Excellent Survival Rate of Cemented Modular Stems in One-Stage Revision for Periprosthetic Hip Infections With Massive Femoral Bone Loss: A Retrospective Single-Center Analysis of 150 Cases.

BACKGROUND: With the increasing incidence of total hip arthroplasty (THA), there is also an expected concurrent increase in revision THA (rTHA), which is known to have a high complication and re-revision rate. In the setting of infection, radical debridement is essential and options for femoral bone loss are limited. One viable solution is cemented modular stems, but limited evidence exists on their use in septic revision. This study aimed to analyze survival and complication related to the use of cemented modular stems in one-stage septic rTHA with severe femoral bone loss. METHODS: The institutional database of patients who underwent rTHA for septic one-stage revision with cemented modular stems was reviewed. Exclusion criteria were patients aged less than 18 years and nonseptic or 2 stage revisions. Outcomes measured were complication, re-infection, re-operation, and survivorship of the implant. A total of 150 patients were included. The mean age was 68 years (range, 30 to 91), and the mean follow-up was 105 months (range, 1 to 150). RESULTS: Treatment was considered successful in 81.3% of cases. Patients who underwent multiple prior surgeries demonstrated a lower rate of treatment success (P < .001). The main cause of failure was re-infection (11 of 28). Among cases failed for aseptic reasons (17 of 28), loosening of the cemented modular stem was the cause of re-revision in 2 patients (1.3%). CONCLUSIONS: The use of modular cemented stems is a viable option in case of septic one-stage rTHA associated with severe femoral bone loss. However, surgeons and patients should be aware that this treatment is still characterized by a high rate of complications, which may lead to further surgeries. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: III.

Postoperative morbidity and mortality in total joint arthroplasty: Exploring the limits of early discharge.

INTRODUCTION: In order to enhance cost-effectiveness, shorter hospital stays have been adopted following hip or knee replacement surgery. This study seeks to describe the incidence of morbidity and mortality, five days after patients were taken to surgery with an expected hospital stay of four days. METHODS: Utilizing an Institutional Joint Replacement database, a descriptive study was carried out using a retrospective cohort of 1233 procedures in 1100 patients between 2012 and 2016. These were followed up for three months to evaluate morbidity and mortality in the postoperative period. RESULTS: Complications were classified as minor or major (these were defined as any adverse event that can threaten a patient's life or had the potential to result in readmission). Of the cohort, 18 (1.5%) patient procedures presented one or more major complications. On the first postoperative day 3 major complications occurred (including one death). On the second and third day, 4 major complications were registered each day. On the fourth day after surgery, there were no major complications. On the fifth day 1 major complication was identified. After patient discharge there were 6 major complications reported. DISCUSSION: The balance between early discharge and out-of-hospital morbidity as well as the frequency of hospital readmission must be the basis to determine whether a patient's hospital stay should be reduced. According to our results, it seems to be safe to shorten hospital stay in young and healthy patients. Furthermore, only orthopedic teams that have minimal rates of outpatient complications and adhere to high standards of care should consider reducing hospital stay.