Use of modular megaprosthesis in managing chronic end-stage periprosthetic hip and knee infections: Is there an increase in relapse rate?

被引:27
作者
Corona P.S. [1 ]
Vicente M. [2 ]
Lalanza M. [2 ]
Amat C. [1 ]
Carrera L. [1 ]
机构
[1] Septic and Reconstructive Surgery Unit, Orthopaedic Surgery Department, Vall d’Hebron University Hospital, Universitat Autónoma de Barcelona, Barcelona
[2] Orthopaedic Surgery Department, Vall d’Hebron University Hospital, Universitat Autónoma de Barcelona, Passeig Vall d’Hebron 119-129, Barcelona
关键词
Cement spacer; Infection relapse; Limb salvage; Modular megaprosthesis; Periprosthetic joint infection; Vancogenx;
D O I
10.1007/s00590-018-2127-9
中图分类号
学科分类号
摘要
Background: Bone loss is a common problem in periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) scenarios. Modular megaprosthesis (MP) could offer a limb salvage solution in such situations. Concerns about risk of infection relapse, reinfection and implant longevity exist regarding MP use in cases of chronic PJI, rather than standard implants. We therefore sought to analyze our results with MP use in chronic PJI cases. Methods: We performed a retrospective analysis of 29 MP patients. Inclusion criteria were the use of this type of modular megaimplant for reconstruction of segmental bone defects in chronically infected lower-extremity arthroplasties (hip or knee) and a minimum follow-up of 18 months. We evaluated the primary outcome of infection control or recurrence. The MPs were classified into 3 groups, according the bone segment replaced (proximal femur, distal femur or total femur). We further analyzed complications, pain, patient satisfaction and functional results. Results: Mean age was 75 years; mean follow-up was 48 months (range 18–82). The most frequently involved pathogens were coagulase-negative staphylococci (62%). Polymicrobial infection was detected in 7 patients. Twenty-eight patients were managed with a two-stage approach. The infection-free rate at the end of follow-up was 82.8% (24 of 29 patients). Aside from infection relapse, the most frequent complication was dislocation. Final-point survival rate was 91.2% (CI 68.1–97.8). Clinical outcome data and satisfaction results were acceptable. Conclusion: According our data, MP is a useful tool in treating end-stage PJI cases, achieving acceptable eradication, satisfaction and implant survivorship rates. © 2018, Springer-Verlag France SAS, part of Springer Nature.
引用
收藏
页码:627 / 636
页数:9
相关论文
共 29 条
[1]  
Zimmerli W., Trampuz A., Ochsner P.E., Prosthetic-joint infections, N Engl J Med, 351, pp. 1645-1654, (2004)
[2]  
Tsukayama D.T., Goldberg V.M., Kyle R., Diagnosis and management of infection after total knee arthroplasty, J Bone Joint Surg Am, 85A, pp. S75-S80, (2003)
[3]  
Kurtz S., Ong K., Lau E., Et al., Projections of primary and revision hip and knee arthroplasty in the United States from 2005 to 2030, J Bone Joint Surg Am, 89, pp. 780-785, (2007)
[4]  
Beck R.T., Illingworth K.D., Saleh K.J., Review of periprosthetic osteolysis in total joint arthroplasty: an emphasis on host factors and future directions, J Orthop Res Off Publ Orthop Res Soc, 30, pp. 541-546, (2012)
[5]  
Sheth N.P., Bonadio M.B., Demange M.K., Bone loss in revision total knee arthroplasty: evaluation and management, J Am Acad Orthop Surg, 25, pp. 348-357, (2017)
[6]  
Calori G.M., Colombo M., Malagoli E., Et al., Megaprosthesis in post-traumatic and periprosthetic large bone defects: issues to consider, Injury, 45, pp. S105-S110, (2014)
[7]  
Pala E., Trovarelli G., Calabro T., Et al., Survival of modern knee tumor megaprostheses: failures, functional results, and a comparative statistical analysis, Clin Orthop, 473, pp. 891-899, (2015)
[8]  
Kapoor S.K., Thiyam R., Management of infection following reconstruction in bone tumors, J Clin Orthop Trauma, 6, pp. 244-251, (2015)
[9]  
Ercolano L.B., Christensen T., McGough R., Weiss K., Treatment solutions are unclear for perimegaprosthetic infections, Clin Orthop, 471, pp. 3204-3213, (2013)
[10]  
Henderson E.R., Groundland J.S., Pala E., Et al., Failure mode classification for tumor endoprostheses: retrospective review of five institutions and a literature review, J Bone Joint Surg Am, 93, pp. 418-429, (2011)