Advertisement for orthosearch.org.uk
Orthopaedic Proceedings Logo

Receive monthly Table of Contents alerts from Orthopaedic Proceedings

Comprehensive article alerts can be set up and managed through your account settings

View my account settings

Visit Orthopaedic Proceedings at:

Loading...

Loading...

Full Access

RESULTS OF DEEP INFECTION AFTER REVERSE SHOULDER ARTHROPLASTY



Abstract

The objective of this study is to report the epidemiology and results of treatment of deep infection after a reverse shoulder arthroplasty.

This is a multicenter retrospective study involving 457 reverse prostheses performed between 1992 and 2002. Fifteen patients (3%) (mean age 71 ± 9 years) presented with a deep infection. Eight were primary arthroplasties and seven were revision procedures. There were five associated peri-operative fractures and three early postoperative complications requiring surgical treatment. Infection was treated by debridement (n=4), prosthetic resection (n=10) or two-stage revision (n=1).

The infection rate was 2% (8/363) for a primary reverse arthroplasty and 7% (7/94) for revisions. The infection was diagnosed at a mean of seventeen months (range, one to fifty-seven) post-operatively, corresponding to two acute, five sub-acute and eight chronic infections. The most common pathogen was P. acnes in six cases (40%). At a mean follow-up of thirty-four ± nineteen months, there were twelve remissions (80%) and three recurrent infections. The two acute infections (one debridement and one resection) and the eight chronic infections (seven resections and one two-stage revision) were in remission. Among the five sub-acute infections, the two resections were in remission, whereas the three debridements recurred. Overall, the ten resections were in remission with seven patients disappointed and three satisfied, a mean Constant score of thirty-one ± eight points and a mean active anterior elevation of 53 ± 15°. The two-stage exchange was in remission but remained disappointed with a Constant score of twenty-seven points and an active anterior elevation of 90°.

Infection compromises the functional results of the reverse prosthesis whatever the treatment performed. Acute infections appear to be satisfactorily treated by debridement or resection. Both resection and two-stage revision can successfully treat sub-acute and chronic infection; however, debridement alone is ineffective and not recommended. There is a high rate of infection when the reverse prosthesis is used in revision arthroplasty. Prevention, by looking for such infection before surgery and by performing a two-stage procedure is recommended in the case of any uncertainty.

Correspondence should be addressed to: Cynthia Vezina, Communications Manager, COA, 4150-360 Ste. Catherine St. West, Westmount, QC H3Z 2Y5, Canada