Skip to main content

Advertisement

Log in

Osteomyelitis nach Endoprothesen

Osteomyelitis after arthroplasty

  • Leitthema
  • Published:
Der Orthopäde Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Zusammenfassung

Jährlich werden in Deutschland >170.000 Hüftendoprothesen und 60–70.000 Knieendoprothesen implantiert. Bei einer publizierten Infektionsrate von 0,5–1,4% ist jährlich mit 800–1700 Hüftendoprotheseninfektionen und 300–850 Knieendoprotheseninfektionen zu rechnen.

Die operative Behandlung von Früh- und Spätinfekten bei Gelenkimplantaten an Knie- und Hüftgelenk (jedoch auch an anderen endoprothetisch versorgten Gelenken wie Schulter-, Ellenbogen- und Sprunggelenk) erfordert ein unterschiedliches Vorgehen: Je nach Zeitpunkt des Infektionsnachweises kann ein reines Débridement, ein einzeitiger Wechsel oder ein zweizeitiger Wechsel mit Interimslösung (in der Regel antibiotikahaltige Knochenzementspacer) angezeigt sein. Die postoperative Verlaufskontrolle der Entzündungsparameter (insbesondere des C-reaktiven Proteins, CRP) gibt erste Hinweise. Die stadiengerechte Nachsorge der Operationswunde unter sterilen Kautelen zeigt die beginnende Inflammation.

Abstract

Today over 170,000 total hip arthroplasties and about 70,000 total knee arthroplasties are performed in Germany. An overall infection rate of 0.5–1.4% is reported in the literature. This means that 800–1700 infections after total hip arthroplasty and 300–850 infections after total knee arthroplasty can occur.

The surgical treatment of early or late infections after arthroplasty of the hip or knee needs different intervention. Depending on when the infection develops, a simple Débridement, an all-in-one exchange arthroplasty, or the explantation of the endoprosthesis with implantation of a spacer followed by the reimplantation of a new prosthesis must be performed. The first hint of postoperative infection is the increase of the C-reactive protein. By correct treatment of the postoperative wound the first sign of an infection can be detected early.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Abb. 1
Abb. 2
Abb. 3a, b
Abb. 4
Abb. 5a, b
Abb. 6

Literatur

  1. Atkins BL, Athanasou N, Deeks JJ (1998) Prospective evaluation of criteria for microbiological diagnosis of prothetic-joint infection at hip arthroplasty. The OSIRIS collaborative study group. J Clin Microbiol 36: 2932–2939

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Buchholz HW, Elson RA, Engelbrecht E, Lodenkämper H, Röttger J, Siegel A (1981) Managment of deep Infection of total hip replacment. J Bone Joint Surg Br 63: 342–353

    Google Scholar 

  3. Cordero J, Munuera L, Folgueira MD (1994) Influence of metal implants on infection. An experimental study in rabbits. J Bone Joint Surg Br 76: 717–720

    Google Scholar 

  4. Cramer J, Ekkernkamp A, Ostermann AW (2001) Die infizierte Endoprothese am Beispiel der Hüftendoprothese. Z Arztl Fortbild Qualsich (ZaeFQ) 95: 195–201

    Google Scholar 

  5. Crockarell JR, Hanssen AD, Osmon DR, Morrey BF (1998) Treatment of infection with Débridement and retention of the components following hip arthroplasty. J Bone Joint Surg 80: 1306–1313

    Google Scholar 

  6. Engelbrecht E, Siegel A, Kappus M (1995) Totale Hüftendoprothese nach Resektionsarthroplastik. Orthopade 24: 344–352

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Fehring TK, Odum S, Calton TF, Mason JB (2000) Articulating versus static spacers in revision total knee arthroplasty for sepsis. The Ranawat Award. Clin Orthop 380: 9–16

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Frommelt L,Gehrke T (2000) Das infizierte Kunstgelenk—Mikrobiologische Konzepte. In: Eulert J, Hassenpflug J (Hrsg) Praxis der Knieendoprothetik. Springer, Berlin Heidelberg New York Tokio, S 273–284

  9. Hackenbroch MH, König DP, Schierholz JM, Beuth J (2001) Implantatmaterialien (Kongressbericht). Dtsch Ärztebl 98: 1138–1139

  10. Haddad FS, Masri BA, Campbell D, McGraw RW, Beauchamp CP, Duncan CP (2000) The PROSTALAC functional spacer in two-stage revision for infected knee replacments. Prothesis of antibiotic-loaded acryl cement. J Bone Joint Surg Br 82: 807–812

    Google Scholar 

  11. Hanssen AD, Rand JA (1998) Instructional course lectures, the american academy of orthopaedic surgeons—evaluation and treatment of nfection at site of a total hip or knee arthroplasty. J Bone Joint Surg Am 80: 910–922

    Google Scholar 

  12. Konig DP, Schierholz JM, Munnich U, Rutt J (2001) Treatment of staphylococcal implant infection with rifampicin—ciprofloxacin in stable implants. Arch Orthop Trauma Surg 121: 297–299

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Kosteson TW, Lewandowski Z, Caldrell DE, Korba DR (1995) Mikrobiolgical biofilms. Ann Res Mikrobiol 49: 711–745

    Google Scholar 

  14. Leunig M, Chosa E, Speck M, Ganz R (1998) A cement spacer for two-stage revision of infected implants of the hip joint. Int Orthop 22: 209–214

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Poss R, Thornhill TS, Ewald FC, Thomas WH, Batte NJ Sledge CB (1984) Factors influencing the incidens and outcome of infection following total joint arthroplasty. Clin Orthop 182: 117–126

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Rand JA, Fitzgerald RH jr (1989) Diagnosis an managment of the infected total-knee arthroplasty. Orthop Clin North Am 20: 201–210

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Ries MD, Jergesen H (1999) An inexpensive molding method for antibiotic- impregnated cemet spacers in infected total hip arthroplasty. J Arthroplasty 14: 764–765

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Segawa H, Tsukayama DT, Kyle RF, Becker DA, Gustilo RB (1999) Infection after total knee arthroplasty. A retrospectiv study of the treatment of eighty-one infections. J. Bone Joint Surg Am 80: 1434–1445

    Google Scholar 

  19. Tsukayama DT, Estrada R, Gustilo RB (1996) Infection after total hip arthroplasty. A study of the treatment of one hundred an six infections. J Bone Joint Surg Am 78: 512–523

    Google Scholar 

  20. Ure KJ, Amstutz HC, Nasser S, Schmalzried TP (1998) Direct exchange arthroplasty for Infection after total hip replacment. An average ten-year follow up. J Bone Joint Surg Am 80: 961–968

    Google Scholar 

  21. Younger ASE, Duncan CP, Masri BA, McGraw RW (1997) The outcome of two-stage arthroplasty using a custom made interval-spacer to treat the infected hip. J Arthroplasty 12: 615–623

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Zimmerli W, Widmer AF, Blatter M, Frei R, Ochsner PE (1998) Role of rifampicin for treatment of orthopedic implant-relate staphylococcal infections: a randomized controlled trial. Foreign Body Infection Study Group. JAMA 279: 1537–1541

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Interessenkonflikt:

Keine Angaben

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to R. Haaker.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Haaker, R., Senge, A., Krämer, J. et al. Osteomyelitis nach Endoprothesen. Orthopäde 33, 431–438 (2004). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00132-003-0624-x

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00132-003-0624-x

Schlüsselwörter

Keywords

Navigation