Literature DB >> 22983683

Two-stage treatment of hip periprosthetic joint infection is associated with a high rate of infection control but high mortality.

Keith R Berend1, Adolph V Lombardi, Michael J Morris, Adam G Bergeson, Joanne B Adams, Michael A Sneller.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Periprosthetic infection after total hip arthroplasty (THA) is a devastating complication. Reported rates of infection control range from 80% to 95% but mortality rates associated with treatment of infected THA are also substantial and we suspect underreported. QUESTIONS/PURPOSES: For patients selected for two-stage treatment of infected THA we therefore determined (1) mortality; (2) rate of reimplantation; and (3) rate of reinfection.
METHODS: We identified 202 patients (205 hips) with infected primary or revision THA treated with a two-stage protocol between 1996 and 2009 in our prospectively collected practice registry. Patients underwent two-stage treatment for infection, including removal of all implants and foreign material with implantation of an antibiotic-laden cement spacer in the first stage followed by intravenous culture-specific antibiotics for a minimum of 6 weeks. Second-stage reimplantation was performed if erythrocyte sedimentation rate and C-reactive protein were trending toward normal and the wound was well healed. Thirteen patients (13 hips) were lost to followup before 24 months. The minimum followup in surviving patients was 24 months or failure (average, 53 months; range, 24-180 months).
RESULTS: Fourteen patients (7%; 14 hips) died before reimplantation and two were not candidates because of medical comorbidities. The 90-day mortality rate after the first-stage débridement was 4% (eight patients). Of the 186 patients (189 hips) who underwent reimplantation, 157 (83%) achieved control of the infection. Including all patients who underwent the first stage, survival and infection control after two-stage reimplantation was 76%.
CONCLUSION: Two-stage treatment of deep infection in primary and revision THA is associated with substantial mortality and a substantial failure rate from both reinfection and inability to perform the second stage. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level IV, therapeutic study. See Guidelines for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2013        PMID: 22983683      PMCID: PMC3549176          DOI: 10.1007/s11999-012-2595-x

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res        ISSN: 0009-921X            Impact factor:   4.176


  37 in total

1.  Clinical effectiveness of antibiotic-impregnated cement spacers for the treatment of infected implants of the hip joint.

Authors:  Kengo Yamamoto; Naoki Miyagawa; Toshinori Masaoka; Yoichi Katori; Takaaki Shishido; Atsuhiro Imakiire
Journal:  J Orthop Sci       Date:  2003       Impact factor: 1.601

2.  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

3.  Two-stage reconstruction of a total hip arthroplasty because of infection.

Authors:  D J McDonald; R H Fitzgerald; D M Ilstrup
Journal:  J Bone Joint Surg Am       Date:  1989-07       Impact factor: 5.284

4.  Reimplantation of infected hip arthroplasties using bone allografts.

Authors:  J W Wang; C E Chen
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  1997-02       Impact factor: 4.176

5.  Incidence and short-term outcomes of primary and revision hip replacement in the United States.

Authors:  Chunliu Zhan; Ronald Kaczmarek; Nilsa Loyo-Berrios; Judith Sangl; Roselie A Bright
Journal:  J Bone Joint Surg Am       Date:  2007-03       Impact factor: 5.284

6.  Comparison of one and two-stage revision of total hip arthroplasty complicated by infection: a Markov expected-utility decision analysis.

Authors:  Christopher F Wolf; Ning Yan Gu; Jason N Doctor; Paul A Manner; Seth S Leopold
Journal:  J Bone Joint Surg Am       Date:  2011-04-06       Impact factor: 5.284

7.  Impregnation of vancomycin, gentamicin, and cefotaxime in a cement spacer for two-stage cementless reconstruction in infected total hip arthroplasty.

Authors:  K H Koo; J W Yang; S H Cho; H R Song; H B Park; Y C Ha; J D Chang; S Y Kim; Y H Kim
Journal:  J Arthroplasty       Date:  2001-10       Impact factor: 4.757

8.  The use of porous prostheses in delayed reconstruction of total hip replacements that have failed because of infection.

Authors:  B J Nestor; A D Hanssen; R Ferrer-Gonzalez; R H Fitzgerald
Journal:  J Bone Joint Surg Am       Date:  1994-03       Impact factor: 5.284

9.  Oral antibiotics are effective for highly resistant hip arthroplasty infections.

Authors:  José Cordero-Ampuero; Jaime Esteban; Eduardo García-Cimbrelo
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  2009-03-31       Impact factor: 4.176

10.  Chronic infections in hip arthroplasties: comparing risk of reinfection following one-stage and two-stage revision: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Authors:  Jeppe Lange; Anders Troelsen; Reimar W Thomsen; Kjeld Søballe
Journal:  Clin Epidemiol       Date:  2012-03-27       Impact factor: 4.790

View more
  79 in total

1.  The 2013 Frank Stinchfield Award: Diagnosis of infection in the early postoperative period after total hip arthroplasty.

Authors:  Paul H Yi; Michael B Cross; Mario Moric; Scott M Sporer; Richard A Berger; Craig J Della Valle
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  2014-02       Impact factor: 4.176

2.  Risk factors and a prognostic model of hip periprosthetic infection recurrence after surgical treatment using articulating and non-articulating spacers.

Authors:  Rashid Tikhilov; Svetlana Bozhkova; Alexey Denisov; Dmitry Labutin; Igor Shubnyakov; Vadim Razorenov; Vasilii Artyukh; Olga Klitsenko
Journal:  Int Orthop       Date:  2015-12-19       Impact factor: 3.075

Review 3.  Single- or two-stage revision for infected total hip arthroplasty? A systematic review of the literature.

Authors:  Hugh A C Leonard; Alexander D Liddle; Orlaith Burke; David W Murray; Hemant Pandit
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  2013-09-21       Impact factor: 4.176

4.  CORR Insights(®): What Are the Risk Factors and Management Options for Infection After Reconstruction With Massive Bone Allografts?

Authors:  Benjamin K Potter
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  2015-06-16       Impact factor: 4.176

5.  Do Trabecular Metal Acetabular Components Reduce the Risk of Rerevision After Revision THA Performed for Periprosthetic Joint Infection? A Study Using the NJR Data Set.

Authors:  Gulraj S Matharu; Andrew Judge; David W Murray; Hemant G Pandit
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  2019-06       Impact factor: 4.176

6.  What is the Long-term Economic Societal Effect of Periprosthetic Infections After THA? A Markov Analysis.

Authors:  Thomas J Parisi; Joseph F Konopka; Hany S Bedair
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  2017-04-07       Impact factor: 4.176

7.  Editorial Comment: 2016 Musculoskeletal Infection Society Proceedings.

Authors:  Charalampos G Zalavras; Bryan D Springer
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  2017-07       Impact factor: 4.176

8.  [Does the certification according to EndoCert lead to a better quality of treatment?]

Authors:  P Weber; A C Paulus; D Hallmen; A Steinbrück; F Schmidutz; V Jansson
Journal:  Orthopade       Date:  2017-01       Impact factor: 1.087

9.  Chronic periprosthetic hip infection: micro-organisms responsible for infection and re-infection.

Authors:  Nikolai M Kliushin; Artem M Ermakov; Tatiana A Malkova
Journal:  Int Orthop       Date:  2016-11-17       Impact factor: 3.075

Review 10.  The Role of One-Stage Exchange for Prosthetic Joint Infection.

Authors:  Fiachra E Rowan; Matthew J Donaldson; Jurek R Pietrzak; Fares S Haddad
Journal:  Curr Rev Musculoskelet Med       Date:  2018-09
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.