• Valérie Zeller, Luc Lhotellier, Simon Marmor, Philippe Leclerc, Alysa Krain, Wilfrid Graff, Françoise Ducroquet, David Biau, Philippe Leonard, Nicole Desplaces, and Patrick Mamoudy.
• Service de Chirurgie Osseuse et Traumatologique, Groupe Hospitalier Diaconesses-Croix Saint-Simon, 125, rue d'Avron, 75020 Paris, France. E-mail address for V. Zeller: vzeller@hopital-dcss.org.
• J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2014 Jan 1;96(1):e1.

BackgroundExchange arthroplasty of one or two stages is required for the treatment of chronic periprosthetic joint infections. Two-stage exchange is costly and has high morbidity with limited patient mobility between procedures. One-stage exchange has been promoted by several European teams as the preferred alternative. The aim of this study was to prospectively analyze the outcome of patients with a periprosthetic hip infection treated with one-stage exchange arthroplasty.MethodsWe performed a prospective cohort study in a French referral center for osteoarticular infections including all periprosthetic hip infections treated with one-stage exchange arthroplasty from November 2002 to March 2010. Direct exchange was performed in chronic periprosthetic hip infection with no or minor bone loss and preoperative identification of a microorganism from joint fluid aspirate. No antibiotic-loaded bone cement was used. Antibiotic therapy was administered for twelve weeks: intravenously for four to six weeks, followed by an oral regimen for six to eight weeks. Follow-up was a minimum of two years. The following events were noted: relapse, new infection, joint revision for mechanical reasons, and periprosthetic hip infection-related and unrelated deaths.ResultsOne hundred and fifty-seven patients with periprosthetic hip infections with a median infection duration of 258 days (interquartile range, 120 to 551 days) prior to our index surgical procedure for infection were included. Periprosthetic hip infection occurred in ninety-nine cases of primary hip arthroplasty, twenty-seven cases of revision arthroplasty, and thirty-one cases in which the periprosthetic hip infection had been treated previously. A difficult-to-treat organism was isolated in fifty-nine cases (38%). After a median follow-up of 41.6 months (interquartile range, 28.1 to 66.9 months), two relapses, six new infections, nine revisions for mechanical reasons, two related deaths, and nineteen unrelated deaths occurred.ConclusionsOne-stage exchange arthroplasty is an effective surgical procedure in patients with periprosthetic hip infection who have good bone quality. Precise identification of the microorganism(s) and prolonged administration of appropriate intravenous antibiotic therapy are key factors for successful treatment.

30 keywords...

hide…