» Articles » PMID: 34853867

Quality of Life, Infection Control, and Complication Rates Using a Novel Custom-made Articulating Hip Spacer During Two-stage Revision for Periprosthetic Joint Infection

Overview
Date 2021 Dec 2
PMID 34853867
Citations 6
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

Introduction: Two-stage revision remains the gold standard treatment for most chronically infected and complex total hip arthroplasty infections. To improve patient outcome and reduce complication rates, we have developed a novel custom-made articulating hip spacer technique and present our short-term results.

Materials And Methods: Between November 2017 and November 2019, 27 patients (mean age 70 years) underwent two-stage revision for periprosthetic joint infection of the hip using the articulating spacer design described here. We retrospectively analyzed spacer-related complications as well as rates for complication, infection control, and implant survivorship after final reimplantation. Furthermore, we prospectively collected patient-reported health-related quality of life (HRQoL) scores prior to spacer implantation, with the spacer and after reimplantation of the new prosthesis.

Results: An additional round of spacer exchange was performed in two patients (8.3%), persistent wound discharge was the reason in both cases. We had one (4.2%) spacer-related mechanical complication, a dislocation that was treated with closed reduction. After reimplantation, infection control was achieved in 96% with an implant survivorship of 92% after a mean follow-up time of 19 (range 7-32, SD 7.2) months. While the scores for VR-12 MCS, VAS hip pain and patient-reported overall satisfaction significantly improved after first stage surgery, the scores for WOMAC, UCLA and VR-12 PCS significantly improved after second stage surgery.

Conclusions: Our two-stage approach for periprosthetic joint infection shows high infection eradication and implant survivorship rates at short-term follow-up. Spacer-related complication rates were low, and we achieved high patient satisfaction rates and low pain levels already during the spacer period. To further simplify comparison between different spacer designs, we propose a new hip spacer classification system.

Citing Articles

The role of acetabular cement augmentation in 2-stage revision arthroplasty for prosthetic joint infection of the hip.

Raspanti F, Zanna L, Sangaletti R, Innocenti M, Benazzo F, Civinini R Arch Orthop Trauma Surg. 2024; 144(12):5251-5260.

PMID: 39259308 DOI: 10.1007/s00402-024-05541-w.


The Effect of Spacer Treatment of Infected Hip and Knee Arthroplasties on Patients' Mental Health: A Narrative Review of the Literature.

Di Gennaro D, Coletta G, Festa E, De Mauro D, Rizzo M, Diana L Healthcare (Basel). 2024; 12(7).

PMID: 38610212 PMC: 11011799. DOI: 10.3390/healthcare12070790.


Enhanced antibiotic release from bone cement spacers utilizing dual antibiotic loading with elevated vancomycin concentrations in two-stage revision for periprosthetic joint infection.

Lunz A, Schonhoff M, Omlor G, Knappe K, Bangert Y, Lehner B Int Orthop. 2023; 47(11):2655-2661.

PMID: 37566227 PMC: 10602962. DOI: 10.1007/s00264-023-05922-7.


Mechanical strength of antibiotic-loaded PMMA spacers in two-stage revision surgery.

Lunz A, Knappe K, Omlor G, Schonhoff M, Renkawitz T, Jaeger S BMC Musculoskelet Disord. 2022; 23(1):945.

PMID: 36309657 PMC: 9617327. DOI: 10.1186/s12891-022-05895-5.


Cure rate of infections is not an argument for spacer in two-stage revision arthroplasty of the hip.

Adl Amini D, Wu C, Perka C, Backer H Arch Orthop Trauma Surg. 2022; 143(4):2199-2207.

PMID: 35534712 PMC: 10030410. DOI: 10.1007/s00402-022-04463-9.


References
1.
Sukeik M, Haddad F . Periprosthetic joint infections after total hip replacement: an algorithmic approach. SICOT J. 2019; 5:5. PMC: 6394232. DOI: 10.1051/sicotj/2019004. View

2.
Dale H, Fenstad A, Hallan G, Havelin L, Furnes O, Overgaard S . Increasing risk of prosthetic joint infection after total hip arthroplasty. Acta Orthop. 2012; 83(5):449-58. PMC: 3488170. DOI: 10.3109/17453674.2012.733918. View

3.
Shohat N, Goswami K, Tan T, Yayac M, Soriano A, Sousa R . 2020 Frank Stinchfield Award: Identifying who will fail following irrigation and debridement for prosthetic joint infection. Bone Joint J. 2020; 102-B(7_Supple_B):11-19. DOI: 10.1302/0301-620X.102B7.BJJ-2019-1628.R1. View

4.
Fowler T, Sayers A, Whitehouse M . Two-stage revision surgery for periprosthetic joint infection following total hip arthroplasty. Ann Transl Med. 2020; 7(Suppl 8):S261. PMC: 6976403. DOI: 10.21037/atm.2019.12.126. View

5.
Winkler T, Trampuz A, Hardt S, Janz V, Kleber C, Perka C . [Periprosthetic infection after hip arthroplasty]. Orthopade. 2014; 43(1):70-8. DOI: 10.1007/s00132-013-2132-y. View