The duration of systemic antibiotic treatment following first-stage revision surgery for periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) after total hip arthroplasty (THA) is contentious. Our philosophy is to perform an aggressive debridement, and to use a high local concentration of targeted antibiotics in cement beads and systemic prophylactic antibiotics alone. The aim of this study was to assess the success of this philosophy in the management of PJI of the hip using our two-stage protocol. The study involved a retrospective review of our prospectively collected database from which we identified all patients who underwent an intended two-stage revision for PJI of the hip. All patients had a diagnosis of PJI according to the major criteria of the Musculoskeletal Infection Society (MSIS) 2013, a minimum five-year follow-up, and were assessed using the MSIS working group outcome-reporting tool. The outcomes were grouped into ‘successful’ or ‘unsuccessful’.Aims
Methods
Two-stage exchange remains the gold standard
for treatment of peri-prosthetic joint infection after total hip replacement
(THR). In the first stage, all components and associated cement
if present are removed, an aggressive debridement is undertaken
including a complete synovectomy, and an antibiotic-loaded cement
spacer is put in place. Patients are then treated with six weeks
of parenteral antibiotics, followed by an ‘antibiotic free period’
to help ensure the infection has been eradicated. If the clinical
evaluation and serum inflammatory markers suggest the infection
has resolved, then the second stage can be completed, which involves
removal of the cement spacer, repeat debridement, and placement
of a new THR. Cite this article:
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 removal of all prosthetic material and a
two-stage revision procedure is the established standard management of
an infected total hip replacement (THR). However, the removal of
well-fixed femoral cement is time-consuming and can result in significant
loss of bone stock and femoral shaft perforation or fracture. We
report our results of two-stage revision THR for treating infection,
with retention of the original well-fixed femoral cement mantle
in 15 patients, who were treated between 1989 and 2002. Following
partial excision arthroplasty, patients received local and systemic
antibiotics and underwent reconstruction and re-implantation at
a second-stage procedure, when the infection had resolved. The mean follow-up of these 15 patients was 82 months (60 to
192). Two patients had positive microbiology at the second stage
and were treated with six weeks of appropriate antibiotics; one
of these developed recurrent infection requiring further revision.
Successful eradication of infection was achieved in the remaining
14 patients. We conclude that when two-stage revision is used for the treatment
of peri-prosthetic infection involving a THR, a well-fixed femoral
cement mantle can be safely left
Periprosthetic infection following total hip replacement can be a catastrophic complication for the patient. The treatments available include single-stage exchange, and two-stage exchange. We present a series of 50 consecutive patients with a diagnosis of infected total hip replacement who were assessed according to a standardised protocol. Of these, 11 underwent single-stage revision arthroplasty with no recurrence of infection at a mean of 6.8 years follow-up (5.5 to 8.8). The remaining 39 underwent two-stage revision, with two recurrences of infection successfully treated by a second two-stage procedure. At five years, significant differences were found in the mean Harris Hip Scores (single-stage 87.8; two-stage 75.5; p = 0.0003) and in a visual analogue score for satisfaction (8.6; 6.9; p = 0.001) between the single- and two-stage groups. Single-stage exchange is successful in eradicating periprosthetic infection and results in excellent functional and satisfaction scores. Identification of patients suitable for the single-stage procedure allows individualisation of care and provides as many as possible with the correct strategy in successfully tackling their periprosthetic infection
When using a staged approach to eradicate chronic infection after total hip replacement, systemic delivery of antibiotics after the first stage is often employed for an extended period of typically six weeks together with the use of an in situ antibiotic-eluting polymethylmethacrylate interval spacer. We report our multi-surgeon experience of 43 consecutive patients (44 hips) who received systemic vancomycin for two weeks in combination with a vancomycin- and gentamicin-eluting spacer system in the course of a two-stage revision procedure for deep infection with a median follow-up of 49 months (25 to 83). The antibiotic-eluting articulating spacers fractured in six hips (13.9%) and dislocated in five patients (11.6%). Successful elimination of the infecting organisms occurred in 38 (92.7%) of 41 hips with three patients developing superinfection with a new organism. We conclude that prolonged systemic antibiotic therapy may not be essential in the two-stage treatment of a total hip replacement for Gram-positive infection, provided that a high concentration of antibiotics is delivered locally using an antibiotic-eluting system.
We present a series of 114 patients with microbiologically-proven chronically-infected total hip replacement, treated between 1991 and 2004 by a two-stage exchange procedure with antibiotic-loaded cement, but without the use of a prolonged course of antibiotic therapy. The mean follow-up for all patients was 74 months (2 to 175) with all surviving patients having a minimum follow-up of two years. Infection was successfully eradicated in 100 patients (87.7%), a rate which is similar to that reported by others, but where prolonged adjuvant antibiotic therapy has been used. Using the technique described, a prolonged course of systemic antibiotics does not appear to be essential and the high cost of the administration of antibiotics can be avoided.
We performed a randomised, radiostereometric study comparing two different bone cements, one of which has been sparsely clinically documented. Randomisation of 60 total hip replacements (57 patients) into two groups of 30 was undertaken. All the patients were operated on using a cemented Charnley total hip replacement, the only difference between groups being the bone cement used to secure the femoral component. The two cements used were Palamed G and Palacos R with gentamicin. The patients were followed up with repeated clinical and radiostereometric examinations for two years to assess the micromovement of the femoral component and the clinical outcome. The mean subsidence was 0.18 mm and 0.21 mm, and the mean internal rotation was 1.7° and 2.0° at two years for the Palamed G and Palacos R with gentamicin bone cements, respectively. We found no statistically significant differences between the groups. Micromovement occurred between the femoral component and the cement, while the cement mantle was stable inside the bone. The Harris hip score improved from a mean of 38 points (14 to 54) and 36 (10 to 57) pre-operatively to a mean of 92 (77 to 100) and 91 (63 to 100) at two years in the Palamed G and Palacos R groups, respectively. No differences were found between the groups. Both bone cements provided good initial fixation of the femoral component and good clinical results at two years.
Iontophoresis is a novel technique which may be used to facilitate the movement of antibiotics into the substance of bone using an electrical potential applied externally. We have examined the rate of early infection in allografts following application of this technique in clinical practice. A total of 31 patients undergoing revision arthroplasty or surgery for limb salvage received 34 iontophoresed sequential allografts, of which 26 survived for a minimum of two years. The mean serum antibiotic levels after operation were low (gentamicin 0.37 mg/l (0.2 to 0.5); flucloxacillin 1 mg/l (0 to 1) and the levels in the drains were high (gentamicin 40 mg/l (2.5 to 131); flucloxacillin 17 mg/l (1 to 43). There were no early deep infections. Two late infections were presumed to be haemotogenous; 28 of the 34 allografts were retained. In 12 patients with pre-existing proven infection further infection has not occurred at a mean follow-up of 51 months (24 to 82).
We have carried out in 24 patients, a two-stage revision arthroplasty of the hip for infection with massive bone loss. We used a custom-made, antibiotic-loaded cement prosthesis as an interim spacer. Fifteen patients had acetabular deficiencies, eight had segmental femoral bone loss and one had a combined defect. There was no recurrence of infection at a mean follow-up of 4.2 years (2 to 7). A total of 21 patients remained mobile in the interim period. The mean Merle D’Aubigné and Postel hip score improved from 7.3 points before operation to 13.2 between stages and to 15.8 at the final follow-up. The allograft appeared to have incorporated into the host bone in all patients. Complications included two fractures and one dislocation of the cement prosthesis. The use of a temporary spacer maintains the function of the joint between stages even when there is extensive loss of bone. Allograft used in revision surgery after septic conditions restores bone stock without the risk of recurrent infection.
Bone allografts can store and release high levels of vancomycin. We present our results of a two-stage treatment for infected hip arthroplasty with acetabular and femoral impaction grafting using vancomycin-loaded allografts. We treated 29 patients (30 hips) by removal of the implants, meticulous debridement, parenteral antibiotic therapy and second-stage reconstruction using vancomycin-supplemented impacted bone allografts and a standard cemented Charnley femoral component. The mean follow-up was 32.4 months (24 to 60). Infection control was obtained in 29 cases (re-infection rate of 3.3%; 95% confidence interval 0.08 to 17) without evidence of progressive radiolucent lines, demarcation or graft resorption. One patient had a further infection ten months after revision caused by a different pathogen. Associated post-operative complications were one traumatic periprosthetic fracture at 14 months, a single dislocation in two hips and four displacements of the greater trochanter. Vancomycin-supplemented allografts restored bone stock and provided sound fixation with a low incidence of further infection.
We prospectively investigated a consecutive series of ten patients undergoing a cemented primary total hip replacement (THR) for osteoarthritis in order to establish the
