This article is more than 5 years old. Information may no longer be current.
Research shows 85% survivorship 5 years after two-stage revisions for infected TKA
From a retrospective review of 253 cases of two-stage revision total knee arthroplasty (TKA) performed in 239 patients for periprosthetic infection, Canadian researchers found overall 5-year infection-free survivorship rates of 85% and survivorship of 78% at 10 years.
“Periprosthetic joint infection has been the leading cause of failure following TKA surgery,” the authors wrote. “The gold standard for infection control has been a two-staged revision TKA. There have been few reports on mid- to long-term survivorship, functional outcomes and fate of patients with a failed two-stage revision TKA.”
The team performed a retrospective study that analyzed results of 253 two-stage revision TKAs with a focus on periprosthetic infection. There were 104 men and 135 women in the study with a mean age of 70 years and a mean body mass index of 31.53 kg/m2. According to the abstract, there was 1-year minimum follow-up, which included radiographic results and assessments using the WOMAC and Knee Society Clinical Rating scores.
The median follow-up duration was 4 years, with a range of 1 year to 17 years.
According to the study results, 33 patients experienced failure of a two-stage TKA. In 16 patients failure was due to recurrent sepsis, the researchers reported, and 17 failures were from aseptic causes, they noted.
Perspective
Back to Top
Craig J. Della Valle, MD
The authors present extensive experience with a two-stage exchange protocol for treatment of an infected total knee arthroplasty, which includes 253 knees treated over a 17-year time period. The reported survivorship free of infection was 85% at 5 years and 78% at 10 years, although 95% confidence intervals at 10 years were wide given the median follow up of 4 years.
Although no patients were lost to follow-up, the minimum time of follow-up was just 1 year, while most studies that report the outcomes of treatment of infection are at a minimum of 2 years; this is particularly relevant as the median time to failure for recurrent infection was 15 months. It is also interesting to note that many of their patients although clinically infected, were culture negative which the authors hypothesize was secondary to prior antibiotic treatment elsewhere; unfortunately this is an all too common scenario. It is critical for physicians managing patients with a suspected periprosthetic joint infection to obtain deep cultures (via aspiration) prior to the administration of antibiotics to avoid this problem.
This is an important study, given its size, and it suggests that although the results of a two-stage exchange are good, overall survivorship at 10 years free of infection is modest. What remains unclear is how we can improve upon these results. As we have seen in many of our own patients, recurrence of infection is often times with a different organism, suggesting that the patient who becomes infected is for some reason prone to this complication. Whether some modifiable factor that can be treated will be discovered to improve upon these results, or if these patients have some inherent immunodeficiency that dooms them to recurrent failure remains unclear.
Craig J. Della Valle, MD
Associate Professor of Orthopaedic Surgery
Rush University Medical Center
Disclosures:
Published by: