Temporary new implant spacers increase post-reimplantation total knee prosthesis survival after periprosthetic joint infection

被引:3
|
作者
Woon, Colin Y. L. [1 ]
Nguyen, Joseph [2 ]
Kapadia, Milan [3 ]
Russell, Celeste A. [3 ]
Henry, Michael [3 ]
Miller, Andy [3 ]
Westrich, Geoffrey [1 ]
机构
[1] Hosp Special Surg, Adult Reconstruct & Joint Replacement Div, 535 East 70th St, New York, NY 10021 USA
[2] Hosp Special Surg, Biostat Core, 535 E 70th St, New York, NY 10021 USA
[3] Hosp Special Surg, Infect Dis Serv, 535 E 70th St, New York, NY 10021 USA
关键词
Antibiotic spacer; Periprosthetic joint infection; Total knee arthroplasty; Total knee replacement; Time-to-failure; AUTOCLAVED FEMORAL COMPONENTS; ARTICULATING SPACER; 2-STAGE REVISION; CEMENT SPACERS; STATIC SPACER; ARTHROPLASTY; REPLACEMENTS; MANAGEMENT; EXCHANGE; MOBILE;
D O I
10.1007/s00167-020-06325-6
中图分类号
R826.8 [整形外科学]; R782.2 [口腔颌面部整形外科学]; R726.2 [小儿整形外科学]; R62 [整形外科学(修复外科学)];
学科分类号
摘要
Purpose Two-stage exchange arthroplasty is considered the gold standard for treatment of periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) following total knee arthroplasty (TKA). Antibiotic cement spacers can include cement-based spacers (CBS), new components (NEW), and autoclaved components (ACL). The factors that most influence post-reimplantation prosthesis (PRP) survival were determined. Methods A retrospective database review of patients undergoing two-stage exchange arthroplasty from 2008 to 2014 was performed. There were 85 patients, 25 patients and 30 patients in CBS, NEW and ACL groups, respectively. Patient, disease and surgical characteristics were collected and analyzed. Post-reimplantation prosthesis (PRP) survival was modeled using the Kaplan-Meier method. Cox proportional hazard modeling was then performed to identify risk factors associated with implant failure. Results Overall PRP survival was 82% in 140 unilateral TKAs. PRP survival between groups was 81%, 96% and 73% within the minimum 2-year follow-up period, respectively. There was a difference in median interval-to-reimplantation between groups (CBS, 72.0 days; NEW, 111.0 days; ACL, 84.0 days,p = 0.003). Adjusting for time-to-reimplantation, NEW spacers demonstrated greater PRP survival compared with ACL spacers (p = 0.044), and a trend towards greater survival compared with CBS spacers (p = 0.086). Excluding early failures (< 90 days), NEW spacers still demonstrated greater survival than ACL spacers (p = 0.046). Lower volume (<= 10 within this series) surgeons tended to use more CBS spacers, while higher volume surgeons were comfortable with ACL spacers. Conclusions There was greater PRP survival with NEW spacers. NEW spacers also demonstrated an increased inter-stage interval, likely because of increased comfort and motion. There were spacer choice differences between low- and high-volume surgeons.
引用
收藏
页码:3621 / 3632
页数:12
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [1] Temporary new implant spacers increase post-reimplantation total knee prosthesis survival after periprosthetic joint infection
    Colin Y. L. Woon
    Joseph Nguyen
    Milan Kapadia
    Celeste A. Russell
    Michael Henry
    Andy Miller
    Geoffrey Westrich
    Knee Surgery, Sports Traumatology, Arthroscopy, 2021, 29 : 3621 - 3632
  • [2] Fungal infection of a total knee prosthesis: Successful treatment using articulating cement spacers and staged reimplantation
    Wyman, J
    McGough, R
    Limbird, R
    ORTHOPEDICS, 2002, 25 (12) : 1391 - 1394
  • [3] Functional outcome of two-stage reimplantation in patients with periprosthetic joint infection after primary total knee arthroplasty
    Preobrazhensky, Petr Mikhailovich
    Bozhkova, Svetlana Anatolievna
    Kazemirsky, Alexander Viktorovich
    Tikhilov, Rashid Murtazalievich
    Kulaba, Taras Andreevich
    Kornilov, Nikolai Nikolaevich
    INTERNATIONAL ORTHOPAEDICS, 2019, 43 (11) : 2503 - 2509
  • [4] Functional outcome of two-stage reimplantation in patients with periprosthetic joint infection after primary total knee arthroplasty
    Petr Mikhailovich Preobrazhensky
    Svetlana Anatolievna Bozhkova
    Alexander Viktorovich Kazemirsky
    Rashid Murtazalievich Tikhilov
    Taras Andreevich Kulaba
    Nikolai Nikolaevich Kornilov
    International Orthopaedics, 2019, 43 : 2503 - 2509
  • [5] Success rates, characteristics, and costs of articulating antibiotic spacers for total knee periprosthetic joint infection
    Nodzo, Scott R.
    Boyle, Keely K.
    Spiro, Sara
    Nocon, Allina A.
    Miller, Andy O.
    Westrich, Geoffrey H.
    KNEE, 2017, 24 (05): : 1175 - 1181
  • [6] Evaluation of time to reimplantation as a risk factor in two-stage revision with static spacers for periprosthetic knee joint infection
    Puetzler, Jan
    Hofschneider, Marc
    Gosheger, Georg
    Theil, Christoph
    Schulze, Martin
    Schwarze, Jan
    Koch, Raphael
    Moellenbeck, Burkhard
    JOURNAL OF ORTHOPAEDICS AND TRAUMATOLOGY, 2024, 25 (01)
  • [7] Evaluation of time to reimplantation as a risk factor in two-stage revision with static spacers for periprosthetic knee joint infection
    Jan Puetzler
    Marc Hofschneider
    Georg Gosheger
    Christoph Theil
    Martin Schulze
    Jan Schwarze
    Raphael Koch
    Burkhard Moellenbeck
    Journal of Orthopaedics and Traumatology, 25
  • [8] Risk factors for periprosthetic joint infection after total knee arthroplasty
    Juan F. Blanco
    Agustín Díaz
    Francisco R. Melchor
    Carmen da Casa
    David Pescador
    Archives of Orthopaedic and Trauma Surgery, 2020, 140 : 239 - 245
  • [9] Periprosthetic joint infection after total knee arthroplasty: a bibliometrics analysis
    Shen, Songpo
    Zhang, Yichao
    Zhang, Qiang
    Xiao, Kai
    Tang, Jiaguang
    ANNALS OF PALLIATIVE MEDICINE, 2021, 10 (09) : 9927 - 9939
  • [10] Periprosthetic knee infection reconstruction with a hinged prosthesis: Implant survival and risk factors for treatment failure
    Chen, Michael Jian-Wen
    Hung, Jui-Fu
    Chang, Chih-Hsiang
    Lee, Sheng-Hsun
    Shih, Hsin-Nung
    Chang, Yu-Han
    KNEE, 2020, 27 (03): : 1035 - 1042