4.2 Article

Risk Factors and Treatment Options for Failure of a Two-Stage Exchange

期刊

CURRENT REVIEWS IN MUSCULOSKELETAL MEDICINE
卷 11, 期 3, 页码 420-427

出版社

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1007/s12178-018-9504-1

关键词

Periprosthetic joint infection (PJI); Two-stage infected exchange failure; Revision hip arthroplasty; Two-stage exchange arthroplasty; Chronic suppression therapy

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Although a two-stage exchange revision is reported to have a high success rate, this strategy may fail as a treatment for prosthetic joint infection (PJI). When it does, resection arthroplasty, arthrodesis, amputation, and chronic antibiotic suppression may play a role. The purpose of this review is to determine which are the main risk factors for a two-stage exchange failure and to analyze the indications and results of resection arthroplasty, arthrodesis, amputation, and antibiotic chronic suppression for PJI. Recent literature demonstrates that the main risk factors for a two-stage exchange failure are as follows: hemodialysis, obesity, multiple previous procedures, diabetes mellitus, corticosteroid therapy, hypoalbuminemia, immunosuppression, rheumatological conditions, coagulation disorders, and infection due to multidrug-resistant (MDR) bacteria or fungal species. Regarding microorganisms, besides Staphylococcus aureus, Streptococcus spp., Enterobacteriaceae species such as Klebsiella pneumoniae and Enterobacter sp., Pseudomonas aeruginosa, or Acinetobacter baumannii, and fungus including Candida sp. are also considered risk factors for a two-stage exchange failure. Resection arthroplasty, arthrodesis, and amputation have a limited role. Chronic suppression is an option for high-risk patients or unfeasible reconstruction. In summary, we report the main risk factors for a two-stage exchange failure and alternative procedures when it occurs. Future research on patient-specific risk factors for a two-stage exchange may aid surgical decision-making and optimization of outcomes.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.2
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据