Next Article in Journal
Adherence to Screening Tests for Gynaecological and Colorectal Cancer in Patients with Diabetes in Spain: A Population-Based Study (2014–2020)
Next Article in Special Issue
Multivariate Analysis of Risk Factors for In-Hospital Dislocation Following Primary Total Hip Arthroplasty
Previous Article in Journal
Cardiac Dysfunction and Exercise Tolerance in Patients after Complex Treatment for Cranial and Craniospinal Tumors in Childhood
Previous Article in Special Issue
Simultaneous Evaluation of Bone Cut and Implant Placement Accuracy in Robotic-Assisted Total Knee Arthroplasty
 
 
Search for Articles:
Title / Keyword
Author / Affiliation / Email
Journal
Article Type
 
 
Advanced Search
 
Section
Special Issue
Volume
Issue
Number
Page
 
Journals
JCM
Volume 13
Issue 11
10.3390/jcm13113046
jcm-logo
Submit to this Journal Review for this Journal Propose a Special Issue
► Article Menu

Article Menu

share Share announcement Help format_quote Cite question_answer Discuss in SciProfiles thumb_up
...
Endorse textsms
...
Comment
first_page
settings
Order Article Reprints
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Systematic Review

Greater Risk of Periprosthetic Joint Infection Associated with Prolonged Operative Time in Primary Total Knee Arthroplasty: Meta-Analysis of 427,361 Patients

by
Kyun-Ho Shin
1,*,
Jin-Ho Kim
1 and
Seung-Beom Han
2
1
Department of Orthopedic Surgery, Yeson Hospital, Bucheon 14555, Republic of Korea
2
Department of Orthopedic Surgery, Anam Hospital, Korea University College of Medicine, Seoul 02841, Republic of Korea
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
J. Clin. Med. 2024, 13(11), 3046; https://doi.org/10.3390/jcm13113046
Submission received: 23 April 2024 / Revised: 20 May 2024 / Accepted: 21 May 2024 / Published: 22 May 2024
(This article belongs to the Special Issue New Advances in Hip and Knee Reconstructive Surgery)
Browse Figures
Versions Notes

Abstract

:
Background/Objectives: Periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) is a severe complication in total knee arthroplasty (TKA) with catastrophic outcomes. The relationship between prolonged operative times and PJI remains debated. This meta-analysis investigated the link between prolonged operative times and the risk of PJI in primary TKA. Methods: A comprehensive search of the MEDLINE/PubMed, Cochrane Library, and EMBASE databases was conducted to identify studies comparing the incidence of PJI in TKAs with prolonged versus short operative times, as well as those comparing operative times in TKAs with and without PJI. Pooled standardized mean differences (SMD) in operative times between groups with and without PJI or surgical site infections (SSI), including superficial SSIs and PJIs, were analyzed. Additionally, the pooled odds ratios (OR) for PJI in TKAs with operative times exceeding 90 or 120 min were examined. Results: Seventeen studies involving 427,361 patients were included. Significant differences in pooled mean operative times between the infected and non-infected TKA groups were observed (PJI, pooled SMD = 0.38, p < 0.01; SSI, pooled SMD = 0.72, p < 0.01). A higher risk of PJI was noted in surgeries lasting over 90 or 120 min compared to those of shorter duration (90 min, pooled OR = 1.50, p < 0.01; 120 min, pooled OR = 1.56, p < 0.01). Conclusions: An association between prolonged operative time and increased risk of PJI in primary TKA has been established. Strategies for infection prevention should encompass thorough preoperative planning aimed at minimizing factors that contribute to prolonged operative times.

1. Introduction

Periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) stands as one of the most severe complications of primary total knee arthroplasty (TKA), often resulting in catastrophic consequences [1,2,3,4,5]. Established risk factors for PJI include elevated body mass index, diabetes mellitus, urinary tract infections, allogenic blood transfusion, and rheumatoid arthritis [4,5,6,7,8]. However, these factors are largely non-modifiable, particularly in patients with severe arthritis, for whom surgery should not be delayed.
In recent decades, increasing evidence has suggested that operative time is an independent risk factor of surgical site infection (SSI) in various surgical procedures [9]. From a surgeon’s point of view, operative time is a potentially modifiable factor, in contrast to patient-related factors. However, in the TKA population, previous studies on operative time as a risk factor of PJI have reported conflicting results. Several studies have demonstrated that longer surgeries are associated with increased risk for infection [10,11,12,13,14,15,16], whereas other studies have failed to report such an association [17,18,19,20,21,22].
To the best of our knowledge, no previous study has conducted a comprehensive review to assess and quantify the association between operative time and PJI in primary TKA. Given the impact of PJIs on patient outcomes and healthcare burdens, the aim of this meta-analysis was to systematically synthesize the relevant literature that reported on the association between operative time and PJI and quantify the magnitude of the risk of prolonged operative time in patients undergoing primary TKA. We hypothesized that prolonged operative time would be associated with a greater risk of developing PJI following primary TKA. This study underscores the critical importance of managing operative duration in TKA procedures, offering clear guidelines that may help reduce the incidence of PJI, thereby enhancing patient recovery and optimizing resource utilization in clinical settings.

2. Materials and Methods

2.1. Search Strategy

This meta-analysis followed the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines [23]. This study is registered with the ResearchRegistry, and the unique identifying number is reviewregistry1823.
We performed an electronic literature search of three online databases, namely, Medline/PubMed, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, and EMBASE. The last electronic search was performed on 30 July 2023. No restrictions were applied, including the publication language, study period, or sample size. We entered the following Medical Subject Headings (MeSH) terms and key terms in all fields of the search engines: “total knee replacement” OR “ total knee arthroplasty” OR “arthroplasty, replacement, knee” [MeSH term] AND “infection” AND “Operative Time” [MeSH term] OR “operative time” OR “operating time” OR “operating times” OR “operating room time” OR “operating room times” OR “surgery time” OR “surgery times” OR “surgical time” OR “surgical times” OR “surgical duration” OR “operation duration” OR “operative duration” OR “surgery duration” or “duration of surgery” or “duration of operation” or “time of operation” or “time of surgery.” Following the initial electronic search, the relevant articles and their references were manually searched to identify other suitable articles that were not identified during the database search.

2.2. Eligibility Criteria and Study Selection

We selected studies that were eligible on the basis of the following predefined criteria: (1) studies that reported the outcomes in a cohort of patients who underwent primary TKA and excluded those who underwent revisional TKA; (2) studies that evaluated SSI or PJI and did not include generalized infections such as sepsis, urinary tract infection, or pneumonia; and (3) studies in which the outcomes were based on comparisons of operative times between infected and non-infected patients or on comparisons of infection risks between TKAs with or without prolonged operative times, defined as a cutoff value of 90 min and 120 min, as suggested by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention to identify post-TKA patients at increased risk of infection [24]. The articles were reviewed by two independent reviewers. During the first stage of screening, the reviewers manually checked the titles and abstracts of all relevant articles. The full texts of the articles were reviewed in the second stage of the screening process to select articles that met the inclusion criteria.

2.3. Data Extraction

Data were extracted according to the following descriptive information provided in the included trials: (1) study characteristics, including the author names, year of publication, study design, level of evidence, and journal title; (2) composition of the study cohort; (3) definition of infection; (4) definition of operative time; (5) controlled variables other than operative times; and (6) follow-up period. In the case of disagreement between the reviewers with respect to the data collected, the extracted data were subsequently cross-checked for accuracy.

2.4. Quality Assessment

Each of the selected studies was evaluated by two independent authors for methodological quality, first independently, and then by consensus. The Newcastle–Ottawa assessment scale was used to assess the methodological quality of the case–control studies [25,26]. The Newcastle–Ottawa assessment scale comprises selection (four categories), comparability, (one category), and outcome domains (three categories). A maximum of one star was assigned for each category within the selection and outcome domains, and a maximum of two stars was given for comparability. Studies with scores ≥ 7 were considered to have a low risk of bias; those with scores 4–6 were considered to have a moderate bias risk; and those with scores 4 were considered to have a high bias risk.

2.5. Definition and Outcomes of Interest

Various definitions of SSI and PJI following TKA are available. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) groups SSIs developed within 90 days of the index procedure into superficial (involvement of skin and subcutaneous tissue of the incision) and deep (involvement of fascial and muscle layers of the incision). Deep SSIs are grouped together as deep SSIs and constitute PJI in the context of hip and knee arthroplasty [24]. Additionally, the Musculoskeletal Infection Society (MSIS) workgroup defined algorithmic criteria for the diagnosis of PJI following TKA [27]. In the clinical practice of arthroplasty, surgical infections are generally divided into superficial SSI or deep SSI as PJI [28]. Reoperation, including debridement and removal or exchange of prostheses, is required for the treatment of PJI, while superficial subcutaneous SSI can be treated with antibiotics and incisional drainage if needed. Therefore, in the present study, PJI was defined as either a deep SSI according to the CDC criteria [24], a PJI diagnosed by the MSIS criteria [27], or a deep infection requiring reoperation after TKA. Furthermore, SSI was defined as all infections around the surgical site, including both superficial SSI and PJI.
Two primary outcomes were evaluated: the operative time in infected versus non-infected TKA cases and the incidence rates of PJI at the latest follow-up, with cohorts divided according to operative time cutoffs of 90 and 120 min.

2.6. Statistical Analysis

All data from the included studies were extracted into an Excel spreadsheet (Version number 1808, Microsoft Corporation, Redmond, WA, USA). Statistical analyses were performed using the packages meta (v4.17-0) in R Studio statistics program (v.1.4.1106) [29]. A p-value < 0.05 was set as the threshold for statistical significance. The operative times were statistically compared between the infected and non-infected groups. The data were standardized for intergroup comparisons of the outcomes because the materials and methods used in the included studies were heterogeneous, such as the definition of operative time. The SMD was defined as the difference in mean outcome divided by the standard deviation of the difference in outcome. The SMD and associated 95% CIs were determined for the operative times. Furthermore, the incidence rates of PJI were compared between a group with prolonged operative times and a control group (patients with short operative times respective to the cutoff value). ORs and 95% CIs were calculated as summary statistics for the incidence rate of PJI.
I2 statistics were calculated to present the percentage of the total variation attributable to the heterogeneity among the included studies. If there was no heterogeneity (I2 ≤ 50%), the fixed-effects model was used to merge the effect sizes. If there was heterogeneity (I2 > 50%), the random-effects model was used to merge the effect sizes [30]. A Sensitivity analysis was conducted to determine the influence of an individual study on the overall pooled effects using the leave-one-out analysis. Publication bias was investigated by evaluating the funnel plot asymmetry and by using an Egger test [31,32]. Forest plots were used to graphically present the results of individual studies and the respective pooled estimate of the effect size.

3. Results

3.1. Study Selection and Quality Assessment

Figure 1 shows the process of study identification, inclusion, and exclusion. Electronic searches of the PubMed (Medline), EMBASE, and Cochrane Library databases yielded 274, 462, and 344 studies, respectively. After removing 236 duplicate studies, we obtained 844 studies. Four additional publications were identified through manual searching, among which, 792 were further excluded after reading their abstracts and titles. The full texts of 56 studies were reviewed, and 17 studies were finally included in the meta-analysis after applying the inclusion criteria [10,12,15,16,17,19,20,21,22,32,33,34,35,36,37,38,39]. The main characteristics of the 17 individual studies are summarized in Table 1. Ten studies [10,15,16,17,21,33,34,37,38,40] showed a low risk of bias. The others [12,19,20,22,35,36,39] did not include a description of the adequacy of patient follow-up and showed a moderate risk of bias (Table 2).

3.2. Operative Times in the Primary TKA Cases with and without SSI

Twelve studies comprising 227,547 patients (1905 SSIs) compared the operative times between patients with and without SSI, including both superficial SSI and PJI after TKA [10,12,17,19,20,21,32,35,36,37,38,39]. The SSI group demonstrated a significantly longer operative time based on our pooled analyses using a random-effects model (pooled standardized mean difference (SMD): 0.38; 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.22–0.53; p < 0.01; Figure 2). However, significant heterogeneity was observed (I2 = 81%; p < 0.01).

3.3. Operative Times in the Primary TKA Cases with and without PJI

Eight studies comprising 85,194 patients (736 PJIs) provided results for the comparison of operative times between patients with and without PJI [12,19,20,21,32,37,38,39]. The pooled results demonstrated that a significantly longer operative time was associated with PJI (pooled SMD: 0.72; 95% CI: 0.20–1.24; p < 0.01; Figure 3). However, significant heterogeneity was observed (I2 = 94%; p < 0.01).

3.4. Comparison of the Incidence of PJI between Operative Times of ≥90 and <90 min

Four studies comprising a total of 194,652 patients compared the incidence rate of PJI in patients divided according to a 90 min cutoff for operative time [15,16,34,35]. The group with longer operative times had a significantly higher prevalence of PJI based on our pooled analysis (pooled odds ratio (OR): 1.50; 95% CI: 1.31–1.73; p < 0.01; Figure 4).

3.5. Comparison of the Incidence of PJI between Operative Times of ≥120 and <120 min

Four studies comprising a total of 89,306 patients compared the incidence rate of PJI in patients divided according to a 120 min cutoff for operative time [22,34,35,38]. The group with longer operative times had a significantly higher prevalence of PJI based on our pooled analysis (pooled OR: 1.56; 95% CI: 1.12–2.16; p < 0.01; Figure 5).

3.6. Sensitivity Analyses and Publication Bias

Sensitivity analysis was conducted on selected studies to evaluate the impact of individual studies on the overall results. The analysis revealed that the data from one study [39] significantly influenced the pooled results for operative times between TKAs with and without SSIs. Another study [12] similarly impacted the pooled results for operative times between TKAs with and without PJIs, as shown in Figures S1 and S2. As a result, these studies were excluded from their respective meta-analyses. Substantial heterogeneity was observed in the pooled risk of PJI associated with the 120 min operative time cutoff. The sensitivity analysis highlighted the study by Anis et al. [38] as a potential source of this heterogeneity. As a result, this study was excluded from the meta-analysis, as detailed in Figure S3. Furthermore, no evidence of publication bias was detected with the Egger regression-based test (all p-values > 0.05).

4. Discussion

The present meta-analysis showed that prolonged operative time was associated with a greater risk of PJI in patients undergoing primary TKA. These findings suggest the need for increasing the effort to reduce operative times during TKA. To the best of our knowledge, this is the only published meta-analysis that focuses solely on the incidence of PJI in relation to extended operating times in a primary TKA population.
SSI or PJI after primary TKA requires additional debridement surgery or two-staged revisional arthroplasty, which results in a longer hospital stay, increased morbidity and mortality, and a consequent socioeconomic burden [1,2,3,4,5,7,41]. Efforts to reduce the incidence rates of PJI and SSI after TKA have become increasingly important, and a thorough understanding of modifiable risk factors is essential. Compared with the various patient-related risk factors, such as obesity, diabetes mellitus, and history of operation, operative time is easily assessable and potentially modifiable [4,5,6,7,8].
The exact mechanism by which prolonged operative time increases the incidence rate of infection is multifactorial and poorly understood. With prolonged operative time, open incisions are exposed to microorganisms in the operative environment for a longer period, thus increasing the risk of bacterial contamination [42,43,44,45]. Moreover, a longer operative time predisposes patients to an increased risk of tissue desiccation, which may also increase the probability of contamination [46]. Prolonged operative time is also associated with a longer tourniquet time, which can cause persistent wound hypoxia and may increase susceptibility to infection [47,48]. Furthermore, the tissue concentrations of antibiotics decrease as the operative time increases and may be insufficient if the antibiotics are not re-administered during the surgical procedures [49,50,51,52].
Many potential factors can affect the operative time, including the complexity of the individual case, experience and fatigue of the surgeon, experience of the operating room staff, implant type, and use of cement. Anis et al. demonstrated that younger age, male sex, higher body mass index, low-volume surgeons, and use of antibiotic cements were significantly associated with longer operative times [38]. Furthermore, relationships between minimally invasive approaches, use of computer navigation, and prolonged operative time have been suggested [20,53,54]. Although none of the factors influencing the increase in operative time can be modified, preoperative planning, procedure efficiency, and surgeon education should be optimized to minimize the impact of operating time on the incidence of PJI where possible [55].
Although identifying a cutoff value for a prolonged operative time is important for surgeons to reduce the risk for PJI, no specific value has been defined due to variation among previous studies. Instead, the pooled risk of prolonged operative time was analyzed in accordance with the National Nosocomial Infections Surveillance guidelines by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, which recommends a cutoff value of 120 min as the 75th percentile of operative times [24]. However, with advancement in surgical techniques and instruments, a primary TKA is usually performed in around 90 min in expert hands [16,20,36]. As previous studies recommended a shorter cutoff value for prolonged operative times from 80 to 110 min [15,16,34,35,38,39], the pooled risk of prolonged operative time using the 90 min cutoff was further analyzed. The results support that orthopedic surgeons should consider the risk of PJI in cases with prolonged operative times and should aim to reduce the duration where possible.
The present study has both strengths and limitations. One strength is the comprehensive literature search, which included numerous observational studies. Moreover, the association between operative time and PJI was established through quantitative meta-analyses. However, several limitations should be noted: First, only retrospective studies with a low level of evidence were included, leading to some inherent heterogeneity. Despite this, the large cohort sizes and validated reporting systems in national surveillance or registry databases provide reliable data regarding surgical outcomes. Second, significant differences existed in the definitions of operative time, SSI, and PJI, as well as the follow-up durations across studies. This heterogeneity necessitates cautious interpretation of the results. However, the consistency of PJI risk at the 90 and 120 min operative time cutoffs was maintained across studies through sensitivity analysis. Third, operative time is closely associated with tourniquet time, a potential risk factor for increased PJI in prolonged operative cases [47,48]. While some surgeons perform TKA without tourniquets, making the relationship between tourniquet time and PJI clinically important, this study could not analyze the pooled risk of prolonged tourniquet times. Future large cohort studies with controlled confounding factors are needed to conclude the association between operative and tourniquet times and the risk of PJI. Fourth, antibiotic practices can significantly alter the risk of SSIs and PJIs [56,57]. However, the absence of data on antibiotic redosing and extended antibiotic prophylaxis limited our ability to perform a subanalysis on these factors. Furthermore, longer operative times are often correlated with technical problems during surgery, such as higher BMI, which are independent risk factors for PJI. These factors were not comprehensively controlled for in our analysis, highlighting the need for future research to account for such confounders.

5. Conclusions

In conclusion, the prolonged operative time was significantly associated with the incidence of PJI and SSI after primary TKA. The risk of PJI was also significantly increased in patients with operative times >90 or 120 min compared to those <90 or 120 min, respectively. Identifying a potentially modifiable risk factor such as operative time is important to achieve better patient outcomes. Given the considerable impact of PJIs and SSIs on patient outcomes and the socioeconomic burden, strategies for infection prevention should incorporate preoperative planning and minimize factors that contribute to a prolonged operative time.

Supplementary Materials

The following supporting information can be downloaded at: https://www.mdpi.com/article/10.3390/jcm13113046/s1, Figure S1: Sensitivity analysis for operative times between TKAs with and without SSI; Figure S2: Sensitivity analysis for operative times between TKAs with and without PJI; Figure S3: Sensitivity analysis for the risk of PJI according to a 120-min cutoff for operative time.

Author Contributions

Conceptualization, K.-H.S. and S.-B.H.; formal analysis, K.-H.S. and S.-B.H.; data curation, K.-H.S., J.-H.K. and S.-B.H.; writing—original draft preparation, K.-H.S.; writing—review and editing, K.-H.S. and S.-B.H. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

This research received no external funding.

Institutional Review Board Statement

Not applicable.

Informed Consent Statement

Not applicable.

Data Availability Statement

The data presented in this study are available on request from the corresponding author.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflicts of interest.

References

  1. Lum, Z.C.; Natsuhara, K.M.; Shelton, T.J.; Giordani, M.; Pereira, G.C.; Meehan, J.P. Mortality during total knee periprosthetic joint infection. J. Arthroplasty 2018, 33, 3783–3788. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  2. Ritter, M.A.; Farris, A. Outcome of infected total joint replacement. Orthopedics 2010, 33, 149–154. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  3. Barton, C.B.; Wang, D.L.; An, Q.; Brown, T.S.; Callaghan, J.J.; Otero, J.E. Two-stage exchange arthroplasty for periprosthetic joint infection following total hip or knee arthroplasty is associated with high attrition rate and mortality. J. Arthroplasty 2020, 35, 1384–1389. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  4. Rodríguez-Merchán, E.C.; Liddle, A.D. Epidemiology of the infected total knee arthroplasty: Incidence, causes, and the burden of disease. In The Infected Total Knee Arthroplasty Prevention, Diagnosis, and Treatment; Rodríguez-Merchán, E.C., Oussedik, S., Eds.; Springer International Publishing AG: Berlin/Heidelberg, Germany, 2018; pp. 1–10. [Google Scholar]
  5. Rodríguez-Merchán, E.C.; Liddle, A.D. Prevention of periprosthetic joint infection in total knee arthroplasty: Main studies reported between November 2017 and January 2020. Arch. Bone Jt. Surg. 2020, 8, 465–469. [Google Scholar] [PubMed]
  6. Kim, J.L.; Park, J.H.; Han, S.B.; Cho, I.Y.; Jang, K.M. Allogeneic blood transfusion is a significant risk factor for surgical-site infection following total hip and knee arthroplasty: A meta-analysis. J. Arthroplast. 2017, 32, 320–325. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  7. Pulido, L.; Ghanem, E.; Joshi, A.; Purtill, J.J.; Parvizi, J. Periprosthetic joint infection: The incidence, timing, and predisposing factors. Clin. Orthop. Relat. Res. 2008, 466, 1710–1715. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  8. Lenguerrand, E.; Whitehouse, M.R.; Beswick, A.D.; Kunutsor, S.K.; Foguet, P.; Porter, M.; Blom, A.W. Risk factors associated with revision for prosthetic joint infection following knee replacement: An observational cohort study from England and Wales. Lancet Infect. Dis. 2019, 19, 589–600. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  9. Cheng, H.; Chen, B.P.; Soleas, I.M.; Ferko, N.C.; Cameron, C.G.; Hinoul, P. Prolonged operative duration increases risk of surgical site infections: A systematic review. Surg. Infect. 2017, 18, 722–735. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  10. Minnema, B.; Vearncombe, M.; Augustin, A.; Gollish, J.; Simor, A.E. Risk factors for surgical-site infection following primary total knee arthroplasty. Infect. Control Hosp. Epidemio 2004, 25, 477–480. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  11. Mraovic, B.; Suh, D.; Jacovides, C.; Parvizi, J. Perioperative hyperglycemia and postoperative infection after lower limb arthroplasty. J. Diabetes Sci. Technol. 2011, 5, 412–418. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  12. Namba, R.S.; Inacio, M.C.; Paxton, E.W. Risk factors associated with deep surgical site infections after primary total knee arthroplasty: An analysis of 56,216 knees. J. Bone Joint Surg. Am. 2013, 95, 775–782. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  13. Peersman, G.; Laskin, R.; Davis, J.; Peterson, M.G.; Richart, T. Prolonged operative time correlates with increased infection rate after total knee arthroplasty. HSS J. 2006, 2, 70–72. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  14. Song, K.H.; Kim, E.S.; Kim, Y.K.; Jin, H.Y.; Jeong, S.Y.; Kwak, Y.G.; Cho, Y.K.; Sung, J.; Lee, Y.S.; Oh, H.B.; et al. Differences in the risk factors for surgical site infection between total hip arthroplasty and total knee arthroplasty in the Korean Nosocomial Infections Surveillance System (KONIS). Infect. Control Hosp. Epidemiol. 2012, 33, 1086–1093. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  15. Badawy, M.; Espehaug, B.; Fenstad, A.M.; Indrekvam, K.; Dale, H.; Havelin, L.I.; Furnes, O. Patient and surgical factors affecting procedure duration and revision risk due to deep infection in primary total knee arthroplasty. BMC Musculoskelet. Disord. 2017, 18, 544. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  16. Ravi, B.; Jenkinson, R.; O’Heireamhoin, S.; Austin, P.C.; Aktar, S.; Leroux, T.S.; Paterson, M.; Redelmeier, D.A. Surgical duration is associated with an increased risk of periprosthetic infection following total knee arthroplasty: A population-based retrospective cohort study. EClinicalMedicine 2019, 16, 74–80. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  17. Hao, L.; Zhang, Y.; Song, W.; Ma, T.; Wang, J.; Cheng, H.; Li, K.; Qin, S. Risk factors for infection following primary total knee replacement. Biomed. Res. 2018, 29, 715–723. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  18. Hijas-Gómez, A.I.; Lucas, W.C.; Checa-García, A.; Martínez-Martín, J.; Fahandezh-Saddi, H.; Gil-de-Miguel, Á.; Durán-Poveda, M.; Rodríguez-Caravaca, G. Surgical site infection incidence and risk factors in knee arthroplasty: A 9-year prospective cohort study at a university teaching hospital in Spain. Am. J. Infect. Control 2018, 46, 1335–1340. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  19. Iqbal, F.; Shafiq, B.; Zamir, M.; Noor, S.; Memon, N.; Memon, N.; Dina, T.K. Micro-organisms and risk factors associated with prosthetic joint infection following primary total knee replacement-our experience in Pakistan. Int. Orthop. 2020, 44, 283–289. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  20. Naranje, S.; Lendway, L.; Mehle, S.; Gioe, T.J. Does operative time affect infection rate in primary total knee arthroplasty? Clin. Orthop. Relat. Res. 2015, 473, 64–69. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  21. Shearer, J.; Agius, L.; Burke, N.; Rahardja, R.; Young, S.W. BMI is a Better Predictor of Periprosthetic Joint Infection Risk Than Local Measures of Adipose Tissue After TKA. J. Arthroplasty 2020, 35, S313–S318. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  22. Crowe, B.; Payne, A.; Evangelista, P.J.; Stachel, A.; Phillips, M.S.; Slover, J.D.; Inneh, I.A.; Iorio, R.; Bosco, J.A. Risk Factors for Infection Following Total Knee Arthroplasty: A Series of 3836 Cases from One Institution. J Arthroplasty 2015, 30, 2275–2278. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  23. Moher, D.; Liberati, A.; Tetzlaff, J.; Altman, D.G.; PRISMA Group. Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: The PRISMA statement. PLoS Med. 2009, 6, e1000097. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  24. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention-National Healthcare Safety Networks (CDC/NHSN). Procedure-Associated Module—Surgical Site Infection (SSI) Event. 2015. Available online: http://www.cdc.gov/nhsn/pdfs/pscmanual/9pscssicurrent.pdf (accessed on 1 August 2023).
  25. Stang, A. Critical evaluation of the Newcastle-Ottawa scale for the assessment of the quality of nonrandomized studies in meta-analyses. Eur. J. Epidemiol. 2011, 25, 603–605. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  26. Wells, G.A.; SHEA, B.; O’connell, D.; Peterson, J.; Welch, V.; Losos, M.; Tugwell, P. The Newcastle-Ottawa Scale (NOS) for Assessing the Quality of Nonrandomized Studies in Meta-Analyses. Available online: http://www.ohri.ca/programs/clinical_epidemiology/oxford.htm (accessed on 30 July 2023).
  27. Parvizi, J.; Zmistowski, B.; Berbari, E.F.; Bauer, T.W.; Springer, B.D.; Della Valle, C.J.; Garvin, K.L.; Mont, M.A.; Wongworawat, M.D.; Zalavras, C.G. New definition for periprosthetic joint infection: From the Workgroup of the Musculoskeletal Infection Society. Clin. Orthop. Relat. Res. 2011, 469, 2992–2994. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  28. Amanatullah, D.; Dennis, D.; Oltra, E.G.; Gomes, L.S.M.; Goodman, S.B.; Hamlin, B.; Hansen, E.; Hashemi-Nejad, A.; Holst, D.C.; Komnos, G.; et al. Hip and Knee Section, Diagnosis, Definitions: Proceedings of International Consensus on Orthopedic Infections. J. Arthroplasty 2019, 34, S329–S337. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  29. RStudio Team. RStudio: Integrated Development for R. RStudio, PBC: Boston, MA, USA, 2020. Available online: http://www.rstudio.com/ (accessed on 30 July 2023).
  30. DerSimonian, R.; Laird, N. Meta-analysis in clinical trials. Control Clin. Trials 1986, 7, 177–188. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  31. Egger, M.; Smith, G.D.; Schneider, M.; Minder, C. Bias in meta-analysis detected by a simple, graphical test. BMJ 1997, 315, 629–634. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  32. Duval, S.; Tweedie, R. Trim and fill: A simple funnel-plot-based method of testing and adjusting for publication bias in meta-analysis. Biometrics 2000, 56, 455–463. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  33. Lee, Q.J.; Mak, W.P.; Wong, Y.C. Risk factors for periprosthetic joint infection in total knee arthroplasty. J. Orthop. Surg. 2015, 23, 282–286. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  34. Tayton, E.R.; Frampton, C.; Hooper, G.J.; Young, S.W. The impact of patient and surgical factors on the rate of infection after primary total knee arthroplasty: An analysis of 64,566 joints from the New Zealand Joint Registry. Bone Joint J. 2016, 98-B, 334–340. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  35. Jung, P.; Morris, A.J.; Zhu, M.; Roberts, S.A.; Frampton, C.; Young, S.W. BMI is a key risk factor for early periprosthetic joint infection following total hip and knee arthroplasty. N. Z. Med. J. 2017, 130, 24–34. [Google Scholar] [PubMed]
  36. George, J.; Mahmood, B.; Sultan, A.A.; Sodhi, N.; Mont, M.A.; Higuera, C.A.; Stearns, K.L. How Fast Should a Total Knee Arthroplasty Be Performed? An Analysis of 140,199 Surgeries. J. Arthroplasty 2018, 33, 2616–2622. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  37. Teo, B.J.X.; Yeo, W.; Chong, H.C.; Tan, A.H.C. Surgical site infection after primary total knee arthroplasty is associated with a longer duration of surgery. J. Orthop. Surg. 2018, 26, 2309499018785647. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  38. Anis, H.K.; Sodhi, N.; Klika, A.K.; Mont, M.A.; Barsoum, W.K.; Higuera, C.A.; Molloy, R.M. Is Operative Time a Predictor for Post-Operative Infection in Primary Total Knee Arthroplasty? J. Arthroplasty 2019, 34, S331–S336. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  39. Blanco, J.F.; Díaz, A.; Melchor, F.R.; da Casa, C.; Pescador, D. Risk factors for periprosthetic joint infection after total knee arthroplasty. Arch. Orthop. Trauma. Surg. 2020, 140, 239–245. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  40. Guo, H.; Xu, C.; Chen, J. Risk factors for periprosthetic joint infection after primary artificial hip and knee joint replacements. J. Infect. Dev. Ctries. 2020, 14, 565–571. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  41. Zmistowski, B.; Karam, J.A.; Durinka, J.B.; Casper, D.S.; Parvizi, J. Periprosthetic joint infection increases the risk of one-year mortality. J. Bone Joint Surg. Am. 2013, 95, 2177–2184. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  42. Whyte, W.; Hodgson, R.; Tinkler, J. The importance of airborne bacterial contamination of wounds. J. Hosp. Infect. 1982, 3, 123–135. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  43. Lidwell, O.M.; Lowbury, E.J.; Whyte, W.; Blowers, R.; Stanley, S.J.; Lowe, D. Airborne contamination of wounds in joint replacement operations: The relationship to sepsis rates. J. Hosp. Infect. 1983, 4, 111–131. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  44. Howorth, F.H. Prevention of airborne infection during surgery. Lancet 1985, 1, 386–388. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  45. Garibaldi, R.A.; Cushing, D.; Lerer, T. Risk factors for postoperative infection. Am. J. Med. 1991, 91, 158S–163S. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  46. Haridas, M.; Malangoni, M.A. Predictive factors for surgical site infection in general surgery. Surgery 2008, 144, 496–503. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  47. Abdel-Salam, A.; Eyres, K.S. Effects of tourniquet during total knee arthroplasty. A prospective randomised study. J. Bone Joint Surg. Br. 1995, 77, 250–253. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  48. Clarke, M.T.; Longstaff, L.; Edwards, D.; Rushton, N. Tourniquet-induced wound hypoxia after total knee replacement. J. Bone Joint Surg. Br. 2001, 83, 40–44. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  49. Alavi, K.; Sturrock, P.R.; Sweeney, W.B.; Maykel, J.A.; Cervera-Servin, J.A.; Tseng, J.; Cook, E.F. A simple risk score for predicting surgical site infections in inflammatory bowel disease. Dis. Colon. Rectum 2010, 53, 1480–1486. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  50. Malone, D.L.; Genuit, T.; Tracy, J.K.; Gannon, C.; Napolitano, L.M. Surgical site infections: Reanalysis of risk factors. J. Surg. Res. 2002, 103, 89–95. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  51. Sergeant, G.; Buffet, W.; Fieuws, S.; de Gheldere, C.; Vanclooster, P. Incisional surgical site infections after colorectal surgery: Time to appraise its true incidence. Acta Chir. Belg. 2008, 108, 513–517. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  52. Tweed, C. Prevention of surgical wound infection: Prophylactic antibiotics in colorectal surgery. J. Wound Care 2005, 14, 202–205. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  53. King, J.; Stamper, D.L.; Schaad, D.C.; Leopold, S.S. Minimally invasive total knee arthroplasty compared with traditional total knee arthroplasty. Assessment of the learning curve and the postoperative recuperative period. J. Bone Joint Surg. Am. 2007, 89, 1497–1503. [Google Scholar]
  54. Lau, R.L.; Perruccio, A.V.; Gandhi, R.; Mahomed, N.N. The role of surgeon volume on patient outcome in total knee arthroplasty: A systematic review of the literature. BMC Musculoskelet. Disord. 2012, 13, 250. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  55. Maoz, G.; Phillips, M.; Bosco, J.; Slover, J.; Stachel, A.; Inneh, I.; Iorio, R. The Otto Aufranc Award: Modifiable versus nonmodifiable risk factors for infection after hip arthroplasty. Clin. Orthop. Relat. Res. 2015, 473, 453–459. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  56. Kheir, M.M.; Dilley, J.E.; Ziemba-Davis, M.; Meneghini, R.M. The AAHKS Clinical Research Award: Extended Oral Antibiotics Prevent Periprosthetic Joint Infection in High-Risk Cases: 3855 Patients With 1-Year Follow-Up. J. Arthroplasty 2021, 36, S18–S25. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  57. Dasari, S.P.; Kanumuri, S.D.; Yang, J.; Manner, P.A.; Fernando, N.D.; Hernandez, N.M. Extended Prophylactic Antibiotics for Primary and Aseptic Revision Total Joint Arthroplasty: A Meta-Analysis. J. Arthroplasty. 2024, 17, S0883-5403(24)00014-7. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
Jcm 13 03046 g001
Figure 1. PRISMA flow diagram. PRISMA: Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses.
Figure 1. PRISMA flow diagram. PRISMA: Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses.
Jcm 13 03046 g001
Jcm 13 03046 g002
Figure 2. Forest plots showing the operative times of patients with and without surgical site infection. CI, confidence interval; SE, standard error; SMD, standardized mean difference.
Figure 2. Forest plots showing the operative times of patients with and without surgical site infection. CI, confidence interval; SE, standard error; SMD, standardized mean difference.
Jcm 13 03046 g002
Jcm 13 03046 g003
Figure 3. Forest plots showing the operative times of patients with and without periprosthetic joint infection. CI, confidence interval; SE, standard error; SMD, standardized mean difference.
Figure 3. Forest plots showing the operative times of patients with and without periprosthetic joint infection. CI, confidence interval; SE, standard error; SMD, standardized mean difference.
Jcm 13 03046 g003
Jcm 13 03046 g004
Figure 4. Forest plots comparing the incidence of periprosthetic joint infection in patients with operative times ≥90 min vs. <90 min. CI, confidence interval; OR, odds ratio; SE, Standard error.
Figure 4. Forest plots comparing the incidence of periprosthetic joint infection in patients with operative times ≥90 min vs. <90 min. CI, confidence interval; OR, odds ratio; SE, Standard error.
Jcm 13 03046 g004
Jcm 13 03046 g005
Figure 5. Forest plots comparing the incidence of periprosthetic joint infection between patients with operative times of ≥120 and <120 min. CI, confidence interval; OR, odds ratio; SE, Standard error.
Figure 5. Forest plots comparing the incidence of periprosthetic joint infection between patients with operative times of ≥120 and <120 min. CI, confidence interval; OR, odds ratio; SE, Standard error.
Jcm 13 03046 g005
Table 1. Baseline characteristics of the included studies.
Table 1. Baseline characteristics of the included studies.
AuthorPublication YearStudy DesignDefinition of InfectionDefinition of Operative TimesComposition of the Case GroupNumber of PatientsSex (M/F)Age (y)Duration of Follow-UpControlled Confounding VariablesThreshold of Operative Time (min)
CaseControlCaseControlCaseControl
Minnema et al. [10] *2004RetrospectiveCDC criteriaNRSSI including both superficial and deep infection226612/10NRMedian: 68NR1 yearMatching for the date of surgeryNR
Namba et al. [12]2013Retrospective registryCDC criteriaNRDeep surgical site infection40455,812210/19420,587/35,225Mean: 66.5Mean: 67.43 monthsNoneNR
Crowe et al. [22]2015RetrospectiveCDC criteriaNRDeep surgical site infection263393NRNRNRNRNRNone114
Lee et al. [33]2015RetrospectiveCriteria of the Musculoskeletal Infection SocietyNRPJI81924/453/139Mean: 62.1Mean: 69.22 yearsMatching for the year of surgeryNR
Naranje et al. [20]2015Retrospective registryReoperation for PJITime from skin incision to dressing placementReoperation for PJI73990026/47NRMean: 66.2NRNRNoneNR
Tayton et al. [34]2016Retrospective registryReoperation for PJINRReoperation for PJI17964,387112/6731,068/33,319≥65 years (61.5%)≥65 years (64.7%)Minimum 1 yearNone90 and 120
Badawy et al. [15]2017Retrospective registryReoperation for PJITime from skin incision to skin closureReoperation for PJI31127,95110,186/18,076 (whole cohort)≥70 years (48.0% of the whole cohort)Minimum 1 yearNone90
Jung et al. [35]2017Retrospective registryCDC criteriaNRDeep surgical site infection44943731/134348/5085≥65 years (52.3%)≥65 years (68.4%)3 monthsNone90 and 120
George et al. [36]2018Retrospective registrySSI including superficial and deep infectionTime from skin incision to skin closureSSI including both superficial and deep infection1121139,07852,855/87,344 (whole cohort)≥65 years (59.4% of the whole cohort)1 monthNoneNR
Hao et al. [17]2018RetrospectiveDeep surgical site infectionNRDeep surgical site infection1611457/9221/924Mean 62.8Mean 64.4Mean: 1.6 yearNoneNR
Teo et al. [37]2018RetrospectiveCriteria of the Musculoskeletal Infection SocietyTime from skin incision to skin closureSSI including both superficial infection and PJI108952/8192/703Mean 65.4Mean 65.92 yearsNoneNR
Anis et al. [38]2019RetrospectiveReoperation for infectionTime from skin incision to skin closurePJI7911,761NRNRNRNRMean: 2 yearsNone85,102 and 121
Ravi et al. [16]2019Retrospective registryReoperation for PJITime from the entry to exit into the operating roomReoperation for PJI83991,504NRNRNRNR1 yearAge, sex, obesity, primary surgeon, hospital, type of anesthesia100
Blanco et al. [39]2020RetrospectiveCriteria of the Musculoskeletal Infection SocietyNRPJI666620/4628/38Mean 70.1Mean 72.4NRMatching for the year of surgery90
Guo et al. [40]2020RetrospectiveCriteria of the Musculoskeletal Infection SocietyNRPJI54108NRNRMean 66.8Mean 67.21 yearMatching for the year of surgeryNR
Iqbal et al. [19]2020RetrospectiveCDC criteriaNRPJI48422128/2001427/2794Mean 61.2Mean 61.5NRNoneNR
Shearer et al. [21]2020RetrospectiveCriteria of the Musculoskeletal Infection SocietyTime from skin incision to skin closurePJI31411421/102070/2644Mean 66.8Mean 68.31 yearNoneNR
M, male; F, female; y, year(s); NR, not reported; CDC, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention; SSI, surgical site infection, PJI, periprosthetic joint infection. * Reference number.
Table 2. Quality assessment of the included studies.
Table 2. Quality assessment of the included studies.
AuthorPublication YearSelectionComparabilityOutcomesOverall
Representativeness of the Exposed CohortSelection of the Nonexposed CohortAscertainment of ExposureDemonstration That the Outcome of Interest Was Not Present at the Start of the Study Assessment of OutcomesSufficient Follow-UpAdequacy of Follow-Up
Minnema et al. [10] *2004★★★★★★★★8
Namba et al. [12]2013★★★★☆★☆★6
Crowe et al. [22]2015★★★★☆★☆☆5
Lee et al. [33]2015★★★★★★★★8
Naranje et al. [20]2015★★★★☆★☆☆5
Tayton et al. [34]2016★★★★☆★★★7
Badawy et al. [15]2017★★★★☆★★★7
Jung et al. [35]2017★★★★☆★☆★6
George et al. [36]2018★★★★☆★☆★6
Hao et al. [17]2018★★★★☆★★★7
Teo et al. [37]2018★★★★☆★★★7
Anis et al. [38]2019★★★★☆★★★7
Ravi et al. [16]2019★★★★★★★★★9
Blanco et al. [39]2020★★★★★★☆☆6
Guo et al. [40]2020★★★★★★★★8
Iqbal et al. [19]2020★★★★☆★☆☆5
Shearer et al. [21]2020★★★★☆★★★7
☆, No star; ★, One star, ★★, Two stars. * Reference number.
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content.

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Shin, K.-H.; Kim, J.-H.; Han, S.-B. Greater Risk of Periprosthetic Joint Infection Associated with Prolonged Operative Time in Primary Total Knee Arthroplasty: Meta-Analysis of 427,361 Patients. J. Clin. Med. 2024, 13, 3046. https://doi.org/10.3390/jcm13113046

AMA Style

Shin K-H, Kim J-H, Han S-B. Greater Risk of Periprosthetic Joint Infection Associated with Prolonged Operative Time in Primary Total Knee Arthroplasty: Meta-Analysis of 427,361 Patients. Journal of Clinical Medicine. 2024; 13(11):3046. https://doi.org/10.3390/jcm13113046

Chicago/Turabian Style

Shin, Kyun-Ho, Jin-Ho Kim, and Seung-Beom Han. 2024. "Greater Risk of Periprosthetic Joint Infection Associated with Prolonged Operative Time in Primary Total Knee Arthroplasty: Meta-Analysis of 427,361 Patients" Journal of Clinical Medicine 13, no. 11: 3046. https://doi.org/10.3390/jcm13113046

Note that from the first issue of 2016, this journal uses article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop