Two-stage revision of prosthetic hip joint infections using antibiotic-loaded cement spacers: When is the best time to perform the second stage?

被引:54
作者
Vielgut, Ines [1 ]
Sadoghi, Patrick [1 ]
Wolf, Matthias [1 ]
Holzer, Lukas [1 ]
Leithner, Andreas [1 ]
Schwantzer, Gerold [2 ]
Poolman, Rudolf [3 ]
Frankl, Bernhard [1 ]
Glehr, Mathias [1 ]
机构
[1] Med Univ Graz, Dept Orthopaed Surg, Graz, Austria
[2] Med Univ Graz, Inst Med Informat Stat & Documentat, Graz, Austria
[3] Onze Lieve Vrouw Hosp, Dept Orthopaed Surg, Amsterdam, Netherlands
关键词
Periprosthetic hip joint infection; Antibiotic-augmented spacer; Two-stage revision procedure; TOTAL KNEE ARTHROPLASTY; REIMPLANTATION; EXCHANGE; REPLACEMENT; SONICATION;
D O I
10.1007/s00264-015-2751-5
中图分类号
R826.8 [整形外科学]; R782.2 [口腔颌面部整形外科学]; R726.2 [小儿整形外科学]; R62 [整形外科学(修复外科学)];
学科分类号
摘要
Aim Managing periprosthetic joint infections remains a challenging task, and adequate treatment strategies seem to be mandatory to avoid irreversible damage of the affected joint and/or systemic complications. Two-stage revision arthroplasty includes removing all implants and subsequent implantation of an antibiotic-loaded cement spacer, followed by revision arthroplasty as the second stage. Although this procedure is well described in the literature, results remain unpredictable due to various clinical findings and the absence of prospective randomised trials. We analysed (1) mortality and (2) reinfection rates in a series of patients who underwent two-stage revision surgery for periprosthetic hip joint infections with antibiotic-augmented joint spacers. We maintained a special focus on the spacer retention period and its influence on outcome in order to determine the best time for second-stage surgery. Patients and methods A consecutive series of 76 patients with native and periprosthetic hip joint infections and who underwent two-stage revision surgery with antibiotic-loaded cement spacers were studied between 2005 and 2010. The second-stage operation was performed when it was assumed that infection was eradicated. The further operative procedure depended upon intra-operative findings (frozen section, local status). Results Mean implant-free period with the antibiotic-loaded spacer in situ was 12.6 weeks. Spacer re-implantation was necessary in 13 cases due to positive signs of acute infection in the frozen section and suspect intra-operative findings. Eight patients were not operated for a second time in the investigated time period due to poor general condition. In 40 patients, the spacer retention period was four to 11 weeks: <four weeks for five and >11 weeks for 23. We observed a significantly higher proportion of women free from reinfection in the four to 11-week group than in patients with the shorter or longer period. Conclusion According to our findings, the optimal timing for second-stage surgery as a second-stage procedure is between four and 11 weeks. A significantly optimal reinfection rate was seen in patients undergoing revision arthroplasty within that time frame, and 90 % of those patients remained infection free until final follow-up.
引用
收藏
页码:1731 / 1736
页数:6
相关论文
共 45 条
[41]   Two-stage revision arthroplasty for periprosthetic joint infections: What is the value of cultures and white cell count in synovial fluid and CRP in serum before second stage reimplantation? [J].
Hoell, Steffen ;
Moeller, Andrea ;
Gosheger, Georg ;
Hardes, Jendrik ;
Dieckmann, Ralf ;
Schulz, Dino .
ARCHIVES OF ORTHOPAEDIC AND TRAUMA SURGERY, 2016, 136 (04) :447-452
[42]   Is the Proportion of Patients with "Successful" Outcomes After Two-stage Revision for Prosthetic Joint Infection Different When Applying the Musculoskeletal Infection Society Outcome Reporting Tool Compared with the Delphi-based Consensus Criteria? [J].
Borsinger, Tracy M. ;
Pierce, Daniel A. ;
Hanson, Thomas M. ;
Werth, Paul M. ;
Orem, Alexander R. ;
Moschetti, Wayne E. .
CLINICAL ORTHOPAEDICS AND RELATED RESEARCH, 2021, 479 (07) :1589-1597
[43]   Does the use of a closed-suction drain reduce the effectiveness of an antibiotic-loaded spacer in two-stage exchange Arthroplasty for Periprosthetic hip infection? A prospective, randomized, controlled study [J].
Xu, Chi ;
Jia, Cheng-Qi ;
Kuo, Feng-Chih ;
Chai, Wei ;
Zhang, Ming-Hua ;
Chen, Ji-Ying .
BMC MUSCULOSKELETAL DISORDERS, 2019, 20 (01)
[44]   Two-Stage Revision for Infected Total Knee Arthroplasty: Based on Autoclaving the Recycled Femoral Component and Intraoperative Molding Using Antibiotic-Impregnated Cement on the Tibial Side [J].
Lee, Byoung-Joo ;
Kyung, Hee-Soo ;
Yoon, Seong-Dae .
CLINICS IN ORTHOPEDIC SURGERY, 2015, 7 (03) :310-317
[45]   Quality of life, infection control, and complication rates using a novel custom-made articulating hip spacer during two-stage revision for periprosthetic joint infection [J].
Lunz, Andre ;
Omlor, Georg W. ;
Schmidt, Gunter ;
Moradi, Babak ;
Lehner, Burkhard ;
Streit, Marcus R. .
ARCHIVES OF ORTHOPAEDIC AND TRAUMA SURGERY, 2022, 142 (12) :4041-4054