Cargando…

Mid-term follow-up results after implementing a new strategy for the diagnosis and management of periprosthetic joint infections

BACKGROUND: Periprosthetic joint infections (PJIs) represent one of the most serious complications associated with joint replacement surgeries, a complication also of modern orthopedic surgery despite the efforts that occurred in this field. Frequently PJIs lead to prolonged morbidity, increased cos...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Birlutiu, Rares Mircea, Mihalache, Manuela, Mihalache, Patricia, Cismasiu, Razvan Silviu, Birlutiu, Victoria
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2021
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8361652/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34384360
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12879-021-06407-x
Descripción
Sumario:BACKGROUND: Periprosthetic joint infections (PJIs) represent one of the most serious complications associated with joint replacement surgeries, a complication also of modern orthopedic surgery despite the efforts that occurred in this field. Frequently PJIs lead to prolonged morbidity, increased costs and mortality. METHODS: We are conducting a single-center observational cohort ongoing study in the Academic Emergency Hospital Sibiu, Romania, study in which sonication of the retrieved and as a rapid method of bacteria detection, molecular identification of bacteria by 16S rRNA beacon-based fluorescent in situ hybridization (bbFISH) are used. RESULTS: A total of 61 patients were enrolled in this study. The diagnosis of aseptic loosening was established in 30 cases (49.1%) and the diagnosis of periprosthetic joint infection was established at 31 patients (50.8%). The mean follow-up period in the subgroup of patients diagnosed with periprosthetic joint infections was 36.06 ± 12.59 months (range: 1–54). The 25-months Kaplan-Meier survival rate as the end point, as a consequence of the period of enrollment and a different follow-up period for each type of surgical procedure, was 75% after debridement and implant retention, 91.7% after one-stage exchange, 92.3% after two-stage exchange, and 100% after three-stage exchange. There were no significant differences in survival percentage. CONCLUSIONS: Our study has good results similar to previously published data. We cannot recommend one strategy of managing prosthetic joint infections over the other. Definitely, there is a need for prospective randomized controlled trials.