Skip to main content

Advertisement

Log in

Therapie infizierter Kniegelenktotalendoprothesen

Wann ist eine prothesenerhaltende Therapie sinnvoll?

Treatment of infected total knee arthroplasty

When does implant salvage make sense?

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

Zusammenfassung

Bei der Infektion von Kniegelenktotalendoprothesen unterscheidet man zwischen Frühinfekt, chronischem Infekt und hämatogener Infektion mit und ohne Lockerung. Die Behandlung dieser Infekte erfordert ein differenziertes Therapiekonzept. Da jede Zeitverzögerung die Prognose verschlechtert, müssen die Symptome einer Infektion frühzeitig erkannt und der Patient einer zielgerichteten Diagnostik und Therapie zugeführt werden. Eine Option ist hierbei der Versuch der Infektsanierung unter Erhalt des Implantats. Wesentliche Voraussetzung ist dabei eine stabile Integration der Prothese. Nach den aktuellen Literaturdaten ist eine implantaterhaltende Therapie dann erfolgversprechend, wenn (1) es sich um einen Frühinfekt handelt (<3 Wochen), (2) ein ungekoppeltes Implantat einliegt, (3) eine Monoinfektion mit antibiotikasensiblen Bakterien vorliegt, (4) eine gute Weichteildeckung vorhanden ist und (5) kein Immundefizit besteht. Als Kontraindikationen für eine prothesenerhaltende Therapie müssen chronische Infektionen, gekoppelte Prothesen und Weichteildefekte gewertet werden. Nur die frühzeitige und konsequente Therapie mit operativem Débridement und differenzierter systemischer Langzeitantibiose kann die dauerhafte Infektsanierung ermöglichen. Der zusätzliche Einsatz biofilmgängiger Antibiotika hat die Prognose der implantaterhaltenden Therapie deutlich verbessert. Aufgrund der häufig nicht zufriedenstellenden Resultate des septischen Prothesenwechsels muss die prothesenerhaltende Therapie bei Frühinfekt als ernstzunehmende Therapieoption gewertet werden.

Abstract

Infection of a total knee arthroplasty can be classified as acute, chronic and haematogenic with and without implant loosening. A differentiated treatment concept for all types of infection is necessary. Furthermore, specific treatment has to be initiated early, as any delay is associated with a worsening of the prognosis. Treatment of infection with implant salvage may be one therapeutic option if the implant is not loose. According to the current literature, therapy with retention of the prosthesis may be promising: (1) in the case of early infection (<3 weeks of ongoing symptoms), (2) with unconstrained implants, (3) in the case of infection with a single organism that is susceptible to antibiotic therapy, (4) if soft tissue coverage is not affected, and (5) if the immune system is not compromised. Chronic infections, (semi-)constrained implants and soft tissue defects have to be considered as contraindications and implants should be removed. Early and consequent therapy with operative débridement and specific long-term antibiotic therapy are necessary to achieve implant salvage. The additional application of antibiotics addressing bacterial biofilms have helped to improve the prognosis. Due to the fact that revision arthroplasty is often associated with limited function after infection of the total knee joint, retention of the implant has to be considered a therapeutic alternative in early infection.

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

Literatur

  1. Bengtson S, Knutson K (1991) The infected knee arthroplasty. A 6-year follow-up of 357 cases. Acta Orthop Scand 62: 301–311

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Berg E, Barth E, Clarke D, Dooley L (1989) The use of adjunctive hyperbaric oxygen in treatment of orthopedic infections and problem wounds: an overview and case reports. J Invest Surg 2(4): 409–421

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Brandt CM, Sistrunk WW, Duffy MC et al. (1997) Staphylococcus aureus prostetic joint infection treated with débridement and prosthesis retention. Clin Infect Dis 24(5): 914–919

    Google Scholar 

  4. Brown RB, Sands M (1995) Infectious disease indications for hyperbaric oxygen therapy. Compr Ther 21(11): 663–667

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Burger RR, Basch T, Hopson CN (1991) Implantat salvage in infected total knee arthroplasty. Clin Orthop 273: 105–111

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Ciampolini J, Harding KG (2000) Pathophysiology of chronic bacterial osteomyelitis. Why do antibiotics fail so often? Postgrad Med J 76: 479–483

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Chuard C, Vaudaux P, Waldvogel FA, Lew DP (1993) Susceptibility of Staphylococcus aureus growing on fibronectin-coated surfaces to bacterial antibiotics. Antimicrob Agents Chemoth 37: 625–632

    Google Scholar 

  8. Cierny G, DiPasquale D (2002) Periprosthetic total joint infections. Clin Orthop 403: 23–28

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Costerton JW, Lewandowski Z, Caldwell DE et al. (1995) Mikrobiological biofilms. Annu Rev Microbiol 49: 711–745

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Costerton JW, Stewart PS, Greenberg EP (1999) Bacterial biofilm: A common cause of persistent infections. Science 284: 1318–1322

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. 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

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Darouiche RO, Dhir A et.al. (1994) Vancomycin penetration into biofilm covering infected prostheses and effect on bacteria. J Infect Dis 170: 720–723

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Deirmengian C, Greenbaum J, Stern J et al. (2003) Open débridement of acute gram-positive infections after total knee arthroplasty. Clin Orth Rel Res 416(11): 129–134

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Drancourt M, Stein A, Argenson JN, Zannier A et al. (1993) Oral rifampin plus ofloxacin for treatment of Stephylococcus-infected orthopedic implants. Antimicrob Agents Chemoth 37: 1214–1218

    Google Scholar 

  15. Gristina AG (1987) Biomaterial-centered infection: microbial adhesion versus tissue integration. Science 237: 1588–1595

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Gristina AG (1994) Implant failure and the immuno-incompetent fibro-inflammatory zone. Clin Orthop Relat Res 298: 106–118

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Gristina AG (1994) Biofilms and chronic bacterial infections. Clin Microbiol Newslett 16: 171–176

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Gristina AG, Costeron JW (1985) Bacterial adherence to biomaterials and tissue: The significance of ist role in clinical sepsis. J Bone Joint Surg Am 67: 264–273

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Hanssen AD, Rand JA (1999) Evaluation and treatment of infection at the site of a total hip or knee arthroplasty. Instr Course Lect 48: 111–122 (1998: J Bone Joint Surg Am 80: 910–922)

  20. Hartmann MB, Fehring TK, Jordan L, Norton HJ (1991) Periprosthetic knee sepsis: the role of irrigation and débridement. Clin Orthop 237: 113–118

    Google Scholar 

  21. Kilgus DJ, Howe DJ, Strang A (2002) Results of periprosthetic hip and knee infections caused by resistant bacteria. Clin Orthop 404: 116–124

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Mader JT, Adams KR (1998) Experimental osteomyelitis. In: Schlossberg D (ed) Orthopedic infection. Springer, New York, pp 39–48

  23. Morrey BF, Westholm F, Schoifet S et al. (1989) Long-term results of various treatment options for infected total knee arthroplasty. Clin Orthop Relat Res 248 (11): 120–128

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Moussa FW, Gainor BJ, Anglen JO et al. (1996) Disinfecting agents for removing adherent bacteria from orthopaedic hardware. Clin Orthop Relat Res 329: 255–262

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Munial S, Phillips MJ, Krackow KA (2001) Revision total knee arthroplasty: Planing, controversies, and management of infection. Instr Course Lect 50: 367–377

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Naylor PT, Myrvik QN, Gristina A (1990) Antibiotic resistanceof biomaterial-adherent coagulase-negative and coagulase-positive staphylococci. Clin Orthop 261: 126–133

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Rediske AM, Roeder BL, Nelson JL et al. (2000) Pulsed ultrasound enhances the killing of Escherichia coli biofilms by aminoglycoside antibiotics in vivo. Antimicrob Agents Chemother 44(3): 771–772

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Schierholz JM, Beuth J, König DP, Pulverer G (1999) Antimicrobial substances and effects on sessile bacteria. Zentralbl Bakteriol 289: 165–178

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. Schoifet SD, Morrey BF (1990) Treatment of infection after total knee arthroplasty by débridment with retention of the components. J Bone Joint Surg Am 72: 1383–1390

    Google Scholar 

  30. Stewart PS, Costerton JW (2001) Antibiotic resistance of bacteria in biofilms. Lancet 358: 135–138

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  31. Tattevin P, Cremieux AC, Pottier P et al. (1999) Prosthetic joint infection: When can prothesis salvage be considered? Clin Infect Dis 29: 292–295

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  32. Widmer AF, Gächter A, Ochsner PE, Zimmerli W (1992) Antimicrobial treatement of orthopedic implant-related intections with rifampin combinations. Clin Infect Dis 14: 1251–1253

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  33. Wilson MG, Kelley K, Thornhill TS (1990) Infection as a complication of total knee-replacement arthroplasty. Risk factors and treatment in sixtyseven cases. J Bone Joint Surg Am 72: 878–883

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  34. Zimmerli W, Ochsner PE (2003) Management of infections associated with prosthetic joints. Infection 31: 93–102

    Article  Google Scholar 

  35. Zimmerli W, WidmerAF, Blatter M et al. (1998) Role of rifampin for treatment of orthopedic implant-related staphylococcal infections. A randomized controlled trial. JAMA 279: 1537–1515

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Interessenkonflikt

Es besteht kein Interessenkonflikt. Der korrespondierende Autor versichert, dass keine Verbindungen mit einer Firma, deren Produkt in dem Artikel genannt ist, oder einer Firma, die ein Konkurrenzprodukt vertreibt, bestehen. Die Präsentation des Themas ist unabhängig und die Darstellung der Inhalte produktneutral.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to T. Kern.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Kern, T., Gollwitzer, H., Militz, M. et al. Therapie infizierter Kniegelenktotalendoprothesen. Orthopäde 35, 929–936 (2006). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00132-006-0985-z

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00132-006-0985-z

Schlüsselwörter

Keywords

Navigation