When a prosthetic joint infection (PJI) is suspected, guidelines recommend performing periprosthetic samples, at least one for histopathological examination and 3 to 6 for microbiological culture. The diagnosis of infection is based on the presence of neutrophil granulocytes whose number and morphology can be variable, resulting in definition of “acute” inflammation. The acute inflammation of periprosthetic tissue is supportive of infection. Since 2007, in our hospital, for all patients with suspected PJI who underwent surgery, from each sample taken by the surgeon, one part has been sent to the pathologist and the other one to the microbiologist. Our aim was to compare histopathological to microbiological results from samples taken intraoperatively at the same site. We conducted a retrospective study including all surgeries for which at least one couple “histopathology-culture” was found. Exclusion criterion was a history of antimicrobial treatment 2 weeks prior the surgery.Aim
Method
To evaluate the value of the use of massive prostheses in periprosthetic infections both in one stage and two stages procedures Between 2008 and 2014, 236 revisions for PJI had been performed in our hospital by the same surgeon. For the most complex cases, we decided to introduce megaprostheses in our practice in 2011. We report a prospective series of 33 infected patients treated between 2011 and the end of 2014, 14 male and 19 female with on average 67.9 years old (38–85) Infection involved TKA in 22 cases (17 TKA revisions, 4 primary TKA), THA in 9 cases (6 revisions, 3 primary THA), a femoral pseudo-arthrosis with posttraumatic gonarthrosis in one case and a septic humeral pseudoarthrosis in one case. We used a total femoral component for two patients: the first one for a hip PJI with extended diaphyseal bone loss and multiples sinus tracks, and the second one for a massive infected knee prosthesis used in a knee reconstruction for liposarcoma. We used one stage procedures in 20 cases (8 hips, 12 knees, 1 shoulder) and two stages in 13 cases (12 knees and 1 hip). Additional technics included 3 massive extensor system allografts, two local flaps. Perioperative hyperbaric treatment was used for 2 patients. The average follow up is 19.8 months (6–48 months). The most frequent complications were wound swelling and delayed healing in 8 cases;). In 3 cases of one stage surgery a complementary debridement was necessary in the three weeks after the surgery with always a good local and infectious evolution. VAC therapy was used in four cases with good results. We report one early postoperative dead. In summary, the use of massive prostheses in PJI is a good option for complex cases. It can be a good alternative to knee arthrodesis. These components must be used preferentially for older patients, in cases of extreme bone loss or extensive osteomyelitis to secure the bone debridement and the quality of the reconstruction. In our series, the one stage procedure is a validated option even by using complementary technics as bone allografts, extensor system allografts or flaps. We believe the two stages surgery is a secondary option, particularly when soft tissues status is compromised before or after the debridement, and mostly for the knees. The longevity of the implantation must be evaluate by a long term follow up.
To evaluate a innovate one stage procedure of the PJI knee treatment using computed assisted guidance. Our objectives; to increase the functional results by optimizing the anatomical joint reconstruction and to verifie if CAS help to simplifie and standardize these complex surgeries It's a prospective, single surgeon study. Since septembre 2011, 41 patients treated for chronic knee PJI in a one stage revision (one of them had a ipsilateral chronic knee arthritis). For all of them, a computed assisted guidance, the ExactechGPS® system was used. This system offers the possibility to define specific profiles to performe primary TKA surgeries. A personnalized profile of revision was created. All surgeries were performed with the same protocole; independently of the type of germ, with no use of tourniquet, no drainage by performing the same debridement procedure step by step and by using the same knee components 27 males, 14 female with 26 PJI of primary TKA, one infected unicompartimental prosthesis and 15 PJI of first revised TKA has been treated. The average age was 71 years old (55–87). The time of surgery was on average 135 mn (120 – 195 mn). The average time of hospitalization was 10 days (7–16). The average follow up was 20,9 months (6–47 months). The ROM were on average 114,7% (90°–130°), None post operative HKA outliers were reported. 3 patients presented a failure of the PJI treatment (one after a local open traumatism, one diabetic patient, one after a early revision for mechanical complication). None specific CAS complications and no failure of the CAS procedures are reported. As surgeon, CAS simplified the management of the bone loss after debridement and the control of the differents parameters (HKA, external femoral rotation, ligamentary balancing, lign joint…) by a real time feedback. we changed our practise by using more constraint condylar component instead hinge prostheses With a rate of success of 92,7% at this follow up, the one stage option appears to be valided. Using CAS is a safe option with no specific complication. It increases the quality of the ROM, a earlier functional recovery and a better middle term clinical result. Both combined, It should be a optimal medicoeconomical solution. compared revision using mechanical ancillary.
