Extended Trochanteric Osteotomy with Intermediate Resection Arthroplasty Is Safe for Use in Two-Stage Revision Total Hip Arthroplasty for Infection.

BACKGROUND

This study sought to compare the results of two-stage revision total hip arthroplasty (THA) for periprosthetic infection (PJI) in patients with and without the use of an extended trochanteric osteotomy (ETO) for removal of a well-fixed femoral stem or cement.

METHODS

Thirty-two patients who had undergone an ETO as part of a two-stage revision without spacer placement were matched 1:2 with a cohort of sixty-four patients of the same sex and age who had stem removal without any osteotomy. Clinical outcomes including interim revision, reinfection and aseptic failure rates were evaluated. Modified Harris hip scores (mHHS) were calculated. Minimum follow-up was two years.

RESULTS

Patients undergoing ETO had a significantly lower rate of interim re-debridement compared to non-ETO patients (0% vs. 14.1%, = 0.026). Reinfection following reimplantation was similar in both groups (12.5% in ETO patients vs. 9.4% in non-ETO patients, = 0.365). Revision for aseptic reason was necessary in 12.5% in the ETO group and 14.1% in the non-ETO group ( = 0.833). Periprosthetic femoral fractures were seen in three patients (3.1%), of which all occurred in non-ETO patients. Dislocation was the most common complication, which was equally distributed in both groups (12.5%). The mean mHHS was 37.7 in the ETO group and 37.3 in the non-ETO group, and these scores improved significantly in both groups following reimplantation ( < 0.01).

CONCLUSION

ETO without the use of spacer is a safe and effective method to manage patients with well-fixed femoral stems and for thorough cement removal in two-stage revision THA for PJI. While it might reduce the rate of repeated debridement in the interim period, the use of ETO appears to lead to similar reinfection rates following reimplantation.