While frequently discussed as a standard treatment for the management of an infected shoulder replacement, there is little information on the outcome of two-stage re-implantation. We examined the outcome of 17 consecutive patients (19 shoulders) who were treated between 1995 and 2004 with a two-stage re-implantation for the treatment of a deep-infection after shoulder replacement. All 19 shoulders were followed for a minimum of two years or until the time of further revision surgery. The mean clinical follow-up was for 35 months (24 to 80). The mean radiological follow-up was 27 months (7 to 80). There were two excellent results, four satisfactory and 13 unsatisfactory. In 12 of the 19 shoulders (63%) infection was considered to be eradicated. The mean pain score improved from 4.2 (3 to 5 (out of 5)) to 1.8 (1 to 4). The mean elevation improved from 42° (0° to 140°) to 89° (0° to 165°), mean external rotation from 30° (0° to 90°) to 43° (0° to 90°), and mean internal rotation from the sacrum to L5. There were 14 complications. Our study suggests that two-stage re-implantation for an infected shoulder replacement is associated with a high rate of unsatisfactory results, marginal success at eradicating infection and a high complication rate

Aims

We describe the use of a protocol of irrigation and debridement (I& D) with retention of the implant for the treatment of periprosthetic infection of a total elbow arthroplasty (TEA). This may be an attractive alternative to staged re-implantation.

The aim of this study was to compare the results of resection arthroplasty with two-stage re-implantation procedure performed for peri-prosthetic infection of the hip. Patients who have had a resection arthroplasty can expect to have less pain, but their functional recovery is inferior to that which can be obtained after a two-stage re-implantation. Resection arthroplasty is usually unacceptable as a definitive solution for relatively young and active patients. Possible options for the operative treatment of a periprosthetic infection include debridement with retention of the prosthesis, immediate one-stage exchange arthroplasty, and excision arthroplasty – either as a definitive procedure or as the first of a two-stage reconstructive procedure. The choice of a particular treatment is influenced by a number of factors. At the Department of Orthopaedic Surgery in Hradec Králové we performed resection arthoplasty of the hip in 67 patients between 1984 and 1998. Mean age was 67 years (range 44–91). We were able to follow-up 33 of these patients in 1999. At follow-up, replacement of the total hip prosthesis in two stages had been carried out in 10 of the 33 patients. In 23 patients (11 male, 12 female) the resection arthroplasty had been present for an average of five years. In the remaining ten patients (3 male, 7 female) a total hip reimplantation had been performed after an average of 17 months (range 3 to 63). Mean follow-up after reimplantation was four years. The Harris hip score was calculated for the individual patients during follow-up. The Harris hip score was 66 in the re-implantation group compared to 57.5 in the patients with resection arthroplasty. Personal satisfaction and hip function were better after the two-stage re-implantation procedure

The aim of this study is to compare the results of resection arthroplasty with two-stage re-implantation procedure performed for peri-prosthetic infection of the hip. Patients who have had a resection arthroplasty can expect to have less pain, but their functional recovery is inferior to that which can be obtained after a two-stage re-implantation. Resection arthroplasty is usually unacceptable as a definitive solution for relatively young and active patients. Possible options for the operative treatment of a periprosthetic infection include debridement with retention of the prosthesis, immediate one-stage exchange arthroplasty, and excision arthroplasty – either as a definitive procedure or as the first of a two-stage reconstructive procedure. The choice of a particular treatment is influenced by a number of factors. At the Department of Orthopaedic Surgery in Hradec Králové we performed resection arthoplasty of the hip in 67 patients between 1984 and 1998. Mean age was 67 years (range 44–91). We were able to follow-up 33 of these patients in 1999. At follow-up, replacement of the total hip prosthesis in two stages had been carried out in 10 of the 33 patients. In 23 patients (11male, 12 female) the resection arthroplasty had been present for an average of five years. In the remaining ten patients (3 male, 7 female) a total hip reimplantation had been performed after an average of 17 months (range 3 to 63). Mean follow-up after reimplantation was four years. The Harris hip score was calculated for the individual patients during follow-up. The Harris hip score was 66 in the re-implantation group compared to 57.5 in the patients with resection arthroplasty. Personal satisfaction and hip function were better after the two-stage re-implantation procedure

The management of a bacterial periprosthetic infection by two-stage re-implantation should be presented using an implanted application spacer for antibiotics to maintain mobility and soft tissue balance and ensure simultaneous local delivery of antibiotics. Indication is an acute periprosthetic infection, acute and chronic course of the infection with unknown spectrum of organism, hardly to treat and with a probable loss of mobility due to protracted immobilization after implant removal. Acute infections with a known spectrum of organisms that can be controlled by synovectomy and antibiotic treatment or by one-stage re-implantation are contraindications for this treatment. Spacers are available for hip and knee replacements including surface replacements of the knee. First a complete synovectomy is performed; the implant bed is then prepared for implantation of the application spacer for antibiotics. Silicone catheters are advanced through two separate drill holes into the intramedullary canal and then inserted into the perforated implant stems. Daily parenteral doses of antibiotics in parenteral doses are delivered through the percutaneous silicone catheters directly into the intramedullary canal. The application spacer for antibiotics allows daily physiotherapy and even mobilization on a CPM device. Partial weight bearing may even be allowed, if there is sufficient stability. Once the CRP values have decreased to normal levels, the definitive implant is placed using antibiotic-impregnated cement according to current resistance studies. 36 patients have been treated with this method since 1993. Two-stage re-implantation of a total knee was performed in 20 cases, and re-implantation of a total hip in 16 cases. The longest postoperative follow-up period is now 10 years. Till now, no revision surgery has been required on a joint treated in this manner, and no periprosthetic re-infections have been observed. In the knee, a range of motion of 0/0 /106 degrees was achieved after an average follow-up period of 6.1 years. In the hip, values of 10/0/110 degrees were achieved after an average of 6.3 years. Revision surgery for infection included cases of fungal and tubercular infection. A postoperative Hospital for Special Surgery rating of 79.5 was achieved in the knee and a rating of 81.3 in the Harris hip score

There remains to be substantial debate on the best treatment of the infected shoulder arthroplasty. Infection after shoulder arthroplasty is an uncommon but devastating complication with a reported incidence from 0 to 4%. The most common organism responsible for infection following rotator cuff surgery, instability surgery, ORIF proximal humerus fractures, and shoulder arthroplasty is Prop. Acnes. A thorough history is important because many patients have a history of difficulty with wound healing or drainage. Prop. Acnes typically does not start to grow until day 5, therefore it is critical to keep cultures a minimum of 10 to 14 days. Diagnosis can be difficult, particularly among patients undergoing revision surgery. The majority of patients with a low grade infection do not have overt signs of infection such as erythema or sinus tracts. Preoperative lab values as well as intraoperative pathology have been shown to be unreliable in predicting who will have positive cultures at the time of revision surgery. There are a number of options for treating a patient with a post-operative infection. Critical variables include the timing of infection, status of the host, the specific organism, status of implant fixation, and the status of the rotator cuff and deltoid. One of the most frequently employed options for treating the infected shoulder arthroplasty is two-stage re-implantation. However, the rate of complications with this technique as well as residual infection remains high

Introduction. Metaphyseal cones with cemented stems are frequently used in revision total knee arthroplasties (TKAs). However, if the diaphysis has been previously violated (as in revision of a failed stemmed implant), the resultant sclerotic canal can impair cemented stem fixation, which is vital for cone ingrowth and long-term fixation. We report the outcomes of our novel solution to this problem, in which impaction grafting and a cemented stem in the diaphysis was combined with an uncemented metaphyseal cone for revision TKAs with severely compromised bone. Methods. A metaphyseal cone was combined with diaphyseal impaction grafting and cemented stems in a novel fashion for 35 revision TKAs. Mean age at revision TKA was 70 years, with 63% being male. Patients had a mean of 4 prior knee arthroplasty procedures. Indications for the revision with this construct were aseptic loosening (80%) and two-stage re-implantation for periprosthetic infection (PJI; 20%). Mean follow-up was 3 years. Results. Survivorship free from revision of the cone/impaction grafting construct due to aseptic loosening was 100% at 5 years. Survivorships free from any revision of the cone/impaction grafting construct and free from any reoperation were 92% and 73% at 5 years, respectively. Six knees (17%) required a reoperation (4 for infection/wound issues and 2 for periprosthetic fractures). Radiographically, 97% of cones were ingrown (1 loose cone in setting of PJI). In all but one case, impacted diaphyseal bone graft appeared to have incorporated radiographically. Conclusions. When presented with a sclerotic diaphysis and substantial metaphyseal bone loss, this innovative technique combining diaphyseal impaction grafting with a metaphyseal cone provided near universal success in regards to implant fixation. Moreover, radiographs revealed incorporation of the bone graft, and ingrowth of the cones. While long-term follow-up is required, this novel technique provides an excellent option in the most difficult of revision TKAs. For figures, tables, or references, please contact authors directly

Introduction. Many surgeons are reluctant to use a constrained liner at the time of acetabular component revision given concerns this might result in early acetabular component loosening. We hypothesized that with appropriate initial implant stabilization of highly porous acetabular components with supplemental screw fixation, constrained liners could be safely used at the time of acetabular revision. Methods. We retrospectively identified 148 revision total hip arthroplasties (THAs) where a constrained liner of one design was cemented into a newly placed highly porous acetabular component fixed with supplemental screws (mean 5 screws). Mean age at revision THA was 69 years, with 68% being female. The most common indications for revision were two-stage re-implantation (33%), recurrent dislocation (30%), and aseptic loosening (22% acetabular; 9% acetabular/femoral component). Mean follow-up was 8 years. Results. There were no failures at the bone-implant interface, and there were no revisions for aseptic loosening of the acetabular component. Furthermore, all acetabular components were bone ingrown on radiographic analysis. The 10-year survivorships free from any acetabular revision and free from any reoperation were 75% and 67%, respectively. Overall, 33 hips (22%) required revision or reoperation for infection/wound complications (n=12), dislocation (n=11), periprosthetic femur fracture (n=4), femoral loosening (n=3), and other (n=3). The 10-year survivorship free from dislocation was 84% overall, which was similar to the 85% 10-year survivorship free from dislocation for those specifically revised for instability (p=0.9). Conclusions. Implanting a constrained liner at the time of acetabular revision in high-risk patients resulted in no cases of aseptic acetabular component loosening in this large series. This is likely related to the fact that a highly porous acetabular component was utilized with a large number of supplemental screws in each case. Such information is valuable as these data favor a paradigm shift when compared to some traditionally-held tenets. For any tables or figures, please contact the authors directly

Infection after shoulder arthroplasty is an uncommon but devastating complication with a reported incidence from 0% to 4%. Prop. Acnes is the most common organism responsible for infection following rotator cuff surgery, instability surgery, ORIF proximal humerus fractures, and shoulder arthroplasty. A detailed history is critical because many patients have a history of difficulty with wound healing or drainage. Prop. Acnes typically does not start to grow until Day 5, therefore it is critical to keep cultures a minimum of 10 to 14 days. Diagnosis can be difficult, particularly among patients undergoing revision surgery. The majority of patients with a low grade infection do not have overt signs of infection such as erythema or sinus tracts. Pre-operative lab values as well as intra-operative pathology have been shown to be unreliable in predicting who will have positive cultures at the time of revision surgery. There are a number of options for treating a patient with a post-operative infection. Important variables include the timing of infection, status of the host, the specific organism, status of implant fixation, and the status of the rotator cuff and deltoid. One of the most frequently employed options for treating the infected shoulder arthroplasty is two-stage re-implantation. However, the rate of complications with this technique as well as residual infection remains high

For most complex primary total knee replacement there is associated soft tissue and bone loss. A constrained condylar implant can be useful in improving the stability of the knee after revision. Augmentation is commonly used to deal with bone loss on the femoral and tibial side of the joint. Stems are known to reduce the load at the interface of the femoral and tibial component and transfer the load into the medullary canals. There are problems with using stems in the complex primary knee setting however, which include: (1) increased cost, (2) difficulty with removal should further revision be necessary, (3) violation of the intramedullary canals if infection occurs, (4) increased operating time. For these reasons a CCK implant was developed without stems in 1998. The use of this device must be very selective and it is primarily used for severe valgus deformity in elderly patients. In a revision setting where there is good preservation of femoral and/or tibial bone but the need for increased constraint is present (e.g. unicompartmental, cruciate retaining knee) a CCK without stems can be used with good results. We retrospectively reviewed 36 primary constrained condylar knee implants without stem extensions from 1998 to 2000 in 31 patients with knees in 15 degrees valgus or greater. All patients were followed up for a minimum 10 years (range, 10 to 12 years). One patient had aseptic loosening and needed to be revised with stemmed components at 9 years post surgery. Wear was found in two patients. One patient, with severe rheumatoid arthritis, had infection and required a two-stage re-implantation procedure. Patients who are very active or heavy body weight where stresses may be excessive at the implant bone interface should have stems utilised

For most revision total knee replacement there is associated soft tissue and bone loss. A constrained condylar implant can be useful in improving the stability of the knee after revision. Augmentation is commonly used to deal with bone loss on the femoral and tibial side of the joint. Stems are known to reduce the load at the interface of the femoral and tibial component and transfer the load into the medullary canals. There are problems with using stems in the revision setting however, which include: (1) increased cost, (2) difficulty with removal should further revision be necessary, (3) violation of the intramedullary canals if infection occurs, (4) increased operating time. For these reasons a CCK implant was developed without stems in 1998. The use of this device must be very selective and it is primarily used for severe valgus deformity in elderly patients. In a revision setting where there is good preservation of femoral and/or tibial bone but the need for increased constraint is present (e.g. unicompartmental, cruciate retaining knee) a CCK without stems can be used with good results. We retrospectively reviewed 36 primary constrained condylar knee implants without stem extensions from 1998 to 2000 in 31 patients with knees in 15 degrees valgus or greater. All patients were followed up for a minimum 10 years (range, 10 to 12 years). One patient had aseptic loosening and needed to be revised with stemmed components at 9 years post-surgery. Wear was found in two patients. One patient, with severe rheumatoid arthritis, had infection and required a two-stage re-implantation procedure. Patients who are very active or heavy body weight where stresses may be excessive at the implant bone interface should have stems utilised

Purpose. Two-stage re-implantation after infection of Total Knee Arthroplasty (TKA), remains the gold standard to which other forms of treatment should be compared. The primary purpose of this study was to determine the rates of failure and functional outcome of two stage revision TKA for treatment of infection comparing cemented posterior stabilized compared to constrained condylar implants. Method. The study group included 25 consecutive patients who had two stage revision TKA to treat infection with an average follow up of 3.25 1.5 years (range 2–6). In all patients the diagnosis of infection was made using standard serum parameters as well as aspiration for joint fluid analysis. Eight patients had posterior stabilized TKAs and 17 patients with had constrained condylar TKAs. Clinical evaluation included the Knee Society Knee Scores (KSKS) at each follow-up visit as well as a detailed record of any difficulties or complications. Results. No patient (8/8) in the LPS posterior stabilized group and 16 of 17 (94.1%) patients in the LCCK constrained condylar group, had any complaint indicative of instability. Two patients (8%) had re-infection (1 in each group). There was no significant difference between the knee scores (p=0.64) and function scores (p=0.38) of the LPS posterior stabilized and LCCK constrained condylar groups at latest follow up. Conclusion. Our findings suggest that the strategy of using the least constrained implants that provide adequate stability as judged intra-operatively is appropriate also in 2 stage revision TKAs for infection

For most revision total knee replacement there is associated soft tissue and bone loss. A constrained condylar implant can be useful in improving the stability of the knee after revision. Augmentation is commonly used to deal with bone loss on the femoral and tibial side of the joint. Stems are known to reduce the load at the interface of the femoral and tibial component and transfer the load into the medullary canals. There are problems with using stems in the revision setting, however, which include: (1) increased cost, (2) difficulty with removal should further revision be necessary, (3) violation of the intramedullary canals if infection occurs, (4) increased operating time. For these reasons a CCK implant was developed without stems in 1998. The use of this device must be very selective and it is primarily used for severe valgus deformity in elderly patients. In a revision setting where there is good preservation of femoral and/or tibial bone but the need for increased constraint is present (e.g. unicompartmental, cruciate retaining knee) a CCK without stems can be used with good results. We retrospectively reviewed 36 primary constrained condylar knee implants without stem extensions from 1998 to 2000 in 31 patients with knees in 15° valgus or greater. All patients were followed up for a minimum 10 years (range, 10 to 12 years). One patient had aseptic loosening and needed to be revised with stemmed components at nine years post-surgery. Wear was found in two patients. One patient, with severe rheumatoid arthritis, had infection and required a two-stage re-implantation procedure. Patients who are very active or heavy body weight where stresses may be excessive at the implant bone interface should have stems utilised

Introduction: Infection post knee arthroplasty is a catastrophic surgical complication offering a major challenge to the orthopaedic surgeon. We present the outcome of a two-stage revision implantation technique utilizing a rotational hinge prosthesis with an antibiotic impregnated cement spacer in the interim period. Materials & Method: Since 1995, 38 definitely infected knee replacements were revised. All were followed prospectively over a 10 year period. Initial treatment consisted of thorough debridement, removal of implants and a period of antibiotic administration. Vancomycin impregnated articulating cement spacer was inserted in the interim. C-reactive protein values were monitored periodically. At second stage all patients were clinically and biochemically free of infection. Results: Second stage revision was performed at an average interval of 9 months (range 4 – 11 months). Average length of hospital stay post 2. nd. stage was 19.8 ± 8.2 days. At follow-up (3.5 ± 2.5 years) outcome was poor in 33 % (amputations, arthrodesis, re-infections), good in 49 % (decreased ROM, PFJ pain) and excellent in 13 %. 3, 5% of patients had died with their prostheses in situ. The average pre and post operative Oxford Knee Score were 47.0 ± 7.5 and 21.6 ± 4.3 respectively. Conclusion: Two-stage re-implantation using a hinge knee prosthesis is a safe and acceptable way of dealing with infected TKRs, conferring a stable reconstruction whilst allowing a through debridement. Thus potentially decreasing failure rates due to recurrence of primary infection. In this challenging group, complication rates were high, but at mid- and long-term review, no prostheses had failed from an aseptic cause. Moreover, this salvage procedure allows a quick rehabilitation and is tolerated well by patients

Metal-on-metal bearing was re-introduced with the aim of eliminating polyethylene wear and resulting complications of osteolysis and aseptic loosening in total hip arthroplasty (THA). However, authors of recent studies have reported periprosthetic osteolysis and aseptic failure following second-generation metal-on-metal THA. The purpose of this study is to report the results at a minimum of five years following cementless total hip arthroplasty with a contemporary metal-on-metal articulation. Our study included findings of histologic examination on periprosthetic tissues from revised hips and wear and roughness analysis of retrieved implants. A consecutive series of 158 cementless THAs that were performed in 154 patients using a contemporary metal-on-metal bearing were assessed at a mean of 6.5 years (5 to 8). Their mean age at surgery was 53 years (21 to 80). The patients were assessed clinically with use of the Harris hip score, and the hips were assessed radiographically. Histological analysis was performed on specimens retrieved from the revised hips, and wear and roughness measurements were made for the explanted prostheses. The average Harris hip score improved from 45 points preoperatively to 92 points at the final follow-up examination. There was no aseptic loosening of the femoral or acetabular components. One hip was revised because of recurrent dislocation and one was managed with two-stage re-implantation for deep infection. Thirteen hips (8%) had osteolysis; 11 had osteolysis localized within the greater trochanter and two had both femoral and ace-tabular osteolysis. Of these, five patients who had a persistent pain and osteolysis underwent revision operation for the consideration of bearing exchange to a ceramic-on-ceramic or ceramic-on-polyethylene combination. All these revised hips showed extensive synovial-like tissue hypertrophy and perivascular infiltration of lymphocytes on histological examinations. Annual volumetric wear rate measured on one retrieved femoral head was 1.04mm3/yr, and roughness measured on three retrieved femoral heads was consistently very low between 8nm and 117nm. After the revision surgery, all the patients noticed disappearance of pain as well as radiographic evidence of healing of the osteolytic lesion. Our mid-term follow-up of cementless THA using a contemporary metal-on-metal bearing revealed an unexpectedly high rate of periprosthetic osteolysis possibly in association with metal hypersensitivity. In patients with persistent hip pain and osteolysis after contemporary metal-on-metal THA, surgeons should consider an exchange of the articulation surface to a ceramic-on-ceramic or ceramic-on-polyethylene combination because they can be cured only after an elimination of the source of hypersensitivity reaction

We report the long-term results of the management of neglected chronically infected total knee replacements with a two-stage re-implantation protocol. In 18 of 34 patients (53%) a resistant organism was isolated. All cases were treated by the same surgical team in a specialist centre and had a mean follow-up of 12.1 years (10 to 14). They were evaluated clinically and radiologically using the Knee Society Score (KSS) and the American Knee Society Roentgenographic scoring system, respectively. One patient died after eight years from an unrelated cause and two were lost to follow-up. Three patients (8.8%) developed a recurrent infection for which further surgery was required. The infection was eradicated successfully in 31 patients (91.1%). There was one case of aseptic loosening after 13 years. We found a significant improvement in the KSS at final follow-up (p < 0.001).

Objectives

Vancomycin and fosfomycin are antibiotics commonly used to treat methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) infection. This study compares the in vitro inhibitory effects against MRSA of articulating cement spacers impregnated with either vancomycin or fosfomycin.

Seven stiff total knee arthroplasties are presented to illustrate the roles of: 1) manipulation under general anesthesia; 2) multiple concurrent diagnoses in addition to stiffness; 3) extra-articular pathology; 4) pain as part of the stiffness triad (pain and limits to flexion or extension); 5) component internal rotation; 6) multifactorial etiology; and 7) surgical exposure in this challenging clinical problem.

Metaphyseal bone loss is common with revision total knee replacement (RTKR). Using the Anderson Orthopaedic Research Institute (AORI) classification, type 2-B and type 3 defects usually require large metal blocks, bulk structural allograft or highly porous metal cones. Tibial and femoral trabecular metal metaphyseal cones are a unique solution for large bone defects. These cones substitute for bone loss, improve metaphyseal fixation, help correct malalignment, restore the joint line and may permit use of a shorter stem. The technique for insertion involves sculpturing of the remaining bone with a high speed burr and rasp, followed by press-fit of the cone into the metaphysis. The fixation and osteoconductive properties of the porous cone outer surface allow ingrowth and encourage long-term biological fixation. The revision knee component is then cemented into the porous cone inner surface, which provides superior fixation compared with cementing into native but deficient metaphyseal bone. The advantages of the cone compared with allograft include: technical ease, biological fixation, no resorption, and possibly a lower risk of infection. The disadvantages include: difficult extraction and relatively short-term follow-up. Several studies using cones report promising short-term results for the reconstruction of large bone defects in RTKR.

Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2014;96-B(11 Suppl A):118–21.