Literature DB >> 35129644

Factors associated with infection recurrence after two-stage exchange for periprosthetic hip infection.

Fabian Schwolow1, Bernd Füchtmeier1, Franz Müller2.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: Two-stage exchange is the treatment of choice for periprosthetic joint infection (PJI). Factors and outcomes associated with infection recurrence for hip PJI are limited. The primary aim of this study was to determine factors associated with infection recurrence after two-stage exchange. Secondary aims were survival, mobility, and the EuroQol five-dimension scale (EQ-5D-5L) health state.
METHODS: We retrospectively investigated patients with two-stage exchange for hip PJI at our institution from 2006 to 2017. Follow-up was conducted for a minimum of four years after the reimplantation.
RESULTS: We included 135 patients with 139 hip PJIs. The mean age of the patients was 69.6 years (range 32-88). The infection recurrence rate was 14.4% (n = 20) after a mean follow-up of 8.0 years (range 4.0-13.1). Four factors for recurrence were identified at the time of the first stage: previous orthopaedic diagnoses (p < 0.001), type of explanted prosthesis (p = 0.004), cultured microorganisms (p = 0.033), and sinus tract (p = 0.035). A longer surgical reimplantation time (p = 0.015) was the only one factor found at the second stage. The estimated Kaplan-Meier survival for the total sample was 9.0 years (95% confidence interval 8.3-9.8), without significant difference for those with infection recurrence compared to recurrence-free patients (log-rank 0.931). At the time of follow-up, 89 patients were alive. For these patients, Parker mobility score (p = 0.102), EuroQol five-dimensional scale (p = 0.099), and EQ Visual Analogue Scale (EQ-VAS) (p = 0.027) were inferior in those with infection recurrence, but significance was found only for VAS.
CONCLUSION: In this study with mid- to long-term follow-up, five factors for infection recurrence were identified. Recurrence did not affect survival, but health-related quality of life was inferior compared to recurrence-free patients. The results suggest that the period of the first stage including previous orthopaedic diagnoses requires more consideration in the future.
© 2022. The Author(s) under exclusive licence to SICOT aisbl.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Complications; Health-related quality of life; Hip arthroplasty; Outcome; Survival

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2022        PMID: 35129644     DOI: 10.1007/s00264-022-05333-0

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


  25 in total

1.  Risk factors for treatment failure in patients with prosthetic joint infections.

Authors:  J Lee; C-I Kang; J H Lee; M Joung; S Moon; Y M Wi; D R Chung; C-W Ha; J-H Song; K R Peck
Journal:  J Hosp Infect       Date:  2010-08       Impact factor: 3.926

Review 2.  Prosthetic-joint infections.

Authors:  Werner Zimmerli; Andrej Trampuz; Peter E Ochsner
Journal:  N Engl J Med       Date:  2004-10-14       Impact factor: 91.245

Review 3.  Two-Stage Revision Arthroplasty for the Treatment of Prosthetic Joint Infection.

Authors:  Ryan S Charette; Christopher M Melnic
Journal:  Curr Rev Musculoskelet Med       Date:  2018-09

4.  Two-stage hip revision arthroplasty for periprosthetic joint infection without the use of spacer or cemented implants.

Authors:  Yves Gramlich; Paul Hagebusch; Philipp Faul; Alexander Klug; Gerhard Walter; Reinhard Hoffmann
Journal:  Int Orthop       Date:  2019-01-18       Impact factor: 3.075

5.  Characterization of Outcomes of 2-Stage Exchange Arthroplasty in the Treatment of Prosthetic Joint Infections.

Authors:  Amy N Ford; Adam M Holzmeister; Harold W Rees; Paul D Belich
Journal:  J Arthroplasty       Date:  2018-02-17       Impact factor: 4.757

6.  Patient-reported quality of life and hip function after 2-stage revision of chronic periprosthetic hip joint infection: a cross-sectional study.

Authors:  Ninna R Poulsen; Inger Mechlenburg; Kjeld Søballe; Jeppe Lange
Journal:  Hip Int       Date:  2017-04-12       Impact factor: 2.135

7.  Time to Reimplantation: Waiting Longer Confers No Added Benefit.

Authors:  Arash Aali Rezaie; Karan Goswami; Noam Shohat; Anthony T Tokarski; Alexander E White; Javad Parvizi
Journal:  J Arthroplasty       Date:  2018-02-07       Impact factor: 4.757

8.  Surgical procedures in the treatment of 784 infected THAs reported to the Norwegian Arthroplasty Register.

Authors:  Lars B Engesæter; Håvard Dale; Jan C Schrama; Geir Hallan; Stein Atle Lie
Journal:  Acta Orthop       Date:  2011-10       Impact factor: 3.717

Review 9.  Re-Infection Outcomes following One- and Two-Stage Surgical Revision of Infected Hip Prosthesis: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

Authors:  Setor K Kunutsor; Michael R Whitehouse; Ashley W Blom; Andrew D Beswick
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2015-09-25       Impact factor: 3.240

10.  Chronic Periprosthetic Hip Joint Infection. A Retrospective, Observational Study on the Treatment Strategy and Prognosis in 130 Non-Selected Patients.

Authors:  Jeppe Lange; Anders Troelsen; Kjeld Søballe
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2016-09-22       Impact factor: 3.240

View more
  1 in total

1.  Debridement, antibiotics and implant retention for prosthetic joint infection: comparison of outcomes between total hip arthroplasty and hip resurfacing.

Authors:  Enrick Castanet; Pierre Martinot; Julien Dartus; Eric Senneville; Henri Migaud; Julien Girard
Journal:  Int Orthop       Date:  2022-08-12       Impact factor: 3.479

  1 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.