Thematic Issue: Management of Periprosthetic Joint Infections after Total Hip and Knee Replacements

Mohamed Sukeik
Department of Trauma and Orthopaedics, The Royal London Hospital, Whitechapel, London, E1 1BB, United Kingdom, Tel: 0044 (0) 7530271137, Fax: 00442034479958, msukeik@hotmail.com

Article Metrics

CrossRef Citations:
Total Statistics:

Full-Text HTML Views: 655
Abstract HTML Views: 373
PDF Downloads: 276
ePub Downloads: 274
Total Views/Downloads: 1578
Unique Statistics:

Full-Text HTML Views: 397
Abstract HTML Views: 248
PDF Downloads: 178
ePub Downloads: 199
Total Views/Downloads: 1022

Creative Commons License
© Mohamed Sukeik; Licensee Bentham Open.

open-access license: This is an open access article licensed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-Non-Commercial 4.0 International Public License (CC BY-NC 4.0) (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/legalcode), which permits unrestricted, non-commercial use, distribution and reproduction in any medium, provided the work is properly cited.


Revision of hip and knee arthroplasties due to infection remains a very expensive procedure to the patient and healthcare systems and no matter how much progress in diagnostic and treatment methods are achieved, the cost and morbidity of infected cases suggest that preventative measures are the single most important factor in managing this problem [1]. On the other hand, there is no single test which is 100% sensitive and/or specific for diagnosis of infection [2]. Hence, prevention and diagnosis of periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) constituted the majority of research work undertaken by lead surgeons at various centers of excellence around the globe [3, 4].

Specialist tertiary centers dealing with such infections on a regular basis using a multidisciplinary approach and clearly defined protocols may improve infection control rates and contribute to standardizing management of PJIs [5]. In fact, efforts from investigators at centers such as The Rothman institute and The Helios ENDO-Klinik Hamburg have led finally to a consensus on defining PJI in the last two years [4]. Having undertaken an MD research degree on management of PJIs at University College London and visited The Rothman Institute, Hospital for Special Surgery and The Helios ENDO-Klinik Hamburg, I have worked closely with leaders in the management of PJIs and observed the variations in approaches and high rates of infection control at those centers. Therefore, I was keen to organize this thematic issue on ‘Management of Periprosthetic Joint Infections after Total Hip and Knee Replacements’ with review articles contributed from those centers summarizing the current literature but also sharing their own experiences and efforts in improving PJI management.

Articles in this thematic issue cover the whole spectrum of defining PJI and the economic burden, prevention of PJIs, advancements in diagnosing PJIs, management strategies including the role of antibiotics, aggressive early debridement, one and two stage revisions, management of resistant, atypical and culture negative infections and salvage procedures.


[1] Sukeik M, Patel S, Haddad FS. Aggressive early débridement for treatment of acutely infected cemented total hip arthroplasty. Clin Orthop Relat Res 2012; 470(11): 3164-70.
[2] Sukeik MT, Haddad FS. Management of periprosthetic infection in total hip arthroplasty. Orthop Trauma 2009; 23(5): 342-9.
[3] Diaz-Ledezma C, Lichstein PM, Dolan JG, Parvizi J. Diagnosis of periprosthetic joint infection in Medicare patients: multicriteria decision analysis. Clin Orthop Relat Res 2014; 472(11): 3275-84.
[4] Parvizi J, Zmistowski B, Berbari EF, et al. New definition for periprosthetic joint infection: from the Workgroup of the Musculoskeletal Infection Society. Clin Orthop Relat Res 2011; 469(11): 2992-4.
[5] Vanhegan IS, Morgan-Jones R, Barrett DS, Haddad FS. Developing a strategy to treat established infection in total knee replacement: a review of the latest evidence and clinical practice. J Bone Joint Surg Br 2012; 94(7): 875-81.