Max Jaenisch, Soufian Ben Amar, Mari Babasiz, Alexander Seuser, Hendrik Kohlhof, Dieter Christian Wirtz, Thomas Martin Randau
{"title":"通过静态垫片植入临时关节融合术两阶段治疗膝关节假体周围关节感染。","authors":"Max Jaenisch, Soufian Ben Amar, Mari Babasiz, Alexander Seuser, Hendrik Kohlhof, Dieter Christian Wirtz, Thomas Martin Randau","doi":"10.1007/s00064-023-00809-7","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>Treatment of chronic periprosthetic joint infection of the knee requires the removal of the implant and thorough debridement, with reimplantation in a second stage surgery. Intramedullary spacers can be helpful during the interval between explantation and reimplantation and provide a temporary arthrodesis which fixes the knee in extension preserving leg length and administers local antibiotic therapy.</p><p><strong>Indications: </strong>Periprosthetic joint infection of the knee with large bony defects and severe infection of the native joint with advanced destruction/infiltration of the cartilage and bone and/or ligament insufficiency.</p><p><strong>Contraindications: </strong>Suspected antibiotic resistance of the microbiological pathogen to local antibiotic drugs, incompliant patient, and known allergy to bone cement or antibiotic.</p><p><strong>Surgical technique: </strong>After implant removal, suitable metal rods are coated with antibiotic-loaded bone cement and inserted into the cleaned intramedullary canals of femur and tibia. Rods are joined at the joint line with a connector and joint space is filled with more bone cement to achieve temporary and very stable arthrodesis.</p><p><strong>Postoperative management: </strong>Partial weight-bearing and no flexion/extension while spacer is in place; second stage reimplantation as soon as infection is controlled.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Complications related to the spacer were rare (5.3%). Reimplantation of an implant was possible in 95 of 113 patients (84%), of those, 23 (20%) received an arthrodesis. Of the 95 patients that were reimplanted, 14 showed signs of recurrent infection. Mean time to last follow-up was 15.6 months post reimplantation. Mean knee pain was 2.9/10; overall function was good; 6 patients had an extension lag; mean total range of motion was 88°.</p>","PeriodicalId":54677,"journal":{"name":"Operative Orthopadie Und Traumatologie","volume":"35 3-4","pages":"170-178"},"PeriodicalIF":1.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Temporary arthrodesis through static spacer implantation in two-stage treatment of periprosthetic joint infections of the knee.\",\"authors\":\"Max Jaenisch, Soufian Ben Amar, Mari Babasiz, Alexander Seuser, Hendrik Kohlhof, Dieter Christian Wirtz, Thomas Martin Randau\",\"doi\":\"10.1007/s00064-023-00809-7\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>Treatment of chronic periprosthetic joint infection of the knee requires the removal of the implant and thorough debridement, with reimplantation in a second stage surgery. Intramedullary spacers can be helpful during the interval between explantation and reimplantation and provide a temporary arthrodesis which fixes the knee in extension preserving leg length and administers local antibiotic therapy.</p><p><strong>Indications: </strong>Periprosthetic joint infection of the knee with large bony defects and severe infection of the native joint with advanced destruction/infiltration of the cartilage and bone and/or ligament insufficiency.</p><p><strong>Contraindications: </strong>Suspected antibiotic resistance of the microbiological pathogen to local antibiotic drugs, incompliant patient, and known allergy to bone cement or antibiotic.</p><p><strong>Surgical technique: </strong>After implant removal, suitable metal rods are coated with antibiotic-loaded bone cement and inserted into the cleaned intramedullary canals of femur and tibia. Rods are joined at the joint line with a connector and joint space is filled with more bone cement to achieve temporary and very stable arthrodesis.</p><p><strong>Postoperative management: </strong>Partial weight-bearing and no flexion/extension while spacer is in place; second stage reimplantation as soon as infection is controlled.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Complications related to the spacer were rare (5.3%). Reimplantation of an implant was possible in 95 of 113 patients (84%), of those, 23 (20%) received an arthrodesis. Of the 95 patients that were reimplanted, 14 showed signs of recurrent infection. Mean time to last follow-up was 15.6 months post reimplantation. Mean knee pain was 2.9/10; overall function was good; 6 patients had an extension lag; mean total range of motion was 88°.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":54677,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Operative Orthopadie Und Traumatologie\",\"volume\":\"35 3-4\",\"pages\":\"170-178\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-06-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Operative Orthopadie Und Traumatologie\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1007/s00064-023-00809-7\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"ORTHOPEDICS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Operative Orthopadie Und Traumatologie","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s00064-023-00809-7","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"ORTHOPEDICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
Temporary arthrodesis through static spacer implantation in two-stage treatment of periprosthetic joint infections of the knee.
Objective: Treatment of chronic periprosthetic joint infection of the knee requires the removal of the implant and thorough debridement, with reimplantation in a second stage surgery. Intramedullary spacers can be helpful during the interval between explantation and reimplantation and provide a temporary arthrodesis which fixes the knee in extension preserving leg length and administers local antibiotic therapy.
Indications: Periprosthetic joint infection of the knee with large bony defects and severe infection of the native joint with advanced destruction/infiltration of the cartilage and bone and/or ligament insufficiency.
Contraindications: Suspected antibiotic resistance of the microbiological pathogen to local antibiotic drugs, incompliant patient, and known allergy to bone cement or antibiotic.
Surgical technique: After implant removal, suitable metal rods are coated with antibiotic-loaded bone cement and inserted into the cleaned intramedullary canals of femur and tibia. Rods are joined at the joint line with a connector and joint space is filled with more bone cement to achieve temporary and very stable arthrodesis.
Postoperative management: Partial weight-bearing and no flexion/extension while spacer is in place; second stage reimplantation as soon as infection is controlled.
Results: Complications related to the spacer were rare (5.3%). Reimplantation of an implant was possible in 95 of 113 patients (84%), of those, 23 (20%) received an arthrodesis. Of the 95 patients that were reimplanted, 14 showed signs of recurrent infection. Mean time to last follow-up was 15.6 months post reimplantation. Mean knee pain was 2.9/10; overall function was good; 6 patients had an extension lag; mean total range of motion was 88°.
期刊介绍:
Orthopedics and Traumatology is directed toward all orthopedic surgeons, trauma-tologists, hand surgeons, specialists in sports injuries, orthopedics and rheumatology as well as gene-al surgeons who require access to reliable information on current operative methods to ensure the quality of patient advice, preoperative planning, and postoperative care.
The journal presents established and new operative procedures in uniformly structured and extensively illustrated contributions. All aspects are presented step-by-step from indications, contraindications, patient education, and preparation of the operation right through to postoperative care. The advantages and disadvantages, possible complications, deficiencies and risks of the methods as well as significant results with their evaluation criteria are discussed. To allow the reader to assess the outcome, results are detailed and based on internationally recognized scoring systems.
Orthopedics and Traumatology facilitates effective advancement and further education for all those active in both special and conservative fields of orthopedics, traumatology, and general surgery, offers sup-port for therapeutic decision-making, and provides – more than 30 years after its first publication – constantly expanding and up-to-date teaching on operative techniques.