Outcome of short versus long interval in two-stage exchange for periprosthetic joint infection: a prospective cohort study.
Hip arthroplasty
Infection management
Interval length
Knee arthroplasty
Periprosthetic joint infection
Two-stage revision
Journal
Archives of orthopaedic and trauma surgery
ISSN: 1434-3916
Titre abrégé: Arch Orthop Trauma Surg
Pays: Germany
ID NLM: 9011043
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
Mar 2019
Mar 2019
Historique:
received:
13
07
2018
pubmed:
18
11
2018
medline:
11
4
2019
entrez:
17
11
2018
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
A two-stage exchange is the standard treatment approach for chronic periprosthetic joint infection (PJI). While a 6-8 week interval is commonly used before reimplantation, the optimal length of the prosthesis-free interval has not yet been determined. We evaluated the influence of a short (< 4 weeks) and long (≥ 4 weeks) interval on reinfection rate and functional outcome of hip and knee PJI. In this prospective cohort, patients undergoing two-stage revision for PJI were assigned to prosthesis reimplantation after a short (< 4 weeks) or long (≥ 4 weeks) interval. All patients received standardized antimicrobial therapy, which consisted of antibiogram-adapted, non-biofilm-active antibiotics during the interval and an antimicrobial combination therapy with biofilm-active antibiotics after reimplantation. Follow-up was performed for infection, joint function, pain, need for care and quality of life. Thirty-eight patients undergoing two-stage revision for PJI (18 hips and 20 knees) were included. Short interval was used in 19 patients having a mean interval of 17.9 days (range 7-27 days), long interval in 19 patients having a mean interval of 63.0 days (range 28-204 days). At a mean follow-up of 39.5 months (range 32-48 months), 37 of 38 patients (97.4%) were infection-free. One failure occurred among patients with long interval and none among patients with short interval. Functional results (ROM, HHS, KSS, VAS) and quality of life (SF-36) were similar in both groups. Patients treated with long interval required cumulatively additional 204 inpatient days for nursing care compared to patients with short interval. This study suggests that two-stage exchange with short interval has a similar outcome than with long interval, when highly active antibiotic therapy is used. Patient inconvenience and care costs due to immobilization were lower when strategies with a short interval were used.
Identifiants
pubmed: 30443674
doi: 10.1007/s00402-018-3052-4
pii: 10.1007/s00402-018-3052-4
doi:
Substances chimiques
Anti-Bacterial Agents
0
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM