
    12. 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.
    13. Beaulieu, Myriam & Tremblay, Joël & Baudry, Claire & Pearson, Jessica & Bertrand, Karine, 2021. "A systematic review and meta-analysis of the efficacy of the long-term treatment and support of substance use disorders," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 285(C).
    14. Se Young Kim & Mi-Kyoung Cho, 2022. "The Effect of Nurse Support Programs on Job Satisfaction and Organizational Behaviors among Hospital Nurses: A Meta-Analysis," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(24), pages 1-23, December.
    15. Layan Sukik & Maryam Alyafei & Manale Harfouche & Laith J Abu-Raddad, 2019. "Herpes simplex virus type 1 epidemiology in Latin America and the Caribbean: Systematic review and meta-analytics," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 14(4), pages 1-20, April.
    16. Trood, Michael D. & Spivak, Benjamin L. & Ogloff, James R.P., 2021. "A systematic review and meta-analysis of the effects of judicial supervision on recidivism and well-being factors of criminal offenders," Journal of Criminal Justice, Elsevier, vol. 74(C).
    17. Sergio Nolazco & Kaspar Delhey & Shinichi Nakagawa & Anne Peters, 2022. "Ornaments are equally informative in male and female birds," Nature Communications, Nature, vol. 13(1), pages 1-10, December.
    18. Xin Zhang & Bai Gao & Bing Xu, 2020. "No association between the vitamin D-binding protein (DBP) gene polymorphisms (rs7041 and rs4588) and multiple sclerosis and type 1 diabetes mellitus: A meta-analysis," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 15(11), pages 1-10, November.
    19. Yucheon Kim & Songyi Lee, 2023. "A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of the Effectiveness of Non-Face-to-Face Coaching," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(12), pages 1-15, June.
    20. Ferrero, Marta & Vadillo, Miguel A. & León, Samuel P., 2021. "A valid evaluation of the theory of multiple intelligences is not yet possible: Problems of methodological quality for intervention studies," Intelligence, Elsevier, vol. 88(C).
    21. William Kofi Bosu & Siobhan Theresa Reilly & Justice Moses Kwaku Aheto & Eugenio Zucchelli, 2019. "Hypertension in older adults in Africa: A systematic review and meta-analysis," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 14(4), pages 1-25, April.

    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.