REVIEW ARTICLE


One-stage Exchange Arthroplasty for Periprosthetic Hip and Knee Joint Infections



Manny Nguyen1, Mohamed Sukeik2, *, Akos Zahar3, Ikram Nizam1, Fares Sami Haddad4
1 Ozorthopaedics, Hospital in Malvern, 1356 High Street Malvern, VIC 3144, Australia
2 Department of Trauma and Orthopaedics, The Royal London Hospital, Whitechapel, London, E1 1BB, United Kingdom
3 Center for Septic Surgery, Helios ENDO Klinik, Holstenstr. 2, 22767 Hamburg, Germany
4 Department of Trauma and Orthopaedics, University College London Hospital, 235 Euston Road, NW1 2BU, London, United Kingdom


Article Metrics

CrossRef Citations:
0
Total Statistics:

Full-Text HTML Views: 798
Abstract HTML Views: 327
PDF Downloads: 154
ePub Downloads: 113
Total Views/Downloads: 1392
Unique Statistics:

Full-Text HTML Views: 462
Abstract HTML Views: 217
PDF Downloads: 118
ePub Downloads: 90
Total Views/Downloads: 887



© Nguyen 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, The Royal London Hospital, Whitechapel, London, E1 1BB, United Kingdom; Tel: 0044 (0) 7530271137; Fax: 0044 (0) 1279 827155; E-mai1s: msukeik@hotmail.com, msukeik@yahoo.com


Abstract

Background:

Periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) is a devastating complication of joint replacement surgery. In an aging population of the developed world, the increasing numbers of hip and knee replacements will inevitably lead to increasing incidence of PJI, carrying with (it) significant patient morbidity and cost to the health care system. Two-stage exchange arthroplasty is currently the gold standard but it is associated with multiple operations, prolonged hospitalization and impaired functionality. One-stage exchange arthroplasty is similar to the two-stage procedure but the interval between removal of the prosthesis and reimplantation of a new one is only a few minutes. It has the theoretical benefits of a single anesthetic, shorter hospitalization, less cost and improved function.

Methods:

We reviewed the current literature regarding the outcomes of one-stage exchange arthroplasties focusing on re-infection rates and functional outcomes.

Results:

Current themes around the one-stage exchange procedure include the indications for the procedure, definition of re-infection, surgical techniques used to provide fixation and differences in approach for hip and knee replacements.

Conclusion:

The current literature on one-stage exchange procedure is promising, with comparable results to two-stage revisions for hips and knees in selected patients. However, there is a great need for a large multi-centred randomized control trial, focusing on re-infection rates and functional scores postoperatively, to provide concrete guidelines in managing this complex condition.

Keywords: Direct exchange arthroplasty, Hip, Infection, Knee, One-Stage arthroplasty, Single stage revision.