Abstract:<h2>Summary</h2><h3>Background</h3><p>Prosthetic joint infection is a devastating complication of knee replacement. The risk of developing a prosthetic joint infection is affected by patient, surgical, and health-care system factors. Existing evidence is limited by heterogeneity in populations studied, short follow-up, inadequate power, and does not differentiate early prosthetic joint infection, most likely related to the intervention, from late infection, more likely to occur due to haematogenous bacterial spread. We aimed to assess the overall and time-specific associations of these factors with the risk of revision due to prosthetic joint infection following primary knee replacement.</p><h3>Methods</h3><p>In this cohort study, we analysed primary knee replacements done between 2003 and 2013 in England and Wales and the procedures subsequently revised for prosthetic joint infection between 2003 and 2014. Data were obtained from the National Joint Registry linked to the Hospital Episode Statistics data in England and the Patient Episode Database for Wales. Each primary replacement was followed for a minimum of 12 months until the end of the observation period (Dec 31, 2014) or until the date of revision for prosthetic joint infection, revision for another indication, or death (whichever occurred first). We analysed the data using Poisson and piecewise exponential multilevel models to assess the associations between patient, surgical, and health-care system factors and risk of revision for prosthetic joint infection.</p><h3>Findings</h3><p>Of 679 010 primary knee replacements done between 2003 and 2013 in England and Wales, 3659 were subsequently revised for an indication of prosthetic joint infection between 2003 and 2014, after a median follow-up of 4·6 years (IQR 2·6–6·9). Male sex (rate ratio [RR] for male <em>vs</em> female patients 1·8 [95% CI 1·7–2·0]), younger age (RR for age ≥80 years <em>vs</em> <60 years 0·5 [0·4–0·6]), higher American Society of Anaesthesiologists [ASA] grade (RR for ASA grade 3–5 <em>vs</em> 1, 1·8 [1·6–2·1]), elevated body-mass index (BMI; RR for BMI ≥30 kg/m<sup>2</sup> <em>vs</em> <25 kg/m<sup>2</sup> 1·5 [1·3–1·6]), chronic pulmonary disease (RR 1·2 [1·1–1·3]), diabetes (RR 1·4 [1·2–1·5]), liver disease (RR 2·2 [1·6–2·9]), connective tissue and rheumatic diseases (RR 1·5 [1·3–1·7]), peripheral vascular disease (RR 1·4 [1·1–1·7]), surgery for trauma (RR 1·9 [1·4–2·6]), previous septic arthritis (RR 4·9 [2·7–7·6]) or inflammatory arthropathy (RR 1·4 [1·2–1·7]), operation under general anaesthesia (RR 1·1 [1·0–1·2]), requirement for tibial bone graft (RR 2·0 [1·3–2·7]), use of posterior stabilised fixed bearing prostheses (RR for posterior stabilised fixed bearing prostheses <em>vs</em> unconstrained fixed bearing prostheses 1·4 [1·3–1·5]) or constrained condylar prostheses (3·5 [2·5–4·7]) were associated with a higher risk of revision for prosthetic joint infection. However, uncemented total, patellofemoral, or unicondylar knee replacement (RR for uncemented <em>vs</em> cemented total knee replacement 0·7 [95% CI 0·6–0·8], RR for patellofemoral <em>vs</em> cemented total knee replacement 0·3 [0·2–0·5], and RR for unicondylar <em>vs</em> cemented total knee replacement 0·5 [0·5–0·6]) were associated with lower risk of revision for prosthetic joint infection. Most of these factors had time-specific effects, depending on the time period post-surgery.</p><h3>Interpretation</h3><p>We have identified several risk factors for revision for prosthetic joint infection following knee replacement. Some of these factors are modifiable, and the use of targeted interventions or strategies could lead to a reduced risk of revision for prosthetic joint infection. Non-modifiable factors and the time-specific nature of the effects we have observed will allow clinicians to appropriately counsel patients preoperatively and tailor follow-up regimens.</p><h3>Funding</h3><p>National Institute for Health Research.</p>

Accuracy and completeness of registry‐reported unicompartmental knee arthroplasty revision

A Systematic Approach to Predicting the Risk of Unicompartmental Knee Arthroplasty Revision.

Analysis of the causes of primary revision after unicompartmental knee arthroplasty: A case series

Revision of unicompartmental knee arthroplasty: a systematic review

Unicondylar knee arthroplasty demonstrating a significant increased risk for aseptic revisions compared to unconstrained and constrained total knee arthroplasty: An analysis of aseptic revisions after unicondylar and primary total knee arthroplasty of the German Arthroplasty Registry

Correlation of revision rate of unicompartmental knee arthroplasty with total knee arthroplasty: a meta-analysis of clinical studies and worldwide arthroplasty registers

Evaluation of Causes and Clinical Effects of Revision Surgery after Artificial Hip Replacement

[Unicondylar knee arthroplasties demonstrate a significantly increased risk of aseptic revisions compared with unconstrained and constrained TKA : Analysis of aseptic revisions after unicondylar and primary total knee arthroplasty of the German Arthroplasty Register]

Revision Rate of Periprosthetic Joint Infection Post Total Hip or Knee Arthroplasty of 34 Hospitals in China Between 2015 and 2017: a Multi-Center Survey

Validating the capture rate of revisions by the New Zealand ACL Registry: An analysis of all‐cause reoperation following primary ACL reconstruction

Enhancing the data capture of periprosthetic joint infections in the Danish Knee Arthroplasty Registry: validity assessment and incidence estimation

Analysis of causes for revision in unicompartmental knee arthroplasty

Robotic-Assisted and Computer-Navigated Unicompartmental Knee Arthroplasties: A Systematic Review

Long term follow up of 257 consecutive cementless Oxford medial compartment knee arthroplasties at a non-designer centre

How good are surgeons at disclosing periprosthetic joint infection at the time of revision, based on pre- and intra-operative assessment? A study on 16,922 primary total hip arthroplasties reported to the Norwegian Arthroplasty Register

Risk factors associated with revision for prosthetic joint infection following knee replacement: an observational cohort study from England and Wales

Racial Disparities in Rates of Revision and use of Modern Features in Total Knee Arthroplasty, a National Registry Study

Does robotic-assisted unicompartmental knee arthroplasty have lower complication and revision rates than the conventional procedure? A systematic review and meta-analysis

The efficacy and safety of patient-specific instrumentation versus conventional instrumentation for unicompartmental knee arthroplasty: Evidence from a meta-analysis

The necessity of revisions for failed primary total knee arthroplasty

The Risk of Revision After TKA Is Affected by Previous HTO or UKA