Cargando…

Missed low-grade infection in suspected aseptic loosening has no consequences for the survival of total hip arthroplasty: 173 patients followed for 6 to 9 years

Background and purpose — Aseptic loosening and infection are 2 of the most common causes of revision of hip implants. Antibiotic prophylaxis reduces not only the rate of revision due to infection but also the rate of revision due to aseptic loosening. This suggests under-diagnosis of infections in p...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Boot, Willemijn, Moojen, Dirk Jan F, Visser, Els, Lehr, A Mechteld, De Windt, Tommy S, Van Hellemondt, Gijs, Geurts, Jan, Tulp, Niek J A, Schreurs, B Wim, Burger, Bart J, Dhert, Wouter J A, Gawlitta, Debby, Vogely, H Charles
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Informa Healthcare 2015
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4750766/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26364842
http://dx.doi.org/10.3109/17453674.2015.1086942
_version_ 1782415478325510144
author Boot, Willemijn
Moojen, Dirk Jan F
Visser, Els
Lehr, A Mechteld
De Windt, Tommy S
Van Hellemondt, Gijs
Geurts, Jan
Tulp, Niek J A
Schreurs, B Wim
Burger, Bart J
Dhert, Wouter J A
Gawlitta, Debby
Vogely, H Charles
author_facet Boot, Willemijn
Moojen, Dirk Jan F
Visser, Els
Lehr, A Mechteld
De Windt, Tommy S
Van Hellemondt, Gijs
Geurts, Jan
Tulp, Niek J A
Schreurs, B Wim
Burger, Bart J
Dhert, Wouter J A
Gawlitta, Debby
Vogely, H Charles
author_sort Boot, Willemijn
collection PubMed
description Background and purpose — Aseptic loosening and infection are 2 of the most common causes of revision of hip implants. Antibiotic prophylaxis reduces not only the rate of revision due to infection but also the rate of revision due to aseptic loosening. This suggests under-diagnosis of infections in patients with presumed aseptic loosening and indicates that current diagnostic tools are suboptimal. In a previous multicenter study on 176 patients undergoing revision of a total hip arthroplasty due to presumed aseptic loosening, optimized diagnostics revealed that 4–13% of the patients had a low-grade infection. These infections were not treated as such, and in the current follow-up study the effect on mid- to long-term implant survival was investigated. Patients and methods — Patients were sent a 2-part questionnaire. Part A requested information about possible re-revisions of their total hip arthroplasty. Part B consisted of 3 patient-related outcome measure questionnaires (EQ5D, Oxford hip score, and visual analog scale for pain). Additional information was retrieved from the medical records. The group of patients found to have a low-grade infection was compared to those with aseptic loosening. Results — 173 of 176 patients from the original study were included. In the follow-up time between the revision surgery and the current study (mean 7.5 years), 31 patients had died. No statistically significant difference in the number of re-revisions was found between the infection group (2 out of 21) and the aseptic loosening group (13 out of 152); nor was there any significant difference in the time to re-revision. Quality of life, function, and pain were similar between the groups, but only 99 (57%) of the patients returned part B. Interpretation — Under-diagnosis of low-grade infection in conjunction with presumed aseptic revision of total hip arthroplasty may not affect implant survival.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-4750766
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2015
publisher Informa Healthcare
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-47507662016-03-02 Missed low-grade infection in suspected aseptic loosening has no consequences for the survival of total hip arthroplasty: 173 patients followed for 6 to 9 years Boot, Willemijn Moojen, Dirk Jan F Visser, Els Lehr, A Mechteld De Windt, Tommy S Van Hellemondt, Gijs Geurts, Jan Tulp, Niek J A Schreurs, B Wim Burger, Bart J Dhert, Wouter J A Gawlitta, Debby Vogely, H Charles Acta Orthop Articles Background and purpose — Aseptic loosening and infection are 2 of the most common causes of revision of hip implants. Antibiotic prophylaxis reduces not only the rate of revision due to infection but also the rate of revision due to aseptic loosening. This suggests under-diagnosis of infections in patients with presumed aseptic loosening and indicates that current diagnostic tools are suboptimal. In a previous multicenter study on 176 patients undergoing revision of a total hip arthroplasty due to presumed aseptic loosening, optimized diagnostics revealed that 4–13% of the patients had a low-grade infection. These infections were not treated as such, and in the current follow-up study the effect on mid- to long-term implant survival was investigated. Patients and methods — Patients were sent a 2-part questionnaire. Part A requested information about possible re-revisions of their total hip arthroplasty. Part B consisted of 3 patient-related outcome measure questionnaires (EQ5D, Oxford hip score, and visual analog scale for pain). Additional information was retrieved from the medical records. The group of patients found to have a low-grade infection was compared to those with aseptic loosening. Results — 173 of 176 patients from the original study were included. In the follow-up time between the revision surgery and the current study (mean 7.5 years), 31 patients had died. No statistically significant difference in the number of re-revisions was found between the infection group (2 out of 21) and the aseptic loosening group (13 out of 152); nor was there any significant difference in the time to re-revision. Quality of life, function, and pain were similar between the groups, but only 99 (57%) of the patients returned part B. Interpretation — Under-diagnosis of low-grade infection in conjunction with presumed aseptic revision of total hip arthroplasty may not affect implant survival. Informa Healthcare 2015-11 2015-09-10 /pmc/articles/PMC4750766/ /pubmed/26364842 http://dx.doi.org/10.3109/17453674.2015.1086942 Text en © 2015 The Author(s). Published by Taylor & Francis on behalf of the Nordic Orthopedic Federation. 2015 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/3.0 This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-Non-Commercial License (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/3.0)
spellingShingle Articles
Boot, Willemijn
Moojen, Dirk Jan F
Visser, Els
Lehr, A Mechteld
De Windt, Tommy S
Van Hellemondt, Gijs
Geurts, Jan
Tulp, Niek J A
Schreurs, B Wim
Burger, Bart J
Dhert, Wouter J A
Gawlitta, Debby
Vogely, H Charles
Missed low-grade infection in suspected aseptic loosening has no consequences for the survival of total hip arthroplasty: 173 patients followed for 6 to 9 years
title Missed low-grade infection in suspected aseptic loosening has no consequences for the survival of total hip arthroplasty: 173 patients followed for 6 to 9 years
title_full Missed low-grade infection in suspected aseptic loosening has no consequences for the survival of total hip arthroplasty: 173 patients followed for 6 to 9 years
title_fullStr Missed low-grade infection in suspected aseptic loosening has no consequences for the survival of total hip arthroplasty: 173 patients followed for 6 to 9 years
title_full_unstemmed Missed low-grade infection in suspected aseptic loosening has no consequences for the survival of total hip arthroplasty: 173 patients followed for 6 to 9 years
title_short Missed low-grade infection in suspected aseptic loosening has no consequences for the survival of total hip arthroplasty: 173 patients followed for 6 to 9 years
title_sort missed low-grade infection in suspected aseptic loosening has no consequences for the survival of total hip arthroplasty: 173 patients followed for 6 to 9 years
topic Articles
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4750766/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26364842
http://dx.doi.org/10.3109/17453674.2015.1086942
work_keys_str_mv AT bootwillemijn missedlowgradeinfectioninsuspectedasepticlooseninghasnoconsequencesforthesurvivaloftotalhiparthroplasty173patientsfollowedfor6to9years
AT moojendirkjanf missedlowgradeinfectioninsuspectedasepticlooseninghasnoconsequencesforthesurvivaloftotalhiparthroplasty173patientsfollowedfor6to9years
AT visserels missedlowgradeinfectioninsuspectedasepticlooseninghasnoconsequencesforthesurvivaloftotalhiparthroplasty173patientsfollowedfor6to9years
AT lehramechteld missedlowgradeinfectioninsuspectedasepticlooseninghasnoconsequencesforthesurvivaloftotalhiparthroplasty173patientsfollowedfor6to9years
AT dewindttommys missedlowgradeinfectioninsuspectedasepticlooseninghasnoconsequencesforthesurvivaloftotalhiparthroplasty173patientsfollowedfor6to9years
AT vanhellemondtgijs missedlowgradeinfectioninsuspectedasepticlooseninghasnoconsequencesforthesurvivaloftotalhiparthroplasty173patientsfollowedfor6to9years
AT geurtsjan missedlowgradeinfectioninsuspectedasepticlooseninghasnoconsequencesforthesurvivaloftotalhiparthroplasty173patientsfollowedfor6to9years
AT tulpniekja missedlowgradeinfectioninsuspectedasepticlooseninghasnoconsequencesforthesurvivaloftotalhiparthroplasty173patientsfollowedfor6to9years
AT schreursbwim missedlowgradeinfectioninsuspectedasepticlooseninghasnoconsequencesforthesurvivaloftotalhiparthroplasty173patientsfollowedfor6to9years
AT burgerbartj missedlowgradeinfectioninsuspectedasepticlooseninghasnoconsequencesforthesurvivaloftotalhiparthroplasty173patientsfollowedfor6to9years
AT dhertwouterja missedlowgradeinfectioninsuspectedasepticlooseninghasnoconsequencesforthesurvivaloftotalhiparthroplasty173patientsfollowedfor6to9years
AT gawlittadebby missedlowgradeinfectioninsuspectedasepticlooseninghasnoconsequencesforthesurvivaloftotalhiparthroplasty173patientsfollowedfor6to9years
AT vogelyhcharles missedlowgradeinfectioninsuspectedasepticlooseninghasnoconsequencesforthesurvivaloftotalhiparthroplasty173patientsfollowedfor6to9years