Literature DB >> 24382729

One-stage exchange arthroplasty for chronic periprosthetic hip infection: results of a large prospective cohort study.

Valérie Zeller1, Luc Lhotellier1, Simon Marmor1, Philippe Leclerc1, Alysa Krain1, Wilfrid Graff1, Françoise Ducroquet1, David Biau2, Philippe Leonard1, Nicole Desplaces1, Patrick Mamoudy1.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Exchange arthroplasty of one or two stages is required for the treatment of chronic periprosthetic joint infections. Two-stage exchange is costly and has high morbidity with limited patient mobility between procedures. One-stage exchange has been promoted by several European teams as the preferred alternative. The aim of this study was to prospectively analyze the outcome of patients with a periprosthetic hip infection treated with one-stage exchange arthroplasty.
METHODS: We performed a prospective cohort study in a French referral center for osteoarticular infections including all periprosthetic hip infections treated with one-stage exchange arthroplasty from November 2002 to March 2010. Direct exchange was performed in chronic periprosthetic hip infection with no or minor bone loss and preoperative identification of a microorganism from joint fluid aspirate. No antibiotic-loaded bone cement was used. Antibiotic therapy was administered for twelve weeks: intravenously for four to six weeks, followed by an oral regimen for six to eight weeks. Follow-up was a minimum of two years. The following events were noted: relapse, new infection, joint revision for mechanical reasons, and periprosthetic hip infection-related and unrelated deaths.
RESULTS: One hundred and fifty-seven patients with periprosthetic hip infections with a median infection duration of 258 days (interquartile range, 120 to 551 days) prior to our index surgical procedure for infection were included. Periprosthetic hip infection occurred in ninety-nine cases of primary hip arthroplasty, twenty-seven cases of revision arthroplasty, and thirty-one cases in which the periprosthetic hip infection had been treated previously. A difficult-to-treat organism was isolated in fifty-nine cases (38%). After a median follow-up of 41.6 months (interquartile range, 28.1 to 66.9 months), two relapses, six new infections, nine revisions for mechanical reasons, two related deaths, and nineteen unrelated deaths occurred.
CONCLUSIONS: One-stage exchange arthroplasty is an effective surgical procedure in patients with periprosthetic hip infection who have good bone quality. Precise identification of the microorganism(s) and prolonged administration of appropriate intravenous antibiotic therapy are key factors for successful treatment.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2014        PMID: 24382729     DOI: 10.2106/JBJS.L.01451

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Bone Joint Surg Am        ISSN: 0021-9355            Impact factor:   5.284


  24 in total

1.  CORR Insights®: What are the Factors Associated With Re-revision After One-stage Revision for Periprosthetic Joint Infection of the Hip? A Case-control Study.

Authors:  Hany Bedair
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  2019-10       Impact factor: 4.176

2.  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

3.  Should well-fixed uncemented femoral components be revised in infected hip arthroplasty? Report of five trial cases.

Authors:  Kiyokazu Fukui; Ayumi Kaneuji; Syusuke Ueda; Tadami Matsumoto
Journal:  J Orthop       Date:  2015-11-01

Review 4.  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

5.  The economic impact of periprosthetic infection in total hip arthroplasty

Authors:  Jason Akindolire; Mina W. Morcos; Jacquelyn D. Marsh; James L. Howard; Brent A. Lanting; Edward M. Vasarhelyi
Journal:  Can J Surg       Date:  2020-01-29       Impact factor: 2.089

6.  Streptococcal and Staphylococcus aureus prosthetic joint infections: are they really different?

Authors:  Yousra Kherabi; Valérie Zeller; Younes Kerroumi; Vanina Meyssonnier; Beate Heym; Olivier Lidove; Simon Marmor
Journal:  BMC Infect Dis       Date:  2022-06-17       Impact factor: 3.667

7.  One-stage revision of infected hip arthroplasty: outcome of 39 consecutive hips.

Authors:  Thomas Ilchmann; Werner Zimmerli; Peter Emil Ochsner; Bernhard Kessler; Lukas Zwicky; Peter Graber; Martin Clauss
Journal:  Int Orthop       Date:  2015-07-30       Impact factor: 3.075

Review 8.  Biofilm Disrupting Technology for Orthopedic Implants: What's on the Horizon?

Authors:  Alexander Connaughton; Abby Childs; Stefan Dylewski; Vani J Sabesan
Journal:  Front Med (Lausanne)       Date:  2014-08-15

9.  Two-Stage Revision Arthroplasty for Periprosthetic Hip Infection: Mean Follow-Up of Ten Years.

Authors:  Szu-Yuan Chen; Chi-Chien Hu; Chun-Chieh Chen; Yu-Han Chang; Pang-Hsin Hsieh
Journal:  Biomed Res Int       Date:  2015-04-29       Impact factor: 3.411

10.  The Alpha-defensin Test for Periprosthetic Joint Infection Responds to a Wide Spectrum of Organisms.

Authors:  Carl Deirmengian; Keith Kardos; Patrick Kilmartin; Simmi Gulati; Patrick Citrano; Robert E Booth
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  2015-07       Impact factor: 4.176

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.