Evaluating the impact of surgery sequence on infection rates in hip or knee arthroplasty: does sequence matter?

dc.contributor.authorRuangsomboon P.
dc.contributor.authorRuangsomboon O.
dc.contributor.authorTomescu S.
dc.contributor.authorRahman C.
dc.contributor.authorPincus D.
dc.contributor.authorRavi B.
dc.contributor.correspondenceRuangsomboon P.
dc.contributor.otherMahidol University
dc.date.accessioned2024-09-26T18:09:38Z
dc.date.available2024-09-26T18:09:38Z
dc.date.issued2024-01-01
dc.description.abstractPurpose: The potential influence of surgical sequence of elective hip-and-knee reconstructive surgery in relation to an infection-related procedure on postoperative infection rates is not clearly understood. Therefore, we aimed to examine the impact of surgical sequence on the incidence of postoperative infections within one-year and the longest available follow-up period in patients undergoing hip-and-knee reconstructive surgery. Methods: A case-control study with propensity matching was utilized to examine elective surgeries conducted at Sunnybrook Holland Orthopaedic & Arthritic centre, Toronto, Canada between 2015 and 2018. We determined and categorized them based on their operating room (OR) sequence in relation to an infected case; the cases were those performed right after (post-infection cohort), and the controls were those performed before an infection-related procedure in the same OR (pre-infection cohort). We employed survival analysis to compare the infection incidence within one year and at the longest available follow-up among the propensity-matched cohort. Results: A total of 13,651 cases were identified during the four year period. We successfully matched 153 cases (21 post-infection and 132 pre-infection) using propensity scores. Demographic and clinical characteristics were balanced through matching. Kaplan-Meier survival analysis showed no significant difference in infection-free survival within one year and at a median follow-up of 2.2 years [interquartile range 0.9-5.0] between surgeries conducted before and after infected cases (both log-rank p-values = 0.4). The hazard ratios for infection within one year and the longest follow-up period were both 0.37 [95%Confidence Interval 0.03–4.09, p = 0.418], as no more events occurred after one year. Conclusion: The sequence of surgical procedures, whether or not an elective arthroplasty or lower limb reconstructive procedure occurs before or after an infection-related case in the same OR, does not significantly affect postoperative infection rates. This finding supports the efficacy of the current infection control measures and suggests a reconsideration of surgical scheduling standards.
dc.identifier.citationInternational Orthopaedics (2024)
dc.identifier.doi10.1007/s00264-024-06317-y
dc.identifier.eissn14325195
dc.identifier.issn03412695
dc.identifier.scopus2-s2.0-85204210487
dc.identifier.urihttps://repository.li.mahidol.ac.th/handle/123456789/101364
dc.rights.holderSCOPUS
dc.subjectMedicine
dc.titleEvaluating the impact of surgery sequence on infection rates in hip or knee arthroplasty: does sequence matter?
dc.typeArticle
mu.datasource.scopushttps://www.scopus.com/inward/record.uri?partnerID=HzOxMe3b&scp=85204210487&origin=inward
oaire.citation.titleInternational Orthopaedics
oairecerif.author.affiliationSiriraj Hospital
oairecerif.author.affiliationLi Ka Shing Knowledge Institute
oairecerif.author.affiliationSunnybrook Health Sciences Centre
oairecerif.author.affiliationInstitute for Clinical Evaluative Sciences

Files

Collections