The success rates of two-stage revision arthroplasty for infection have evolved since their early description. The implementation of internationally accepted outcome criteria led to the readjustment of such rates. However, patients who do not undergo reimplantation are usually set aside from these calculations. The aim of this study was to investigate the outcomes of two-stage revision arthroplasty when considering those who do not undergo reimplantation, and to investigate the characteristics of this subgroup. A retrospective cohort study was conducted. Patients with chronic hip or knee periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) treated with two-stage revision between January 2010 and October 2018, with a minimum follow-up of one year, were included. Variables including demography, morbidity, microbiology, and outcome were collected. The primary endpoint was the eradication of infection. Patients who did not undergo reimplantation were analyzed in order to characterize this subgroup better.Aims
Methods
This study evaluates the long-term survival of
spinal implants after surgical site infection (SSI) and the risk
factors associated with treatment failure. A Kaplan-Meier survival analysis was carried out on 43 patients
who had undergone a posterior spinal fusion with instrumentation
between January 2006 and December 2008, and who consecutively developed
an acute deep surgical site infection. All were appropriately treated
by surgical debridement with a tailored antibiotic program based
on culture results for a minimum of eight weeks. A ‘terminal event’ or failure of treatment was defined as implant
removal or death related to the SSI. The mean follow-up was 26 months
(1.03 to 50.9). A total of ten patients (23.3%) had a terminal event.
The rate of survival after the first debridement was 90.7% (95%
confidence interval (CI) 82.95 to 98.24) at six months, 85.4% (95%
CI 74.64 to 96.18) at one year, and 73.2% (95% CI 58.70 to 87.78)
at two, three and four years. Four of nine patients required re-instrumentation
after implant removal, and two of the four had a recurrent infection
at the surgical site. There was one recurrence after implant removal
without re-instrumentation. Multivariate analysis revealed a significant risk of treatment
failure in patients who developed sepsis (hazard ratio (HR) 12.5
(95% confidence interval (CI) 2.6 to 59.9); p <
0.001) or who
had >
three fused segments (HR 4.5 (95% CI 1.25 to 24.05); p = 0.03).
Implant survival is seriously compromised even after properly treated
surgical site infection, but progressively decreases over the first
24 months. Cite this article:
