Year : 2016 | Volume
: 51 | Issue : 2 | Page : 101--110
Single-stage versus two-stage revision of total hip replacement for contained periprosthetic infection
Ayman M Ebied
Department of Orthopedic and Trauma Surgery, Menoufia University Hospital, Menoufia, Egypt
In this article, single-stage exchange arthroplasty for periprosthetic hip infection was compared with the two-stage revision protocol in patients without draining sinuses.
Staged revision for periprosthetic infection of the hip is an accepted and widely used technique by many surgeons. However, single-stage exchange of the hip prosthesis remains an attractive option to some.
Patients and methods
Fifty-two patients with evidence of periprosthetic infection underwent preoperative aspiration of the affected hip. The organism was identified in 33/52 patients, and single-stage revision was performed. The remaining 19 patients underwent two-stage exchange arthroplasty. All patients had cemented cup and long cementless stem.
At an average 4 years (range: 2–7 years) postoperatively, only one case of persistent infection was found in the single-stage group, which showed a success rate of 97%, in comparison with 95% success rate in the staged protocol.
Single-stage exchange achieves excellent success rates in patients with contained infection when the organism is identified preoperatively.
Ayman M Ebied
Number 3, El Zahraa Tower, Gamal Abdul Naser Street, Sharaf Square, Shebin El Kom
|How to cite this article:|
Ebied AM. Single-stage versus two-stage revision of total hip replacement for contained periprosthetic infection.Egypt Orthop J 2016;51:101-110
|How to cite this URL:|
Ebied AM. Single-stage versus two-stage revision of total hip replacement for contained periprosthetic infection. Egypt Orthop J [serial online] 2016 [cited 2018 Feb 23 ];51:101-110
Available from: http://www.eoj.eg.net/article.asp?issn=1110-1148;year=2016;volume=51;issue=2;spage=101;epage=110;aulast=Ebied;type=0