Based on the first implementation of mixing antibiotics
into bone cement in the 1970s, the Endo-Klinik has used one stage
exchange for prosthetic joint infection (PJI) in over 85% of cases.
Looking carefully at current literature and guidelines for PJI treatment,
there is no clear evidence that a two stage procedure has a higher
success rate than a one-stage approach. A cemented one-stage exchange
potentially offers certain advantages, mainly based on the need
for only one operative procedure, reduced antibiotics and hospitalisation time.
In order to fulfill a one-stage approach, there are obligatory pre-,
peri- and post-operative details that need to be meticulously respected,
and are described in detail. Essential pre-operative diagnostic
testing is based on the joint aspiration with an exact identification
of any bacteria. The presence of a positive bacterial culture and
respective antibiogram are essential, to specify the antibiotics
to be loaded to the bone cement, which allows a high local antibiotic
elution directly at the surgical side. A specific antibiotic treatment
plan is generated by a microbiologist. The surgical success relies
on the complete removal of all pre-existing hardware, including
cement and restrictors and an aggressive and complete debridement
of any infected soft tissues and bone material. Post-operative systemic
antibiotic administration is usually completed after only ten to
14 days. Cite this article:
The use of joint-preserving surgery of the hip
has been largely abandoned since the introduction of total hip replacement.
However, with the modification of such techniques as pelvic osteotomy,
and the introduction of intracapsular procedures such as surgical
hip dislocation and arthroscopy, previously unexpected options for
the surgical treatment of sequelae of childhood conditions, including
developmental dysplasia of the hip, slipped upper femoral epiphysis
and Perthes’ disease, have become available. Moreover, femoroacetabular
impingement has been identified as a significant aetiological factor
in the development of osteoarthritis in many hips previously considered to
suffer from primary osteoarthritis. As mechanical causes of degenerative joint disease are now recognised
earlier in the disease process, these techniques may be used to
decelerate or even prevent progression to osteoarthritis. We review
the recent development of these concepts and the associated surgical
techniques. Cite this article:
Early failure associated with adverse reactions to metal debris is an emerging problem after hip resurfacing but the exact mechanism is unclear. We analysed our entire series of 660 metal-on-metal resurfacings (Articular Surface Replacement (ASR) and Birmingham Hip Resurfacing (BHR)) and large-bearing ASR total hip replacements, to establish associations with metal debris-related failures. Clinical and radiological outcomes, metal ion levels, explant studies and lymphocyte transformation tests were performed. A total of 17 patients (3.4%) were identified (all ASR bearings) with adverse reactions to metal debris, for which revision was required. This group had significantly smaller components, significantly higher acetabular component anteversion, and significantly higher whole concentrations of blood and joint chromium and cobalt ions than asymptomatic patients did (all p <
0.001). Post-revision lymphocyte transformation tests on this group showed no reactivity to chromium or cobalt ions. Explants from these revisions had greater surface wear than retrievals for uncomplicated fractures. The absence of adverse reactions to metal debris in patients with well-positioned implants usually implies high component wear. Surgeons must consider implant design, expected component size and acetabular component positioning in order to reduce early failures when performing large-bearing metal-on-metal hip resurfacing and replacement.
