Archives of orthopaedic and trauma surgery · 2022
Revision surgery for periprosthetic elbow infection: eradication rate, complications, and functional outcomes-a systematic review.
Систематический обзорСтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Mercurio Michele, Castioni Davide, Cosentino Orlando, Familiari Filippo, Iannò Bruno, Gasparini Giorgio, Galasso Olimpio
Аннотация
INTRODUCTION: The aim of this systematic review was to investigate the outcomes of revision surgery after periprosthetic elbow infection (PEI).
MATERIAL AND METHODS: Eighteen studies with 332 PEI that underwent revision surgery were included. Demographics, laboratory and microbiological data, types of implants, surgical techniques with complications and reoperations, eradication rates, and clinical and functional outcomes were reported.
RESULTS: Staphylococcus aureus was the most common microorganism (40%). Pre-operatively, the mean white blood cell count was 8400 ± 4000 per microliter; the mean C-reactive protein level was 41.6 ± 66.9 mg/dl, and the mean erythrocyte sedimentation rate was 45 ± 66.9 mm/h. The Coonrad-Morrey total elbow prosthesis represented 41.2% of the infected implant, and it also represented the most common system used for the PEI revision surgery. Two-stage revision and debridement and implant retention (DAIR) were the most common procedures performed for PEI, and, on the whole, they represented 35.7 and 32.7%, respectively. The eradication rate was 76% with 2-stage, 71% with resection arthroplasty (RA), 66.7% with 1-stage, 57.7% with DAIR, and 40% with arthrodesis (EA). DAIR showed a significantly lower eradication rate than 2-stage (P = 0.003). The mean postoperative Mayo Elbow Performance Score was significantly higher in patients who underwent DAIR, and 2-stage compared with RA (P < 0.001 for all). Postoperative flexion-extension ROM was significantly higher in patients who underwent DAIR compared with 1-stage, 2-stage, and RA (P < 0.001 for all). Moreover, 1-stage and 2-stage showed a significantly greater postoperative flexion-extension ROM compared with RA (P < 0.001 for all). Reoperations occurred in 40% of patients after EA, 33.3% after 1-stage, 26.9% after DAIR and RA, and 24.1% after 2-stage. Conversion to amputation occurred in 2.2% of patients after RA and 1% after DAIR.
CONCLUSIONS: Two-stage revision and DAIR are the most common procedures used to manage PEI; however, the former procedure showed a significantly higher eradication rate. Resection arthroplasty showed a high eradication rate, but postoperative lower clinical and functional outcomes limit the indications for this technique. One-stage procedure showed a limited role in the current practice of PEI treatment.
LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level IV.
MATERIAL AND METHODS: Eighteen studies with 332 PEI that underwent revision surgery were included. Demographics, laboratory and microbiological data, types of implants, surgical techniques with complications and reoperations, eradication rates, and clinical and functional outcomes were reported.
RESULTS: Staphylococcus aureus was the most common microorganism (40%). Pre-operatively, the mean white blood cell count was 8400 ± 4000 per microliter; the mean C-reactive protein level was 41.6 ± 66.9 mg/dl, and the mean erythrocyte sedimentation rate was 45 ± 66.9 mm/h. The Coonrad-Morrey total elbow prosthesis represented 41.2% of the infected implant, and it also represented the most common system used for the PEI revision surgery. Two-stage revision and debridement and implant retention (DAIR) were the most common procedures performed for PEI, and, on the whole, they represented 35.7 and 32.7%, respectively. The eradication rate was 76% with 2-stage, 71% with resection arthroplasty (RA), 66.7% with 1-stage, 57.7% with DAIR, and 40% with arthrodesis (EA). DAIR showed a significantly lower eradication rate than 2-stage (P = 0.003). The mean postoperative Mayo Elbow Performance Score was significantly higher in patients who underwent DAIR, and 2-stage compared with RA (P < 0.001 for all). Postoperative flexion-extension ROM was significantly higher in patients who underwent DAIR compared with 1-stage, 2-stage, and RA (P < 0.001 for all). Moreover, 1-stage and 2-stage showed a significantly greater postoperative flexion-extension ROM compared with RA (P < 0.001 for all). Reoperations occurred in 40% of patients after EA, 33.3% after 1-stage, 26.9% after DAIR and RA, and 24.1% after 2-stage. Conversion to amputation occurred in 2.2% of patients after RA and 1% after DAIR.
CONCLUSIONS: Two-stage revision and DAIR are the most common procedures used to manage PEI; however, the former procedure showed a significantly higher eradication rate. Resection arthroplasty showed a high eradication rate, but postoperative lower clinical and functional outcomes limit the indications for this technique. One-stage procedure showed a limited role in the current practice of PEI treatment.
LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level IV.