Cargando…

Risk factors for revision due to infection after primary total hip arthroplasty: A population-based study of 80,756 primary procedures in the Danish Hip Arthroplasty Registry

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: There has been a limited amount of research on risk factors for revision due to infection following total hip arthroplasty (THA), probably due to low absolute numbers of revisions. We therefore studied patient- and surgery-related risk factors for revision due to infection af...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Pedersen, Alma B, Svendsson, Jens E, Johnsen, Søren P, Riis, Anders, Overgaard, Søren
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Informa Healthcare 2010
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3214741/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20860453
http://dx.doi.org/10.3109/17453674.2010.519908
Descripción
Sumario:BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: There has been a limited amount of research on risk factors for revision due to infection following total hip arthroplasty (THA), probably due to low absolute numbers of revisions. We therefore studied patient- and surgery-related risk factors for revision due to infection after primary THA in a population-based setting. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Using the Danish Hip Arthroplasty Registry, we identified 80,756 primary THAs performed in Denmark between Jan 1, 1995 and Dec 31, 2008. We used Cox regression analysis to compute crude and adjusted relative risk (RR) of revision due to infection. Revision was defined as extraction or exchange of any component due to infection. The median follow-up time was 5 (0–14) years. RESULTS: 597 primary THAs (0.7%) were revised due to infection. Males, patients with any co-morbidity, patients operated due to non-traumatic avascular femoral head necrosis, and patients with long duration of surgery had an increased RR of revision due to infection within the total follow-up time. A tendency of increased RR of revision was found for patients who had received cemented THA without antibiotic and hybrid THA relative to patients with cementless implants. Hip diagnosis and fixation technique were not associated with risk of revision due to infection within 1 year of surgery (short-term risk). INTERPRETATION: We identified several categories of THA patients who had a higher risk of revision due to infection. Further research is required to explain the mechanism underlying this increased risk. More attention should be paid by clinicians to infection prevention strategies in patients with THA, particularly those with increased risk.