Borowski Marcin, Kusz Damian, Wojciechowski Piotr, Cieliński Łukasz
Department and Chair of Orthopedic and Trauma Surgery, Medical University of Silesia in Katowice.
Ortop Traumatol Rehabil. 2012 Jan-Feb;14(1):41-54. doi: 10.5604/15093492.976900.
With the increasing number of total joint replacement procedures, the number of complications from that surgery has also been on the rise. Although quite rare (<1%), a PPI may ruin even the best and technically excellent joint replacement procedure, causing extensive damage and loss of bone and periprosthetic tissues, which makes subsequent restoration surgery extremely difficult. At present, a two-stage revision arthroplasty seems to be the best solution for PPI patients [4,9,15]. In the first stage, implant removal and radical débridement of infected tissues is performed and an antibiotic-loaded spacer is inserted. After a few months, the second stage is performed where the spacer is removed and a revision endoprosthesis is implanted. The aim of the study was to evaluate the effectiveness of treatment for periprosthetic infections with a two-stage revision arthroplasty.
Forty-one patients diagnosed with PPI were treated at the Department of Orthopedic and Trauma Surgery, Silesian Medical University in Katowice, between January 2007 and March 2010. PPI was a complication of knee arthroplasty (12 patients, 29%) and hip replacement (29 patients, 71%). During the first stage of the treatment, intraoperative cultures were negative in 17 patients (41%) and positive in 24 (59%).
Cultures obtained in patients with reinfection after revision endoprosthesoplasty (second stage of the treatment) grew no pathogen in 1 patient, MSSA (1), E. faecalis (1), and A. baumanii with MSSA and MRSE (1). After the first stage of the treatment (spacer implantation), infection was not cured in one patient (2.5%). In 4 patients (10%), there was reinfection after the implantation of a revision endoprosthesis.
Our analysis provides evidence to suggest that two-stage revision endoprosthesoplasty is an effective method of treatment of periprosthetic infections.
随着全关节置换手术数量的增加,该手术的并发症数量也在上升。尽管假体周围感染(PPI)相当罕见(<1%),但它可能会毁掉即使是最成功且技术精湛的关节置换手术,导致广泛的骨和假体周围组织损伤及缺失,这使得后续的修复手术极其困难。目前,两阶段翻修关节成形术似乎是PPI患者的最佳解决方案[4,9,15]。在第一阶段,进行植入物取出和感染组织的彻底清创,并插入载有抗生素的间隔物。几个月后,进行第二阶段手术,取出间隔物并植入翻修假体。本研究的目的是评估两阶段翻修关节成形术治疗假体周围感染的有效性。
2007年1月至2010年3月期间,在卡托维兹西里西亚医科大学骨科与创伤外科对41例诊断为PPI的患者进行了治疗。PPI是膝关节置换术的并发症(12例患者,29%)和髋关节置换术的并发症(29例患者,71%)。在治疗的第一阶段,17例患者(41%)术中培养结果为阴性,24例(59%)为阳性。
翻修假体成形术后(治疗的第二阶段)再次感染患者的培养物中,1例未培养出病原体,1例培养出甲氧西林敏感金黄色葡萄球菌(MSSA),1例培养出粪肠球菌,1例培养出鲍曼不动杆菌合并MSSA和耐甲氧西林表皮葡萄球菌(MRSE)。在治疗的第一阶段(间隔物植入)后,1例患者(2.5%)感染未治愈。4例患者(10%)在植入翻修假体后出现再次感染。
我们的分析提供了证据表明,两阶段翻修假体成形术是治疗假体周围感染的有效方法。