Bone morphogenic protein-2 use in revision total hip arthroplasty with acetabular defects.

INTRODUCTION: The restoration of acetabular bone stock during revision hip arthroplasty remains a challenge. There have been no clinical series reporting the efficacy of bone morphogenic protein-2 (rhBMP-2) in the revision hip setting. METHODS: We retrospectively reviewed the radiographs and records of 15 patients who received rhBMP-2 mixed with allograft bone chips (+BMP), and 14 who received allograft bone chips alone (-BMP) for their acetabular defect during revision total hip arthroplasty with a mean two-year follow up. Radiographs were evaluated for acetabular defect size, superior cup migration, and changes in the lateral cup abduction angle. Modified Harris hip scores were used for evaluation of clinical outcomes. RESULTS: Patients in the +BMP group compared to the -BMP group had significantly larger amounts of cancellous bone chips used (72.1 ± 35.5 cc vs. 38.6 ± 14.1 cc; p = 0.003). Mean rhBMP-2 used per case was 7.4 ± 3.1 mg in the +BMP group. Three patients in the -BMP group had cup migration which was not observed in the +BMP group. Mean Harris hip scores (HHS) improved post-operatively in both groups (40.1 ± 20.9 to 71.9 ± 19, p < .0001). No local adverse reaction was noted in the +BMP group. CONCLUSION: rhBMP-2 had modest clinical benefit in the setting of revision THA. Cost of this synthetic biologic versus the added clinical benefit should be carefully considered when being used in the revision hip setting.

The Influence of a Failed Irrigation and Debridement on the Outcomes of a Subsequent 2-Stage Revision Knee Arthroplasty.

BACKGROUND: Previous work has suggested a failed irrigation and debridement (I&D) before a 2-stage exchange negatively impacts the outcome of the subsequent 2-stage revision. METHODS: This was a retrospective review of 132 patients who underwent a 2-stage exchange without prior I&D (2-Stage), and 45 patients had a failed I&D before their 2-stage exchange (I&D+2Stage) between April 2009 and April 2015. Charts were reviewed for patient demographics, presenting inflammatory laboratory values, type of antibiotic spacer used, surgical details, microbiology data, length of postoperative antibiotic treatment, and reoperation. A logistic regression was used to assess the association between I&D and reoperation. RESULTS: The I&D+2Stage group had an 82.2% success rate, and the 2-Stage group had an 82.5% success rate (P = .95). The odds of reoperation for infection with the use of greater than 2 grams of vancomycin was 0.33 (P = .01, 95% confidence interval 0.14-0.79) as compared with having less than 2 grams of vancomycin in the construct. Spacer type, having a prior I&D to the 2-stage procedure, being infected with an antibiotic resistant organism, total grams of aminoglycoside were not associated with a risk of failure. CONCLUSION: Success rates between the I&D+2Stage group and the 2-Stage group were similar. The use of greater than 2 grams of vancomycin in the spacer construct decreased the odds of reoperation. I&D before a 2-stage exchange may not negatively influence the outcomes of a subsequent 2-stage revision procedure and requires further investigation.

Success rates, characteristics, and costs of articulating antibiotic spacers for total knee periprosthetic joint infection.

BACKGROUND: The optimal type, characteristics, and success rates of articulating antibiotic spacers used during total knee arthroplasty (TKA) periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) have not been well defined in a single series. We sought to (1) determine the success rate for three unique spacer constructs and (2) evaluate any microbiological, surgical, or patient characteristics that would influence the success rate. METHODS: We retrospectively reviewed patients who underwent a two-stage exchange for a TKA PJI with a prefabricated spacer (PREFAB), home-made mold (MOLD), or autoclaved femoral component (AUTOCL). Patient demographics, microbiology data, amount of antibiotic in each spacer construct, postoperative course, and infection cure outcomes were evaluated. RESULTS: The success rate for being infection free at final follow-up without the need for further reoperation for infection was 82.7% in the PREFAB group, 88.4% in the MOLD group, and 79.4% in the AUTOCL group (p=0.54). There was no clear statistical link between raw quantities of vancomycin and aminoglycoside in the spacer and a successful outcome. The surgeon's own intraoperatively created mold group had the lowest construct cost at a mean $1341.00±889.10 (p<0.0001) per construct, while the commercial cement molds had the highest mean cost at $5439.00±657.80 (p<0.0001). CONCLUSIONS: There was no statistically significant difference in the success rates between the antibiotic spacer types. The surgeon's own intraoperative mold had the least overall associated cost.