Is two-stage revision surgery for infected hip arthroplasty worth the suffering, resources and results compared to one-stage?

PURPOSE

Periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) is the most serious complication of total hip arthroplasty. The treatment is usually revision in either 1 or 2 stages. This study analyses revision with impaction bone grafting for periprosthetic joint infection of the hip and compares 1- and 2-stage strategies.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

We reviewed 55 consecutive cases (54 patients) of revision arthroplasty for PJI carried out at our hospital between 2002 and 2016. Of these, 46 were 2-stage procedures. 21 had vancomycin mixed in with the bone graft, and all had gentamycin-containing bone cement. The total perioperative blood loss, duration of operation, and length of hospital stay were recorded. Clinical and radiological results were analysed for 48 hips at 2-16 years follow-up.

RESULTS

No PJI remained at follow-up. 3 patients (6%) had undergone revision for all causes. 1 had radiological signs of mechanical loosening but was not revised. 2-stage procedures had a significantly longer operating time (409 vs. 238 min) and hospital stay (34 vs. 13 days), greater blood loss (2764 vs. 1638 ml), and lower mean functional hip score (15.9 vs. 17.5) at follow-up than the one-stage procedures.

INTERPRETATION

Revision total hip arthroplasty for PJI with vancomycin-loaded impaction bone grafting is a safe method that achieves both the restoration of bone stock and resolution of the infection. This single-stage procedure could therefore be the new gold standard for treatment of non-complicated PJI in the hip.