Literature DB >> 15834702

[Early results of one-stage septic revision arthroplasties with antibiotic-laden cement. A clinical and statistical analysis].

D Sofer1, B Regenbrecht, J Pfeil.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Periprosthetic infections will generally require revision arthroplasty. The one-stage revision arthroplasty with antibiotic-laden cement is hence an attractive therapeutic option, since it only requires one operation, has a low morbidity and, if successful, is cost-efficient.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: We performed one-stage revision arthroplasties. The exchanged prostheses were fixed with antibiotic-laden cement after biotic resistance was determined. All patients were treated with postoperative systemic antibiotics.
RESULTS: After a mean postoperative examination period of 18.4 months, we confirmed eradication of infection in 14 of 15 knee joints and in 15 of 16 hip joints. The mean duration of hospital stay was 23 days. Patients' satisfaction was high (93.55%) and the clinical results were satisfactory.
CONCLUSION: Our analysis shows that our low early reinfection rate (6.45%) is within statistical expectation. Furthermore, we have showed that there is evidence to suggest that the rate of successful outcomes in one-stage revision arthroplasties, at least at the hip, is not different from the rate of two-stage revision arthroplasties and that the difference may be interpreted as stochastic deviation (p=0.264494). According to existing studies, an analogy to knee arthroplasties can be assumed. We demonstrated that one-stage revision is an adequate therapeutic option if patients are carefully selected and under the supervision of an experienced surgeon.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2005        PMID: 15834702     DOI: 10.1007/s00132-005-0780-2

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Orthopade        ISSN: 0085-4530            Impact factor:   1.087


  27 in total

1.  Two-stage uncemented revision hip arthroplasty for infection.

Authors:  F S Haddad; S K Muirhead-Allwood; A R Manktelow; I Bacarese-Hamilton
Journal:  J Bone Joint Surg Br       Date:  2000-07

2.  One-stage exchange in the treatment of the infected total hip arthroplasty.

Authors:  R Elson
Journal:  Semin Arthroplasty       Date:  1994-07

3.  One-stage reimplantation for infected total knee arthroplasty.

Authors:  S B Göksan; M A Freeman
Journal:  J Bone Joint Surg Br       Date:  1992-01

4.  The infected knee arthroplasty. A 6-year follow-up of 357 cases.

Authors:  S Bengtson; K Knutson
Journal:  Acta Orthop Scand       Date:  1991-08

5.  The outcome of two-stage arthroplasty using a custom-made interval spacer to treat the infected hip.

Authors:  A S Younger; C P Duncan; B A Masri; R W McGraw
Journal:  J Arthroplasty       Date:  1997-09       Impact factor: 4.757

6.  Infection management in total hip replacement.

Authors:  A Härle
Journal:  Arch Orthop Trauma Surg       Date:  1989       Impact factor: 3.067

7.  Biomaterial-centered infection: microbial adhesion versus tissue integration.

Authors:  A G Gristina
Journal:  Science       Date:  1987-09-25       Impact factor: 47.728

8.  One-stage revision of infected total hip replacements with discharging sinuses.

Authors:  V V Raut; P D Siney; B M Wroblewski
Journal:  J Bone Joint Surg Br       Date:  1994-09

9.  Outcome of the infected hip arthroplasty. A retrospective study of 36 patients.

Authors:  I Antti-Poika; S Santavirta; Y T Konttinen; V Honkanen
Journal:  Acta Orthop Scand       Date:  1989-12

10.  Palacos gentamicin for the treatment of deep periprosthetic hip infections.

Authors:  K L Garvin; B G Evans; E A Salvati; B D Brause
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  1994-01       Impact factor: 4.176

View more
  8 in total

1.  High rate of infection control with one-stage revision of septic knee prostheses excluding MRSA and MRSE.

Authors:  Joachim Singer; Andreas Merz; Lars Frommelt; Bernd Fink
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  2011-11-12       Impact factor: 4.176

Review 2.  Two-stage revision of septic knee prosthesis with articulating knee spacers yields better infection eradication rate than one-stage or two-stage revision with static spacers.

Authors:  C L Romanò; L Gala; N Logoluso; D Romanò; L Drago
Journal:  Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc       Date:  2012-01-21       Impact factor: 4.342

Review 3.  [Revision strategy for periprosthetic infection].

Authors:  B Lehner; D Witte; A J Suda; S Weiss
Journal:  Orthopade       Date:  2009-08       Impact factor: 1.087

4.  Can Good Infection Control Be Obtained in One-stage Exchange of the Infected TKA to a Rotating Hinge Design? 10-year Results.

Authors:  Akos Zahar; Daniel O Kendoff; Till O Klatte; Thorsten A Gehrke
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  2016-01       Impact factor: 4.176

5.  Patient reported outcome measures after revision of the infected TKR: comparison of single versus two-stage revision.

Authors:  Paul Baker; Timothy G Petheram; Steven Kurtz; Yrjö T Konttinen; Paul Gregg; David Deehan
Journal:  Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc       Date:  2012-06-13       Impact factor: 4.342

6.  Is single-stage revision according to a strict protocol effective in treatment of chronic knee arthroplasty infections?

Authors:  Fares Sami Haddad; Mohamed Sukeik; Sulaiman Alazzawi
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  2015-01       Impact factor: 4.176

7.  Antibiotic bone cement's effect on infection rates in primary and revision total knee arthroplasties.

Authors:  Donald Kleppel; Jacob Stirton; Jiayong Liu; Nabil A Ebraheim
Journal:  World J Orthop       Date:  2017-12-18

Review 8.  Periprosthetic knee infection: ten strategies that work.

Authors:  Javad Parvizi; Priscilla Ku Cavanaugh; Claudio Diaz-Ledezma
Journal:  Knee Surg Relat Res       Date:  2013-11-29
  8 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.