Abstract
Determine if debridement, rather than staged revision is a more effective strategy in some patient subgroups with infected arthroplasty
We compiled a database comprising 154 proven infected knee replacements and 144 infected hip replacements in Christchurch over the last 10 years. This has given us the largest series in the literature. Cross referencing this database with the joint registry enabled us to compare the treatment of both acute and chronic infection in hip and knee arthroplasty with regard to both functional outcome and re-revision rate.
Patients treated with debridement had no statistically significant difference in re-revision rate or functional score when compared with patients undergoing staged revision.
Orthopaedic surgeons justifiably aim to eradicate infection in arthroplasty patients. A prosthesis retaining management strategy may be justifiable, especially in certain patient groups in whom multiple operations are best avoided.
