Cargando…
Outcome of single-stage versus two-stage exchange for revision knee arthroplasty for chronic periprosthetic infection
The gold standard for treating chronic periprosthetic joint infection is still considered to be double-stage exchange revision. The purpose of this review is to analyse the difference in terms of eradication rates and functional outcome after single- and double-stage prosthetic exchange for chronic...
Autores principales: | , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
British Editorial Society of Bone and Joint Surgery
2019
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6719605/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31537999 http://dx.doi.org/10.1302/2058-5241.4.190003 |
_version_ | 1783447959207149568 |
---|---|
author | Pangaud, Corentin Ollivier, Matthieu Argenson, Jean-Noël |
author_facet | Pangaud, Corentin Ollivier, Matthieu Argenson, Jean-Noël |
author_sort | Pangaud, Corentin |
collection | PubMed |
description | The gold standard for treating chronic periprosthetic joint infection is still considered to be double-stage exchange revision. The purpose of this review is to analyse the difference in terms of eradication rates and functional outcome after single- and double-stage prosthetic exchange for chronic periprosthetic joint infection around the knee. We reviewed full text articles written in English from 1992 to 2018 reporting the success rates and functional outcomes of either single-stage exchange or double-stage exchange for knee arthroplasty revision performed for chronic infection. In the case of double-stage exchange, particular attention was paid to the type of spacer: articulating or static. In all, 32 articles were analysed: 14 articles for single-stage including 687 patients and 18 articles for double-stage including 1086 patients. The average eradication rate was 87.1% for the one-stage procedure and 84.8% for the two-stage procedure. The functional outcomes were similar in both groups: the average Knee Society Knee Score was 80.0 in the single-stage exchange group and 77.8 in the double-stage exchange. The average range of motion was 91.4° in the single-stage exchange group and 97.8° in the double-stage exchange group. Single-stage exchange appears to be a viable alternative to two -stage exchange in cases of chronic periprosthetic joint infection around the knee, provided there are no contra-indications, producing similar results in terms of eradication rates and functional outcomes, and offering the advantage of a unique surgical procedure, lower morbidity and reduced costs. Cite this article: EFORT Open Rev 2019;4:495-502. DOI: 10.1302/2058-5241.4.190003 |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-6719605 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2019 |
publisher | British Editorial Society of Bone and Joint Surgery |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-67196052019-09-19 Outcome of single-stage versus two-stage exchange for revision knee arthroplasty for chronic periprosthetic infection Pangaud, Corentin Ollivier, Matthieu Argenson, Jean-Noël EFORT Open Rev Knee The gold standard for treating chronic periprosthetic joint infection is still considered to be double-stage exchange revision. The purpose of this review is to analyse the difference in terms of eradication rates and functional outcome after single- and double-stage prosthetic exchange for chronic periprosthetic joint infection around the knee. We reviewed full text articles written in English from 1992 to 2018 reporting the success rates and functional outcomes of either single-stage exchange or double-stage exchange for knee arthroplasty revision performed for chronic infection. In the case of double-stage exchange, particular attention was paid to the type of spacer: articulating or static. In all, 32 articles were analysed: 14 articles for single-stage including 687 patients and 18 articles for double-stage including 1086 patients. The average eradication rate was 87.1% for the one-stage procedure and 84.8% for the two-stage procedure. The functional outcomes were similar in both groups: the average Knee Society Knee Score was 80.0 in the single-stage exchange group and 77.8 in the double-stage exchange. The average range of motion was 91.4° in the single-stage exchange group and 97.8° in the double-stage exchange group. Single-stage exchange appears to be a viable alternative to two -stage exchange in cases of chronic periprosthetic joint infection around the knee, provided there are no contra-indications, producing similar results in terms of eradication rates and functional outcomes, and offering the advantage of a unique surgical procedure, lower morbidity and reduced costs. Cite this article: EFORT Open Rev 2019;4:495-502. DOI: 10.1302/2058-5241.4.190003 British Editorial Society of Bone and Joint Surgery 2019-08-02 /pmc/articles/PMC6719605/ /pubmed/31537999 http://dx.doi.org/10.1302/2058-5241.4.190003 Text en © 2019 The author(s) https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/ This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-Non Commercial 4.0 International (CC BY-NC 4.0) licence (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/) which permits non-commercial use, reproduction and distribution of the work without further permission provided the original work is attributed. |
spellingShingle | Knee Pangaud, Corentin Ollivier, Matthieu Argenson, Jean-Noël Outcome of single-stage versus two-stage exchange for revision knee arthroplasty for chronic periprosthetic infection |
title | Outcome of single-stage versus two-stage exchange for revision knee arthroplasty for chronic periprosthetic infection |
title_full | Outcome of single-stage versus two-stage exchange for revision knee arthroplasty for chronic periprosthetic infection |
title_fullStr | Outcome of single-stage versus two-stage exchange for revision knee arthroplasty for chronic periprosthetic infection |
title_full_unstemmed | Outcome of single-stage versus two-stage exchange for revision knee arthroplasty for chronic periprosthetic infection |
title_short | Outcome of single-stage versus two-stage exchange for revision knee arthroplasty for chronic periprosthetic infection |
title_sort | outcome of single-stage versus two-stage exchange for revision knee arthroplasty for chronic periprosthetic infection |
topic | Knee |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6719605/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31537999 http://dx.doi.org/10.1302/2058-5241.4.190003 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT pangaudcorentin outcomeofsinglestageversustwostageexchangeforrevisionkneearthroplastyforchronicperiprostheticinfection AT olliviermatthieu outcomeofsinglestageversustwostageexchangeforrevisionkneearthroplastyforchronicperiprostheticinfection AT argensonjeannoel outcomeofsinglestageversustwostageexchangeforrevisionkneearthroplastyforchronicperiprostheticinfection |