Literature DB >> 33750632

Two-Stage Revision Total Hip Arthroplasty Without Spacer Placement: A Viable Option to Manage Infection in Patients With Severe Bone Loss or Abductor Deficiency.

Christian Hipfl1, Teresa Carganico1, Vincent Leopold1, Carsten Perka1, Michael Müller1, Sebastian Hardt1.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: High rates of spacer-related complications in two-stage exchange total hip arthroplasty (THA) have been reported. Patients with advanced bone defects and abductor deficiency may benefit from a nonspacer two-stage revision. This study reports on the clinical course of a contemporary two-stage exchange for periprosthetic hip infection without spacer insertion.
METHODS: We reviewed 141 infected THAs with extensive bone loss or abductor damage who underwent two-stage exchange without spacer placement. The mean duration from resection arthroplasty to reimplantation was 9 weeks (2-29). Clinical outcomes included interim revision, reinfection, and aseptic revision rates. Restoration of leg-length and offset was assessed radiographically. Modified Harris hip scores were calculated. Mean follow-up was 5 years (3-7). Treatment success was defined using the modified Delphi consensus criteria.
RESULTS: Thirty-four patients (24%) had treatment failure, including 13 reinfections, 16 interim redebridements for persistent infection, 2 antibiotic suppressive therapies, and 3 prosthetic joint infection-related deaths. Aseptic rerevision after reimplantation was necessary in 14 patients (10%). Dislocation accounted for most aseptic complications, with 20 dislocations occurring in 15 patients (11%). Leg-length and offset were restored to preoperative measures. Mean modified Harris hip scores significantly improved from 35 points to 67 points.
CONCLUSION: A nonspacer two-stage exchange is a viable option for managing chronically infected THA with severe bone loss or abductor deficiency, showing comparable rates of interim revision and recurrence of infection. Cementless reimplantation demonstrates good midterm survivorship with comparable functional outcomes and leg-length restoration. However, dislocation continues to be a major concern.
Copyright © 2021 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Keywords:  periprosthetic infection; reinfection; resection arthroplasty; revision total hip arthroplasty; spacer; two-stage revision

Year:  2021        PMID: 33750632     DOI: 10.1016/j.arth.2021.02.040

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


  3 in total

Review 1.  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

2.  Extended Trochanteric Osteotomy with Intermediate Resection Arthroplasty Is Safe for Use in Two-Stage Revision Total Hip Arthroplasty for Infection.

Authors:  Sebastian Hardt; Vincent Justus Leopold; Thilo Khakzad; Matthias Pumberger; Carsten Perka; Christian Hipfl
Journal:  J Clin Med       Date:  2021-12-22       Impact factor: 4.241

3.  One-Stage Hip Revision Arthroplasty Using Megaprosthesis in Severe Bone Loss of The Proximal Femur Due to Radiological Diffuse Osteomyelitis.

Authors:  Roy Gonzalez; Ernesto Muñoz-Mahamud; Guillem Bori
Journal:  Trop Med Infect Dis       Date:  2021-12-31
  3 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.