S09.6 THE ROLE OF A TREATMENT ALGORITHM TO GUIDE ONE- OR TWO-STAGE EXCHANGE IN PERIPROSTHETIC HIP JOINT INFECTION

Abstract

At our institution, periprosthetic hip joint infections are treated according to a previously defined treatment algorithm. Each patient is evaluated regarding risk factors such as duration of clinical signs and symptoms, stability of the implant, condition of the soft tissue, and antimicrobial susceptibility of the microorganism. Depending on these factors, either debridement with retention, one-stage exchange, or two-stage exchange with spacer (short interval, 2–4 weeks), or without spacer (long interval, 8 weeks) is performed. Very rarely, resection arthroplasty or lifetime suppression is necessary. All surgical procedures are combined with an antimicrobial therapy for 6 or 12 weeks, depending on the surgical pathway. For infection due to staphylococci, whenever possible, rifampicin is used in combination with a fluoroquinolone. From 2002–2006, 89 patients with 95 episodes (3 patients with 2 independent episodes, 3 patients with bilateral infection) of periprosthetic hip joint infection have been treated at our hospital. Five patients died within 2 years after revision, one of them with septic shock related to the periprosthetic hip joint infection. One patient is living abroad. All other patients (n=83) had consecutive follow-up visits at least until 2 years after infection treatment without recurrence. Debridement with retention has been performed in 18 episodes, one-stage exchange in 25 episodes, two-stage exchange with temporary spacer for 2–4 weeks has been performed in 26 episodes, and two-stage exchange without spacer and an interval of 8 weeks in 19 episodes. In 4 cases, immediate resection arthroplasty was performed and 3 patients received long-term suppression therapy. After debridement with retention, 3 recurrences and one event of death occurred (4/18=22.2%), 3 of them did not fulfil the criteria of the algorithm. No failure was observed after one-stage exchange (0/25). Treatment with two-stage exchange was followed by one failure in the group with spacer and short interval (1/26=3.8%), as well as one in the group without spacer and long interval (1/19=5.3%). No recurrence occurred after resection arthroplasty or suppression therapy. All 5 patients with relapse could be cured with a one- or two-stage exchange and remained without recurrence. Comparing one-stage versus two-stage exchange, one-stage exchange is known to have better functional results. It is associated with better patient acceptance, shorter hospital stay, and therefore lower economic burden.

In conclusion, one-stage exchange implies no increasing risk of recurrence provided that the standards of our algorithm are considered.