We compared the outcomes of one-stage and two-stage revision surgeries for periprosthetic joint infections of the knee and hip joints. Patients in both groups had similar reinfection rates and functional recovery, but two-stage hip patients experienced more complications, partly due to the temporary use of cement spacers. Our findings suggest that one-stage revision may be a viable alternative to two-stage revision, potentially reducing complications without increasing reinfection risk.

This study evaluated the use of an automated custom-made multiplex PCR (mPCR) test of synovial fluid in presumed aseptic revision hip and knee arthroplasties. Of all 200 patients, none developed a periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) within the first year after surgery. The study showed that a positive mPCR test did not have value for prediction of PJI development. Therefore, the authors do not recommend using this test in presumed aseptic hip or knee revision surgery.

This systematic review presents the results regarding the concordance rate between preoperative synovial fluid and intraoperative tissue culturing in patients with a prosthetic joint infection (PJI). The included studies had heterogeneous results and were at a high risk of bias. Higher-quality future research may help to better understand the true concordance between these cultures. This may result in better guidance for orthopedic surgeons regarding the treatment of patients with PJI.

Patients who receive joint replacement surgery might suffer from infection, which usually requires another surgery to clean the prosthesis and remove infected tissue. This tissue is analysed for bacteria in order to start appropriate antibiotic therapy. Bacteria are not always found, calling the appropriateness of the second surgery into question. We compared the treatment outcome in a large group of culture-positive and culture-negative patients and noticed a better outcome in the latter group.