Abstract
The management of prosthetic joint infection (PJI) has been widely performed for total hip arthroplasties (THA), but none has compared it with hip resurfacing arthroplasty (RSA). We also carried out a retrospective case-control study comparing the surgical treatment of PJI by surgical debridement and implant retention between RSA and THA in order to clarify whether there was a difference in terms of (1) successful healing of PJI (2) functional scores after recovery (3) risk factors for recurrence of PJI. Our hypothesis was that simple debridement with prosthesis retention regardless of the timeframe allowed to obtain a higher success rate for RSA compared to THA.
From 2010 to 2018, a single-center case-control study based on 3056 RSA found 13 PJI were age-matched (based on the 139 THA PJI treated) with 15 THA PJI (mean age of 53 years old (47–58) for THA and 59 (45–66) for RSA (p=0.34)). We compared their survival (absence of infectious recurrence) and the means differences between the 2 groups (demographical, clinical and biological data).
There was no difference between the 2 groups concerning: age (p=0.3), BMI (p=0.4), initial diagnosis (p=0.4), operating time for primary surgery (p=0.3), the presence of a postoperative hematoma (p=0.4), the type of bacteria (p=0.5), the total duration of antibiotic therapy (p=0.9) and the type of antibiotic therapy (p=0.6). Early postoperative infections (less than 6 weeks) occurred in 7/13 RSA cases (54%) compared to 11/15 THA cases (73%). At the mean follow-up of 5 years (2–7), the success rate without recurrence was significantly higher in the RSA group 100% versus 66.7% (10/15) for the THA group (p=0.044). At the last follow-up, the Oxford Hip Score was higher in the RSA versus THA group's (14 versus 22 p=0.004).
Simple surgical debridement an RSA without changing implants after PJI can be done regardless of the time to onset of infection. This is secondary to the absence of metaphyseal bone invasion and the low content of joint fluid.
