Literature DB >> 26164543

Chronic infection of unicompartmental knee arthroplasty: one-stage conversion to total knee arthroplasty.

C Labruyère1, V Zeller1, L Lhotellier1, N Desplaces1, P Léonard1, P Mamoudy1, S Marmor2.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: The main reasons for revision of unicompartmental knee arthroplasty (UKA) are loosening, wear, extension of osteoarthritis to another compartment, and infection. There have been no studies of the management of infected UKA, whose incidence varies from 0.2% to 1%. Our objective was to describe infection-related and mechanical outcomes of chronic UKA infection managed by one-stage conversion to total knee arthroplasty (TKA). PATIENTS AND METHODS: Consecutive patients with chronic UKA infection managed by one-stage conversion to TKA between January 2003 and December 2010 were included in a retrospective single-center study. All patients also received appropriate dual antibiotic therapy intravenously for 6 weeks then orally for 6 additional weeks.
RESULTS: During the study period, among 233 cases of infected knee arthroplasty managed at our center, 9 met the study inclusion criteria. The UKA was medial in 6 patients, lateral in 2, and patellofemoral in 1. Median age was 67 years (range, 36-83 years) and median infection duration was 9months. In 5 patients, previous treatment with synovectomy, joint lavage, and antibiotics had failed. The following bacteria were identified: oxacillin-susceptible Staphylococci, n=6 (S. epidermidis, n=4; S. capitis, n=1; and S. lugdunensis, n=1); nutritionally deficient Streptococcus, n=1; Enterococcus durans, n=1; and Escherichia coli, n=1. Median follow-up was 60 months (range, 36-96 months). No patient experienced recurrent infection or required revision surgery for infection. No medical complications limiting the use of appropriate antibiotic therapy were recorded. The mean preoperative knee and function scores were 60 and 50, respectively; corresponding mean postoperative values were 75 and 65, respectively. DISCUSSION: UKA infection involves both the prosthesis and the native cartilage, neither of which can be treated conservatively in chronic forms. After identification of the causative organism, synovectomy and joint excision followed by same-stage TKA and combined with appropriate antibiotic therapy for 3 months is effective. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: IV, retrospective cohort study.
Copyright © 2015 Elsevier Masson SAS. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Infection; One-stage prosthesis exchange; Revision of unicompartimental knee prosthesis; Unicompartmental knee prosthesis

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2015        PMID: 26164543     DOI: 10.1016/j.otsr.2015.04.006

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Orthop Traumatol Surg Res        ISSN: 1877-0568            Impact factor:   2.256


  14 in total

Review 1.  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

2.  CORR Insights®: Infection After Unicompartmental Knee Arthroplasty: A High Risk of Subsequent Complications.

Authors:  Keun Jung Ryu
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  2019-01       Impact factor: 4.176

3.  Infection After Unicompartmental Knee Arthroplasty: A High Risk of Subsequent Complications.

Authors:  Nicholas M Hernandez; Stephen M Petis; Arlen D Hanssen; Rafael J Sierra; Matthew P Abdel; Mark W Pagnano
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  2019-01       Impact factor: 4.176

Review 4.  Treatment patterns and failure rates associated with prosthetic joint infection in unicompartmental knee arthroplasty: A systematic review.

Authors:  Joseph P Barbera; Ryan C Xiao; Christine S Williams; Jashvant Poeran; Calin S Moucha; Darwin D Chen; Brett L Hayden
Journal:  J Orthop       Date:  2022-09-14

5.  Two-stage revision for periprosthetic joint infection in unicompartmental knee arthroplasty: clinical and radiological results.

Authors:  Luca Cavagnaro; Francesco Chiarlone; Lorenzo Mosconi; Andrea Zanirato; Matteo Formica; Giorgio Burastero
Journal:  Arch Orthop Trauma Surg       Date:  2022-05-19       Impact factor: 2.928

6.  Hip and Knee Section, Treatment, Surgical Technique: Proceedings of International Consensus on Orthopedic Infections.

Authors:  Moneer M Abouljoud; David Backstein; Andrew Battenberg; Matthew Dietz; Alejo Erice; Andrew A Freiberg; Jeffrey Granger; Adam Katchky; Anton Khlopas; Tae-Kyun Kim; Per Kjaersgaard-Andersen; Kyung-Hoi Koo; Yona Kosashvili; Percia Lazarovski; Jennifer Leighton; Adolph Lombardi; Konstantinos Malizos; Jorge Manrique; Michael A Mont; Marianthe Papanagiotoy; Rafael J Sierra; Nipun Sodhi; John Stammers; Maik Stiehler; Timothy L Tan; Katsufumi Uchiyama; Derek Ward; Anna Ziogkou
Journal:  J Arthroplasty       Date:  2018-10-19       Impact factor: 4.757

7.  Survival analysis of one-stage exchange of infected unicompartmental knee arthroplasty: a single-center study with minimum 3 years follow-up.

Authors:  Hakan Kocaoğlu; Fabian Hennes; Hussein Abdelaziz; Michael E Neufeld; Thorsten Gehrke; Mustafa Citak
Journal:  Eur J Orthop Surg Traumatol       Date:  2022-01-23

Review 8.  Unicompartmental Knee Arthroplasty: Modes of Failure and Conversion to Total Knee Arthroplasty.

Authors:  Michele Vasso; Katia Corona; Rocco D'Apolito; Giuseppe Mazzitelli; Alfredo Schiavone Panni
Journal:  Joints       Date:  2017-06-05

9.  One-Stage Arthroplasty or Revision for Seronegative Infections in Hip and Knee.

Authors:  Hao-Yang Wang; Rui Zhang Md; Ze-Yu Luo; Duan Wang Md PhD; Fu-Xing Pei; Xin Tang; Zong-Ke Zhou
Journal:  Orthop Surg       Date:  2019-12-01       Impact factor: 2.071

10.  Unicompartmental Knee Arthroplasty Is Not Associated With Increased Revision Rates in Obese Patients.

Authors:  Kevin F Purcell; Benjamin M Stronach; Marie Gene Almand; Doug Parsell; Trevor Pickering; R Kerk Mehrle; Craig Winkler; Jeff D Almand
Journal:  Arthroplast Today       Date:  2021-06-23
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.