Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Clinical Effectiveness of Treatment Strategies for Prosthetic Joint Infection Following Total Ankle Replacement: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.
Kunutsor, Setor K; Barrett, Matthew C; Whitehouse, Michael R; Blom, Ashley W.
Afiliación
  • Kunutsor SK; Research Fellow, National Institute for Health Research Bristol Biomedical Research Centre, University Hospitals Bristol NHS Foundation Trust and University of Bristol, Bristol, UK; Research Fellow, Translational Health Sciences, Bristol Medical School, Musculoskeletal Research Unit, University of B
  • Barrett MC; Medical Student, Barts and The London School of Medicine and Dentistry, London, UK.
  • Whitehouse MR; Reader, National Institute for Health Research Bristol Biomedical Research Centre, University Hospitals Bristol NHS Foundation Trust and University of Bristol, Bristol, UK; Reader, Translational Health Sciences, Bristol Medical School, Musculoskeletal Research Unit, University of Bristol, Learning &
  • Blom AW; Professor, National Institute for Health Research Bristol Biomedical Research Centre, University Hospitals Bristol NHS Foundation Trust and University of Bristol, Bristol, UK; Professor, Translational Health Sciences, Bristol Medical School, Musculoskeletal Research Unit, University of Bristol, Lear
J Foot Ankle Surg ; 59(2): 367-372, 2020.
Article en En | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-32131004
ABSTRACT
Prosthetic joint infection (PJI) after total ankle replacement (TAR) is a challenging complication, which often requires debridement and implant retention (DAIR) with or without polyethylene exchange, revision surgery, implantation of a cement spacer, conversion to arthrodesis, or even amputation. The optimum treatment for ankle PJI is not well established. We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to compare the clinical effectiveness of various treatment strategies for infected ankle prostheses. We searched MEDLINE, Embase, Web of Science, and the Cochrane Library up to December 2018 for studies evaluating the impact of treatment in patient populations with infected ankle prostheses following TAR. Binary data were pooled after arcsine transformation. Six citations comprising 17 observational design comparisons were included. The reinfection rates (95% confidence intervals) for DAIR with or without polyethylene exchange, 1-stage revision, 2-stage revision, cement spacer, and arthrodesis were 39.8% (24.4 to 56.1), 0.0% (0.0 to 78.7), 0.0% (0.0 to 8.5), 0.2% (0.0 to 17.9), and 13.6% (0.0 to 45.8), respectively. Rates of amputation for DAIR with or without polyethylene exchange and cement spacer were 5.6% (0.0 to 16.9) and 22.2% (6.3 to 54.7), respectively. Measures of function, pain, and satisfaction could not be compared because of limited data. One- and 2-stage revision strategies seem to be associated with the lowest reinfection rates, but these findings are based on limited data. Arthrodesis and DAIR with or without polyethylene exchange appear to be commonly used in treating infected ankle prosthesis, but are associated with poor infection control. Clear gaps exist in the literature, and further research is warranted to evaluate treatment strategies for infected ankle prosthesis.
Asunto(s)
Palabras clave

Texto completo: 1 Colección: 01-internacional Banco de datos: MEDLINE Asunto principal: Artrodesis / Artritis Infecciosa / Infecciones Relacionadas con Prótesis / Desbridamiento / Artroplastia de Reemplazo de Tobillo / Articulación del Tobillo Tipo de estudio: Systematic_reviews Límite: Humans Idioma: En Revista: J Foot Ankle Surg Año: 2020 Tipo del documento: Article

Texto completo: 1 Colección: 01-internacional Banco de datos: MEDLINE Asunto principal: Artrodesis / Artritis Infecciosa / Infecciones Relacionadas con Prótesis / Desbridamiento / Artroplastia de Reemplazo de Tobillo / Articulación del Tobillo Tipo de estudio: Systematic_reviews Límite: Humans Idioma: En Revista: J Foot Ankle Surg Año: 2020 Tipo del documento: Article