Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Does the Implementation of the PRO-IMPLANT Foundation Treatment Algorithm Improve the Outcome of Chronic Periprosthetic Knee Infections? Mid-Term Results of a Prospective Study. / Verbessert die Implementierung des PRO-IMPLANT Foundation Behandlungsalgorithmus die Therapie chronischer periprothetischer Knieprotheseninfektionen? Ergebnisse einer prospektiven Studie.
Hanusrichter, Yannik; Frieler, Sven; Gessmann, Jan; Schulte, Martin; Krejczy, Martin; Schildhauer, Thomas; Baecker, Hinnerk.
Afiliação
  • Hanusrichter Y; Department of General and Trauma Surgery, BG University Hospital Bergmannsheil, Ruhr-University Bochum, Bochum, Germany.
  • Frieler S; Department of General and Trauma Surgery, BG University Hospital Bergmannsheil, Ruhr-University Bochum, Bochum, Germany.
  • Gessmann J; Swedish Neuroscience Institute, Swedish Medical Center, Seattle, Washington, United States.
  • Schulte M; Seattle Science Foundation, Seattle Science Foundation, Seattle, Washington, United States.
  • Krejczy M; Hansjörg Wyss Hip and Pelvic Center, Swedish Hospital, Seattle, Washington, United States.
  • Schildhauer T; Department of General and Trauma Surgery, BG University Hospital Bergmannsheil, Ruhr-University Bochum, Bochum, Germany.
  • Baecker H; Department of General and Trauma Surgery, BG University Hospital Bergmannsheil, Ruhr-University Bochum, Bochum, Germany.
Z Orthop Unfall ; 161(3): 260-270, 2023 Jun.
Article em En, De | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-34753193
ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND:

Several treatment options for chronic periprosthetic joint infections have been published in the current literature, with an on-going discussion to determine effective management algorithms.

OBJECTIVES:

To compare outcomes of the two-stage exchange procedure in revision TKA prior to and after implementation of the PRO-IMPLANT Foundation treatment algorithm. The primary endpoints were defined as (i) revisions during the interval time, (ii) duration of the interval time and (iii) successful PJI eradication. MATERIAL AND

METHODS:

Between 02/2013 and 09/2016, 122 patients were included in a single-centre cohort analysis. 55 patients were treated according to the previously used algorithm (K1) and 67 according to the PRO-IMPLANT Foundation algorithm (K2). A minimum follow-up period of 3 years was set as the inclusion criterion. Successful eradication of infection was defined in accordance with the consensus criteria by Diaz-Ledezma et al.

RESULTS:

Successful eradication was achieved in 42 (67%) patients in K1 and 47 (85.5%) in K2 (p ≤ 0.005). The mean interval time was 88 days (range 51 - 353) in K1 and 52 days (range 42 - 126) in K2 (p ≤ 0.005). In K1, a mean of 0.8 (range 0 - 6) revisions were necessary during the interval period compared with 0.5 (range 0 - 4) in K2 (p = 0.066).

CONCLUSION:

Implementation of the PRO-IMPLANT treatment algorithm led to significant improvement in the outcome of periprosthetic joint infections. During mid-term follow-up, infection eradication was highly successful, with decreases in the interval time as well as the number of revisions.
Assuntos

Texto completo: 1 Base de dados: MEDLINE Assunto principal: Infecções Relacionadas à Prótese / Artroplastia do Joelho Tipo de estudo: Observational_studies / Prognostic_studies Limite: Humans Idioma: De / En Ano de publicação: 2023 Tipo de documento: Article

Texto completo: 1 Base de dados: MEDLINE Assunto principal: Infecções Relacionadas à Prótese / Artroplastia do Joelho Tipo de estudo: Observational_studies / Prognostic_studies Limite: Humans Idioma: De / En Ano de publicação: 2023 Tipo de documento: Article