Advertisement

Clinical Orthopaedics and Related Research®

, Volume 472, Issue 11, pp 3295–3304 | Cite as

Arthrodesis Should Be Strongly Considered After Failed Two-stage Reimplantation TKA

  • Chia H. Wu
  • Chancellor F. Gray
  • Gwo-Chin LeeEmail author
Symposium: 2013 Musculoskeletal Infection Society

Abstract

Background

A two-stage reimplantation procedure is a well-accepted procedure for management of first-time infected total knee arthroplasty (TKA). However, there is a lack of consensus on the treatment of subsequent reinfections.

Questions/purposes

The purpose of this study was to perform a decision analysis to determine the treatment method likely to yield the highest quality of life for a patient after a failed two-stage reimplantation.

Methods

We performed a systematic review to estimate the expected success rates of a two-stage reimplantation procedure, chronic suppression, arthrodesis, and amputation for treatment of infected TKA. To determine utility values of the various possible health states that could arise after two-stage revision, we used previously published values and methods to determine the utility and disutility tolls for each treatment option and performed a decision tree analysis using the TreeAgePro 2012 software suite (Williamstown, MA, USA). These values were subsequently varied to perform sensitivity analyses, determining thresholds at which different treatment options prevailed.

Results

Overall, the composite success rate for two-stage reimplantation was 79.1% (range, 33.3%–100%). The utility (successful outcome) and disutility toll (cost for treatment) for two-stage reimplantation were determined to be 0.473 and 0.20, respectively; the toll for undergoing chronic suppression was set at 0.05; the utility for arthrodesis was 0.740 and for amputation 0.423. We set the utilities for subsequent two-stage revision and other surgical procedures by subtracting the disutility toll from the utility each time another procedure was performed. The two-way sensitivity analysis varied the utility status after an additional two-stage reimplantation (0.47–0.99) and chance of a successful two-stage reimplantation (45%–95%). The model was then extended to a three-way sensitivity analysis twice: once by setting the variable arthrodesis utility at a value of 0.47 and once more by setting utility of two-stage reimplantation at 0.05 over the same range of values on both axes. Knee arthrodesis emerged as the treatment most likely to yield the highest expected utility (quality of life) after initially failing a two-stage revision. For a repeat two-stage revision to be favored, the utility of that second two-stage revision had to substantially exceed the published utility of primary TKA of 0.84 and the probability of achieving infection control had to exceed 90%.

Conclusions

Based on best available evidence, knee arthrodesis should be strongly considered as the treatment of choice for patients who have persistent infected TKA after a failed two-stage reimplantation procedure. We recognize that particular circumstances such as severe bone loss can preclude or limit the applicability of fusion as an option and that individual clinical circumstances must always dictate the best treatment, but where arthrodesis is practical, our model supports it as the best approach.

Keywords

Total Knee Arthroplasty Primary Total Knee Arthroplasty Chronic Suppression Reinfection Rate Knee Infection 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

References

  1. 1.
    Azzam K, McHale K, Austin M, Purtill JJ, Parvizi J. Outcome of a second two stage reimplantation for periprosthetic knee infection. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2009;467:1706–1714.PubMedCrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Baker P, Petheram TG, Kurtz S, Konttinen YT, Gregg P, Deehan D. Patient reported outcome measures after revision of the infected TKR: a comparison of single versus two stage revision. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc. 2012 Jun 13 [Epub ahead of print].Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Bedair H, Ting N, Bozic KJ, Della Valle CJ, Sporer SM. Treatment of early postoperative infections after THA: a decision analysis. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2011;469:3477–3485.PubMedCrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Bengston S, Knutson K, Lidgren L. Treatment of infected knee arthroplasty. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 1989;245:173–178.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Benson ER, Resine ST, Lewis CG. Functional outcome of arthrodesis for failed total knee arthroplasty. Orthopedics. 1998;21:875–879.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Blom AW, Brown J, Taylor AH, Pattison G, Whitehouse S, Bannister GC. Infection after total knee arthroplasty. J Bone Joint Surg Br. 2004;86:688–691.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Bozic KJ, Chiu VW, Slover JD, Immerman I, Kahn JG. Health state utility in patients with osteoarthritis of the hip and total hip arthroplasty. J Arthroplasty. 2011;26:129–132.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Chen AF, Kinback NC, Heyl AE, McClain EJ, Klatt BA. Better function for fusions versus above the knee amputations for recurrent periprosthetic knee infection. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2012;470:2737–2745.PubMedCrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Fedorka CJ, Chen AF, McGarry WM, Parvizi J, Klatt BA. Functional ability after above the knee amputation for infected total knee arthroplasty. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2011;469:1024–1032.PubMedCrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Fuchs S, Mersmann A. Results of arthrodesis after knee prosthesis infection. Special reference to quality of life. Unfallchirurg. 2000;103:626–631.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Garvin KL, Cordero GX. Infected total knee arthroplasty: diagnosis and treatment. Instr Course Lect. 2008;57:305–315.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Haleem AA, Berry DJ, Hanssen AD. Mid-term to long term followup of two stage reimplantation for infected total knee arthroplasty. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2004;428:35–39.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Hanssen AD. Managing the infected knee: as good as it gets. J Arthroplasty. 2002;17:98–101.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Hanssen AD, Trousdale RT, Osmon DR. Patient outcome with reinfection following reimplantation for the infected total knee arthroplasty. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 1995;325:55–67.Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Hirakawa K, Stulberg BN, Wilde AH, Bauer TW, Secic M. Results of 2 stage reimplantation for infected total knee arthroplasty. J Arthroplasty. 1998;13:22–28.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Jenny JY, Barbe B, Gaudias J, Boeri C, Argenson JN. High infection control rate after routine one-stage exchange for chronically infected TKA. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2013;471:238–243.PubMedCrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Johnson DP, Bannister GC. The outcome of infected arthroplasty of the knee. J Bone Joint Surg Br. 1986;68:289–291.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Kim TW, Makani A, Choudhury R, Kamath AF, Lee GC. Patient reported activity levels after successful treatment of infected total knee arthroplasty. J Arthroplasty. 2012;27:81–85.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Kurtz SM, Ong KL, Lau E, Bozic KJ, Berry D, Parvizi J. Prosthetic joint infection risk after TKA in the Medicare population. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2010;468:52–56.PubMedCrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Kutscha-Lissberg F, Hebler U, Esenwein SA, Muhr G, Wick M. Fusion of the septic knee with external hybrid fixator. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc. 2006;14:968–974.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Mabry TM, Jacofsky DJ, Haidukewych GJ, Hanssen AD. Comparison of intramedullary nailing and external fixation knee arthrodesis for the infected knee replacement. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2007;464:11–15.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    MacDonald JH, Agarwal S, Lorei MP, Johanson NA, Freiberg AA. Knee arthrodesis. J Am Acad Orthop Surg. 2008;14:154–163.Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Maheswari AV, Gioe TJ, Kalore NV, Cheng EY. Reinfection after prior staged reimplantation for septic total knee arthroplasty: is salvage still possible? J Arthroplasty. 2010;25:92–97.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Mahmud T, Lyons MC, Naudie DD, Macdonald SJ, McCalden RW. Assessing the gold standard: a review of 253 two-stage revisions for infected TKA. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2012;470:2730–2736.PubMedCrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Mittal Y, Fehring TK, Hanssen AD, Marculescu C, Odum SM, Osmon D. Two stage reimplantation for periprosthetic knee infection involving resistant organisms. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2007;89:1227–1231.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Mortazavi SM, Vegari D, Ho A, Zmistowski B, Parvizi J. Two stage exchange arthroplasty for infected total knee arthroplasty: predictors of failure. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2011;469:3049–3054.PubMedCrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Parvizi J, Zmistowski B, Adeli B. Periprosthetic joint infections: treatment options. Orthopedics. 2010;33:659.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Rasanen P, Paavolainen P, Sintonen H, Koivisto AM, Blom M, Ryynanen OP, Roine RP. Effectiveness of hip or knee replacement surgery in terms of quality adjusted life years and costs. Acta Orthop. 2007;78:108–115.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Schairer WW, Vail TP, Bozic KJ. What are the rates and causes of hospital readmission after total knee arthroplasty. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2013 May 4 [Epub ahead of print].Google Scholar
  30. 30.
    Sierra RJ, Trousdale RT, Pagnano MW. Above the knee amputation after total knee replacement: prevalence, etiology and functional outcome. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2003;85:1000–1004.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Spina M, Gualdrini G, Fosco M, Giunti A. Knee arthrodesis with the Ilizarov external fixator as treatment for septic failure of knee arthroplasty. J Orthop Traumatol. 2010;11:81–88.PubMedCrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Tigani D, Trisolino G, Fosco M, Ben Ayad R, Costigliola P. Two stage reimplantation for periprosthetic knee infection: influence of host health status and infecting microorganism. Knee. 2013;20:9–18.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Voleti PB, Baldwin KD, Lee GC. Use of static or articulating spacers for infection following total knee arthroplasty: a systematic literature review. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2013;95:1594–1599.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Westrich GH, Walcott-Sapp S, Bornstein LJ, Bostrom MP, Windsor RE, Brause BD. Modern treatment of infected total knee arthroplasty with a 2 stage reimplantation protocol. J Arthroplasty. 2010;25:1015–1021.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Whiteside LA, Peppers M, Nayfeh TA, Roy ME. Methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus in TKA treated with revision and direct intra-articular antibiotic infusion. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2011;469:26–33.PubMedCrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Zmistowski B, Fedorka CJ, Sheehan E, Deirmengian G, Austin MS, Parvizi J. Prosthetic joint infection caused by Gram negative infections. J Arthroplasty. 2011;26:104–108.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© The Association of Bone and Joint Surgeons® 2014

Authors and Affiliations

  • Chia H. Wu
    • 1
  • Chancellor F. Gray
    • 1
  • Gwo-Chin Lee
    • 1
    Email author
  1. 1.Department of Orthopaedic SurgeryUniversity of PennsylvaniaPhiladelphiaUSA

Personalised recommendations