Management of prosthetic joint infections: a guidelines comparison

被引：6
作者：
Ometti M. [1 ]
Delmastro E. [2 ]
Salini V. [2 ]
机构：
[1] Department of Orthopaedics and Traumatology, San Raffaele Hospital, Milan
[2] Vita-Salute San Raffaele University, Milan
来源：
MUSCULOSKELETAL SURGERY | 2022年 / 106卷 / 3期
关键词：
Arthroplasty; Guidelines; PJI; Prosthetic joint infections;
D O I：
10.1007/s12306-021-00734-7
中图分类号：
学科分类号：
摘要：
Background: In the last decade, the number of prosthetic joint replacements has been rising each year and this growing trend is related to the increased number of prosthetic joint infections (PJI). As PJI represent a devastating condition for the patient, physicians must identify the best treatment option for each case. Guidelines are not always clear regarding the most appropriate therapy pathway as they differ in many parameters. Materials and methods: Aim of this article is to compare the different indications as reported by four major Academic Societies: the Infectious Disease Society of America, the American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons, and the Musculoskeletal Infection Society (MSIS) which published the guideline in partnership with the European Bone And Joint Infection Society. Conclusions: PJI Guidelines differ in many parameters, therefore the choice of treatment for each case does not appear immediate; it would be desirable that, in the next few years, new scientific evidence will help clarify the indications of the most effective therapeutic protocols for PJI to determine the ultimate surgical strategy for every single patient. © 2022, The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Istituto Ortopedico Rizzoli.
引用
收藏
页码：219 / 226
页数：7
相关论文
共 19 条
  • [1] Kurtz S., Mowat F., Ong K., Et al., Prevalence of primary and revision total hip and knee arthroplasty in the United States from 1990 through 2002, J Bone Joint Surg Am, 87, 7, pp. 1487-1497, (2005)
  • [2] Etkin D., Springer B., The American Joint Replacement Registry—the first 5 years, Arthroplasty Today, 3, 2, pp. 67-69, (2017)
  • [3] Signore A., Sconfienza L.M., Borens O., Et al., Consensus document for the diagnosis of prosthetic joint infections: a joint paper by the EANM, EBJIS, and ESR (with ESCMID endorsement), Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging, 46, 4, pp. 971-988, (2019)
  • [4] Glaudemans A.W., Galli F., Pacilio M., Et al., Review Leukocyte and bacteria imaging in prosthetic joint infection, Eur Cell Mater, 25, pp. 61-77, (2013)
  • [5] Cataldo M.A., Petrosillo N., Cipriani M., Et al., Review prosthetic joint infection: recent developments in diagnosis and management, J Infect, 61, 6, pp. 443-448, (2010)
  • [6] Parvizi J., Tan T.L., Goswami K., Higuera C., Della Valle C., Chen A.F., Shohat N., The 2018 definition of periprosthetic hip and knee infection: an evidence-based and validated criteria, J Arthroplasty, 33, 5, pp. 1309-1314.e2, (2018)
  • [7] Barberan J., Management of infections of osteoarticular prosthesis, Clin Microbiol Infect, 12, pp. 93-101, (2006)
  • [8] Wolf C.F., Gu N.Y., Doctor J.N., Et al., Comparison of one and two-stage revision of total hip arthroplasty complicated by infection: a Markov expected-utility decision analysis, J Bone Joint Surg Am, 93, pp. 631-639, (2011)
  • [9] Azzam K., McHale K., Austin M., Et al., Outcome of a second two stage reimplantation for periprosthetic knee infection, Clin Orthop Relat Res, 467, pp. 1706-1714, (2009)
  • [10] Sia I.G., Berbari E.F., Karchmer A.W., Prosthetic joint infections, Infect Dis Clin N Am, 19, pp. 885-914, (2005)
12