Retention treatment after periprosthetic total hip arthroplasty infection.

PURPOSE

The purpose of this study was to compare infection control rates between implant retention and two-stage revision and assess the effectiveness of retention treatment in THA.

METHODS

Twenty-eight debridements with implant retention (retention group) and 65 staged revisions (removal group) were retrospectively analysed and risk factors that can contribute to failure of infection control were explored.

RESULTS

For the retention and removal groups, infection control rates were 50% and 78% after initial treatment, and 68% and 82% at latest follow-up, respectively. There were no significant differences in the number of additional operative procedures, total length of hospital stay, and duration of treatment between groups. Infection of revision THA, polybacterial and S. aureus infection were identified as risk factors for infection control.

CONCLUSIONS

Retention treatment can be considered an initial treatment option in selected cases of primary THA, with a single organism, non-S. aureus infection with 50% chance of infection control and no disadvantages in terms of additional procedure, hospital stay, and treatment duration.