One-Stage or Two-Stage Revision for Infected Shoulder Arthroplasty: A Head-to-Head Meta-Analysis of Comparative Studies.

IF 2.8 Q2 SURGERY
JBJS Reviews Pub Date : 2026-07-28 eCollection Date: 2026-07-01 DOI:10.2106/JBJS.RVW.26.00055
Amr Selim, Abdelrahman Ibrahim, Azhar Abbas, Salman Sadiq, Muhamed M Farhan-Alanie, Mohammed Lyeeq Ahmed, Jae Rhee
{"title":"One-Stage or Two-Stage Revision for Infected Shoulder Arthroplasty: A Head-to-Head Meta-Analysis of Comparative Studies.","authors":"Amr Selim, Abdelrahman Ibrahim, Azhar Abbas, Salman Sadiq, Muhamed M Farhan-Alanie, Mohammed Lyeeq Ahmed, Jae Rhee","doi":"10.2106/JBJS.RVW.26.00055","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) following shoulder arthroplasty is a devastating complication associated with substantial morbidity and revision burden. While 2-stage revision has traditionally been regarded as the gold standard for chronic shoulder PJI, single-stage revision has emerged as a potential alternative. The aim of this systematic review was to directly compare infection-related outcomes and complications between single-stage and 2-stage revision arthroplasties for shoulder PJI.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This systematic review was prospectively registered with PROSPERO (CRD420251159566) and conducted according to Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines. MEDLINE, EMBASE, and Web of Science were searched up to September 22, 2025. Comparative observational studies and randomized controlled trials (RCTs) evaluating single-stage vs. 2-stage revision for shoulder PJI in adults were eligible; no RCTs were identified. Primary outcomes were reinfection and infection control success; overall complications were secondary. Odds ratios (ORs) were calculated within each study and pooled using a random-effects model. Risk of bias was assessed with the Risk of Bias in Non-randomized Studies of Interventions tool, and the certainty of evidence was assessed using Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Thirteen retrospective comparative studies involving 260 patients (127 single-stage and 133 two-stage) were included. Compared with 2-stage revision, single-stage revision showed a lower, but not statistically significant, odds of reinfection (OR 0.46, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.21-1.04; p = 0.06; I2 = 0%) and overall complications (OR 0.52, 95% CI 0.18-1.53; p = 0.24; I2 = 0%) and a higher, but nonsignificant, odds of infection control success (OR 1.57, 95% CI 0.45-5.40; p = 0.48; I2 = 17%).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Single-stage revision demonstrated infection control and complication rates comparable with 2-stage revision for shoulder PJI. Although no statistically significant differences were observed, trends favored single-stage revision. Given that the certainty of the evidence was graded as low, these findings should be interpreted with caution, and high-quality RCTs are required to define optimal patient selection and surgical strategy.</p><p><strong>Level of evidence: </strong>Therapeutic Level III. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.</p>","PeriodicalId":47098,"journal":{"name":"JBJS Reviews","volume":"14 7","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.8000,"publicationDate":"2026-07-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"JBJS Reviews","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2106/JBJS.RVW.26.00055","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2026/7/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"SURGERY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) following shoulder arthroplasty is a devastating complication associated with substantial morbidity and revision burden. While 2-stage revision has traditionally been regarded as the gold standard for chronic shoulder PJI, single-stage revision has emerged as a potential alternative. The aim of this systematic review was to directly compare infection-related outcomes and complications between single-stage and 2-stage revision arthroplasties for shoulder PJI.

Methods: This systematic review was prospectively registered with PROSPERO (CRD420251159566) and conducted according to Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines. MEDLINE, EMBASE, and Web of Science were searched up to September 22, 2025. Comparative observational studies and randomized controlled trials (RCTs) evaluating single-stage vs. 2-stage revision for shoulder PJI in adults were eligible; no RCTs were identified. Primary outcomes were reinfection and infection control success; overall complications were secondary. Odds ratios (ORs) were calculated within each study and pooled using a random-effects model. Risk of bias was assessed with the Risk of Bias in Non-randomized Studies of Interventions tool, and the certainty of evidence was assessed using Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation.

Results: Thirteen retrospective comparative studies involving 260 patients (127 single-stage and 133 two-stage) were included. Compared with 2-stage revision, single-stage revision showed a lower, but not statistically significant, odds of reinfection (OR 0.46, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.21-1.04; p = 0.06; I2 = 0%) and overall complications (OR 0.52, 95% CI 0.18-1.53; p = 0.24; I2 = 0%) and a higher, but nonsignificant, odds of infection control success (OR 1.57, 95% CI 0.45-5.40; p = 0.48; I2 = 17%).

Conclusion: Single-stage revision demonstrated infection control and complication rates comparable with 2-stage revision for shoulder PJI. Although no statistically significant differences were observed, trends favored single-stage revision. Given that the certainty of the evidence was graded as low, these findings should be interpreted with caution, and high-quality RCTs are required to define optimal patient selection and surgical strategy.

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

感染肩关节置换术的一期或二期翻修:一项比较研究的头对头荟萃分析
背景:肩关节置换术后假体周围关节感染(PJI)是一种毁灭性的并发症,与大量发病率和翻修负担相关。传统上,两阶段翻修被认为是治疗慢性肩关节PJI的金标准,单阶段翻修已成为一种潜在的替代方案。本系统综述的目的是直接比较单期和2期肩关节置换术治疗PJI的感染相关结果和并发症。方法:本系统评价在PROSPERO (CRD420251159566)前瞻性注册,并按照系统评价和荟萃分析指南的首选报告项目进行。MEDLINE, EMBASE和Web of Science被检索到2025年9月22日。比较观察性研究和随机对照试验(rct)评估成人肩关节PJI单期与2期翻修;未发现随机对照试验。主要结局为再感染和感染控制成功;总体并发症是次要的。在每个研究中计算优势比(ORs),并使用随机效应模型进行汇总。偏倚风险采用干预措施非随机研究的偏倚风险评估工具,证据的确定性采用推荐分级评估、发展和评价方法评估。结果:纳入13项回顾性比较研究,涉及260例患者(127例单期和133例两期)。与两期翻修相比,单期翻修的再感染几率(OR 0.46, 95%可信区间[CI] 0.21-1.04; p = 0.06; I2 = 0%)和总并发症(OR 0.52, 95% CI 0.18-1.53; p = 0.24; I2 = 0%)较低,但无统计学意义,感染控制成功的几率较高(OR 1.57, 95% CI 0.45-5.40; p = 0.48; I2 = 17%)。结论:单期修复与两期修复肩关节PJI的感染控制和并发症发生率相当。虽然没有观察到统计学上的显著差异,但趋势倾向于单阶段修正。鉴于证据的确定性被评为低,这些发现应谨慎解释,并需要高质量的随机对照试验来确定最佳的患者选择和手术策略。证据等级:治疗性III级。有关证据水平的完整描述,请参见作者说明。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
JBJS Reviews
JBJS Reviews SURGERY-
CiteScore
4.40
自引率
4.30%
发文量
132
期刊介绍: JBJS Reviews is an innovative review journal from the publishers of The Journal of Bone & Joint Surgery. This continuously published online journal provides comprehensive, objective, and authoritative review articles written by recognized experts in the field. Edited by Thomas A. Einhorn, MD, and a distinguished Editorial Board, each issue of JBJS Reviews, updates the orthopaedic community on important topics in a concise, time-saving manner, providing expert insights into orthopaedic research and clinical experience. Comprehensive reviews, special features, and integrated CME provide orthopaedic surgeons with valuable perspectives on surgical practice and the latest advances in the field within twelve subspecialty areas: Basic Science, Education & Training, Elbow, Ethics, Foot & Ankle, Hand & Wrist, Hip, Infection, Knee, Oncology, Pediatrics, Pain Management, Rehabilitation, Shoulder, Spine, Sports Medicine, Trauma.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信
小红书