Vielgut Ines, Sadoghi Patrick, Wolf Matthias, Holzer Lukas, Leithner Andreas, Schwantzer Gerold, Poolman Rudolf, Frankl Bernhard, Glehr Mathias
Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Medical University Graz, Graz, Austria,
Int Orthop. 2015 Sep;39(9):1731-6. doi: 10.1007/s00264-015-2751-5. Epub 2015 Apr 14.
Managing periprosthetic joint infections remains a challenging task, and adequate treatment strategies seem to be mandatory to avoid irreversible damage of the affected joint and/or systemic complications. Two-stage revision arthroplasty includes removing all implants and subsequent implantation of an antibiotic-loaded cement spacer, followed by revision arthroplasty as the second stage. Although this procedure is well described in the literature, results remain unpredictable due to various clinical findings and the absence of prospective randomised trials. We analysed (1) mortality and (2) reinfection rates in a series of patients who underwent two-stage revision surgery for periprosthetic hip joint infections with antibiotic-augmented joint spacers. We maintained a special focus on the spacer retention period and its influence on outcome in order to determine the best time for second-stage surgery.
A consecutive series of 76 patients with native and periprosthetic hip joint infections and who underwent two-stage revision surgery with antibiotic-loaded cement spacers were studied between 2005 and 2010. The second-stage operation was performed when it was assumed that infection was eradicated. The further operative procedure depended upon intra-operative findings (frozen section, local status).
Mean implant-free period with the antibiotic-loaded spacer in situ was 12.6 weeks. Spacer re-implantation was necessary in 13 cases due to positive signs of acute infection in the frozen section and suspect intra-operative findings. Eight patients were not operated for a second time in the investigated time period due to poor general condition. In 40 patients, the spacer retention period was four to 11 weeks:
According to our findings, the optimal timing for second-stage surgery as a second-stage procedure is between four and 11 weeks. A significantly optimal reinfection rate was seen in patients undergoing revision arthroplasty within that time frame, and 90% of those patients remained infection free until final follow-up.
处理人工关节周围感染仍然是一项具有挑战性的任务,似乎必须采取适当的治疗策略以避免受影响关节的不可逆损害和/或全身并发症。两阶段翻修关节成形术包括取出所有植入物,随后植入载有抗生素的骨水泥间隔物,第二阶段为翻修关节成形术。尽管该手术在文献中有详细描述,但由于各种临床发现以及缺乏前瞻性随机试验,结果仍然难以预测。我们分析了一系列接受两阶段翻修手术治疗人工髋关节周围感染并使用抗生素增强型关节间隔物的患者的(1)死亡率和(2)再感染率。我们特别关注间隔物保留期及其对结果的影响,以确定第二阶段手术的最佳时间。
对2005年至2010年间连续76例患有原发性和人工髋关节周围感染且接受了载有抗生素的骨水泥间隔物两阶段翻修手术的患者进行了研究。当假定感染已根除时进行第二阶段手术。进一步的手术程序取决于术中发现(冰冻切片、局部状况)。
载有抗生素的间隔物原位植入的平均无植入物期为12.6周。由于冰冻切片中有急性感染的阳性体征和可疑的术中发现,13例患者需要重新植入间隔物。8例患者由于全身状况不佳在研究期间未进行第二次手术。在40例患者中,间隔物保留期为4至11周:5例小于4周,23例大于11周。我们观察到,4至11周组中无再感染的女性比例明显高于间隔物保留期较短或较长的患者。
根据我们的研究结果,作为第二阶段手术的最佳时机是4至11周。在该时间段内接受翻修关节成形术的患者再感染率明显最佳,其中90%的患者直至最终随访时仍无感染。