scholarly journals Two-stage Treatment of Hip Periprosthetic Joint Infection Is Associated With a High Rate of Infection Control but High Mortality

2012 ◽  
Vol 471 (2) ◽  
pp. 510-518 ◽  
Author(s):  
Keith R. Berend ◽  
Adolph V. Lombardi ◽  
Michael J. Morris ◽  
Adam G. Bergeson ◽  
Joanne B. Adams ◽  
...  
Author(s):  
Andre Lunz ◽  
Georg W. Omlor ◽  
Gunter Schmidt ◽  
Babak Moradi ◽  
Burkhard Lehner ◽  
...  

Abstract Introduction Two-stage revision remains the gold standard treatment for most chronically infected and complex total hip arthroplasty infections. To improve patient outcome and reduce complication rates, we have developed a novel custom-made articulating hip spacer technique and present our short-term results. Materials and methods Between November 2017 and November 2019, 27 patients (mean age 70 years) underwent two-stage revision for periprosthetic joint infection of the hip using the articulating spacer design described here. We retrospectively analyzed spacer-related complications as well as rates for complication, infection control, and implant survivorship after final reimplantation. Furthermore, we prospectively collected patient-reported health-related quality of life (HRQoL) scores prior to spacer implantation, with the spacer and after reimplantation of the new prosthesis. Results An additional round of spacer exchange was performed in two patients (8.3%), persistent wound discharge was the reason in both cases. We had one (4.2%) spacer-related mechanical complication, a dislocation that was treated with closed reduction. After reimplantation, infection control was achieved in 96% with an implant survivorship of 92% after a mean follow-up time of 19 (range 7–32, SD 7.2) months. While the scores for VR-12 MCS, VAS hip pain and patient-reported overall satisfaction significantly improved after first stage surgery, the scores for WOMAC, UCLA and VR-12 PCS significantly improved after second stage surgery. Conclusions Our two-stage approach for periprosthetic joint infection shows high infection eradication and implant survivorship rates at short-term follow-up. Spacer-related complication rates were low, and we achieved high patient satisfaction rates and low pain levels already during the spacer period. To further simplify comparison between different spacer designs, we propose a new hip spacer classification system.


2018 ◽  
Vol 33 (11) ◽  
pp. 3555-3560 ◽  
Author(s):  
Feng-Chih Kuo ◽  
Karan Goswami ◽  
Noam Shohat ◽  
Kier Blevins ◽  
Alexander J. Rondon ◽  
...  

2019 ◽  
Vol 10 (10) ◽  
pp. 348-355 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ewout S Veltman ◽  
Dirk Jan F Moojen ◽  
Marc L van Ogtrop ◽  
Rudolf W Poolman

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Janse T Schermerhorn ◽  
Donald F Colantonio ◽  
Derek T Larson ◽  
Robert J McGill

ABSTRACT Periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) is a rare but devastating complication of total joint arthroplasty. Identifying the offending infectious agent is essential to appropriate treatment, and uncommon pathogens often lead to a diagnostic delay. This case describes the first known instance of a total knee arthroplasty (TKA) with Rothia mucilaginosa, a typical respiratory tract organism. This report aims to provide insight into the treatment of this atypical PJI, as there are only six previously published cases of Rothia species PJI septic arthritis. The patient is a 64-year-old diabetic male who underwent a right TKA and left TKA ∼6 months later. Approximately 3 weeks status post-left TKA, he showed evidence of left PJI. One year after treatment and recovery from his left PJI, he presented with several months of right knee pain and fatigue. Subsequent labs and imaging revealed right PJI. No recent history of dental disease or work was observed. He then underwent two-stage revision right knee arthroplasty and microbial cultures yielded Rothia mucilaginosa. After initial empiric treatment, antibiotic therapy was narrowed to 6 weeks of vancomycin. Following negative aspiration cultures the patient underwent reimplantation of right TKA components. One year following treatment, the patient was fully recovered with no evidence of infection. This case emphasizes the possibility of microbial persistence despite various antibiotic treatment regimens for the patient’s contralateral knee arthroplasty and PJI. Additionally, this case demonstrates the importance of two-stage revision in patients with PJI, and the viability of treating Rothia species PJIs with vancomycin.


2019 ◽  
Vol 34 (11) ◽  
pp. 2749-2756 ◽  
Author(s):  
Qiaojie Wang ◽  
Karan Goswami ◽  
Feng-Chih Kuo ◽  
Chi Xu ◽  
Timothy L. Tan ◽  
...  

2020 ◽  
Vol 17 (3) ◽  
pp. 245-252 ◽  
Author(s):  
Joseph R. Palmer ◽  
Tejbir S. Pannu ◽  
Jesus M. Villa ◽  
Jorge Manrique ◽  
Aldo M. Riesgo ◽  
...  

2017 ◽  
Vol 41 (11) ◽  
pp. 2253-2258 ◽  
Author(s):  
Dariusz Marczak ◽  
Marek Synder ◽  
Marcin Sibiński ◽  
Michał Polguj ◽  
Julian Dudka ◽  
...  

2021 ◽  
Vol 29 (3) ◽  
pp. 230949902110552
Author(s):  
Junbiao Guo ◽  
Shuxu Wu ◽  
Huimin Wang ◽  
Wenzhi Chen ◽  
Xiaoqiang Deng

Background: Although the correlation between body mass index (BMI) and two-stage revision failure of periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) following total joint arthroplasty (TJA) have been frequently reported, the results remain controversial. Therefore, the correlation between them was systematically evaluated and meta-classified in this study. Methods: Literature on the correlation between BMI and two-stage revision failure of PJI following TJA was retrieved in PubMed, Embase and Cochrane Library due May 2020. Stata 13.0 software and Cochrane Collaboration Review Manager software (RevMan version 5.3) were applied to data synthesis, subgroup analysis, analyses of publication bias, and sensitivity. Results: A total of 15 observational studies included 1267 patients, of which 15 studies were included in systematic review and 11 studies in meta-analysis. Eight studies found a correlation between BMI and two-stage revision failure of PJI following TJA, but seven other studies found no correlation. Meta-analysis found that the risk of two-stage revision failure of PJI following TJA significantly boosted by 3.53 times in patients with BMI ≥ 30 kg/m2 (OR = 3.53; 95% CI = 1.63–7.64 for the BMI ≥ 30 kg/m2 vs. BMI < 30 kg/m2) and the risk of two-stage revision failure of PJI following TJA significantly increased by 2.92 times in patients with BMI ≥ 40 kg/m2 ( OR = 2.92; 95% CI = 1.06–8.03 for the BMI ≥ 40 kg/m2 vs. BMI < 30 kg/m2). The subgroup analysis showed that significant association was observed among the studies performed in TKA ( OR = 3.63; 95% CI = 2.27–5.82), but not among those conducted in THA ( OR = 3.06; 95% CI = 0.42–22.19). A significant association remained consistent, as indicated by sensitivity analyses. Because there are too few studies that can be combined in the included studies, Egger’s and Begg’s tests were not performed. Conclusion: Meta-analysis suggests that the risk of two-stage revision failure of PJI following TJA significantly boosted in obese patients. However, because there may be publication bias of this study, combined overall systematically evaluated and meta-analysis results, we cannot yet conclude that BMI is associated with two-stage revision failure of PJI following TJA.


Author(s):  
A. C. Steinicke ◽  
J. Schwarze ◽  
G. Gosheger ◽  
B. Moellenbeck ◽  
T. Ackmann ◽  
...  

Abstract Introduction Two-stage revision is a frequently chosen approach to treat chronic periprosthetic joint infection (PJI). However, management of recurrent infection after a two-stage exchange remains debated and the outcome of a repeat two-stage procedure is unclear. This study investigates the success rates of repeat two-stage exchange arthroplasty and analyzes possible risk factors for failure. Materials and methods We retrospectively identified 55 patients (23 hips, 32 knees) who were treated with repeat resection arthroplasty and planned delayed reimplantation for recurrent periprosthetic joint infection between 2010 and 2019 after a prior two-stage revision at the same institution. The minimum follow-up was 12 months with a median follow-up time of 34 months (IQR 22–51). The infection-free survival, associated revision surgeries, and potential risk factors for further revision were analyzed using Kaplan–Meier survival curves and comparative non-parametric testing. Results 78% (43/55) underwent reimplantation after a repeat implant removal. Of those who completed the second-stage surgery, 37% (16/43) underwent additional revision for infection and 14% (6/55) underwent amputation. The reinfection-free implant survivorship amounted to 77% (95% CI 64–89%) after 1 year and 38% (95% CI 18–57%) after 5 years. Patients with a higher comorbidity score were less likely to undergo second-stage reimplantation (median 5 vs. 3, p = 0.034). Furthermore, obese patients (p = 0.026, Fisher’s exact test) and diabetics (p < 0.001, log-rank test) had a higher risk for further infection. Most commonly cultures yielded polymicrobial growth at the repeat two-stage exchange (27%, 15/55) and at re-reinfection (32%, 9/28). Pathogen persistence was observed in 21% (6/28) of re-reinfected patients. Conclusion The success rates after repeat two-stage exchange arthroplasty are low. Patients must be counseled accordingly and different modes of treatment should be considered.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document