Related Experiment Video
Updated: Jun 14, 2026
Novel Diagnostics in Revision Arthroplasty: Implant Sonication and Multiplex Polymerase Chain Reaction
Published on: December 3, 2017
Should national standards for reporting surgical site infections distinguish between primary and revision orthopedic
Surbhi Leekha1, Priya Sampathkumar, Daniel J Berry
1Division of Infectious Diseases, College of Medicine, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota 55905, USA. leekha.surbhi@mayo.edu
Objective:
To compare the surgical site infection (SSI) rate after primary total hip arthroplasty with the SSI rate after revision total hip arthroplasty.
Design:
Retrospective cohort study.
Setting:
Mayo Clinic in Rochester, Minnesota, a referral orthopedic center.
Patients:
All patients undergoing primary total hip arthroplasty or revision total hip arthroplasty during the period from January 1, 2002, through December 31, 2006.
Methods:
We obtained data on total hip arthroplasties from a prospectively maintained institutional surgical database. We reviewed data on SSIs collected prospectively as part of routine infection control surveillance, using the criteria of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention for the definition of an SSI. We used logistic regression analyses to evaluate differences between the SSI rate after primary total hip arthroplasty and the SSI rate after revision total hip arthroplasty.
Results:
A total of 5,696 total hip arthroplasties (with type 1 wound classification) were analyzed, of which 1,381 (24%) were revisions. A total of 61 SSIs occurred, resulting in an overall SSI rate of 1.1% for all total hip arthroplasties. When stratified by the National Nosocomial Infection Surveillance (NNIS) risk index, SSI rates were 0.5%, 1.2%, and 1.6% in risk categories 0, 1, and 2, respectively. After controlling for the NNIS risk index, the risk of SSI after revision total hip arthroplasty was twice as high as that after primary total hip arthroplasty (odds ratio, 2.2 [95% confidence interval, 1.3-3.7]). In the analysis restricted to the development of deep incisional or organ space infections, the risk of SSI after revision total hip arthroplasty was nearly 4 times that after primary total hip arthroplasty (odds ratio, 3.9 [95% confidence interval, 2.0-7.6]).
Conclusion:
Including revision surgeries in the calculation of SSI rates can result in higher infection rates for institutions that perform a larger number of revisions. Taking NNIS risk indices into account does not eliminate this effect. Differences between primary and revision surgeries should be considered in national standards for the reporting of SSIs.
Related Concept Videos
01:21Types of Reports II: Incident or Occurrence Report
Purposes:
In the healthcare industry, reports play a crucial role in documenting incidents within an agency. The primary objective of these reports is to ensure patient safety, uphold the...
01:22Healthcare Associated Infections II: Preventive Measures
The best practices for preventing healthcare-associated infections include hand hygiene, patient risk...
01:14SBAR II: Application of SBAR
SBAR Report from a Nurse to a Health Care Provider
S: "Hello, Dr. Smith. This is Jane, RN, from the Med Surg unit. I am calling to tell you about Ms. White in Room 210, who is experiencing increased pain and redness at her incision site. Her recent...
01:29Appendicitis-II: Diagnostic Studies and Management
Diagnosing Appendicitis
It requires a multifaceted approach, starting with a detailed physical examination to pinpoint the location and nature of the pain and identify any associated symptoms. Laboratory tests play a crucial role. A complete Blood Count (CBC) typically reveals leukocytosis (an increased number of...