Functional outcome of two-stage reimplantation in patients with periprosthetic joint infection after primary total knee arthroplasty
- 144 Downloads
Two-stage reimplantation in patients with chronic periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) after total knee arthroplasty (TKA) with the use of either articulating or static antibiotic-loaded spacers during the first step is considered to be the golden standard in orthopaedics.
The aim of the study
The aim of the study was to evaluate the correlation of spacer type with the infection elimination rate as well as functional outcomes after two-staged revision TKA in patients with PJI.
Materials and methods
The cohort comprised 161 patients who were treated for PJI after TKA during a period from January 2007 to December 2015. After the exclusion of patients with severe bone defects (AORI 2B or 3), 104 were left for the analysis: 72 patients with articulating and 32 with static spacers. The overall patient mean age was 62 years old (95% CI, 30–84): 73 for females, 31 for males. The outcomes were evaluated after three, six and 12 months using the American Knee Society Score (KSS) and EQ-5D. Only 92 patients were available for observation: 25 with static and 67 with articulating spacers.
One year after the surgery, patients with articulating spacers demonstrated significantly higher mean KSS and function scores in comparison to patients with static spacers (90.4, 77.3 and 78.5, 67.8, respectively (p < 0.05)). The range of motion was also significantly better in patients with articulating spacers: 104.9° in comparison to 93.9° (р < 0.0001). The final EQ-5D score was comparable in both groups (0.82, 73.1 in articulating and 0.82, 72.6 in static spacers).
The two-stage revision TKA for PJI using articulating spacers in comparison to the static ones provides better infection eradication rate as well as functional outcomes and improved quality of life.
KeywordsTotal knee arthroplasty Periprosthetic joint infection Two-stage revision Spacer Quality of life Outcome
Compliance with ethical standards
Conflict of interest
The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.
All procedures performed in the study involving human participants were in accordance with the ethical standards of the institutional and/or national research committee and with the 1964 Helsinki declaration and its later amendments or comparable ethical standards. For this type of study, formal consent is not required.
- 8.Bozhkova, S.A, (2011) Modern principles of diagnostics and antibacterial therapy of prosthetic joint infection (review). Traumatology and Orthopedics of Russia, (3): p. 126-136. (In Russ.)Google Scholar
- 11.Buechel FF, Femino FP (2004) Primary exchange revision arthroplasty for infected total knee replacement: a long-term study. Am J Orthop (Belle Mead NJ) 33(4):190–198Google Scholar
- 17.Insall JN, Dorr LD (1989) Rationale of the Knee Society clinical rating system. Clin Orthop Relat Res (248):13–14Google Scholar
- 28.Janssen M.F. and A.S. Pickard (2013). Qual Life Res, Sep;22(7):1717–1727Google Scholar