4.6 Article

Ten-Year Results Following One-Stage Septic Hip Exchange in the Management of Periprosthetic Joint Infection

Journal

JOURNAL OF ARTHROPLASTY
Volume 34, Issue 6, Pages 1221-1226

Publisher

CHURCHILL LIVINGSTONE INC MEDICAL PUBLISHERS
DOI: 10.1016/j.arth.2019.02.021

Keywords

revision hip arthroplasty; periprosthetic joint infection; total joint replacement; bone cement; one-stage exchange

Categories

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Background: Although 2-stage revision is still considered the gold standard for surgical management of periprosthetic joint infection (PJI), 1-stage revision has been reported to be as effective. Long-term reports for 1-stage revision in hip PJIs are lacking. Methods: We reviewed our 10-11 years of results of 85 patients who underwent 1-stage exchange of the hip with an antibiotic-loaded bone cemented prosthesis due to PJI to determine the following: (1) What is the infection-free survival? (2) What is the overall survival? and (3) What are the long-term clinical outcomes? All 1-stage revision total hip arthroplasties (THAs) for infection between January 2006 and December 2007, with a minimum 10-year follow-up (range 10-11), were included in this retrospective cohort. Patients from another country or patients who were unable to participate were excluded. Eighty-five patients with a hip PJI were available at the last follow-up. Thirty-seven patients died during the 10-year study. Harris Hip Scores were recorded before the surgery and at last follow-up. Failures are reported as infection-related or aseptic. Results: The 10-year infection-free survival was 94% and the surgery-free survival was 75.9%. The Harris Hip Scores improved from 43 (range 3-91) to 75 (range 10-91) (P < .001). The main indication for rerevision after 1-stage exchange was instability (10/20 patients). Conclusion: One-stage exchange of the hip for PJI is a reliable treatment option with high rate of infection control and long-lasting favorable outcomes. (C) 2019 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available