FAILURE AFTER REVISION THR BECAUSE OF DEEP INFECTION

Abstract

Of 960 first-revision total hip replacements (THR) because of deep infection identified in the Swedish Hip Arthroplasty Registry, 16.9% were treated with a permanent implant extraction, while a staged or direct reconstruction revision protocol were employed in 56.2% and 26.9% respectively. The majority of the interventions were performed more than one year after index THR, and the dominating pathogen was coagulase negative staphylococci (CNS). We found a significant shift in types of bacteria over the years (Chi-square test, p smaller than 0.001): an increase in the CNS group and a decrease in Gram-negative aerobes. Patients treated with a permanent resection were generally older (p< 0.001), had more often a previous ipsilateral hip fracture (p< 0.001), and had more frequently Gram-negative infections (p=0.02). No systematic differences in patient characteristics or pathogens were detected between one-stage or two-stage procedures, of which the latter had a median re-implantation time of 2 (range: 0.2–62) months. Of 798 (one- or two-stage) revisions, 60 (7.5%) were revised again due to recurrent infection, with no difference between the two methods, and implying a 10-year survival of 90%; 95% confidence interval (CI95%) 88.2–93.0. Previous surgery for soft-tissue problems (RR 3.2 (CI95% 1.3–7.2)) predicted a worse outcome for one-stage procedures. The prognosis of two-staged revisions improved with increasing re-implantation interval (RR 0.8 (CI95% 0.7–1.0)) per month, and a 6 month interval carried the lowest risk of repeat revision due to infection; RR 0.1 (CI95% 0.0–0.9). Staged revisions in female patients (RR 2.3, (CI95% 0.9–5.7)) and with Staphylococcus aureus infections (RR 2.3 (CI95% 0.9–5.5)) predicted a worse outcome. Ten-year survival with repeat revision for aseptic loosening as end-point was 89% (95%CI 85.7–92.0), but decreased to 79% when all reasons for revision were taken into account (95%CI 75.0–82.3) mainly because of revision for peri-prosthetic fractures.

The results suggest that direct and staged revision protocols can have a good prognosis on a national level, but efforts must be made to counteract periprosthetic fractures and the high incidence of permanent implant extraction in elderly patients.