header advert
Orthopaedic Proceedings Logo

Receive monthly Table of Contents alerts from Orthopaedic Proceedings

Comprehensive article alerts can be set up and managed through your account settings

View my account settings

Visit Orthopaedic Proceedings at:

Loading...

Loading...

Full Access

PERIPROSTHETIC INFECTION OF THE HIP: ARE CURRENT STRATEGIES FOR TREATMENT ADEQUATE?



Abstract

Currently two-stage resection arthroplasty is the preferred method for surgical treatment of periprosthetic infection in North America. However, the success of this treatment strategy has varied from 54% to 98% based on previous reports. The exact reason for this variation in outcome is not known. The purpose of this study was to determine the efficacy of this treatment modality and delineate patient risk factors that result in recurrent infection and failure.

During the period of this study (2000–2005) 77 patients with an infected THA were treated at our institution. Fifty-four patients underwent two-stage exchange arthroplasty while the remaining 22 failed to have the second stage reimplantation due to ill health. The latter 22 were excluded from the analysis. All patients were followed up prospectively for at least two years after reimplantation. Detailed data including demographics, comorbidities, surgical history, and medication intake was collected. Intraoperative data, organism profile, and complications were also documented. Failure was defined as patient requiring additional surgical procedure for control of infection or loosening.

Two-stage exchange arthroplasty successfully eradicated infection in 36 patients (67%) without need for further treatment. Seven patients (13%) had recurrent infection that necessitated resection arthroplasty. Eleven (20%) patients required irrigation and debridement for postoperative purulent drainage which successfully treated infection in 8 of the cases. The remaining 3 patients failed and required resection arthroplasty. Three additional patients had early loosening of components and required revision arthroplasty. The exact cause of loosening in these patients could not be determined and despite lack of isolation of organisms infection was suspected. Multivariate analysis identified previous medical comorbidity and postoperative allogenic transfusion as risk factors for failure.

Current strategies to treat periprosthetic infection remain imperfect. Two-stage exchange arthroplasty with all its inherent problems and inconveniences imparted a modest success in treatment of PPI at our high volume specialized center. With the increase in the number of virulent and resistant organisms, and the rise in arthroplasties being performed in infirm patients with medical comorbidities the success of this procedure is likely to be jeopardized. Novel treatment modalities to combat this dreaded condition is needed.



Correspondence should be addressed to Vasiliki Boukouvala at Department of Orthopaedic Surgery & Traumatology, University Hospital of Larissa, 110 Mezourlo, Larissa, GREECE. Tel: +30 2410 682722, Fax: +30 2410 670107, Email: malizos@med.uth.gr