Purpose: The aim of our work is to evaluate results obtained from a cohort of patients affected by periprosthetic joint infection and treated with a primary cementless stem in a two-stage technique framework. Methods: Eighty-four patients were evaluated at a mean follow-up of 37.4 months. The main demographic, surgical, clinical, and radiographic data were recorded. A femoral window for stem removal was performed in 33 patients. Results: Statistically significant improvement was noted for both the Harris Hip score and the Oxford Hip score. Postsurgical complications included thigh pain in three patients, subsidence (>2 mm) in one patient, implant dislocation in two patients, cup revision in one patient, implant revision for septic failure in two patients, and stem revision for varus position in one patient. The stem survivorship rate was 96.3%. There were no significant differences between the groups in which a cortical window was created or not. Conclusion: Femoral stem revision with primary cementless stems is a viable option in selected patients undergoing two-stage hip revision surgery. Correct indication is a cornerstone of good outcome. The use of a cortical window does not affect the final outcome or implant survivorship rate.

Primary cementless stems in septic hip revision: Indications and results

Cavagnaro L.;Chiarlone F.;Divano S.;Capello A. G.;Felli L.;Burastero G.
2019

Abstract

Purpose: The aim of our work is to evaluate results obtained from a cohort of patients affected by periprosthetic joint infection and treated with a primary cementless stem in a two-stage technique framework. Methods: Eighty-four patients were evaluated at a mean follow-up of 37.4 months. The main demographic, surgical, clinical, and radiographic data were recorded. A femoral window for stem removal was performed in 33 patients. Results: Statistically significant improvement was noted for both the Harris Hip score and the Oxford Hip score. Postsurgical complications included thigh pain in three patients, subsidence (>2 mm) in one patient, implant dislocation in two patients, cup revision in one patient, implant revision for septic failure in two patients, and stem revision for varus position in one patient. The stem survivorship rate was 96.3%. There were no significant differences between the groups in which a cortical window was created or not. Conclusion: Femoral stem revision with primary cementless stems is a viable option in selected patients undergoing two-stage hip revision surgery. Correct indication is a cornerstone of good outcome. The use of a cortical window does not affect the final outcome or implant survivorship rate.
File in questo prodotto:
File Dimensione Formato  
primary stems in revision.Journal of Orthopaedic Surgery.2019.pdf

accesso aperto

Descrizione: ARTICOLO
Tipologia: Documento in versione editoriale
Dimensione 467.64 kB
Formato Adobe PDF
467.64 kB Adobe PDF Visualizza/Apri

I documenti in IRIS sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione.

Utilizza questo identificativo per citare o creare un link a questo documento: https://hdl.handle.net/11567/959830
Citazioni
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.pmc??? 1
  • Scopus 3
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.isi??? 3
social impact