Author/Authors :
JANSSEN, Daniël M C Department of Orthopedic Surgery - Research School CAPHRI - Maastricht University Medical Centre, Maastricht, the Netherlands , GEURTS, Jan A P Department of Orthopedic Surgery - Research School CAPHRI - Maastricht University Medical Centre, Maastricht, the Netherlands , JÜTTEN, Liesbeth M C Department of Orthopedic Surgery - Research School CAPHRI - Maastricht University Medical Centre, Maastricht, the Netherlands , WALENKAMP, Geert H I M Department of Orthopedic Surgery - Research School CAPHRI - Maastricht University Medical Centre, Maastricht, the Netherlands
Abstract :
Background and purpose — A 2-stage revision is the most
common treatment for late deep prosthesis-related infections and
in all cases of septic loosening. However, there is no consensus
about the optimal interval between the 2 stages.
Patients and methods — We retrospectively studied 120 deep
infections of total hip (n = 95) and knee (n = 25) prostheses that
had occurred over a period of 25 years. The mean follow-up time
was 5 (2–20) years. All infections had been treated with extrac-
tion, 1 or more debridements with systemic antibiotics, and
implantation of gentamicin-PMMA beads. There had been differ-
ent time intervals between extraction and reimplantation: median
14 (11–47) days for short-term treatment with uninterrupted hos-
pital stay, and 7 (3–22) months for long-term treatment with tem-
porary discharge. We analyzed the outcome regarding resolution
of the infection and clinical results.
Results — 88% (105/120) of the infections healed, with no dif-
ference in healing rate between short- and long-term treatment.
82 prostheses were reimplanted. In the most recent decade,
we treated patients more often with a long-term treatment but
reduced the length of time between the extraction and the reim-
plantation. More reimplantations were performed in long-term
treatments than in short-term treatments, despite more having
diffi cult-to-treat infections with worse soft-tissue condition.
Interpretation — Patient, wound, and infection consider-
ations resulted in an individualized treatment with different
intervals between stages. The 2-stage revision treatment in
combination with local gentamicin-PMMA beads gave good
results even with diffi cult prosthesis infections and gentamicin-
resistant bacteria.