Two-Stage Revision Arthroplasty for the Treatment of Prosthetic Joint Infection

被引：88

作者：

Charette R.S. ^{[1
]}

Melnic C.M. ^{[2
]}

机构：

[1] Resident, Orthopaedic Surgery, University of Pennsylvania, 3737 Market Street, 6th Floor, Philadelphia, 19104, PA

[2] Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Massachusetts General Hospital, Newton Wellesley Hospital, Harvard Medical School, 55 Fruit Street, Boston, 02114, MA

来源：

Current Reviews in Musculoskeletal Medicine | 2018年 / 11卷 / 3期

关键词：

Antibiotic spacer; Prosthetic joint infection; Total hip arthroplasty; Total knee arthroplasty; Two-stage revision;

D O I：

10.1007/s12178-018-9495-y

中图分类号：

学科分类号：

摘要：

Purpose of Review: To review the diagnosis and treatment of prosthetic joint infection (PJI) with a focus on two-stage revision arthroplasty. The text will discuss different spacer constructs in total knee and total hip arthroplasty and will present clinical outcome data for these various options. Recent Findings: There is no appreciable difference in infection eradication between mobile and static antibiotic spacers. Mobile spacers have shown improved knee range of motion after second-stage re-implantation. Summary: Two-stage revision arthroplasty is the gold standard treatment for PJI. The first stage involves removal of all components, cement, and compromised soft tissues with placement of an antibiotic-impregnated spacer. Spacer options include both mobile and static spacers. Mobile spacers offer maintenance of ambulation and joint range of motion between staged procedures and have shown to be as effective in eradicating infection as static spacers. © 2018, Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature.

引用

页码：332 / 340

页数：8

共 85 条

[1]

Martinez-Cano J., Herrera-Escobar J., Arango Gutierrez A., Sanchez Vergel A., Martinez-Rondanelli A., Prospective quality of life assessment after hip and knee arthroplasty: short and mid-term follow up results, Arthroplasty Today, 15, pp. 125-130, (2016)

[2]

Kurtz S., Ong K., Lau E., Mowat F., Halpern M., Projections of primary and revision hip and knee arthroplasty in the United States from 2005 to 2030, J Bone Joint Surg Am, 4, pp. 780-785, (2007)

[3]

Zhan C., Kaczmarek R., Loyo-Berrio N., Sangl J., Bright R., Incidence and short-term outcomes of primary and revision hip replacement in the United States, J Bone Joint Surg Am, 3, pp. 526-533, (2007)

[4]

Bozic K., Katz P., Cisternas M., Ono L., Ries M., Showstack J., Hospital resource utilization for primary and revision total hip arthroplasty, 3, pp. 570-576, (2005)

[5]

Salvati E., Gonzalez Della Valle A., Masri B., Duncan C., The infected total hip arthroplasty, Instr Course Lect, 52, pp. 223-245, (2003)

[6]

Spangehl M., Masri B., O'Connell J., Duncan C., Prospective analysis of preoperative and intraoperative. investigations for the diagnosis of infection at the sites of two hundred and. two revision total hip arthroplasties, J Bone Joint Surg Am, 81, 5, pp. 672-683, (1999)

[7]

Springer B., Cahue S., Etkin C., Lewallen D., McGrory B., Infection burden in total hip and knee arthroplasties: an international registry-based perspective, Arthroplasty Today, 3, 2, pp. 137-140, (2017)

[8]

Parvizi J., Gehrke T., Definition of Periprosthetic joint infection, J Arthroplast, 29, (2014)

[9]

Parvizi J., Zmistowski B., Berbari E., Bauer T., Springer B., Della Valle C., Garvin K., Mont M., Wongworawat M., Zalavras C., New definition for Periprosthetic joint infection, Clin Orthop Relat Res, 469, pp. 2992-2994, (2011)

[10]

Bedair H., Ting N., Jacovides C., Saxena A., Moric M., Parvizi J., Della Valle C., The mark Coventry award: diagnosis of early postoperative TKA infection using synovial fluid analysis, Clin Orthop Relat Res, 469, 1, pp. 34-40, (2011)

← 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 →