REVIEW ARTICLE


Two-stage Revision for Periprosthetic Hip and Knee Joint Infections



Sunil Gurpur Kini*, 1, Ayman Gabr1, Rishi Das1, Mohamed Sukeik2, Fares Sami Haddad1
1 Department of Trauma and Orthopaedics, University College London Hospital, 235 Euston Road, NW1 2BU, London, United Kingdom
2 Department of Trauma and Orthopaedics, The Royal London Hospital, Whitechapel, London, E1 1BB, United Kingdom


Article Metrics

CrossRef Citations:
0
Total Statistics:

Full-Text HTML Views: 2406
Abstract HTML Views: 779
PDF Downloads: 242
ePub Downloads: 192
Total Views/Downloads: 3619
Unique Statistics:

Full-Text HTML Views: 961
Abstract HTML Views: 470
PDF Downloads: 158
ePub Downloads: 137
Total Views/Downloads: 1726



© Kini et al.; Licensee Bentham Open

open-access license: This is an open access article licensed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-Non-Commercial 4.0 International Public License (CC BY-NC 4.0) (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/legalcode), which permits unrestricted, non-commercial use, distribution and reproduction in any medium, provided the work is properly cited.

* Address correspondence to this author at the Department of Trauma and Orthopaedics, University College London Hospital, 235 Euston Road, NW1 2BU, London, United Kingdom; Tel: 02034479413; Fax: 02034479958; E-mail: drsunilkini@gmail.com


Abstract

Background:

Periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) continues to be one of the leading causes of failure following hip and knee surgery. The diagnostic workflow of PJI includes detailed clinical examination, serum markers, imaging and aspiration/biopsy of the affected joint. The goals of treatment are eradication of the infection, alleviation of pain, and restoration of joint function. Surgical management of PJI consists of debridement, antibiotics and implant retention (DAIR) and single or two-stage revision procedures. Two-stage revision remains the gold standard for treatment of PJIs. We aim to discuss the two stage procedure in this article and report the outcomes.

Methods:

The first stage of the two stages consists of removal of all components and associated cement with aggressive debridement and placement of an antibiotic-loaded cement spacer. Patients are then treated with variable periods of parenteral antibiotics, followed by an antibiotic free period to help ensure the infection has been eradicated. If the clinical evaluation and serum inflammatory markers suggest infection control, then the second stage can be undertaken and this involves removal of the cement spacer, repeat debridement, and placement of a new prosthesis.

Results:

Common themes around the two-stage revision procedure include timing of the second stage, antibiotics used in the interim period, length of the interim period before consideration of reimplantation and close liaising with microbiologists.

Conclusion:

Successful eradication of infection and good functional outcome using the two stage procedure is dependent on a multidisciplinary approach and having a standard reproducible startegy.

Keywords: Infection, Hip, Knee, Prosthetic joint, Two-stage revision.