Abstract
Introduction and Aims: To compare the results of patients treated with articulating versus static antibiotic-impregnated spacers for infected knee arthroplasty.
Method: All patients undergoing two-stage revision knee arthroplasty for sepsis in the last five years were reviewed. Twenty-six patients had been treated with articulating spacers. This group was compared to 36 patients treated with static spacers. The articulating spacer technique had been adopted more recently than the static technique. Minimum follow-up was 12 months from second stage re-implantation (average 22 months articulating, 40 months static). Patients were compared in terms of the need for extensile exposures required for re-implantation, range of motion at most recent review, eradication of infection and augmentation required on revision implants.
Results: In the articulating group, fewer extensile exposure methods were required at second-stage prosthesis re-implantation (19% vs 36%). No tibial tuberosity osteotomies have been required since using the articulating spacer. The articulating group demonstrated a significantly improved range of flexion compared to the static group (106 vs 97 degrees – p=0.045) and had fewer patients with significant loss of extension or quadriceps lag. Eradication of infection was improved in the articulating group (92% vs 82%) but at shorter average follow-up. The need for augments and stabilised prostheses at revision surgery as a measure of bone loss was no different between the groups but was related to the number of prior surgical procedures.
Conclusion: Articulating cement spacers facilitate reimplantation surgery by maintaining tissue planes and joint mobility without compromising joint stability or eradication rate of infection. Patients demonstrate better range of motion and less complications related to the extensor mechanism with the articulated spacer.
These abstracts were prepared by Editorial Secretary, George Sikorski. Correspondence should be addressed to Australian Orthopaedic Association, Ground Floor, The William Bland Centre, 229 Macquarie Street, Sydney, NSW 2000, Australia.
At least one of the authors is receiving or has received material benefits or support from a commercial source.
