Skip to main content
PMC home page
JBJS Essential Surgical Techniques logoLink to JBJS Essential Surgical Techniques
. 2019 Nov 1;9(4):e38.1-2. doi: 10.2106/JBJS.ST.19.00019

Irrigation and Debridement, Modular Exchange, and Implant Retention for Acute Periprosthetic Infection After Total Knee Arthroplasty

Kevin J Choo 1, Matthew Austin 1, Javad Parvizi 1,✉
PMCID: PMC6974313  PMID: 32051782

Abstract

The role of irrigation and debridement, modular exchange, and implant retention for the treatment of periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) after total knee arthroplasty (TKA) remains controversial. The proposed benefits of debridement, antibiotics, and implant retention, often referred to as DAIR, include reduced economic cost and morbidity of 2-stage reimplantation1. The primary disadvantage of this approach is a higher rate of failure and infection recurrence2,3. Furthermore, several authors have demonstrated inferior outcomes of 2-stage exchange revision arthroplasty after a failed attempt at limited debridement with implant retention4-6.

Because of study heterogeneity, the outcomes of acute PJI treatment with irrigation and debridement and implant retention have been variable in the literature, with reported success rates ranging from 16% to 100%; overall, the success rate is around 50%3,7,8. Recently, studies evaluating outcomes of DAIR have indicated that host factors, organism type, the timing of intervention, and the duration of symptoms can influence the likelihood of success with this approach7,9-12.

DAIR may be considered for all patients with early postoperative PJI or an acute hematogenous infection in the context of well-fixed implants and a healthy soft-tissue envelope. Chronic PJI should be considered an absolute contraindication to DAIR13. The patient’s health status, comorbidities, and immune status also should be considered. Caution should be exercised when considering DAIR for a patient in whom preoperative cultures demonstrate a drug-resistant or highly virulent organism, because of a higher risk of failure1,9,14,15. With careful patient selection and meticulous surgical technique, it is possible to achieve success with this treatment strategy.

The surgical procedure begins with a medial parapatellar approach and arthrotomy. A complete synovectomy is then performed, and remaining synovial tissue is aggressively debrided. Multiple culture samples should be obtained, and aseptic technique should be utilized to decrease contamination. The implant is interrogated to ensure stable fixation. Following adequate debridement, high-volume irrigation is performed; in cases involving irrigation and debridement with implant retention, we recommend incorporation of an antiseptic solution such as povidone-iodine. We recommend switching to a clean setup to facilitate sterile, uncontaminated closure of the wound, which is performed in a standard fashion. Meticulous attention should be paid to layered closure, and, if there is concern about delayed skin-healing, incisional negative-pressure wound therapy may be utilized.

Download video file (22.1MB, mp4)
DOI: 10.2106/JBJS.ST.19.00019.vid1
Open in a new tab
Download video file (28.5MB, mp4)
DOI: 10.2106/JBJS.ST.19.00019.vid2
Open in a new tab
Download video file (6.9MB, mp4)
DOI: 10.2106/JBJS.ST.19.00019.vid3
Open in a new tab
Download video file (16MB, mp4)
DOI: 10.2106/JBJS.ST.19.00019.vid4
Open in a new tab
Download video file (30.2MB, mp4)
DOI: 10.2106/JBJS.ST.19.00019.vid5
Open in a new tab
Download video file (9.4MB, mp4)
DOI: 10.2106/JBJS.ST.19.00019.vid6
Open in a new tab
Download video file (6.7MB, mp4)
DOI: 10.2106/JBJS.ST.19.00019.vid7
Open in a new tab
Download video file (8.8MB, mp4)
DOI: 10.2106/JBJS.ST.19.00019.vid8
Open in a new tab
Download video file (45.4MB, mp4)
DOI: 10.2106/JBJS.ST.19.00019.vid9
Open in a new tab
Download video file (11.7MB, mp4)
DOI: 10.2106/JBJS.ST.19.00019.vid10
Open in a new tab

Acknowledgments

Note: In Video 1, the title page of the original article in which the procedure was described is reproduced, with permission, from: Argenson JN, Arndt M, Babis G, Battenberg A, Budhiparama N, Catani F, Chen F, de Beaubien B, Ebied A, Esposito S, Ferry C, Flores H, Giorgini A, Hansen E, Hernugrahanto KD, Hyonmin C, Kim TK, Koh IJ, Komnos G, Lausmann C, Loloi J, Lora-Tamayo J, Lumban-Gaol I, Mahyudin F, Mancheno-Losa M, Marculescu C, Marei S, Martin KE, Meshram P, Paprosky WG, Poultsides L, Saxena A, Schwechter E, Shah J, Shohat N, Sierra RJ, Soriano A, Stefánsdóttir A, Suleiman LI, Taylor A, Triantafyllopoulos GK, Utomo DN, Warren D, Whiteside L, Wouthuyzen-Bakker M, Yombi J, Zmistowski B. Hip and Knee Section, Treatment, Debridement and Retention of Implant: Proceedings of International Consensus on Orthopedic Infections. J Arthroplasty. 2019 Feb;34(2S): S399-S419.

Footnotes

Published outcomes of this procedure can be found at: J Arthroplasty. 2019 Feb;34(2S):S399-S419.

Investigation performed at the Rothman Orthopaedic Institute, Sidney Kimmel Medical College at Thomas Jefferson University, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania

Disclosure: The authors indicated that no external funding was received for any aspect of this work. On the Disclosure of Potential Conflicts of Interest forms, which are provided with the online version of the article, one or more of the authors checked “yes” to indicate that the author had a relevant financial relationship in the biomedical arena outside the submitted work and “yes” to indicate that the author had a patent and/or copyright, planned, pending, or issued, broadly relevant to this work (http://links.lww.com/JBJSEST/A272).

References

  • 1.Duque AF, Post ZD, Lutz RW, Orozco FR, Pulido SH, Ong AC. Is there still a role for irrigation and debridement with liner exchange in acute periprosthetic total knee infection? J Arthroplasty. 2017. April;32(4):1280-4. Epub 2016 Nov 1. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 2.Bradbury T, Fehring TK, Taunton M, Hanssen A, Azzam K, Parvizi J, Odum SM. The fate of acute methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus periprosthetic knee infections treated by open debridement and retention of components. J Arthroplasty. 2009. September;24(6)(Suppl):101-4. Epub 2009 Jun 24. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 3.Fehring TK, Odum SM, Berend KR, Jiranek WA, Parvizi J, Bozic KJ, Della Valle CJ, Gioe TJ. Failure of irrigation and débridement for early postoperative periprosthetic infection. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2013. January;471(1):250-7. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 4.Gardner J, Gioe TJ, Tatman P. Can this prosthesis be saved?: implant salvage attempts in infected primary TKA. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2011. April;469(4):970-6. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 5.Sherrell JC, Fehring TK, Odum S, Hansen E, Zmistowski B, Dennos A, Kalore N; Periprosthetic Infection Consortium. The Chitranjan Ranawat Award: fate of two-stage reimplantation after failed irrigation and débridement for periprosthetic knee infection. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2011. January;469(1):18-25. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 6.Choi HR, von Knoch F, Zurakowski D, Nelson SB, Malchau H. Can implant retention be recommended for treatment of infected TKA? Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2011. April;469(4):961-9. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 7.Urish KL, Bullock AG, Kreger AM, Shah NB, Jeong K, Rothenberger SD; Infected Implant Consortium. A multicenter study of irrigation and debridement in total knee arthroplasty periprosthetic joint infection: treatment failure is high. J Arthroplasty. 2018. April;33(4):1154-9. Epub 2017 Nov 21. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 8.Qasim SN, Swann A, Ashford R. The DAIR (debridement, antibiotics and implant retention) procedure for infected total knee replacement - a literature review. SICOT J. 2017;3:2 Epub 2017 Jan 11. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 9.Odum SM, Fehring TK, Lombardi AV, Zmistowski BM, Brown NM, Luna JT, Fehring KA, Hansen EN; Periprosthetic Infection Consortium. Irrigation and debridement for periprosthetic infections: does the organism matter? J Arthroplasty. 2011. September;26(6)(Suppl):114-8. Epub 2011 May 31. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 10.Triantafyllopoulos GK, Poultsides LA, Zhang W, Sculco PK, Ma Y, Sculco TP. Periprosthetic knee infections treated with irrigation and debridement: outcomes and preoperative predictive factors. J Arthroplasty. 2015. April;30(4):649-57. Epub 2014 Oct 25. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 11.Klare CM, Fortney TA, Kahng PW, Cox AP, Keeney BJ, Moschetti WE. Prognostic factors for success after irrigation and debridement with modular component exchange for infected total knee arthroplasty. J Arthroplasty. 2018. July;33(7):2240-5. Epub 2018 Feb 13. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 12.Kuiper JWP, Vos SJ, Saouti R, Vergroesen DA, Graat HCA, Debets-Ossenkopp YJ, Peters EJ, Nolte PA. Prosthetic joint-associated infections treated with DAIR (debridement, antibiotics, irrigation, and retention): analysis of risk factors and local antibiotic carriers in 91 patients. Acta Orthop. 2013. August;84(4):380-6. Epub 2013 Jul 12. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 13.Argenson JN, Arndt M, Babis G, Battenberg A, Budhiparama N, Catani F, et al. Hip and knee section, treatment, debridement and retention of implant: proceedings of International Consensus on Orthopedic Infections. 2019;34. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 14.Zmistowski B, Fedorka CJ, Sheehan E, Deirmengian G, Austin MS, Parvizi J. Prosthetic joint infection caused by gram-negative organisms. J Arthroplasty. 2011. September;26(6)(Suppl):104-8. Epub 2011 Jun 8. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 15.Deirmengian C, Greenbaum J, Lotke PA, Booth RE, Lonner JH. Limited success with open debridement and retention of components in the treatment of acute Staphylococcus aureus infections after total knee arthroplasty. J Arthroplasty. 2003;18(7):22-6. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

Articles from JBJS Essential Surgical Techniques are provided here courtesy of Wolters Kluwer Health

RESOURCES