De Cloedt P, Emery R, Legaye J, Lokietek W
Clinique UCL Mont-Godinne, Yvoir, Belgique.
Rev Chir Orthop Reparatrice Appar Mot. 1994;80(7):626-33.
The aim of the study is to assess the functional results and septic evolution in the treatment of infected total knee arthroplasties.
22 patients were reviewed; 8 were initially treated in our institution and 14 transferred from other hospitals. Articular debridement alone leaving the prosthesis in situ was initiated in 3 of our 8 patients as well as in 6 of the transferred cases. In both groups, this procedure appeared to be a failure. Prosthetic-reimplantation procedure was elected in 10 patients either as a one-stage (5 cases) or a two-stage surgery (5 cases). This has been successfully rated in 7 cases. Femoro-tibial arthrodesis was performed in 15 patients, three of them being a failure of the prosthetic reimplantation. Follow-up ranges from 16 months to 9 years with well documented records.
As stated earlier, articular debridement alone has not proven to be a helpful procedure since it did not eradicate the septic complication in any case. Prosthetic reimplantation has been a successful treatment in 7 of the 10 attempted cases. The one-stage procedure is providing the best functional result. Recurrent infection occurred in 3 cases: there were patients with poor host defense (diabetes, arteritis, old age, ...) with resistant bacteria complicating a hinge-knee prosthesis. Femoro-tibial arthrodesis was achieved in 10 of the 15 patients and necessitated all together 23 surgical operations. The highest union rate was observed in cases where sterile conditions were achieved, fixation being performed with an intramedullary nail. Failure of arthrodesis confines the patients in such an uncomfortable situation that 2 of them has asked for an amputation.
Early surgical debridement may occasionally salve a prosthesis when it is performed shortly after the onset of infection, in an unloosened unconstrained prosthesis infected by a low-virulence organism. In our study, no patient but one met those criteria. For those cases nevertheless, our procedure of choice is now the one-stage reimplantation who seems to be more effective for eradicating the infection and gives rise to a better clinical result. The two-stage reimplantation is the current procedure for handling an infected knee prosthesis. Some patients are still excluded from this procedure because of their poor health condition, bone loss, inadequate viability of skin and extensor mechanism or an uncontrolled sepsis. For such a case, arthrodesis remains the most reliable method of management, especially when it can be stabilized with an intramedullary fixation, which implies to perform a two-stage arthrodesis.
本研究旨在评估感染性全膝关节置换术治疗后的功能结果和感染进展情况。
对22例患者进行了回顾性研究;其中8例最初在我院接受治疗,14例从其他医院转诊而来。在我院的8例患者中有3例以及转诊病例中的6例仅进行了关节清创并保留假体原位。在两组中,该手术似乎均告失败。10例患者选择了假体再植入手术,其中5例为一期手术,5例为二期手术。7例手术成功。15例患者进行了股骨 - 胫骨关节融合术,其中3例是假体再植入失败后进行的。随访时间为16个月至9年,记录完整。
如前所述,单纯关节清创未被证明是一种有效的方法,因为在任何情况下都未能根除感染并发症。在10例尝试进行假体再植入的病例中,7例手术成功。一期手术提供了最佳的功能结果。3例出现复发性感染:这些患者存在宿主防御功能差(糖尿病、动脉炎、老年等)且有耐药菌,导致铰链膝关节假体感染。15例患者中有10例实现了股骨 - 胫骨关节融合,总共需要进行23次手术。在达到无菌条件并采用髓内钉固定的情况下,融合率最高。关节融合失败使患者处于非常不舒服的状态,其中2例要求截肢。
早期手术清创在感染发生后不久、假体未松动且由低毒力微生物感染的非限制性假体情况下偶尔可能挽救假体。在我们的研究中,除1例患者外,没有其他患者符合这些标准。然而,对于这些病例,我们现在首选的手术方法是一期再植入,它似乎在根除感染方面更有效,并能带来更好的临床结果。二期再植入是目前处理感染膝关节假体的方法。一些患者由于健康状况差、骨质流失、皮肤和伸肌机制活力不足或败血症未得到控制而仍被排除在该手术之外。对于这种情况,关节融合仍然是最可靠的治疗方法,特别是当可以通过髓内固定实现稳定时,这意味着要进行二期关节融合术。