| Literature DB >> 16565839 |
E Jämsen1, P Sheng, P Halonen, M U K Lehto, T Moilanen, J Pajamäki, T Puolakka, Y T Konttinen.
Abstract
At present, no consensus exists on the best spacer alternative for the management of two-stage exchange arthroplasty of infected knee arthroplasties. In this retrospective study, patient records of 24 patients, who had undergone two-stage revisions in which resterilised prosthetic components were used as spacers, were reviewed. The outcome was compared to that of operations performed during the same period (1993-2003) using cement spacers (n=10). With an average follow-up of 32 months, control of infection was achieved in 26 cases (76%), with good or excellent clinical outcome in 19 cases (56%). Treatment failed and resulted in amputation at the level of the thigh before reimplantation in one case. Three patients did not undergo reimplantation. In four cases (12%) infection relapsed. The reinfection rate did not differ between the two spacer groups. Patients treated with resterilised components had a superior range of motion during the period between the two stages. Operative time was shorter and there was less blood loss in the reimplantation arthroplasty when a prosthetic spacer was used. We consider resterilised prosthetic components a safe and effective alternative to cement spacers in the management of infected knee arthroplasties.Entities:
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2006 PMID: 16565839 PMCID: PMC2532134 DOI: 10.1007/s00264-006-0102-2
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Int Orthop ISSN: 0341-2695 Impact factor: 3.075