To evaluate clinical outcomes of two-stage revision arthroplasty for managing infected knee arthroplasties in significantly compromised patients (host-C).
This was a prospective consecutive series of two-stage revisions of infected total knee arthroplasties in host-C-type patients with a minimum 2-year follow-up using objective and patient-reported outcome measures. Thirteen consecutive patients were included and prospectively followed with a median 5-year follow-up (range 2–10). Median age was 68 years (range 59–73) at time of initial presentation. All patients were type-C host using McPherson classification system. All patients had primary arthroplasties in situ with confirmed chronic infections; the infecting pathogens were Staphylococcus aureus in 5/13 patients, coagulase-negative Staphylococci in 5/13, and the remaining three patients had mixed growth. All patients underwent two-stage revision protocol.
At the final follow-up, 9/13 patients were infection free achieving satisfactory outcomes. Two patients had recurrent infections with different organisms and treated with suppressive antibiotics and salvage knee arthrodesis, respectively. Furthermore, two patients had chronic pain and poor functional outcomes with deficient extensor mechanism and significant bone loss; later underwent salvage knee arthrodesis. The preoperative knee society score (median 35.5; range 22–51; n = 10) showed a statistically significant improvement at the final follow-up (median 79.5; range 49–87; n = 10) p < 0.05. Patients reported outcome scores at the final follow-up were WOMAC-knee (median 59.1; range 47.7–94.7; n = 13) and Oxford knee score (median 26; range 11 to 43; n = 13).
This study highlights the challenge of treating infected knee arthroplasties in physiologically compromised patients with 9/13 (69%) having satisfactory clinical outcomes.
Level of evidence
Case series, level IV.
This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution.
Buy single article
Instant access to the full article PDF.
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.
Subscribe to journal
Immediate online access to all issues from 2019. Subscription will auto renew annually.
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.
Baker P, Petheram TG, Kurtz S, Konttinen YT, Gregg P, Deehan D (2013) Patient reported outcome measures after revision of the infected TKR: comparison of single versus two-stage revision. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 21:2713–2720
Barrack RL (1996) Economics of the infected total knee replacement. Orthopedics 19:780–782
Bartlett W, Vijayan S, Pollock R, Skinner J, Blunn G, Cannon S et al (2011) The Stanmore knee arthrodesis prosthesis. J Arthroplasty 26:903–908
Bellamy N, Buchanan WW, Goldsmith CH, Campbell J, Stitt LW (1988) Validation study of WOMAC: a health status instrument for measuring clinically important patient relevant outcomes to antirheumatic drug therapy in patients with osteoarthritis of the hip or knee. J Rheumatol 15:1833–1840
Buechel FF (2004) The infected total knee arthroplasty: just when you thought it was over. J Arthroplasty 19:51–55
Buechel FF, Femino FP, D’Alessio J (2004) Primary exchange revision arthroplasty for infected total knee replacement: a long-term study. Am J Orthop (Belle Mead NJ) 33:190–198; discussion 198
Cancienne JM, Granadillo VA, Patel KJ, Werner BC, Browne JA (2018) Risk factors for repeat debridement, spacer retention, amputation, arthrodesis, and mortality after removal of an infected total knee arthroplasty with spacer placement. J Arthroplasty 33:515–520
Cochran AR, Ong KL, Lau E, Mont MA, Malkani AL (2016) Risk of reinfection after treatment of infected total knee arthroplasty. J Arthroplasty 31:156–161
Davies DG, Parsek MR, Pearson JP, Iglewski BH, Costerton JW, Greenberg EP (1998) The involvement of cell-to-cell signals in the development of a bacterial biofilm. Science 280:295–298
Dawson J, Fitzpatrick R, Murray D, Carr A (1998) Questionnaire on the perceptions of patients about total knee replacement. J Bone Joint Surg Br 80:63–69
Di Benedetto P, Di Benedetto ED, Buttironi MM, De Franceschi D, Beltrame A, Gissoni R et al (2017) Two-stage revision after total knee arthroplasty. Acta Biomed 88:92–97
Dripps RD (1963) New classification of physical status. Anesthesiol 24:111
Dzaja I, Howard J, Somerville L, Lanting B (2015) Functional outcomes of acutely infected knee arthroplasty: a comparison of different surgical treatment options. Can J Surg 58:402–407
Haddad FS, Sukeik M, Alazzawi S (2015) Is single-stage revision according to a strict protocol effective in treatment of chronic knee arthroplasty infections? Clin Orthop Relat Res 473:8–14
Insall JN, Dorr LD, Scott RD, Scott WN (1989) Rationale of the Knee Society clinical rating system. Clin Orthop Relat Res 248:13–14
Jones RE, Russell RD, Huo MH (2012) Alternatives to revision total knee arthroplasty. J Bone Joint Surg Br 94:137–140
Kamath AF, Ong KL, Lau E, Chan V, Vail TP, Rubash HE et al (2015) Quantifying the burden of revision total joint arthroplasty for periprosthetic infection. J Arthroplasty 30:1492–1497
Kunutsor SK, Whitehouse MR, Lenguerrand E, Blom AW, Beswick AD (2016) Re-infection outcomes following one- and two-stage surgical revision of infected knee prosthesis: a systematic review and meta-analysis. PLoS One 11:e0151537
Masters JP, Smith NA, Foguet P, Reed M, Parsons H, Sprowson AP (2013) A systematic review of the evidence for single stage and two stage revision of infected knee replacement. BMC Musculoskelet Disord 14:222
McPherson EJ, Tontz W Jr, Patzakis M, Woodsome C, Holtom P, Norris L et al (1999) Outcome of infected total knee utilizing a staging system for prosthetic joint infection. Am J Orthop (Belle Mead NJ) 28:161–165
McPherson EJ, Woodson C, Holtom P, Roidis N, Shufelt C, Patzakis M (2002) Periprosthetic total hip infection: outcomes using a staging system. Clin Orthop Relat Res 403:8–15
Moyad TF, Thornhill T, Estok D (2008) Evaluation and management of the infected total hip and knee. Orthopedics 31:581–588 (quiz 589–590)
Nagra NS, Hamilton TW, Ganatra S, Murray DW, Pandit H (2016) One-stage versus two-stage exchange arthroplasty for infected total knee arthroplasty: a systematic review. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 24:3106–3114
Nickinson RS, Board TN, Gambhir AK, Porter ML, Kay PR (2010) The microbiology of the infected knee arthroplasty. Int Orthop 34:505–510
Parvizi J, Gehrke T, Chen AF (2013) Proceedings of the international consensus on periprosthetic joint infection. Bone Joint J 95:1450–1452
Parvizi J, Zmistowski B, Berbari EF, Bauer TW, Springer BD, Della Valle CJ et al (2011) New definition for periprosthetic joint infection: from the Workgroup of the Musculoskeletal Infection Society. Clin Orthop Relat Res 469:2992–2994
Ribeiro M, Monteiro FJ, Ferraz MP (2012) Infection of orthopedic implants with emphasis on bacterial adhesion process and techniques used in studying bacterial-material interactions. Biomatter 2:176–194
Saleh KJ, Dykes DC, Tweedie RL, Mohamed K, Ravichandran A, Saleh RM et al (2002) Functional outcome after total knee arthroplasty revision: a meta-analysis. J Arthroplasty 17:967–977
Salgado CD, Dash S, Cantey JR, Marculescu CE (2007) Higher risk of failure of methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus prosthetic joint infections. Clin Orthop Relat Res 461:48–53
Son MS, Lau E, Parvizi J, Mont MA, Bozic KJ, Kurtz S (2017) What are the frequency, associated factors, and mortality of amputation and arthrodesis after a failed infected TKA? Clin Orthop Relat Res 475:2905–2913
Stammers J, Kahane S, Ranawat V, Miles J, Pollock R, Carrington RW et al (2015) Outcomes of infected revision knee arthroplasty managed by two-stage revision in a tertiary referral centre. Knee 22:56–62
White CJ, Palmer AJR, Rodriguez-Merchan EC (2017) External fixation vs intramedullary nailing for knee arthrodesis after failed infected total knee arthroplasty: a systematic review and meta-analysis. J Arthroplasty. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.arth.2017.10.055
No external funding was used.
Conflict of interest
The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.
The study was approved by the local research and clinical effectiveness department.
About this article
Cite this article
Matar, H.E., Stritch, P. & Emms, N. Higher failure rate of two-stage revision for infected knee arthroplasties in significantly compromised (host-C) patients. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 27, 2206–2210 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00167-018-5051-y
- Total knee arthroplasty
- Periprosthetic joint infection
- two-stage revisions
- Host-C patients