Department of Orthopaedic Surgery and Rehabilitation, University of Nebraska Medical Center, Omaha, NE.
J Arthroplasty. 2021 Jul;36(7):2630-2641. doi: 10.1016/j.arth.2021.02.046. Epub 2021 Feb 23.
Although two-stage exchange for chronic periprosthetic hip infections remains an effective option for infection eradication, long-term outcome reporting remains scarce. Compiling outcomes data for this standard of care is necessary to characterize long-term reinfection risk and identify bacteria associated with reinfection. The purpose of our study was to perform a systematic review to determine the long-term risk of reinfection after two-stage reimplantation. The second purpose was to identify the proportion of reinfections caused by the same or different organism(s) relative to the index infection.
We performed a systematic review of two-stage reimplantation randomized control trials, cohort studies, and case series for the treatment of periprosthetic joint infections, yielding 320 unique citations for abstract review, of which 138 were reviewed in full. We collected reinfection data including the timing of reinfection after successful reimplantation and the bacteria identified at reinfection. Meeting inclusion criteria were 28 studies with 2047 patients and 2055 hips that completed both reimplantation stages with just seven studies having greater than 24 month follow-up.
Studies with longer average follow-up reported significantly higher all-time reinfection rates (P = .042). Among studies with at least 5 years of follow-up, the risk of reinfection was 10.25% (8.21-12.47). Among studies with minimum follow-up of at least 24 months, the 24-month rate of reinfection was 4.58% (2.17-7.66), which increased to 7.34% (4.44-10.82) by final follow-up. Only 12 studies reported index and recurrent pathogen data. In those studies, 3.00% (1.19-5.38) of all hips which completed both reimplantation stages were reinfected by a new pathogen, and 1.70% (0.52-3.35) of patients became reinfected by recurrent pathogens.
While the majority of two stage reimplantation literature follows patients for two years, there is significant risk of reinfection into the long term. Further studies with detailed outcomes and long-term follow-up are needed to identify factors associated with late infections.
尽管两阶段置换术治疗慢性假体周围髋关节感染仍然是一种有效的感染清除方法,但长期结果报告仍然很少。为这种标准治疗方法汇编结果数据对于确定长期再感染风险和识别与再感染相关的细菌是必要的。我们研究的目的是进行系统评价,以确定两阶段再植入后再感染的长期风险。第二个目的是确定相对于索引感染,由相同或不同的病原体引起的再感染的比例。
我们对两阶段再植入的随机对照试验、队列研究和病例系列进行了系统评价,以治疗假体周围关节感染,从摘要审查中获得了 320 个独特的引文,其中有 138 个进行了全面审查。我们收集了再感染数据,包括成功再植入后再感染的时间以及再感染时发现的细菌。符合纳入标准的是 28 项研究,涉及 2047 名患者和 2055 髋,这些患者都完成了两阶段再植入,只有 7 项研究的随访时间超过 24 个月。
平均随访时间较长的研究报告的总体再感染率显著更高(P=0.042)。在随访时间至少为 5 年的研究中,再感染的风险为 10.25%(8.21-12.47)。在随访时间至少为 24 个月的研究中,24 个月时的再感染率为 4.58%(2.17-7.66),最终随访时增至 7.34%(4.44-10.82)。只有 12 项研究报告了索引和复发性病原体数据。在这些研究中,完成两阶段再植入的所有髋关节中,有 3.00%(1.19-5.38)由新病原体引起再感染,有 1.70%(0.52-3.35)的患者由复发性病原体引起再感染。
尽管大多数两阶段再植入文献在两年内随访患者,但长期再感染的风险仍然很大。需要进一步进行具有详细结果和长期随访的研究,以确定与晚期感染相关的因素。