Scholarlink

Background <p>This study aimed to conduct a systematic review and meta-analysis to assess the impact of extended postoperative oral antibiotic prophylaxis (EPOAP) on the risk of reinfection following two-stage exchange arthroplasty for hip and knee periprosthetic joint infection (PJI).</p> Methods <p>A comprehensive search of PubMed, Embase, and the Cochrane Library was conducted on January 11, 2025. Studies reporting reinfection rates in patients receiving EPOAP after two-stage exchange arthroplasty, compared to those who did not, were included. A random-effects model was used to calculate pooled risk ratios (RRs) and subgroup analyses were performed based on the duration of EPOAP use (&gt; 2 weeks vs. ≤2 weeks) and the joint site (hip or knee).</p> Results <p>Five studies, including four retrospective cohort studies and one randomized controlled trial, with a total of 486 knees and 444 hips, were included. The meta-analysis demonstrated that EPOAP significantly reduced the risk of reinfection following two-stage exchange arthroplasty (pooled RR: 0.52; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.35, 0.75; <i>p</i> = 0.0006). Subgroup analyses yielded similar findings, with significant reductions in reinfection risk for EPOAP duration &gt; 2 weeks (pooled RR: 0.51; 95% CI: 0.34, 0.78; <i>p</i> = 0.002), hip arthroplasty (pooled RR: 0.37; 95% CI: 0.20, 0.70; <i>p</i> = 0.002), while knee arthroplasty showed a borderline nonsignificant reduction (pooled RR: 0.64; 95% CI: 0.39, 1.04; <i>p</i> = 0.07). Only one cohort study reported a decreased risk of reinfection with EPOAP use ≤ 2 weeks. Two studies assessed adverse events related to EPOAP. No complications were observed among 22 patients in one cohort study, whereas 6 of 22 patients (27%) in an RCT experienced mild gastrointestinal or dermatologic reactions that led to treatment discontinuation. Additionally, another cohort study reported that 16 of 24 reinfection cases (67%) involved organisms resistant to EPOAP.</p> Conclusions <p>This meta-analysis suggests that EPOAP is associated with a reduced risk of reinfection following two-stage exchange arthroplasty for hip arthroplasty, while further research is warranted for knee cases. This approach may improve patient outcomes and help optimize post-operative antibiotic management.</p>

错误：搜索内容不能为空，请输入英文关键词
错误：关键词超出字数限制，请精简
高级检索

The effect of extended postoperative oral antibiotic prophylaxis on the reinfection risk following two-stage exchange arthroplasty for hip and knee periprosthetic joint infection: a systematic review and meta-analysis

  • 期刊论文

  • 出版模式：

    开放获取

  • 发表日期：

    2026年1月8日

查看全文
  • Pei-En Kao,
  • Chih-Wei Hsu,
  • Allen Herng Shouh Hsu,
  • Cheng-Ta Wu,
  • Po-Chun Lin,
  • Feng-Chih Kuo

摘要

Background

This study aimed to conduct a systematic review and meta-analysis to assess the impact of extended postoperative oral antibiotic prophylaxis (EPOAP) on the risk of reinfection following two-stage exchange arthroplasty for hip and knee periprosthetic joint infection (PJI).

Methods

A comprehensive search of PubMed, Embase, and the Cochrane Library was conducted on January 11, 2025. Studies reporting reinfection rates in patients receiving EPOAP after two-stage exchange arthroplasty, compared to those who did not, were included. A random-effects model was used to calculate pooled risk ratios (RRs) and subgroup analyses were performed based on the duration of EPOAP use (> 2 weeks vs. ≤2 weeks) and the joint site (hip or knee).

Results

Five studies, including four retrospective cohort studies and one randomized controlled trial, with a total of 486 knees and 444 hips, were included. The meta-analysis demonstrated that EPOAP significantly reduced the risk of reinfection following two-stage exchange arthroplasty (pooled RR: 0.52; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.35, 0.75; p = 0.0006). Subgroup analyses yielded similar findings, with significant reductions in reinfection risk for EPOAP duration > 2 weeks (pooled RR: 0.51; 95% CI: 0.34, 0.78; p = 0.002), hip arthroplasty (pooled RR: 0.37; 95% CI: 0.20, 0.70; p = 0.002), while knee arthroplasty showed a borderline nonsignificant reduction (pooled RR: 0.64; 95% CI: 0.39, 1.04; p = 0.07). Only one cohort study reported a decreased risk of reinfection with EPOAP use ≤ 2 weeks. Two studies assessed adverse events related to EPOAP. No complications were observed among 22 patients in one cohort study, whereas 6 of 22 patients (27%) in an RCT experienced mild gastrointestinal or dermatologic reactions that led to treatment discontinuation. Additionally, another cohort study reported that 16 of 24 reinfection cases (67%) involved organisms resistant to EPOAP.

Conclusions

This meta-analysis suggests that EPOAP is associated with a reduced risk of reinfection following two-stage exchange arthroplasty for hip arthroplasty, while further research is warranted for knee cases. This approach may improve patient outcomes and help optimize post-operative antibiotic management.