Literature DB >> 25582658

Mechanical complications with one hundred and thirty eight (antibiotic-laden) cement spacers in the treatment of periprosthetic infection after total hip arthroplasty.

Martin Faschingbauer1, Heiko Reichel, Ralf Bieger, Thomas Kappe.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: Periprosthetic infection after total hip arthroplasty is a devastating complication. A two-stage protocol with the temporary insertion of an antibiotic-laden cement spacer is the gold standard treatment for chronic infections (Clinics (Sao Paulo) 62:99-108, 2007; Clin Orthop Relat Res 427:37-46, 2004; J Arthroplast 14:175-181, 1999; Clin Orthop Relat Res 467:1848-1858, 2009; J Arthroplast 20:874-879, 2005; J Arthroplast 24: 607-613, 2009; Clin Orthop Relat Res 469:1009-1015, 2011; Hip Int 20:26-33, 2010; J Arthroplast 24:1051-1060, 2009; J Bone Joint Surg Br 91:44-51, 2009). Some authors, however (Int J Med Sci 6(5):265-73, 2009), report mechanical complication rates with spacers in excess of 50%.Therefore, the aim of this study is to determine (1) the mechanical complications associated with enclosed articulating partial load-bearing spacers when treating periprosthetic hip infections and (2) possible factors of influence.
METHODS: Between 2000 and 2011, 138 patients received an antibiotic-laden cement spacer as part of a two-stage protocol. The overall frequency of complications (spacer fracture, dislocation, femoral fracture with enclosed spacer, spacer fracture with dislocation, protusion into the pelvis) was recorded. Potential influencing factors ('mould spacer' vs. handmade spacer, Steinmann pins as an endoskeleton, addition of vancomycin into the spacer) were analysed.
RESULTS: The mean age at the time of the first stage operation was 69.3 ± 10.5 years. Overall, 27 of 138 patients suffered one of the above-mentioned complications (19.6%). Spacer fracture occurred in 12 cases (8.7%) and dislocation in another 12 (8.7%). There was also one periprosthetic femoral fracture with a spacer in situ, one dislocation with a simultaneous spacer fracture, and one protrusion into the pelvis (0.7% each).
CONCLUSIONS: Our data revealed an overall complication rate of 13.2% with a mould spacer enclosing a Steinman pin. The mechanical complication rate of over 50% reported by some authors cannot be confirmed. As a consequence, we recommend using a mould spacer with an enclosed Steinman pin as an endoskeleton to minimize the complication rate.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2015        PMID: 25582658     DOI: 10.1007/s00264-014-2636-z

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Int Orthop        ISSN: 0341-2695            Impact factor:   3.075


  27 in total

1.  Individual bone cement spacers (IBCS) for septic hip revision-preliminary report.

Authors:  C Schoellner; S Fuerderer; J-D Rompe; A Eckardt
Journal:  Arch Orthop Trauma Surg       Date:  2003-05-01       Impact factor: 3.067

Review 2.  Static and mobile antibiotic-impregnated cement spacers for the management of prosthetic joint infection.

Authors:  Cale Jacobs; Christian P Christensen; Michael E Berend
Journal:  J Am Acad Orthop Surg       Date:  2009-06       Impact factor: 3.020

3.  Mechanical evaluation of unipolar hip spacer constructs.

Authors:  Frederick J Kummer; Eric Strauss; Kevin Wright; Erik N Kubiak; Paul E Di Cesare
Journal:  Am J Orthop (Belle Mead NJ)       Date:  2008-10

Review 4.  Infection after total hip arthroplasty. Past, present, and future.

Authors:  K L Garvin; A D Hanssen
Journal:  J Bone Joint Surg Am       Date:  1995-10       Impact factor: 5.284

5.  A cement spacer for two-stage revision of infected implants of the hip joint.

Authors:  M Leunig; E Chosa; M Speck; R Ganz
Journal:  Int Orthop       Date:  1998       Impact factor: 3.075

6.  A temporary antibiotic-loaded joint replacement system for management of complex infections involving the hip.

Authors:  C P Duncan; C Beauchamp
Journal:  Orthop Clin North Am       Date:  1993-10       Impact factor: 2.472

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.  Treatment outcome of two-stage revision total hip arthroplasty for infected hip arthroplasty using antibiotic-impregnated cement spacer.

Authors:  Naonobu Takahira; Moritoshi Itoman; Kei Higashi; Katsufumi Uchiyama; Motoi Miyabe; Kouji Naruse
Journal:  J Orthop Sci       Date:  2003       Impact factor: 1.601

9.  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

10.  Complications after spacer implantation in the treatment of hip joint infections.

Authors:  Jochen Jung; Nora Verena Schmid; Jens Kelm; Eduard Schmitt; Konstantinos Anagnostakos
Journal:  Int J Med Sci       Date:  2009-09-02       Impact factor: 3.738

View more
  19 in total

1.  Altering polymerization temperature of antibiotic-laden cement can increase porosity and subsequent antibiotic elution.

Authors:  Jeffrey Sundblad; Mary Nixon; Nancy Jackson; Rahul Vaidya; David Markel
Journal:  Int Orthop       Date:  2018-09-15       Impact factor: 3.075

2.  Periarticular joint infection: Survey of the European Knee Associates (EKA) of ESSKA.

Authors:  Antonia F Chen; Sufian S Ahmad; Michael T Hirschmann; Sandro Kohl; Olivier Borens; Roland Becker
Journal:  Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc       Date:  2016-10       Impact factor: 4.342

Review 3.  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

4.  Cure rate of infections is not an argument for spacer in two-stage revision arthroplasty of the hip.

Authors:  Dominik Adl Amini; Chia H Wu; Carsten Perka; Henrik C Bäcker
Journal:  Arch Orthop Trauma Surg       Date:  2022-05-09       Impact factor: 3.067

Review 5.  Mechanical complications of hip spacers: a systematic review of the literature.

Authors:  Andrea Sambri; Michele Fiore; Claudia Rondinella; Lorenzo Morante; Azzurra Paolucci; Claudio Giannini; Calogero Alfonso; Massimiliano De Paolis
Journal:  Arch Orthop Trauma Surg       Date:  2022-04-12       Impact factor: 2.928

6.  Cemented prosthesis as spacer for two-stage revision of infected hip prostheses: a similar infection remission rate and a lower complication rate.

Authors:  Wenming Zhang; Xinyu Fang; Tengbin Shi; Yuanqing Cai; Zida Huang; Chaofan Zhang; Jianhua Lin; Wenbo Li
Journal:  Bone Joint Res       Date:  2020-08-02       Impact factor: 5.853

7.  One-stage Revision With Catheter Infusion of Intraarticular Antibiotics Successfully Treats Infected THA.

Authors:  Leo A Whiteside; M E Roy
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  2017-02       Impact factor: 4.176

Review 8.  Two-stage Revision for Periprosthetic Hip and Knee Joint Infections.

Authors:  Sunil Gurpur Kini; Ayman Gabr; Rishi Das; Mohamed Sukeik; Fares Sami Haddad
Journal:  Open Orthop J       Date:  2016-11-30

9.  Outcome of Irrigation and Debridement after Failed Two-Stage Reimplantation for Periprosthetic Joint Infection.

Authors:  M Faschingbauer; F Boettner; R Bieger; C Weiner; H Reichel; T Kappe
Journal:  Biomed Res Int       Date:  2018-10-11       Impact factor: 3.411

10.  Cerclages after Femoral Osteotomy Are at Risk for Bacterial Colonization during Two-Stage Septic Total Hip Arthroplasty Revision.

Authors:  Viktor Janz; Georgi I Wassilew; Carsten F Perka; Michael Müller
Journal:  J Bone Jt Infect       Date:  2018-07-06
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.