An articulated spacer made of new primary implants in two-stage exchange for infected total knee arthroplasty may provide durable results
| Autor: | Donald S. Garbuz, Bassam A. Masri, Nelson V. Greidanus, Tomas Zamora |
|---|---|
| Rok vydání: | 2020 |
| Předmět: |
Male
Reoperation Prosthesis-Related Infections Total knee arthroplasty Dentistry Prosthesis Design Disability Evaluation Knee prosthesis Humans Prosthesis design Medicine Orthopedics and Sports Medicine Range of Motion Articular Stage (cooking) Arthroplasty Replacement Knee Aged Retrospective Studies business.industry Follow up studies Prosthetic joint infection Patient Satisfaction Quality of Life Female Surgery Knee Prosthesis business Follow-Up Studies |
| Zdroj: | The Bone & Joint Journal. :852-860 |
| ISSN: | 2049-4408 2049-4394 |
| DOI: | 10.1302/0301-620x.102b7.bjj-2019-1443.r1 |
| Popis: | Aims Our objective is to describe our early and mid-term results with the use of a new simple primary knee prosthesis as an articulating spacer in planned two-stage management for infected knee arthroplasty. As a second objective, we compared outcomes between the group with a retained first stage and those with a complete two-stage revision. Methods We included 47 patients (48 knees) with positive criteria for infection, with a minimum two-year follow-up, in which a two-stage approach with an articulating spacer with new implants was used. Patients with infection control, and a stable and functional knee were allowed to retain the initial first-stage components. Outcomes recorded included: infection control rate, reoperations, final range of motion (ROM), and quality of life assessment (QoL) including Western Ontario and McMaster Universities osteoarthritis index, Knee Injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score, Oxford Knee Score, 12-Item Short-Form Health Survey questionnaire, and University of California Los Angeles (UCLA) activity score and satisfaction score. These outcomes were evaluated and compared to additional cohorts of patients with retained first-stage interventions and those with a complete two-stage revision. Mean follow-up was 3.7 years (2.0 to 6.5). Results Eight knees failed directly related to lack of infection control (16%), and two patients (two knees) died within the first year for causes not directly related, giving an initial success rate of 79% (38/48). Secondary success rate after a subsequent procedure was 91% (44/48 knees). From the initially retained spacers, four knees (22%) required a second-stage revision for continuous symptoms and one (5%) for an acute infection. There were no significant differences regarding the failure rate due to infection, ROM, and QoL assessment between patients with a retained first-stage procedure and those who underwent a second-stage operation. Conclusion Our protocol of two-stage exchange for infected knee arthroplasties with an articulating spacer and using new primary knee implants achieves adequate infection control. Retained first-stage operations achieve comparable results in selected cases, with no difference in infection control, ROM, and QoL assessment in comparison to patients with completed two-stage revision surgery. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2020;102-B(7):852–860. |
| Databáze: | OpenAIRE |
| Externí odkaz: |
|