POSTOPERATIVE ANTIBIOTIC TREATMENT DOES NOT LOWER RE-REVISION RATE IN PRESUMED ASEPTIC HIP AND KNEE REVISION ARTHROPLASTIES WITH UNEXPECTED POSITIVE INTRAOPERATIVE CULTURES: A PROPENSITY SCORE-MATCHED COHORT STUDY

Aim It still remains unclear whether postoperative antibiotic treatment is advantageous in presumed aseptic revision-arthroplasties of the hip (rTHA) and knee (rTKA) with unexpected-positive-intraoperative-cultures (UPIC). The aim of this study was to evaluate if there is a difference in the septic and/or aseptic re-revision rate in patients with or without postoperative antibiotics. Method In this retrospective propensity-score (PS) matched cohort-study we compared the re-revision rate and the microbiological spectrum in rTHA and rTKA treated with (AB-Group; n=70) and without (non-AB-Group; n=70) antibiotic treatment in patients with UPIC. Baseline covariates for PS-matching were type of revision, sex, Body-Mass-Index, age, Surgical-Site-Infection-Score, American-Society-of-Anesthesiologists-Classification, serum C-reactive-protein. All patients received routine antibiotic prophylaxis, but empiric AB treatment was started only in patients in the AB-Group. Post-operative treatment was decided on an individual basis according to the preference of the surgeon and the infectious disease specialist for a minimum duration of two weeks. In total, 90 rTHA (45 AB-Group, 45 in non-AB-Group) patients with UPICs and 50 rTKA (25 AB-Group, 25 in non-AB-Group) were included in the study. There was no significant variation in patient demographics. Results After a median follow-up of 4.1 (IQR: 2.9-5.5) years after rTHA and rTKA, there was no higher re-revision rate (p=0.813) between the AB-group 10/70 (14.3%), and the non-AB-group 11/70 (15.7%). In the AB group, 4.3% (3/70) of patients underwent revision due to septic complications compared to 5.7% (4/70) in the non-AB group (survival log-rank: p=0.691). In total, 30/70 (42.9%) of patients in the AB-group and 23/70 (32.9%) of patients in the non-AB group were diagnosed as having an “infection likely” according to the PJI diagnostic criteria of EBJIS (p=0.223). All UPICs comprised low virulent microorganisms and were considered as a contaminant. In total, 68/70 (97.1%) of the patients in the AB-group received a dual antibiotic treatment for a mean duration of 41 (IQR: 23.5-56.5) days. Conclusion Postoperative antibiotic treatment did not result in a decreased re-revision rate compared to non-antibiotic treatment in patients with UPIC in presumed aseptic rTHA and rTKA. UPICs with pathogens are likely to be a containment and therefore the classification of “infection likely” according to the EBJIS definition can be safely ignored.