Abstract
Background and Purpose
Although the treatment for infected total hip arthroplasty (THA) has been still controversial, some reports suggested two-stage revision THA seems to be more preferable rather than one-stage revision. The purpose of this study is to estimate the outcome of treatment for infected THA in our institutions.
Patients and methods
The medical records of patients who have been underwent surgical treatment for infected THA between 2006 and 2012 in two hospitals and followed more than one year after surgery were reviewed. 34 patients and 35 hips were included. Age at surgery, gender, a period until surgical treatment after diagnosis of infection, method of treatment (debridement, one-stage or two-stage revision THA) and the outcome are estimated for each hips. Remission was defined by the absence of local and systemic sign of implant related infection and the normalization of WBC and C-reactive protein value without antibiotics.
Result
A mean post-treatment follow-up period was 32.3 months. Two hips were removed without spacer or reconstruction because their general conditions were poor. The remission rates were 22%(2/9) in debridement and retention, 60%(3/5) in one-stage revision THA and 81%(21/26) in two-stage revision THA respectively.
Conclusion
The remission rate of two-stage revision was better than one-stage revision in this study. Although our study supports two-stage revision for the treatment of infected THA, the possibility of one-stage revision should not be neglected because the outcome of one-stage revision could be improve in the presence of effective antibiotics and the physical and psychological burden of two-stage revision are serious.
