Literature DB >> 29107499

Clinical Outcome of Massive Endoprostheses Used for Managing Periprosthetic Joint Infections of the Hip and Knee.

Abtin Alvand1, George Grammatopoulos2, Floris de Vos1, Matthew Scarborough2, Ben Kendrick2, Andrew Price1, Roger Gundle2, Duncan Whitwell2, William Jackson2, Adrian Taylor2, Christopher L M H Gibbons2.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Endoprosthetic replacement (EPR) is an option for management of massive bone loss resulting from infection around failed lower limb implants. The aim of this study is to determine the mid-term outcome of EPRs performed in the treatment of periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) and infected failed osteosyntheses around the hip and knee joint and identify factors that influence it.
METHODS: We retrospectively reviewed all hip and knee EPRs performed between 2007 and 2014 for the management of chronic infection following complex arthroplasty or fracture fixation. Data recorded included indication for EPR, number of previous surgeries, comorbidities, and organism identified. Outcome measures included PJI eradication rate, complications, implant survival, mortality, and functional outcome (Oxford Hip or Knee Score).
RESULTS: Sixty-nine EPRs (29 knees and 40 hips) were performed with a mean age of 68 years (43-92). Polymicrobial growth was detected in 36% of cases, followed by coagulase-negative staphylococci (28%) and Staphylococcus aureus (10%). Recurrence of infection occurred in 19 patients (28%): 5 were treated with irrigation and debridement, 5 with revision, 1 with above-knee amputation, and 8 remain on long-term antibiotics. PJI eradication was achieved in 50 patients (72%); the chance of PJI eradication was greater in hips (83%) than in knees (59%) (P = .038). The 5-year implant survivorship was 81% (95% confidence interval 74-88). The mean Oxford Hip Score and Oxford Knee Score were 22 (4-39) and 21 (6-43), respectively.
CONCLUSION: This study supports the use of EPRs for eradication of PJI in complex, multiply revised cases. We describe PJI eradication rate of 72% with acceptable functional outcome. Crown
Copyright © 2017. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Keywords:  clinical outcome; massive endoprosthetic replacement; megaprosthesis; periprosthetic joint infection; revision arthroplasty

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2017        PMID: 29107499     DOI: 10.1016/j.arth.2017.09.046

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Arthroplasty        ISSN: 0883-5403            Impact factor:   4.757


  6 in total

1.  The Performances of Conventional Titanium and Silver-Coated Megaprostheses in Non-oncological and Post-oncological Patients: An Analysis of Infection Failures in 142 Patients.

Authors:  Federico Sacchetti; Raphael Kilian; Francesco Muratori; Stephane Cherix; Lorenzo Foschi; Riccardo Morganti; Domenico Andrea Campanacci; Rodolfo Capanna
Journal:  Arch Bone Jt Surg       Date:  2022-05

2.  Management of Severe Proximal Femur Bone Loss With a Modular Articulating Antibiotic Spacer.

Authors:  Wesley Mayes; Paul K Edwards; Simon C Mears
Journal:  Geriatr Orthop Surg Rehabil       Date:  2019-05-09

3.  Management of peri-prosthetic joint infection and severe bone loss after total hip arthroplasty using a long-stemmed cemented custom-made articulating spacer (CUMARS).

Authors:  J Quayle; A Barakat; A Klasan; A Mittal; G Chan; J Gibbs; M Edmondson; P Stott
Journal:  BMC Musculoskelet Disord       Date:  2021-04-16       Impact factor: 2.362

4.  The Fate of Periprosthetic Joint Infection Following Megaprosthesis Reconstruction.

Authors:  Kamolsak Sukhonthamarn; Timothy L Tan; John Strony; Scot Brown; David Nazarian; Javad Parvizi
Journal:  JB JS Open Access       Date:  2021-11-11

5.  Proximal femoral replacement for non-neoplastic conditions: a systematic review on current outcomes.

Authors:  Alberto Di Martino; Davide Pederiva; Barbara Bordini; Gabriele Di Carlo; Alessandro Panciera; Giuseppe Geraci; Niccolò Stefanini; Cesare Faldini
Journal:  J Orthop Traumatol       Date:  2022-03-29

6.  Revision TKA with a distal femoral replacement is at high risk of reinfection after two-stage exchange for periprosthetic knee joint infection.

Authors:  Jan Schwarze; Burkhard Moellenbeck; Christoph Theil; Kristian Nikolaus Schneider; Georg Gosheger; Tom Schmidt-Braekling; Thomas Ackmann; Ralf Dieckmann; Adrien Frommer; Sebastian Klingebiel
Journal:  Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc       Date:  2021-02-10       Impact factor: 4.342

  6 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.