Lindberg-Larsen Martin, Jørgensen Christoffer C, Bagger Jens, Schrøder Henrik M, Kehlet Henrik
a The Lundbeck Center for Fast-track Hip and Knee Arthroplasty , Copenhagen University Hospital , Rigshospitalet , Copenhagen .
b Department of Orthopedic Surgery , Copenhagen University Hospital , Bispebjerg , Copenhagen .
Acta Orthop. 2016 Aug;87(4):333-8. doi: 10.3109/17453674.2016.1148453. Epub 2016 Feb 22.
Background and purpose - The surgical treatment of periprosthetic knee infection is generally either a partial revision procedure (open debridement and exchange of the tibial insert) or a 2-stage exchange arthroplasty procedure. We describe the failure rates of these procedures on a nationwide basis. Patients and methods - 105 partial revisions (100 patients) and 215 potential 2-stage revision procedures (205 patients) performed due to infection from July 1, 2011 to June 30, 2013 were identified from the Danish Knee Arthroplasty Register (DKR). Failure was defined as surgically related death ≤ 90 days postoperatively, re-revision due to infection, or not reaching the second stage for a planned 2-stage procedure within a median follow-up period of 3.2 (2.2-4.2) years. Results - The failure rate of the partial revisions was 43%. 71 of the partial revisions (67%) were revisions of a primary prosthesis with a re-revision rate due to infection of 34%, as compared to 55% in revisions of a revision prosthesis (p = 0.05). The failure rate of the 2-stage revisions was 30%. Median time interval between stages was 84 (9-597) days. 117 (54%) of the 2-stage revisions were revisions of a primary prosthesis with a re-revision rate due to infection of 21%, as compared to 29% in revisions of a previously revised prosthesis (p = 0.1). Overall postoperative mortality was 0.6% in high-volume centers (> 30 procedures within 2 years) as opposed to 7% in the remaining centers (p = 0.003). Interpretation - The failure rates of 43% after the partial revision procedures and 30% after the 2-stage revisions in combination with the higher mortality outside high-volume centers call for centralization and reconsideration of surgical strategies.
背景与目的——人工膝关节周围感染的手术治疗通常采用部分翻修手术(切开清创并更换胫骨衬垫)或两阶段翻修置换手术。我们在全国范围内描述了这些手术的失败率。
患者与方法——从丹麦膝关节置换登记处(DKR)中确定了2011年7月1日至2013年6月30日期间因感染而进行的105例部分翻修手术(100例患者)和215例潜在的两阶段翻修手术(205例患者)。失败定义为术后90天内与手术相关的死亡、因感染再次翻修,或在3.2(2.2 - 4.2)年的中位随访期内未完成计划的两阶段手术的第二阶段。
结果——部分翻修手术的失败率为43%。71例(67%)部分翻修手术是对初次假体进行翻修,因感染的再次翻修率为34%,而对翻修过的假体进行翻修的再次翻修率为55%(p = 0.05)。两阶段翻修手术的失败率为30%。两阶段之间的中位时间间隔为84(9 - 597)天。117例(54%)两阶段翻修手术是对初次假体进行翻修,因感染的再次翻修率为21%,而对先前翻修过的假体进行翻修的再次翻修率为29%(p = 0.1)。高手术量中心(2年内> 30例手术)的总体术后死亡率为0.6%,而其余中心为7%(p = 0.003)。
解读——部分翻修手术后43%的失败率和两阶段翻修手术后30%的失败率,以及高手术量中心以外较高的死亡率,都需要对手术策略进行集中化和重新考量。