Suppr超能文献

模块化膝关节融合术在翻修膝关节置换术不可行时,可固定肢体、保留活动能力、提高生活质量,并能有效控制假体周围膝关节感染的感染率。

Modular knee arthrodesis secures limb, mobility, improves quality of life, and leads to high infection control in periprosthetic knee infection, when revision knee arthroplasty is not an option.

机构信息

Department of Trauma and Orthopedic Surgery, Berufsgenossenschaftliche Unfallklinik Frankfurt Am Main, Friedberger Landstr. 430, 60389, Frankfurt am Main, Germany.

出版信息

Arch Orthop Trauma Surg. 2021 Aug;141(8):1349-1360. doi: 10.1007/s00402-021-03907-y. Epub 2021 Apr 23.

Abstract

INTRODUCTION

This study compared the outcome of knee arthrodesis versus hinged total knee arthroplasty (TKA) in patients suffering from periprosthetic joint infection (PJI).

METHODS

104 patients with PJI were treated using a two-stage exchange of failed TKA. In case of non reconstructable bone loss or loss of extension mechanism, a modular intramedullary arthrodesis nail was used for reimplantation [Knee Arthrodesis Module (KAM); n = 52]. The control group was retrospectively matched treated using a hinged revision TKA [Rotating Hinge Knee (RHK); n = 52]. PJI remission rates, functional outcome (WOMAC; KSS) and quality of life (SF-12), as well as comorbidities and pain were evaluated.

RESULTS

Mean age was 72.5 years. Charlson Comorbidity Index was higher in the KAM group (3.3 vs. 2.8). PJI remission rate was 89.4% (88.5% vs. 90.4%, respectively). In case of reinfection, implant retention was mostly possible in the RHK group (7.7%), whereas amputations were mostly performed in the KAM group (9.6%). Significant pain reduction (VAS 7.9-2.8) was achieved in both groups. Walking distance was significantly reduced in the KAM groups versus the RHK group (504 vs. 1064 m). WOMAC and KSS function scores were significantly reduced in the KAM group (25 vs. 40 and 35 vs. 64). Only moderate reduction in quality of life in the KAM group was observed (SF-12 physical: 34 vs. 40; SF-12 mental: 51 vs. 56) respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

Arthrodesis using a modular intramedullary nail is an alternative for limb salvage, pain reduction, and preservation of quality of life and everyday mobility, when revision TKA is not an option. This study presents the largest number of case, comparing the outcome after performing an arthrodesis versus hinged TKA after septic failed TKA.

摘要

简介

本研究比较了膝关节融合术与铰链式全膝关节置换术(TKA)治疗人工关节周围感染(PJI)患者的结果。

方法

104 例 PJI 患者采用两期翻修失败 TKA 进行治疗。在存在不可重建的骨丢失或伸直机制丢失的情况下,使用模块化髓内融合钉进行再植入[膝关节融合模块(KAM);n=52]。对照组采用铰链式翻修 TKA 进行回顾性匹配治疗[旋转铰链膝关节(RHK);n=52]。评估了 PJI 缓解率、功能结局(WOMAC;KSS)和生活质量(SF-12)以及合并症和疼痛。

结果

平均年龄为 72.5 岁。KAM 组Charlson 合并症指数更高(3.3 比 2.8)。KAM 组的 PJI 缓解率为 89.4%(88.5%比 90.4%)。在再感染的情况下,RHK 组的植入物保留率大多为 7.7%,而 KAM 组的截肢率大多为 9.6%。两组患者的疼痛均显著减轻(VAS 7.9-2.8)。KAM 组的步行距离明显低于 RHK 组(504 比 1064m)。KAM 组的 WOMAC 和 KSS 功能评分明显降低(25 比 40 和 35 比 64)。KAM 组的生活质量仅略有下降(SF-12 生理:34 比 40;SF-12 心理:51 比 56)。

结论

当翻修 TKA 不可行时,使用模块化髓内钉进行融合术是保留肢体、减轻疼痛、维持生活质量和日常活动能力的一种选择。本研究是比较关节融合术与铰链式 TKA 治疗人工关节周围感染翻修失败 TKA 后结果的最大病例数研究。

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验