Post-surgery and recovery experiences following one- and two-stage revision for prosthetic joint infection-A qualitative study of patients' experiences

The Effect of Spacer Treatment of Infected Hip and Knee Arthroplasties on Patients' Mental Health: A Narrative Review of the Literature

BACKGROUND

The gold standard treatment for periprosthetic joint infections is the two-stage revision that includes the spacer placement before definitive reimplantation. The management of PJI affects patients' joint function and, subsequently, their mental health. Even though significant advances have been achieved, little to no attention has been paid to the psychological implications. So, based on standardized patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs), this study aimed to clarify the effect of spacer treatment of infected hip and knee arthroplasties on patients' mental health.

METHODS

We performed research on the literature on PJIs in the English language using the MEDLINE database with the search strings "spacer" OR "spacers" AND "hip" OR "knee" AND "SF-12" OR "SF-36" OR "EQ-5" OR "mental" OR "depression" OR "anxiety." The reference lists of selected articles were also hand-searched for any additional articles.

RESULTS

A total of 973 published papers were extracted, and 9 papers were finally included. A total of 384 patients who underwent spacer placement for PJI were identified. Of these 384 patients, 54% were female. The mean age ranged from 62 to 78.2 years. Of the11 papers identified for this review, 4 analyzed only hip spacers, including 119 patients; 4 only knee spacers, evaluating 153 patients; while a single study included 112 patients for both joints.

CONCLUSIONS

Patients with the spacer are living in a state of mental upset, albeit better than the preoperative state. Clinical improvement with the review is not assured. The alteration of mental state turns out not to be transient for all the patients.

Healing beyond the joint: Addressing mental health in periprosthetic joint infection in a prospective longitudinal study

OBJECTIVE

Periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) is a devastating complication following joint replacement surgeries. While the somatic impacts of PJI have been extensively explored, the influence on mental health remains understudied. This study aimed to longitudinally assess the psychological burden, quality of life, and expectations in individuals undergoing treatment for PJI.

METHODS

A prospective study was conducted at a German trauma center between January 2020 and December 2022. Patients diagnosed with PJI (n = 29, mean age 71.4 ± 8.8 years) were assessed at five timepoints, within one week before revision surgery, one month, three, six, and twelve months postoperatively. Outcomes included the ICD-10 symptom-rating (ISR), German Short-Form 36 (SF-36), European Quality of Life 5 Dimensions (EQ-5D), and an expectation questionnaire.

RESULTS

Psychological scores exhibited significant upward trends over time. The ISR score increased from 0.55 preoperatively to 0.87 at the 12-month follow-up (p = 0.002), surpassing the clinically relevant threshold. Depression and anxiety scores peaked at 6 months (1.6, p = 0.005) and 12 months (1.12, p = 0.001), respectively. Quality of life, measured by SF-36, showed stable physical component summary scores but declining mental component summary scores. Patients' expectations of returning to normal health consistently decreased (p = 0.009).

CONCLUSION

Patients undergoing treatment for PJI experience significant psychological burden, with implications for quality of life and expectations of recovery. The findings underscore the importance of addressing psychological well-being in the management of PJI and emphasize the need for comprehensive care strategies that encompass both somatic and psychological dimensions.

Exploring needs, barriers to, and facilitators of rehabilitation exercise following revision hip replacement - A grounded theory study

PURPOSE

Evidence on rehabilitation after revision total hip replacement (THR) is inadequate and development of rehabilitation interventions is warranted. Even so, little is known about patients' experiences with revision THR rehabilitation. This study aimed to explore patients' rehabilitation exercise experiences after revision THR.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Using constructivist grounded theory, we conducted semi-structured qualitative interviews with twelve patients with completed or almost completed rehabilitation exercise after revision THR. Data collection and analysis were a constant comparative process conducted in three phases; initial, focused, and theoretical.

FINDINGS

From the data, we generated a substantial theory of the participant's circumstances and ability to integrate rehabilitation exercise into their everyday life after revision THR. Four categories were constructed based on patients' experiences in different contexts: hesitance, fear avoidance, self-commitment, and fidelity.

CONCLUSIONS

This study highlighted that patients' expectations, past experiences, attitudes, trusts, and circumstances interact to influence engagement and adherence to rehabilitation exercise and described four categories relating to the integration of revision THR rehabilitation exercise into their everyday life. Clinicians should be aware of and account for these categories during rehabilitation exercise. Tailored individual rehabilitation exercise interventions and clinician approaches to optimize engagement and adherence are needed among patients with revision THR.

Articulating Hip Spacers with a Constrained Acetabular Liner: Effect of Acetabular Bone Loss and Cementation Quality

Articulating hip spacers for periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) offer numerous advantages over static spacers such as improved patient mobilization, hip functionality, and soft tissue tension. Our study aimed to determine complication rates of a functional articulating spacer using a constrained liner to determine the role of acetabular cementation mantle and bone loss on the need for second-stage surgery. A retrospective review of 103 patients was performed and demographic information, spacer components and longevity, spacer-related complications, reinfection rates, and grade of bone loss and acetabular cement mantle quality were determined. There was no significant difference in spacer-related complications or reinfection rate between PJI and native hip infections. 33 of 103 patients (32.0%) elected to retain their spacers. Between patients who retained their initial spacer and those who underwent reimplantation surgery, there was not a significant difference in cement mantle grade (p = 0.52) or degree of bone loss (p = 0.78). Functional articulating antibiotic spacers with cemented constrained acetabular liners demonstrate promising early results in the treatment of periprosthetic and native hip infections. The rate of dislocation events was low. Further efforts to improve cement fixation may help decrease the need for second-stage reimplantation surgery.

Multidisciplinary team meetings in prosthetic joint infection management: A qualitative study

BACKGROUND

Prosthetic joint infections (PJIs) cause substantial morbidity to patients and are extremely challenging for clinicians. Their management can include multiple operations, antibiotics, and prolonged hospital admissions. Multidisciplinary team meetings (MDTM) are increasingly used for collaborative decision-making around the management of PJIs, but thus far there has been no examination of the role of MDTM in decisions and management. This study aimed to examine interactions in a PJI MDTM to identify the dynamics in decision-making, and inter-specialty relationships more broadly.

METHODS

Twelve MDTMs over 7 months at an Australian tertiary referral hospital were video recorded, transcribed, and thematic analysis was performed.

RESULTS

Thematic analysis revealed four key areas of collaborative discussion 1. Achieving Inter-specialty Balance: The role of the multidisciplinary team discussion in providing balance between specialty views, and traversing the barriers between specialty interactions. 2. Negotiating Grey zones: there was frequent discussion of the limits of tests, interpretation of symptoms, and the limits of proposed operative strategies, and the resultant tensions of balancing ideal care vs pragmatic decision-making, and divergent goals of care. 3. Tailoring Treatment: identification of individual patient factors (both physiological and behavioural) and risks into collaborative decision-making. 4. Affording Failure: creating affordances in communication to openly discuss 'failure' to eliminate infection and likely negative outcomes.

CONCLUSIONS

MDTM in the management of prosthetic joint infections serve multiple functions including: achieving interdisciplinary balance; effective grey zone management, tailoring reconfigured care; and most critically, recognition of 'failure' to eliminate infection, a communicative affordance most likely leading to better care.

The patients' perspective - a qualitative analysis of experiencing a fracture-related infection

Introduction

Fracture-related infection is a devastating complication confronting the patient with several challenges. To improve the management and to enhance the patients' wellbeing the focus of this study was to understand the emotional impact and patients' experiences during the process to identify challenges, difficulties, and resources. For this, a qualitative content analysis of semi-structured interviews according to Graneheim and Lundman was performed.

Methods

In total n = 20 patients of a German university orthopedic trauma centre specialized in bone and joint infections were recruited using a purposive sampling strategy. The patients were treated at the hospital between 2019 and 2021 and underwent at least one surgery. Individual in-person interviews were performed by one researcher based on a semi-structured guide, which was previously conceptualized. Content analysis according to Graneheim and Lundman was performed on the transcripts by two of the researchers independently.

Results

The following major themes emerged: (i) the emotional and mental aspects highlighting the fact that FRI patients faced severe restrictions in their day-to-day life, which resulted in dependency on others and frustration, as well as future concerns showing that patients could not overcome a state of anxiety and fear even after successful treatment, (ii) socioeconomic consequences confronting patients with consequences on the job and in finances where they often feel helpless, and (iii) resources emphasizing the role of spirituality as a coping strategy and yoga exercises for keeping the positivity.

Conclusion

This study emphasized the challenge of fracture-related infection management and associated consequences from the patients' perspective. Not being well informed about possible negative outcomes or restrictions makes it harder for patients to accept the situation and patients expressed a need for better information and certainty. Also, patients developed constant anxiety and other psychological disturbances, highlighting the potential benefit of psychological support and patient-peer support to exchange experiences.

Development of evidence-based guidelines for the treatment and management of periprosthetic hip infection

Aims

Periprosthetic hip-joint infection is a multifaceted and highly detrimental outcome for patients and clinicians. The incidence of prosthetic joint infection reported within two years of primary hip arthroplasty ranges from 0.8% to 2.1%. Costs of treatment are over five-times greater in people with periprosthetic hip joint infection than in those with no infection. Currently, there are no national evidence-based guidelines for treatment and management of this condition to guide clinical practice or to inform clinical study design. The aim of this study is to develop guidelines based on evidence from the six-year INFection and ORthopaedic Management (INFORM) research programme.

Methods

We used a consensus process consisting of an evidence review to generate items for the guidelines and online consensus questionnaire and virtual face-to-face consensus meeting to draft the guidelines.

Results

The consensus panel comprised 21 clinical experts in orthopaedics, primary care, rehabilitation, and healthcare commissioning. The final output from the consensus process was a 14-item guideline. The guidelines make recommendations regarding increased vigilance and monitoring of those at increased risk of infection; diagnosis including strategies to ensure the early recognition of prosthetic infection and referral to orthopaedic teams; treatment, including early use of DAIR and revision strategies; and postoperative management including appropriate physical and psychological support and antibiotic strategies.

Conclusion

We believe the implementation of the INFORM guidelines will inform treatment protocols and clinical pathways to improve the treatment and management of periprosthetic hip infection.

Cite this article: Bone Jt Open 2023;4(4):226–233.

A qualitative study of patients' experiences before, during and after surgical treatment for periprosthetic knee joint infection; "I assumed it had to be like that … "

BACKGROUND

Periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) of the knee is associated with extended hospital stay, high doses of antibiotics, lengthy rehabilitation, and pain. Standard treatment is a two-stage procedure comprising two surgeries and two hospitalizations. To facilitate exploration of patients' perspectives, the qualitative study presented here was an adjunct to a Danish randomized controlled trial comparing one-stage and two-stage revision surgery.

AIM

To explore patient experiences, before, during and after hospitalization and surgical treatment with one- or two-stage revision for PJI of the knee.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

Qualitative, semi-structured telephone interviews were conducted with 10 individuals who had undergone either one- or two-stage revision because of PJI. Thematic analysis was employed.

RESULTS

The essence of the findings was that the infection was a transition point in a possible life-changing illness. The three themes representing this comprised: 1) physical, 2) psychological, and 3) social implications. Each theme is further illuminated with subthemes.

CONCLUSIONS

Infection is a transition point in a possible life changing illness. Late diagnosis and delayed treatment are major issues. Individuals suffer from pain, weight loss, fatigue, and reduced mobility as well as dependency on family members, leading to psychological challenges including depression.

IMPLICATIONS FOR CLINICAL PRACTICE

Patients with PJI of the knee could be better informed, educated and involved before and during treatment. Information is needed not only about the physical consequences, but also the psychological and social consequences. More patient involvement and inter-professional and care sector coordination is important when caring for patients with PJI.

Patient-Reported Outcome on Quality of Life and Pain after Revision Arthroplasty for Periprosthetic Joint Infection: A Cross-Sectional Study

This study aims to explore the quality of life (QOL) and pain after revision surgery for periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) based on patients' reported outcomes. A cross-sectional questionnaire survey was conducted and 137 valid responses were included (response rate 64.0%). A total of 42 patients underwent debridement with implant retention (DAIR), 31 underwent one-stage revision, and 64 underwent two-stage revision. The average overall SF-36 score was 70.3. The DAIR group had significantly higher SF-36 than the two-stage revision group (p = 0.01). There was no significant difference between the one-stage revision group and the other two groups. A total of 74.5% of patients reported pain with an average McGill Pain Questionnaire (MPQ) score of 8.6. There was no significant difference in the MPQ scores among the three groups. Simple linear regression analyses demonstrated that higher preoperative PMN%, VAS, and shorter hospital stay were associated with pain (adjusted R² = 4%, p = 0.020; adjusted R² = 2.1%, p = 0.048; adjusted R² = 2.1%, p = 0.049; respectively). We concluded that the overall QOL of patients after revision surgery for PJI is generally satisfactory. Persistent pain is prevalent, but the severity was mostly mild. Preoperative PMN%, VAS, and hospital stay were associated with postoperative pain.

Infection after total joint replacement of the hip and knee: research programme including the INFORM RCT

Background

People with severe osteoarthritis, other joint conditions or injury may have joint replacement to reduce pain and disability. In the UK in 2019, over 200,000 hip and knee replacements were performed. About 1 in 100 replacements becomes infected, and most people with infected replacements require further surgery.

Objectives

To investigate why some patients are predisposed to joint infections and how this affects patients and the NHS, and to evaluate treatments.

Design

Systematic reviews, joint registry analyses, qualitative interviews, a randomised controlled trial, health economic analyses and a discrete choice questionnaire.

Setting

Our studies are relevant to the NHS, to the Swedish health system and internationally.

Participants

People with prosthetic joint infection after hip or knee replacement and surgeons.

Interventions

Revision of hip prosthetic joint infection with a single- or two-stage procedure.

Main outcome measures

Long-term patient-reported outcomes and reinfection. Cost-effectiveness of revision strategies over 18 months from two perspectives: health-care provider and Personal Social Services, and societal.

Data sources

National Joint Registry; literature databases; published cohort studies; interviews with 67 patients and 35 surgeons; a patient discrete choice questionnaire; and the INFORM (INFection ORthopaedic Management) randomised trial.

Review methods

Systematic reviews of studies reporting risk factors, diagnosis, treatment outcomes and cost comparisons. Individual patient data meta-analysis.

Results

In registry analyses, about 0.62% and 0.75% of patients with hip and knee replacement, respectively, had joint infection requiring surgery. Rates were four times greater after aseptic revision. The costs of inpatient and day-case admissions in people with hip prosthetic joint infection were about five times higher than those in people with no infection, an additional cost of > £30,000. People described devastating effects of hip and knee prosthetic joint infection and treatment. In the treatment of hip prosthetic joint infection, a two-stage procedure with or without a cement spacer had a greater negative impact on patient well-being than a single- or two-stage procedure with a custom-made articulating spacer. Surgeons described the significant emotional impact of hip and knee prosthetic joint infection and the importance of a supportive multidisciplinary team. In systematic reviews and registry analyses, the risk factors for hip and knee prosthetic joint infection included male sex, diagnoses other than osteoarthritis, high body mass index, poor physical status, diabetes, dementia and liver disease. Evidence linking health-care setting and surgeon experience with prosthetic joint infection was inconsistent. Uncemented fixation, posterior approach and ceramic bearings were associated with lower infection risk after hip replacement. In our systematic review, synovial fluid alpha-defensin and leucocyte esterase showed high diagnostic accuracy for prosthetic joint infection. Systematic reviews and individual patient data meta-analysis showed similar reinfection outcomes in patients with hip or knee prosthetic joint infection treated with single- and two-stage revision. In registry analysis, there was a higher rate of early rerevision after single-stage revision for hip prosthetic joint infection, but, overall, 40% fewer operations are required as part of a single-stage procedure than as part of a two-stage procedure. The treatment of hip or knee prosthetic joint infection with early debridement and implant retention may be effective in > 60% of cases. In the INFORM randomised controlled trial, 140 patients with hip prosthetic joint infection were randomised to single- or two-stage revision. Eighteen months after randomisation, pain, function and stiffness were similar between the randomised groups (p = 0.98), and there were no differences in reinfection rates. Patient outcomes improved earlier in the single-stage than in the two-stage group. Participants randomised to a single-stage procedure had lower costs (mean difference –£10,055, 95% confidence interval –£19,568 to –£542) and higher quality-adjusted life-years (mean difference 0.06, 95% confidence interval –0.07 to 0.18) than those randomised to a two-stage procedure. Single-stage was the more cost-effective option, with an incremental net monetary benefit at a threshold of £20,000 per quality-adjusted life-year of £11,167 (95% confidence interval £638 to £21,696). In a discrete choice questionnaire completed by 57 patients 18 months after surgery to treat hip prosthetic joint infection, the most valued characteristics in decisions about revision were the ability to engage in valued activities and a quick return to normal activity.

Limitations

Some research was specific to people with hip prosthetic joint infection. Study populations in meta-analyses and registry analyses may have been selected for joint replacement and specific treatments. The INFORM trial was not powered to study reinfection and was limited to 18 months’ follow-up. The qualitative study subgroups were small.

Conclusions

We identified risk factors, diagnostic biomarkers, effective treatments and patient preferences for the treatment of hip and knee prosthetic joint infection. The risk factors include male sex, diagnoses other than osteoarthritis, specific comorbidities and surgical factors. Synovial fluid alpha-defensin and leucocyte esterase showed high diagnostic accuracy. Infection is devastating for patients and surgeons, both of whom describe the need for support during treatment. Debridement and implant retention is effective, particularly if performed early. For infected hip replacements, single- and two-stage revision appear equally efficacious, but single-stage has better early results, is cost-effective at 18-month follow-up and is increasingly used. Patients prefer treatments that allow full functional return within 3–9 months.

Future work

For people with infection, develop information, counselling, peer support and care pathways. Develop supportive care and information for patients and health-care professionals to enable the early recognition of infections. Compare alternative and new treatment strategies in hip and knee prosthetic joint infection. Assess diagnostic methods and establish NHS diagnostic criteria.

Study registration

The INFORM randomised controlled trial is registered as ISRCTN10956306. All systematic reviews were registered in PROSPERO (as CRD42017069526, CRD42015023485, CRD42018106503, CRD42018114592, CRD42015023704, CRD42017057513, CRD42015016559, CRD42015017327 and CRD42015016664).

Funding

This project was funded by the National Institute for Health and Care Research (NIHR) Programme Grants for Applied Research programme and will be published in full in Programme Grants for Applied Research; Vol. 10, No. 10. See the NIHR Journals Library website for further project information.

Clinical and cost effectiveness of single stage compared with two stage revision for hip prosthetic joint infection (INFORM): pragmatic, parallel group, open label, randomised controlled trial

OBJECTIVES

To determine whether patient reported outcomes improve after single stage versus two stage revision surgery for prosthetic joint infection of the hip, and to determine the cost effectiveness of these procedures.

DESIGN

Pragmatic, parallel group, open label, randomised controlled trial.

SETTING

High volume tertiary referral centres or orthopaedic units in the UK (n=12) and in Sweden (n=3), recruiting from 1 March 2015 to 19 December 2018.

PARTICIPANTS

140 adults (aged ≥18 years) with a prosthetic joint infection of the hip who required revision (65 randomly assigned to single stage and 75 to two stage revision).

INTERVENTIONS

A computer generated 1:1 randomisation list stratified by hospital was used to allocate participants with prosthetic joint infection of the hip to a single stage or a two stage revision procedure.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

The primary intention-to-treat outcome was pain, stiffness, and functional limitations 18 months after randomisation, measured by the Western Ontario and McMasters Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC) score. Secondary outcomes included surgical complications and joint infection. The economic evaluation (only assessed in UK participants) compared quality adjusted life years and costs between the randomised groups.

RESULTS

The mean age of participants was 71 years (standard deviation 9) and 51 (36%) were women. WOMAC scores did not differ between groups at 18 months (mean difference 0.13 (95% confidence interval -8.20 to 8.46), P=0.98); however, the single stage procedure was better at three months (11.53 (3.89 to 19.17), P=0.003), but not from six months onwards. Intraoperative events occurred in five (8%) participants in the single stage group and 20 (27%) in the two stage group (P=0.01). At 18 months, nine (14%) participants in the single stage group and eight (11%) in the two stage group had at least one marker of possible ongoing infection (P=0.62). From the perspective of healthcare providers and personal social services, single stage revision was cost effective with an incremental net monetary benefit of £11 167 (95% confidence interval £638 to £21 696) at a £20 000 per quality adjusted life years threshold (£1.0; $1.1; €1.4).

CONCLUSIONS

At 18 months, single stage revision compared with two stage revision for prosthetic joint infection of the hip showed no superiority by patient reported outcome. Single stage revision had a better outcome at three months, fewer intraoperative complications, and was cost effective. Patients prefer early restoration of function, therefore, when deciding treatment, surgeons should consider patient preferences and the cost effectiveness of single stage surgery.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ISRCTN registry ISRCTN10956306.

Managing periprosthetic joint infection-a qualitative analysis of nursing staffs' experiences

Background

Periprosthetic joint infection represents a major complication in orthopaedics and trauma surgery. For an ideal management approach, it is important to understand the distinct challenges for all persons involved in the treatment. Therefore, it was aimed at investigating (1) the impact of periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) on the well-being of nursing staff to (2) identify challenges, which could be improved facilitating the management of PJI.

Methods

This is a qualitative interview study. In total, 20 nurses of a German university orthopedic trauma center specialized on infectious complications were recruited using a purposive sampling strategy. Content analysis was performed on transcripts of individual in-person interviews conducted between March 2021 and June 2021.

Results

Three major themes could be extracted including (i) feelings associated with the management of PJI and the need for emotional support, illustrating the negative emotional impact on nurses, whereby receiving collegial support was perceived as an important coping strategy, (ii) patients’ psychological burden, highlighting the nurses’ lack of time to address mental issues adequately and, (iii) realization of the severity of PJI and compliance problems.

Conclusion

Identified facilitating factors for PJI management include strengthening of mental care in the treatment of PJI, providing opportunities for exchange among multidisciplinary team members and implementing compliance-enhancing strategies. The findings of this study can be beneficial for improving professionals’ satisfaction, optimising the work environment, creating organizational structures which enhance opportunities for exchange and preventing mental health issues among the nursing team.

Life After Total Hip Replacement: A Qualitative Study on Patient Experiences

The present study aimed to determine the life experiences of patients undergoing total hip replacement. This study was a qualitative study conducted using the content analysis method. Using purposive sampling, 10 patients with total hip replacement were selected and interviewed. Data were collected using semistructured interviews and were analyzed using the content analysis method. The mean age of the 10 patients was 59.33 ± 9.9 years. Six patients were female and four were male. Of these 10 participants, eight were married and had nuclear families; all participants were literate, and seven belonged to the middle-income group. Four main themes and 10 subthemes were identified. The themes included a painful process (severe pain and feeling of pain due to emotional exhaustion), fear (fear of feeling pain, fear of moving, and fear of recurrence), difficulty (self-care, sleep, and participation in social life), and positive thinking about life (feeling good and hope). The participants expressed mostly negative life experiences while also pointing out the positive life experiences. This study provides an in-depth understanding of the views of patients with total hip replacement on life experiences. These results can be used in planning and implementing health services for patients with total hip replacement.

Prevention of Periprosthetic Joint Infection in Total Hip and Knee Replacement: One European Consensus

Periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) is a devastating complication in total hip and knee replacement. Its prevention is key to decrease the incidence and avoid some consequences that seriously impact patients and health systems. In view of the variety of recommendations and guidelines, we decided to conduct an expert, peer-reviewed European consensus analysis about the pre-, intra-, and postoperative prevention of PJI. A multinational group of practicing orthopedic experts developed a series of 47 consensus statements in 6 main groups of intervention, and a 2-stage Delphi approach was launched with a threshold for agreement at 75% and for very high agreement at more than 90%. A total of 306 orthopedic surgeon responses were gathered from 9 countries. Consensus was reached for 42/47 statements, 31/47 of which achieved a very high consensus. Many preoperative actions gathered strong consensus, although areas like the use of alcoholic chlorhexidine or the timing of hair removal did not attain strong consensus, despite available evidence. Intra- and postoperative actions showed more variability regarding incise drapes, skin suturing techniques, and wound follow-up. This study confirms an important consensus among orthopedic surgeons across Europe in many areas well known to contribute to the prevention of PJI; however, there are still grounds for improvement.

Management strategies for prosthetic joint infection: long-term infection control rates, overall survival rates, functional and quality of life outcomes

DAIR (debridement, antibiotics, and implant retention), one-stage and two-stage revision surgery are the most common management strategies for prosthetic joint infection (PJI) management. Our knowledge concerning their efficacy is based on short to medium-term low-quality studies.

Most studies report infection recurrence rates or infection-free time intervals. However, long-term survival rates of the infection-free joints, functional and quality of life outcome data are of paramount importance.

DAIR, one-stage and two-stage revision strategies are not unique surgical techniques, presenting several variables. Infection control rates for the above strategies vary from 75% to 90%, but comparisons are difficult because different indications and patient selection criteria are used in each strategy.

Recent outcome data show that DAIR and one-stage revision in selected patients (based on host, bacteriological, soft tissue and type of infection criteria) may present improved functional and quality of life outcomes and reduced costs for health systems as compared to those of two-stage revision.

It is expected that health system administrators and providers will apply pressure on surgeons and departments towards the wider use of DAIR and one-stage revision strategies. It is the orthopaedic surgeon’s responsibility to conduct quality studies in order to fully clarify the indications and outcomes of the different revision strategies.

Cite this article: EFORT Open Rev 2021;6:727-734. DOI: 10.1302/2058-5241.6.210008

Improved patient reported outcomes with functional articulating spacers in two-stage revision of the infected hip

BACKGROUND

Two-stage revision arthroplasty with an antibiotic-loaded spacer is the treatment of choice in chronically infected total hip arthroplasties. Interval spacers can be functional articulating or prefabricated. Functional results of these spacers have scarcely been reported.

AIM

To compare retrospectively the patient reported outcome and infection eradication rate after two-stage revision arthroplasty of the hip with the use of a functional articulating or prefabricated spacer. 

METHODS

All patients with two-stage revision of a hip prosthesis at our hospital between 2003 and 2016 were included in this retrospective cohort study. Patients were divided into two groups; patients treated with a functional articulating spacer or with a prefabricated spacer. Patients completed the Hip Osteoarthritis Outcome Score and the EQ-5D-3L (EQ-5D) and the EQ-5D quality of life thermometer (EQ-VAS) scores. Primary outcomes were patient reported outcome and infection eradication after two-stage revision. The results of both groups were compared to the patient acceptable symptom state for primary arthroplasty of the hip. Secondary outcomes were complications during spacer treatment and at final follow-up. Descriptive statistics, mean and range are used to represent the demographics of the patients. For numerical variables, students’ t-tests were used to assess the level of significance for differences between the groups, with 95% confidence intervals; for binary outcome, we used Fisher’s exact test.

RESULTS

We consecutively treated 55 patients with a prefabricated spacer and 15 patients with a functional articulating spacer of the hip. The infection eradication rates for functional articulating and prefabricated spacers were 93% and 78%, respectively (P > 0.05). With respect to the functional outcome, the Hip Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (HOOS) and its subscores (all P < 0.01), the EQ-5D (P < 0.01) and the EQ-VAS scores (P < 0.05) were all significantly better for patients successfully treated with a functional articulating spacer. More patients in the functional articulating spacer group reached the patient acceptable symptom state for the HOOS pain, HOOS quality of life and EQ-VAS. The number of patients with a spacer dislocation was not significantly different for the functional articulating or prefabricated spacer group (P > 0.05). However, the number of dislocations per patient experiencing a dislocation was significantly higher for patients with a prefabricated spacer (P < 0.01).

CONCLUSION

Functional articulating spacers lead to improved patient reported functional outcome and less perioperative complications after two-stage revision arthroplasty of an infected total hip prosthesis, while maintaining a similar infection eradication rate compared to prefabricated spacers.