Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Acetabular spacers in 2-stage hip revision: is it worth it? A single-centre retrospective study.
Burastero, Giorgio; Basso, Marco; Carrega, Giuliana; Cavagnaro, Luca; Chiarlone, Francesco; Salomone, Carlo; Papa, Gabriele; Felli, Lamberto.
Afiliação
  • Burastero G; Infectious Diseases and Septic Orthopaedics, Hospital St. Mary of Mercy, Albenga - Italy.
  • Basso M; Orthopaedic Clinic - IRCCS University Hospital San Martino IST, Genova - Italy.
  • Carrega G; Infectious Diseases and Septic Orthopaedics, Hospital St. Mary of Mercy, Albenga - Italy.
  • Cavagnaro L; Orthopaedic Clinic - IRCCS University Hospital San Martino IST, Genova - Italy.
  • Chiarlone F; Orthopaedic Clinic - IRCCS University Hospital San Martino IST, Genova - Italy.
  • Salomone C; Infectious Diseases and Septic Orthopaedics, Hospital St. Mary of Mercy, Albenga - Italy.
  • Papa G; Orthopaedic Clinic - IRCCS University Hospital San Martino IST, Genova - Italy.
  • Felli L; Orthopaedic Clinic - IRCCS University Hospital San Martino IST, Genova - Italy.
Hip Int ; 27(2): 187-192, 2017 Mar 31.
Article em En | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-27886355
PURPOSE: The aim of this work is to evaluate an acetabular antibiotic loaded bone cement spacer in 2-stage revision surgery as a potential approach able to reduce complications during the inter-stage period (i.e. dislocation, acetabular wear), as well as simplify 2-stage hip revision surgery and improve hip biomechanics. METHODS: We performed a retrospective comparative study and evaluated clinical, radiological and surgical data of 71 patients affected by periprosthetic hip infection who were treated with 2-stage exchange. 31 patients were treated using an acetabular spacer in addition to the femoral (group A) while 40 underwent a standard revision surgery (femoral spacer only, group B). RESULTS: Mean time of surgery for the first stage was 148 ± 59 minutes and 142 ± 45 minutes for group A and B respectively; we noted a statistically significant reduction (26 min, p = 0.015) in the same parameter for the second stage (83 ± 35 minutes for group A and 109 ± 36 minutes for group B). We observed the following interstage complications: 5 femoral spacer dislocations (1 for group A and 4 for group B); 1 spacer fracture (group B), 1 spacer fracture (group A), 2 periprosthetic fractures (group B) and 2 patients with acetabular spacer instability (group B). Additionally, we observed a significant improvement in leg length restoration for group A (p = 0.03). CONCLUSIONS: Our data show that the acetabular spacer technique is able to reduce the interstage complication rate and allow improved hip biomechanics restoration.
Assuntos

Texto completo: 1 Coleções: 01-internacional Base de dados: MEDLINE Tipo de estudo: Diagnostic_studies / Etiology_studies / Evaluation_studies / Incidence_studies / Observational_studies / Prognostic_studies / Risk_factors_studies Limite: Adult / Aged / Female / Humans / Male / Middle aged Idioma: En Ano de publicação: 2017 Tipo de documento: Article

Texto completo: 1 Coleções: 01-internacional Base de dados: MEDLINE Tipo de estudo: Diagnostic_studies / Etiology_studies / Evaluation_studies / Incidence_studies / Observational_studies / Prognostic_studies / Risk_factors_studies Limite: Adult / Aged / Female / Humans / Male / Middle aged Idioma: En Ano de publicação: 2017 Tipo de documento: Article