S08.7 INFECTION AFTER TOTAL ANKLE REPLACEMENT: A 5-YEAR RETROSPECTIVE ANALYSIS OF 92 IMPLANTED ANKLE PROSTHESES (2004–2008)

Abstract

Objectives: Total ankle replacement (TAR) is increasingly used for treatment of primary or posttraumatic arthritis of the ankle joint, if joint movement is intended to be preserved. Data on characteristics and treatment of ankle prosthetic joint infection (PJI) is limited and no validated therapeutic algorithm exist. Therefore, we analyzed all infections, which occurred in a cohort of implanted ankle prostheses during a 5-year-period.

Methods: Between 06/2004 and 12/2008, all patients with an implanted ankle prosthesis at our institution were retrospectively reviewed. All patients were operated by the same surgical team. Ankle PJI was defined as visible purulence, acute inflammation on histopathology, sinus tract, or microbial growth in periprosthetic tissue or sonication fluid of the removed prosthesis. The surgery on the infected ankle prosthesis and the follow-up were performed by the surgical team, who implanted the prosthesis. A specialized septic team consisting of an orthopaedic surgeon and infectious diseases consultant were included in the treatment.

Results: During the study period, 92 total ankle prostheses were implanted in 90 patients (mean age 61 years, range 28–80 years). 78 patients had posttraumatic arthritis, 11 rheumatoid arthritis and 3 other degenerative disorder. Ankle PJI occurred in 3 of 92 TAR (3.3%), occurring 1, 2 and 24 months after implantation; the causative organisms were Enterobacter cloacae, Streptococcus pyogenes and Staphylococcus epidermidis, respectively. The ankle prosthesis was removed in all infected patients, including debridement of the surrounding tissue was debrided and insertion of an antibiotic loaded spacer. Provisional arthrodesis was performed by external fixation in two patients and by plaster cast in one. A definitive ankle arthrodesis with a retrograde nail was performed 6 to 8 weeks after prosthesis removal. One patient needed a flap coverage. All 3 patients received intravenous antibiotic treatment for 2 weeks, followed by oral antibiotics for 4–6 weeks. At follow-up visit up to 18 months after start of treatment, all patients were without clinical or laboratory signs of infection.

Conclusions: The infection incidence after TAR was 3.3%, which is slightly higher than reported after hip (< 1%) or knee arthroplasty (< 2%). A two-step approach consisting of removal of the infected prosthesis, combined with local and systemic antibiotic treatment, followed by definitive ankle arthrodesis shows good results. Larger patient cohort and longer follow-up evaluation is needed to define the optimal treatment approach for ankle PJI.