<- Back to digest

JOA - 2026-08-08 - Journal Article

Failure Rates After Treatment of Periprosthetic Joint Infection Using Musculoskeletal Infection Society Outcome Reporting Tool, Delphi, and Clinical Outcome Definitions.

Tyler JR, Grayson W, Wozniak A, Schmitt D, Brown NM

retrospective cohortLOE IIIn = 184 (primary analytic cohort from 198 unique hip and knee PJI episodes)Minimum 12 months or documented failure event before 12 months; exact mean not reported.

Topics

arthroplasty
PMID: 42570734DOI: 10.1016/j.arth.2026.08.002View on PubMed ->

Key Takeaway

DAIR failure rates reached 52.0% by clinical definition versus 44.8% by MSIS-ORT in a 184-episode cohort, with 12.5% of MSIS-ORT successes reclassified as failures under pragmatic clinical criteria.

Summary Depth

Choose how much analysis to show on this article page.

Summary

This single-center retrospective study compared PJI treatment failure rates across three outcome frameworks—MSIS-ORT, Delphi, and a pragmatic clinical definition—in 184 hip and knee PJI episodes treated 2007–2024. Failure rates were 43.5% (MSIS-ORT), 40.8% (Delphi), and 47.3% (clinical definition) overall, with DAIR showing the greatest definitional divergence (44.8% vs. 52.0%). Despite high aggregate concordance between MSIS-ORT and Delphi, 13 of 104 episodes (12.5%) deemed successful by MSIS-ORT were failures by clinical criteria, driven by specific discordant classification elements.

Key Limitation

The pragmatic clinical definition is not standardized or externally validated, limiting reproducibility and direct comparison with published literature using MSIS-ORT or Delphi benchmarks.

Original Abstract

BACKGROUND

Reported success rates after treatment of periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) vary widely, in part because treatment failure is not defined uniformly. Modern consensus outcome frameworks such as the Musculoskeletal Infection Society Outcome Reporting Tool (MSIS ORT) and Delphi criteria may not fully capture clinically meaningful outcomes. This study compared failure rates after treatment of PJI using MSIS-ORT, Delphi, and a pragmatic clinical definition; assessed agreement between these definitions at the patient level; and examined the criteria responsible for discordant classifications.

METHODS

A retrospective cohort study was performed of 198 unique hip and knee PJI episodes treated at a single academic medical center from 2007 to 2024. The primary analytic cohort consisted of 184 episodes with either a documented failure event before 12 months or documented follow-up of at least 12 months. Failure rates were calculated using MSIS-ORT, Delphi, and pragmatic clinical definitions. Agreement between definitions was assessed using cross-tabulations, and discordant cases were reviewed to identify the criteria responsible for disagreement.

RESULTS

In the 184-episode primary analytic cohort, failure rates were 43.5% (80 of 184) by MSIS-ORT, 40.8% (75 of 184) by Delphi, and 47.3% (87 of 184) by the clinical definition. Among debridement, antibiotics, and implant retention (DAIR) procedures, failure rates were 44.8, 42.4, and 52.0%, respectively; among staged revisions, failure rates were 40.7, 37.3, and 37.3%, respectively. The MSIS ORT and Delphi showed high concordance, but 13 of 104 episodes (12.5%) classified as successful by MSIS-ORT were considered failures under the clinical definition.

CONCLUSIONS

Failure after treatment of PJI remained common regardless of the outcome framework applied. Although MSIS ORT and Delphi produced similar aggregate estimates, these frameworks were not fully interchangeable with a pragmatic clinical definition at the patient level. Definitional choice materially influences interpretation of PJI treatment outcomes.