Is two-stage revision surgery for infected hip arthroplasty worth the suffering,resources and results compared to one-stage?

Abstract

Purpose:

Periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) is the most serious complication of total hip arthroplasty. The treatment is usually revision in either 1 or 2 stages. This study analyses revision with impaction bone grafting for periprosthetic joint infection of the hip and compares 1- and 2-stage strategies.

Patients and methods:

We reviewed 55 consecutive cases (54 patients) of revision arthroplasty for PJI carried out at our hospital between 2002 and 2016. Of these, 46 were 2-stage procedures. 21 had vancomycin mixed in with the bone graft, and all had gentamycin-containing bone cement. The total perioperative blood loss, duration of operation, and length of hospital stay were recorded. Clinical and radiological results were analysed for 48 hips at 2–16 years follow-up.

Results:

No PJI remained at follow-up. 3 patients (6%) had undergone revision for all causes. 1 had radiological signs of mechanical loosening but was not revised. 2-stage procedures had a significantly longer operating time (409 vs. 238 min) and hospital stay (34 vs. 13 days), greater blood loss (2764 vs. 1638 ml), and lower mean functional hip score (15.9 vs. 17.5) at follow-up than the one-stage procedures.

Interpretation:

Revision total hip arthroplasty for PJI with vancomycin-loaded impaction bone grafting is a safe method that achieves both the restoration of bone stock and resolution of the infection. This single-stage procedure could therefore be the new gold standard for treatment of non-complicated PJI in the hip.

Keywords

Antibiotic carrier periprosthetic joint infection revision total hip arthroplasty

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Kapadia

McElroy

Issa

, et al. The economic impact of periprosthetic infections following total knee arthroplasty at a specialized tertiary-care center. J Arthroplasty 2014; 29: 929–932.

Kurtz

Lau

Watson

, et al. Economic burden of periprosthetic joint infection in the United States. J Arthroplasty 2012; 27(Suppl. 8): 61–65.e1.

Haddad

George

. Can national joint registries play a role in improving our understanding of periprosthetic infections? Bone Joint J 2016; 98-B: 289–290.

Lindgren

Gordon

Wretenberg

, et al. Validation of reoperations due to infection in the Swedish hip arthroplasty register. BMC Musculoskelet Disord 2014; 15: 384.

Kärrholm

Mohaddes

Odin

, et al. Swedish hip arthroplasty register, annual report 2017. Göteborg, Sweden: Swedish Hip Arthroplasty Register, 2018.

Kunutsor

Whitehouse

Blom

, et al. Re-infection outcomes following one- and two-stage surgical revision of infected hip prosthesis: a systematic review and meta-analysis. PLoS One 2015; 10: e0139166.

Kunutsor

Whitehouse

Lenguerrand

, et al. Re-infection outcomes following one- and two-stage surgical revision of infected knee prosthesis: a systematic review and meta-analysis. PLoS One 2016; 11: e0151537.

Strange

Whitehouse

Beswick

, et al. One-stage or two-stage revision surgery for prosthetic hip joint infection—the INFORM trial: a study protocol for a randomised controlled trial. Trials 2016; 17: 90.

Tan

Kheir

Tan

, et al. Polymicrobial periprosthetic joint infections: outcome of treatment and identification of risk factors. J Bone Joint Surg Am 2016; 98: 2082–2088.

10.

Yeganeh

Kheir

Shahi

, et al. Rheumatoid arthritis, disease modifying agents, and periprosthetic joint infection: what does a joint surgeon need to know? J Arthroplasty 2018; 33: 1258–1264.

11.

Kheir

Tan

Higuera

, et al. Periprosthetic joint infections caused by Enterococci have poor outcomes. J Arthroplasty 2017; 32: 933–947.

12.

Colo

Rijnen

WHC

Schreurs

. The biological approach in acetabular revision surgery: impaction bone grafting and a cemented cup. Hip Int 2015; 25: 361–367.

13.

Gehrke

Gebauer

Kendoff

. Femoral stem impaction grafting: extending the role of cement. Bone Joint J 2013; 95-B(Suppl. A): 92–94.

14.

Witsø

Persen

Løseth

, et al. Adsorption and release of antibiotics from morselized cancellous bone. In vitro studies of 8 antibiotics. Acta Orthop Scand 1999; 70: 298–304.

15.

Winkler

Haiden

. Allograft bone as antibiotic carrier. J Bone Jt Infect 2017; 2: 52–62.

16.

Buttaro

Gimenez

Greco

, et al. High active local levels of vancomycin without nephrotoxicity released from impacted bone allografts in 20 revision hip arthroplasties. Acta Orthop 2005; 76: 336–340.

17.

Ullmark

Hovelius

Strindberg

, et al. Reduced bleeding through temporary balloon occlusion in hip and knee revision surgery. Acta Orthop Scand 2000; 71: 51–54.

18.

Engelbrecht

Heinert

. Klassifikation und Behandlungsrichtlinien von Knochensubstanzverlusten bei Revisionsoperationen am Huftgelenk - mittelfristige Ergebnisse. Primare und Revisionsalloarthroplastik Hrsg - Endo-Klinik. Hamburg: Springer-Verlag, 1987, pp.189–201.

19.

Ullmark

Hallin

Nilsson

. Impacted corticocancellous allografts and cement for femoral revision of total hip arthroplasty using Lubinus and Charnley prostheses. J Arthroplasty 2002; 17: 325–334.

20.

Zeller

Lhotellier

Marmor

, et al. One-stage exchange arthroplasty for chronic periprosthetic hip infection: results of a large prospective cohort study. J Bone Joint Surg Am 2014; 96: e1.

21.

Harris

McCarthy

Jr O’Neill

. Femoral component loosening using contemporary techniques of femoral cement fixation. J Bone Joint Surg Am 1982; 64: 1063–1067.

22.

Zicat

Engh

Gokcen

. Patterns of osteolysis around total hip components inserted with and without cement. J Bone Joint Surg Am 1995; 77: 432–439.

23.

Hodgkinson

Shelley

Wroblewski

. The correlation between the roentgenographic appearance and operative findings at the bone-cement junction of the socket in Charnley low friction arthroplasties. Clin Orthop Relat Res 1988; 105–109.

24.

Charnley

. Numerical grading of clinical results. In: Charnley

(ed.) Low friction arthroplasty of the hip: theory and practice. Berlin Heidelberg: Springer-Verlag, 1979, pp.20–24.

25.

Buchholz

Elson

Engelbrecht

, et al. Management of deep infection of total hip replacement. J Bone Joint Surg Br 1981; 63-B: 342–353.

26.

Steinbrink

Frommelt

. [Treatment of periprosthetic infection of the hip using one-stage exchange surgery]. Orthopade 1995; 24: 335–343.

27.

Gehrke

Kendoff

. Peri-prosthetic hip infections: in favour of one-stage. Hip Int 2012; 22(Suppl. 8): S40–S45.

28.

Loty

Postel

Evrard

, et al. [One stage revision of infected total hip replacements with replacement of bone loss by allografts. Study of 90 cases of which 46 used bone allografts]. Int Orthop 1992; 16: 330–338.

29.

Raut

Siney

Wroblewski

. One-stage revision of total hip arthroplasty for deep infection. Long-term followup. Clin Orthop Relat Res 1995; 202–207.

30.

Winkler

Stoiber

Kaudela

, et al. One stage uncemented revision of infected total hip replacement using cancellous allograft bone impregnated with antibiotics. J Bone Joint Surg Br 2008; 90: 1580–1584.

31.

Klouche

Leonard

Zeller

, et al. Infected total hip arthroplasty revision: one- or two-stage procedure? Orthop Traumatol Surg Res 2012; 98: 144–150.

32.

Hansen

Tetreault

Zmistowski

, et al. Outcome of one-stage cementless exchange for acute postoperative periprosthetic hip infection. Clin Orthop Relat Res 2013; 471: 3214–3222.

33.

Choi

H-R

Kwon

Y-M

Freiberg

, et al. Comparison of one-stage revision with antibiotic cement versus two-stage revision results for infected total hip arthroplasty. J Arthroplasty 2013; 28(Suppl. 8): 66–70.

34.

Lange

Troelsen

Thomsen

, et al. Chronic infections in hip arthroplasties: comparing risk of reinfection following one-stage and two-stage revision: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Clin Epidemiol 2012; 4: 57–73.

35.

Henry

Russell

Nocon

, et al. Low rate of microbiologic relapse in two-stage exchange for hip prosthetic joint infections. Open Forum Infect Dis 2017; 4(Suppl. 1): S90.

36.

Gomez

Tan

Manrique

, et al. The fate of spacers in the treatment of periprosthetic joint infection. J Bone Joint Surg Am 2015; 97: 1495–1502.

37.

Gehrke

Alijanipour

Parvizi

. The management of an infected total knee arthroplasty. Bone Joint J 2015; 97-B(Suppl. A): 20–29.

38.

Frew

Cannon

Nichol

, et al. Comparison of the elution properties of commercially available gentamicin and bone cement containing vancomycin with ‘home-made’ preparations. Bone Joint J 2017; 99-B: 73–77.

39.

Fink

Vogt

Reinsch

, et al. Sufficient release of antibiotic by a spacer 6 weeks after implantation in two-stage revision of infected hip prostheses. Clin Orthop Relat Res 2011; 469: 3141–3147.

40.

Barckman

Baas

Sorensen

, et al. Does tobramycin impregnation of allograft bone affect implant fixation? - An experimental study in 12 dogs. J Biomed Mater Res B Appl Biomater 2014; 102: 173–180.

41.

Lindsey

Probe

Miclau

, et al. The effects of antibiotic-impregnated autogeneic cancellous bone graft on bone healing. Clin Orthop Relat Res 1993; 303–312.

42.

Anagnostakos

Schröder

. Antibiotic-impregnated bone grafts in orthopaedic and trauma surgery: a systematic review of the literature. Int J Biomater 2012; 2012: 538061.

43.

Buttaro

Della Valle

AMG

Piñeiro

, et al. Incorporation of vancomycin-supplemented bone allografts: radiographical, histopathological and immunohistochemical study in pigs. Acta Orthop Scand 2003; 74: 505–513.

44.

Buttaro

. Bone grafting and two-stage revision total hip arthroplasty. Hip Int 2012; 22(Suppl. 8): S69–S74.

45.

Buttaro

Pusso

Piccaluga

. Vancomycin-supplemented impacted bone allografts in infected hip arthroplasty. Two-stage revision results. J Bone Joint Surg Br 2005; 87: 314–319.

46.

Bue

Hanberg

Koch

, et al. Single-dose bone pharmacokinetics of vancomycin in a porcine implant-associated osteomyelitis model. J Orthop Res 2018; 36: 1093–1098.

47.

Parvizi

Gehrke

Chen

. Proceedings of the international consensus on periprosthetic joint infection. Bone Joint J 2013; 95-B: 1450–1452.

48.

Scarborough

Zambellas

, et al. Oral versus intravenous antibiotic treatment for bone and joint infections (OVIVA): study protocol for a randomised controlled trial. Trials 2015; 16: 583.

49.

English

Timperley

Dunlop

, et al. Impaction grafting of the femur in two-stage revision for infected total hip replacement. J Bone Joint Surg Br 2002; 84: 700–705.

50.

Stigbrand

Gustafsson

Ullmark

. A 2- to 16-year clinical follow-up of revision total hip arthroplasty using a new acetabular implant combined with impacted bone allografts and a cemented cup. J Arthroplasty 2018; 33: 815–822.

51.

Stigbrand

Ullmark

. A 3- to 18-year follow-up of revision total hip arthroplasty with impacted bone allografts and cemented lubinus SP II stem. Clinical, radiographic, and survivorship analysis with comparison to the literature. J Arthroplasty 2017; 32: 2810–2814.

52.

Ornstein

Linder

Ranstam

, et al. Femoral impaction bone grafting with the exeter stem - the Swedish experience: survivorship analysis of 1305 revisions performed between 1989 and 2002. J Bone Joint Surg Br 2009; 91: 441–446.

53.

Slooff

Huiskes

van Horn

, et al. Bone grafting in total hip replacement for acetabular protrusion. Acta Orthop Scand 1984; 55: 593–596.

54.

Gie

Linder

Ling

, et al. Impacted cancellous allografts and cement for revision total hip arthroplasty. J Bone Joint Surg Br 1993; 75: 14–21.

55.

Te Stroet

MAJ

Keurentjes

Rijnen

WHC

, et al. Acetabular revision with impaction bone grafting and a cemented polyethylene acetabular component: comparison of the Kaplan-Meier analysis to the competing risk analysis in 62 revisions with 25 to 30 years follow-up. Bone Joint J 2015; 97-B: 1338–1344.

56.

Ullmark

Obrant

. Histology of impacted bone-graft incorporation. J Arthroplasty 2002; 17: 150–157.

57.

Sörensen

Ullmark

Långström

, et al. Rapid bone and blood flow formation in impacted morselized allografts: positron emission tomography (PET) studies on allografts in 5 femoral component revisions of total hip arthroplasty. Acta Orthop Scand 2003; 74: 633–643.

58.

Ullmark

Sörensen

Nilsson

, et al. Bone healing of severe acetabular defects after revision arthroplasty. Acta Orthop 2009; 80: 179–183.

59.

Sharqzad

Cavalheiro

Zahar

, et al. Blood loss and allogeneic transfusion for surgical treatment of periprosthetic joint infection: a comparison of one- vs. two-stage exchange total hip arthroplasty. Int Orthop 2019; 43: 2025–2030.

60.

De Man

FHR

Sendi

Zimmerli

, et al. Infectiological, functional, and radiographic outcome after revision for prosthetic hip infection according to a strict algorithm. Acta Orthop 2011; 82: 27–34.

61.

Langlais

. Can we improve the results of revision arthroplasty for infected total hip replacement? J Bone Joint Surg Br 2003; 85: 637–640.

62.

Garellick

Kärrholm

Rogmark

, et al. Swedish Hip Arthroplasty Register, Annual Report 2010. Göteborg, Sweden: Swedish Hip Arthroplasty Register, 2011.