One-stage revision of infected hip arthroplasty: outcome of 39 consecutive hips
- PMID: 26224611
- DOI: 10.1007/s00264-015-2833-4
One-stage revision of infected hip arthroplasty: outcome of 39 consecutive hips
Abstract
Purpose: There are various options for treating periprosthetic joint infection (PJI). Two-stage exchange has traditionally been the gold standard. However, if the appropriate surgical intervention is chosen according to a rational algorithm, the outcome is similar when using all types of interventions. In an observational cohort study, the outcome of patients with PJI after hip replacement treated with one-stage revision was analysed.
Methods: All patients fulfilling all criteria for one-stage exchange according to the Infectious Diseases Society of America (IDSA) guidelines and six without preoperative identification of a microorganism were included. Implant removal, debridement and cemented or uncemented reimplantations were performed in a single intervention. If a cemented device was implanted, commercially available gentamicin cement was used in all cases. Antibiotic treatment was administered intravenously for at least 2 weeks, followed by oral therapy for a total duration of 3 months. Patients had standardised clinical and radiological follow-up visits.
Results: Between 1996 and 2011, 38 patients (39 hips) were treated with a one-stage procedure and followed for at least 2 years. Coagulase-negative staphylococci were the most frequent pathogens, and polymicrobial infection was observed in five cases. In 25 hips, an uncemented revision stem was implanted, and 37 hips received an acetabular reinforcement ring. The mean follow-up was 6.6 (2.0-15.1) years. No patient had persistent, recurrent or new infection. There were four stem revisions for aseptic loosening. The mean Harris Hip Score was 81 points (26-99) at the final follow-up.
Conclusions: Excellent cure rate and function seen in our study suggest that one-stage exchange is a safe procedure, even without local antibiotic treatment, provided that the patient has no sinus tract or severe soft tissue damage, no major bone grafting is required and the microorganism is susceptible to orally administered agents with high bioavailability.
Keywords: Hip arthroplasty; Hip replacement; Infection; One-stage; Treatment; Uncemented.
Similar articles
-
Eradication of infection, survival, and radiological results of uncemented revision stems in infected total hip arthroplasties.Acta Orthop. 2016 Dec;87(6):637-643. doi: 10.1080/17453674.2016.1237423. Epub 2016 Sep 23. Acta Orthop. 2016. PMID: 27658856 Free PMC article.
-
Functional outcome of debridement, antibiotics and implant retention in periprosthetic joint infection involving the hip: a case-control study.Bone Joint J. 2017 May;99-B(5):614-622. doi: 10.1302/0301-620X.99B5.BJJ-2016-0562.R2. Bone Joint J. 2017. PMID: 28455470
-
One-stage Revision With Catheter Infusion of Intraarticular Antibiotics Successfully Treats Infected THA.Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2017 Feb;475(2):419-429. doi: 10.1007/s11999-016-4977-y. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2017. PMID: 27511201 Free PMC article.
-
Extensively coated non-modular stem used in two-stage revision for infected total hip arthroplasty: mid-term to long-term follow-up.Orthop Surg. 2014 May;6(2):103-9. doi: 10.1111/os.12107. Orthop Surg. 2014. PMID: 24890291 Free PMC article. Review.
-
Two-stage revision for periprosthetic joint infection in cemented total hip arthroplasty: an increased risk for failure?Arch Orthop Trauma Surg. 2023 Jul;143(7):4481-4490. doi: 10.1007/s00402-022-04671-3. Epub 2022 Nov 3. Arch Orthop Trauma Surg. 2023. PMID: 36323976 Free PMC article. Review.
Cited by
-
Bacterial pathogens and in-hospital mortality in revision surgery for periprosthetic joint infection of the hip and knee: analysis of 346 patients.Eur J Med Res. 2023 May 19;28(1):177. doi: 10.1186/s40001-023-01138-y. Eur J Med Res. 2023. PMID: 37208700 Free PMC article.
-
Excellent long-term results of the Müller acetabular reinforcement ring in primary cup revision.Acta Orthop. 2017 Dec;88(6):619-626. doi: 10.1080/17453674.2017.1361137. Epub 2017 Aug 3. Acta Orthop. 2017. PMID: 28771057 Free PMC article.
-
Comparative reinfection rate of one-stage versus two-stage revision in the management of periprosthetic joint infection following total hip arthroplasty: a meta-analysis.BMC Musculoskelet Disord. 2024 Dec 20;25(1):1056. doi: 10.1186/s12891-024-08199-y. BMC Musculoskelet Disord. 2024. PMID: 39707249 Free PMC article.
-
Blood loss and allogeneic transfusion for surgical treatment of periprosthetic joint infection: a comparison of one- vs. two-stage exchange total hip arthroplasty.Int Orthop. 2019 Sep;43(9):2025-2030. doi: 10.1007/s00264-018-4137-y. Epub 2018 Sep 5. Int Orthop. 2019. PMID: 30187096
-
Risk factors and a prognostic model of hip periprosthetic infection recurrence after surgical treatment using articulating and non-articulating spacers.Int Orthop. 2016 Jul;40(7):1381-7. doi: 10.1007/s00264-015-3072-4. Epub 2015 Dec 19. Int Orthop. 2016. PMID: 26686498
References
Publication types
MeSH terms
Substances
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources
Medical