The Journal Of Bone & Joint Surgery - Scientific Articles: 01 January 2014 - Volume 96 - Issue 1 - p. e1

One-Stage Exchange Arthroplasty for Chronic Periprosthetic Hip Infection: Results of a Large Prospective Cohort Study

Zeller Valérie, MD; Lhotellier Luc, MD; Marmor Simon, MD; Leclerc Philippe, MD; Krain Alysa, MD; Graff Wilfrid, MD; Ducroquet Françoise, MD; Biau David, PhD; Leonard Philippe, MD; Desplaces Nicole, MD; Mamoudy Patrick, MD

Hip

Background: Exchange arthroplasty of one or two stages is required for the treatment of chronic periprosthetic joint infections. Two-stage exchange is costly and has high morbidity with limited patient mobility between procedures. One-stage exchange has been promoted by several European teams as the preferred alternative. The aim of this study was to prospectively analyze the outcome of patients with a periprosthetic hip infection treated with one-stage exchange arthroplasty.

Methods: We performed a prospective cohort study in a French referral center for osteoarticular infections including all periprosthetic hip infections treated with one-stage exchange arthroplasty from November 2002 to March 2010. Direct exchange was performed in chronic periprosthetic hip infection with no or minor bone loss and preoperative identification of a microorganism from joint fluid aspirate. No antibiotic-loaded bone cement was used. Antibiotic therapy was administered for twelve weeks: intravenously for four to six weeks, followed by an oral regimen for six to eight weeks. Follow-up was a minimum of two years. The following events were noted: relapse, new infection, joint revision for mechanical reasons, and periprosthetic hip infection-related and unrelated deaths.

Results: One hundred and fifty-seven patients with periprosthetic hip infections with a median infection duration of 258 days (interquartile range, 120 to 551 days) prior to our index surgical procedure for infection were included. Periprosthetic hip infection occurred in ninety-nine cases of primary hip arthroplasty, twenty-seven cases of revision arthroplasty, and thirty-one cases in which the periprosthetic hip infection had been treated previously. A difficult-to-treat organism was isolated in fifty-nine cases (38%). After a median follow-up of 41.6 months (interquartile range, 28.1 to 66.9 months), two relapses, six new infections, nine revisions for mechanical reasons, two related deaths, and nineteen unrelated deaths occurred.

Conclusions: One-stage exchange arthroplasty is an effective surgical procedure in patients with periprosthetic hip infection who have good bone quality. Precise identification of the microorganism(s) and prolonged administration of appropriate intravenous antibiotic therapy are key factors for successful treatment.

Level of Evidence: Therapeutic Level II. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

Link to article