Cargando…
Outcome of prosthesis exchange for infected knee arthroplasty: the effect of treatment approach: A systematic review of the literature
Background and purpose Two-stage revision remains the gold standard in the treatment of infected knee arthroplasty. Lately, good long-term results of direct exchange arthroplasty have been reported. The purpose of this literature review is to compare the clinical outcome achieved with one-stage revi...
Autores principales: | , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Informa Healthcare
2009
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2823239/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19234888 http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/17453670902805064 |
_version_ | 1782177625247055872 |
---|---|
author | Jämsen, Esa Stogiannidis, Ioannis Malmivaara, Antti Pajamäki, Jorma Puolakka, Timo Konttinen, Yrjö T |
author_facet | Jämsen, Esa Stogiannidis, Ioannis Malmivaara, Antti Pajamäki, Jorma Puolakka, Timo Konttinen, Yrjö T |
author_sort | Jämsen, Esa |
collection | PubMed |
description | Background and purpose Two-stage revision remains the gold standard in the treatment of infected knee arthroplasty. Lately, good long-term results of direct exchange arthroplasty have been reported. The purpose of this literature review is to compare the clinical outcome achieved with one-stage revision and two-stage revision with different types of spacers. Methods A thorough systematic review of literature was undertaken to idenepsy reports on the treatment alternatives. Papers written in English or including an English abstract, published from 1980 through 2005, and reporting either the success rate in eradication of infection or the clinical status achieved were reviewed. 31 original articles describing the results of 154 one-stage exchange arthoplasties and of 926 two-stage exchange arthoplasties were included. The depth of detail in the description of materials and methods varied markedly, making it impossible to perform a meta-analysis. Instead, a descriptive review of the results is presented. Results With a follow-up of 12–122 months, the overall success rate in eradication of infection was 73–100% after one-stage revisions and 82–100% after two-stage revisions. Reinfection rates were the lowest in series where articulating cement spacers were used, though the follow-up was relatively short. Studies using articulating spacers reported the highest average postoperative ranges of motion. Otherwise, no correlations were observed between the clinical outcome and the length of follow-up, the type of revision, or the type of spacer. The clinical outcome (knee scores and range of motion) of the one-stage revisions was no different from that of the two-stage revisions. Interpretation Two-stage exchange is an effective treatment. Mobile spacers may further improve the range of motion. More experience in one-stage revision is required in order to define its role in the management of infected knee arthroplasties. |
format | Text |
id | pubmed-2823239 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2009 |
publisher | Informa Healthcare |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-28232392010-02-18 Outcome of prosthesis exchange for infected knee arthroplasty: the effect of treatment approach: A systematic review of the literature Jämsen, Esa Stogiannidis, Ioannis Malmivaara, Antti Pajamäki, Jorma Puolakka, Timo Konttinen, Yrjö T Acta Orthop Research Article Background and purpose Two-stage revision remains the gold standard in the treatment of infected knee arthroplasty. Lately, good long-term results of direct exchange arthroplasty have been reported. The purpose of this literature review is to compare the clinical outcome achieved with one-stage revision and two-stage revision with different types of spacers. Methods A thorough systematic review of literature was undertaken to idenepsy reports on the treatment alternatives. Papers written in English or including an English abstract, published from 1980 through 2005, and reporting either the success rate in eradication of infection or the clinical status achieved were reviewed. 31 original articles describing the results of 154 one-stage exchange arthoplasties and of 926 two-stage exchange arthoplasties were included. The depth of detail in the description of materials and methods varied markedly, making it impossible to perform a meta-analysis. Instead, a descriptive review of the results is presented. Results With a follow-up of 12–122 months, the overall success rate in eradication of infection was 73–100% after one-stage revisions and 82–100% after two-stage revisions. Reinfection rates were the lowest in series where articulating cement spacers were used, though the follow-up was relatively short. Studies using articulating spacers reported the highest average postoperative ranges of motion. Otherwise, no correlations were observed between the clinical outcome and the length of follow-up, the type of revision, or the type of spacer. The clinical outcome (knee scores and range of motion) of the one-stage revisions was no different from that of the two-stage revisions. Interpretation Two-stage exchange is an effective treatment. Mobile spacers may further improve the range of motion. More experience in one-stage revision is required in order to define its role in the management of infected knee arthroplasties. Informa Healthcare 2009-02-26 2009-02-01 /pmc/articles/PMC2823239/ /pubmed/19234888 http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/17453670902805064 Text en Copyright: © Nordic Orthopedic Federation http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.5/ This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Noncommercial License which permits any noncommercial use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the source is credited. |
spellingShingle | Research Article Jämsen, Esa Stogiannidis, Ioannis Malmivaara, Antti Pajamäki, Jorma Puolakka, Timo Konttinen, Yrjö T Outcome of prosthesis exchange for infected knee arthroplasty: the effect of treatment approach: A systematic review of the literature |
title | Outcome of prosthesis exchange for infected knee arthroplasty: the effect of treatment approach: A systematic review of the literature |
title_full | Outcome of prosthesis exchange for infected knee arthroplasty: the effect of treatment approach: A systematic review of the literature |
title_fullStr | Outcome of prosthesis exchange for infected knee arthroplasty: the effect of treatment approach: A systematic review of the literature |
title_full_unstemmed | Outcome of prosthesis exchange for infected knee arthroplasty: the effect of treatment approach: A systematic review of the literature |
title_short | Outcome of prosthesis exchange for infected knee arthroplasty: the effect of treatment approach: A systematic review of the literature |
title_sort | outcome of prosthesis exchange for infected knee arthroplasty: the effect of treatment approach: a systematic review of the literature |
topic | Research Article |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2823239/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19234888 http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/17453670902805064 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT jamsenesa outcomeofprosthesisexchangeforinfectedkneearthroplastytheeffectoftreatmentapproachasystematicreviewoftheliterature AT stogiannidisioannis outcomeofprosthesisexchangeforinfectedkneearthroplastytheeffectoftreatmentapproachasystematicreviewoftheliterature AT malmivaaraantti outcomeofprosthesisexchangeforinfectedkneearthroplastytheeffectoftreatmentapproachasystematicreviewoftheliterature AT pajamakijorma outcomeofprosthesisexchangeforinfectedkneearthroplastytheeffectoftreatmentapproachasystematicreviewoftheliterature AT puolakkatimo outcomeofprosthesisexchangeforinfectedkneearthroplastytheeffectoftreatmentapproachasystematicreviewoftheliterature AT konttinenyrjot outcomeofprosthesisexchangeforinfectedkneearthroplastytheeffectoftreatmentapproachasystematicreviewoftheliterature |