Periprosthetic joint infection is a serious complication of primary total hip replacement (THR) with significant associated morbidity. In acute infection, Debridement, Antibiotics and Implant Retention (DAIR) may be considered. Current national guidelines recommend a DAIR should be performed by “an experienced arthroplasty surgeon┕ but do not specify the need for this to be a revision arthroplasty surgeon. We investigated outcomes in our NHS Trust of DAIR procedures performed by revision and non-revision arthroplasty surgeons. Infection registry data and patient records were analysed for all DAIR procedures of infected primary THRs between 2017 and 2021. Data collected included details of the primary surgery, the presentation with infection, the DAIR procedure and any subsequent complications including return to theatre at any time point. Routinely collected pre- and post-operative patient reported outcome measures (PROMs) were reviewed. 54 periprosthetic joint infections of primary THRs received a DAIR procedure. 41 DAIRs were performed by a revision surgeon and 13 by non-revision surgeons. There was no significant difference in time from primary THR to presentation with infection, time from presentation to DAIR or pre-operative C-reactive protein between the two groups. In 21 (38.9%) patients the DAIR procedure was classed as a treatment failure; 17 patients (31.5%) returned to theatre for further revision surgery, one (2.4%) died related to infection and three (5.6%) had persistent infection but did not receive further surgery. Treatment failure was significantly higher in the non-revision surgeon group (9/13 (69.2%)) than in the revision surgeon group (12/41 (29.3%)) (p = 0.02). Overall, improvement in PROMs after DAIR was seen at both six and 12 months. The overall success rate of DAIR was 61.1% and there was a sustained improvement in PROMs after surgery. However, there was a significant difference in failure rates between revision surgeons and non-revision surgeons.
The purpose of this study was to examine the
complications and outcomes of total hip replacement (THR) in super-obese
patients (body mass index (BMI) >
50 kg/m2) compared
with class I obese (BMI 30 to 34.9 kg/m2) and normal-weight
patients (BMI 18.5 to 24.9 kg/m2), as defined by the
World Health Organization. A total of 39 THRs were performed in 30 super-obese patients
with a mean age of 53 years (31 to 72), who were followed for a
mean of 4.2 years (2.0 to 11.7). This group was matched with two
cohorts of normal-weight and class I obese patients, each comprising
39 THRs in 39 patients. Statistical analysis was performed to determine differences
among these groups with respect to complications and satisfaction
based on the Western Ontario and McMaster Universities (WOMAC) osteoarthritis
index, the Harris hip score (HHS) and the Short-Form (SF)-12 questionnaire. Super-obese patients experienced significantly longer hospital
stays and higher rates of major complications and readmissions than
normal-weight and class I obese patients. Although super-obese patients
demonstrated reduced pre-operative and post-operative satisfaction
scores, there was no significant difference in improvement, or change in
the score, with respect to HHS or the WOMAC osteoarthritis index. Super-obese patients obtain similar satisfaction outcomes as
class I obese and normal-weight patients with respect to improvement
in their scores. However, they experience a significant increase
in length of hospital stay and major complication and readmission
rates. Cite this article:
