Literature DB >> 30473231

The Effectiveness of Repeat Two-Stage Revision for the Treatment of Recalcitrant Total Knee Arthroplasty Infection.

Iman Vadiee1, David J Backstein1.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: The gold-standard method in North America for the management of infected total knee arthroplasty is 2-stage revision arthroplasty. This has provided generally a high success rate. However, persistent infection after 2-stage revision knee arthroplasty does occur. The purpose of this study was to predict the success rate of second, 2-stage revision arthroplasty.
METHODS: All infected total knee arthroplasty treated between 2000 and 2015 that were operated by a single senior surgeon were reviewed retrospectively. Patients were stratified according to general health and limb status according to the Musculoskeletal Infection Society (MSIS) scoring system. The reinfection rate at the last follow-up was identified. The chi-square test and Fisher exact test were used to compare binary variables.
RESULTS: We found a statistical relationship between the higher stage of MSIS score, type of microorganism, flap surgery, and reinfection rate after reimplantation of second two-stage surgery. There is not any statistically significant correlation between age, gender, constraint pattern of prosthesis, number of spacers, and time interval between the first and second stages of second 2-stage surgery with the numbers available in this study.
CONCLUSION: Another 2-stage knee revision is an effective method of treatment. However, we found a higher incidence of failure in those patients with poor general health based on the MSIS score, inadequate soft tissue envelope and resistant bacteria. The success of second, 2-stage protocol is best in patients with optimized general health, soft tissue coverage, and antibiotic-sensitive microorganism. Patients who cannot be optimized are most likely to require amputation or knee arthrodesis than another futile 2-stage surgery.
Copyright © 2018 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Keywords:  2-stage knee arthroplasty; Musculoskeletal Infection Society(MSIS) staging system; infection; revision knee arthroplasty; success rate

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2018        PMID: 30473231     DOI: 10.1016/j.arth.2018.10.021

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


  6 in total

1.  Recurrent Failures After 2-Stage Exchanges are Secondary to New Organisms Not Previously Covered by Antibiotics.

Authors:  Fortune J Egbulefu; JaeWon Yang; John C Segreti; Scott M Sporer; Antonia F Chen; Matthew S Austin; Craig J Della Valle
Journal:  Arthroplast Today       Date:  2022-08-27

2.  What's New in Musculoskeletal Infection.

Authors:  Thomas K Fehring; Keith A Fehring; Angela Hewlett; Carlos A Higuera; Jesse E Otero; Aaron J Tande
Journal:  J Bone Joint Surg Am       Date:  2020-07-15       Impact factor: 6.558

3.  Long-term result of a second or third two-stage revision total knee arthroplasty for infected total knee arthroplasty.

Authors:  Young-Hoo Kim; Jang-Won Park; Young-Soo Jang
Journal:  Arthroplasty       Date:  2021-01-12

4.  A Low Percentage of Patients Satisfy Typical Indications for Single-stage Exchange Arthroplasty for Chronic Periprosthetic Joint Infection.

Authors:  M E Dombrowski; A E Wilson; R A Wawrose; M J O'Malley; K L Urish; B A Klatt
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  2020-08       Impact factor: 4.755

5.  Successful Treatment of a Recalcitrant Staphylococcus epidermidis Prosthetic Knee Infection with Intraoperative Bacteriophage Therapy.

Authors:  James B Doub; Vincent Y Ng; Eleanor Wilson; Lorenzo Corsini; Benjamin K Chan
Journal:  Pharmaceuticals (Basel)       Date:  2021-03-08

6.  Outcomes of Modular Knee Arthrodesis for Challenging Periprosthetic Joint Infections.

Authors:  Alexandra I Stavrakis; Erik N Mayer; Sai K Devana; Madhav Chowdhry; Matthew V Dipane; Edward J McPherson
Journal:  Arthroplast Today       Date:  2022-01-22
  6 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.