Do Antibiotic Intramedullary Dowels Assist in Eradicating Infection in Two-Stage Resection for Septic Total Knee Arthroplasty?

Evidence suggests approximately 40% of intramedullary (IM) canals are culture positive at resection for infected knee arthroplasty. While commonly utilized, no clinical data on the efficacy of antibiotic-eluding IM dowels exist. We quantified treatment success with and without the use of antibiotic-...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:The Journal of arthroplasty 2019-10, Vol.34 (10), p.2461-2465
Hauptverfasser: Zielinski, Matthew R., Ziemba-Davis, Mary, Warth, Lucian C., Keyes, Brian J., Meneghini, R. Michael
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
container_end_page 2465
container_issue 10
container_start_page 2461
container_title The Journal of arthroplasty
container_volume 34
creator Zielinski, Matthew R.
Ziemba-Davis, Mary
Warth, Lucian C.
Keyes, Brian J.
Meneghini, R. Michael
description Evidence suggests approximately 40% of intramedullary (IM) canals are culture positive at resection for infected knee arthroplasty. While commonly utilized, no clinical data on the efficacy of antibiotic-eluding IM dowels exist. We quantified treatment success with and without the use of antibiotic-eluding IM dowels in two-stage treatment of periprosthetic knee infection using static and articulating antibiotic cement spacers. 109 consecutive patients who underwent two-stage treatment for periprosthetic knee infection were reviewed. Treatment failure, defined as repeat resection before reimplantation or recurrent infection within 6 months of reimplantation, was evaluated based on spacer type and use of IM dowels, accounting for infection type and systemic host and local extremity grade. After exclusions for confounds, articulating spacers without IM dowels were used in 49 (57.7%) cases, articulating spacers with IM dowels in 14 cases (16.5%), and static spacers with IM dowels in 22 (25.9%) cases. Treatment success regardless of infection classification was 85.7% for articulating spacers with IM dowels, 89.8% for articulating spacers without IM dowels, and 68.2% for static spacers with IM dowels (P = .074). In chronically infected poor hosts with compromised extremities, treatment success remained highest in patients with articulating spacers with (90.9%) or without (92.9%) IM dowels compared with static spacers with IM dowels (68.4%) (P = .061). Findings suggest that the use of IM dowels did not enhance infection eradication above and beyond that observed for articulating spacers alone, including in the worst cases involving chronically infected poor hosts with compromised extremities.
doi_str_mv 10.1016/j.arth.2019.05.022
format Article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_2297126878</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><els_id>S0883540319304966</els_id><sourcerecordid>2297126878</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c400t-e3ea26ae98e249ea08474df34e443803f1c2feefce29fd762b82d97da72f724a3</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNp9kMFu1DAQhi1ERZfCC3BAPnJJsMdO4khIaNWWtqJSpXY5W15nXLzKxovtpeqlz46jXThyGmnmm18zHyEfOKs54-3nTW1i_lkD433NmpoBvCIL3giolGTta7JgSomqkUyckrcpbRjjvGnkG3IqOFcgmVqQl4tAl1P2ax-yt_RmytFscdiPo4nP9CI84ZjoMiWfMvUTvYxm8NZkPz0W1qHNPkzzYPUUqodsHpHeYzq2XYj0AXdz7ipkM9LvEyJdlptj2I0m5eev78iJM2PC98d6Rn58u1ydX1e3d1c358vbykrGcoUCDbQGe4UgezRMyU4OTkiUUigmHLfgEJ1F6N3QtbBWMPTdYDpwHUgjzsinQ-4uhl97TFlvfbJYvpww7JMG6DsOrepUQeGA2hhSiuj0LvptsaE507N3vdGzdz1716zRxXtZ-njM36-Lvn8rf0UX4MsBKD7xt8eok_U4WRx8LLr0EPz_8v8A4CKWBA</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>2297126878</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Do Antibiotic Intramedullary Dowels Assist in Eradicating Infection in Two-Stage Resection for Septic Total Knee Arthroplasty?</title><source>Access via ScienceDirect (Elsevier)</source><creator>Zielinski, Matthew R. ; Ziemba-Davis, Mary ; Warth, Lucian C. ; Keyes, Brian J. ; Meneghini, R. Michael</creator><creatorcontrib>Zielinski, Matthew R. ; Ziemba-Davis, Mary ; Warth, Lucian C. ; Keyes, Brian J. ; Meneghini, R. Michael</creatorcontrib><description>Evidence suggests approximately 40% of intramedullary (IM) canals are culture positive at resection for infected knee arthroplasty. While commonly utilized, no clinical data on the efficacy of antibiotic-eluding IM dowels exist. We quantified treatment success with and without the use of antibiotic-eluding IM dowels in two-stage treatment of periprosthetic knee infection using static and articulating antibiotic cement spacers. 109 consecutive patients who underwent two-stage treatment for periprosthetic knee infection were reviewed. Treatment failure, defined as repeat resection before reimplantation or recurrent infection within 6 months of reimplantation, was evaluated based on spacer type and use of IM dowels, accounting for infection type and systemic host and local extremity grade. After exclusions for confounds, articulating spacers without IM dowels were used in 49 (57.7%) cases, articulating spacers with IM dowels in 14 cases (16.5%), and static spacers with IM dowels in 22 (25.9%) cases. Treatment success regardless of infection classification was 85.7% for articulating spacers with IM dowels, 89.8% for articulating spacers without IM dowels, and 68.2% for static spacers with IM dowels (P = .074). In chronically infected poor hosts with compromised extremities, treatment success remained highest in patients with articulating spacers with (90.9%) or without (92.9%) IM dowels compared with static spacers with IM dowels (68.4%) (P = .061). Findings suggest that the use of IM dowels did not enhance infection eradication above and beyond that observed for articulating spacers alone, including in the worst cases involving chronically infected poor hosts with compromised extremities.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0883-5403</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1532-8406</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1016/j.arth.2019.05.022</identifier><identifier>PMID: 31182408</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>United States: Elsevier Inc</publisher><subject>antibiotic spacer ; intramedullary dowel ; knee infection ; knee revision ; periprosthetic joint infection ; two-stage treatment</subject><ispartof>The Journal of arthroplasty, 2019-10, Vol.34 (10), p.2461-2465</ispartof><rights>2019 Elsevier Inc.</rights><rights>Copyright © 2019 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c400t-e3ea26ae98e249ea08474df34e443803f1c2feefce29fd762b82d97da72f724a3</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c400t-e3ea26ae98e249ea08474df34e443803f1c2feefce29fd762b82d97da72f724a3</cites><orcidid>0000-0001-9602-3925</orcidid></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.arth.2019.05.022$$EHTML$$P50$$Gelsevier$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>315,781,785,3551,27926,27927,45997</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31182408$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Zielinski, Matthew R.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Ziemba-Davis, Mary</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Warth, Lucian C.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Keyes, Brian J.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Meneghini, R. Michael</creatorcontrib><title>Do Antibiotic Intramedullary Dowels Assist in Eradicating Infection in Two-Stage Resection for Septic Total Knee Arthroplasty?</title><title>The Journal of arthroplasty</title><addtitle>J Arthroplasty</addtitle><description>Evidence suggests approximately 40% of intramedullary (IM) canals are culture positive at resection for infected knee arthroplasty. While commonly utilized, no clinical data on the efficacy of antibiotic-eluding IM dowels exist. We quantified treatment success with and without the use of antibiotic-eluding IM dowels in two-stage treatment of periprosthetic knee infection using static and articulating antibiotic cement spacers. 109 consecutive patients who underwent two-stage treatment for periprosthetic knee infection were reviewed. Treatment failure, defined as repeat resection before reimplantation or recurrent infection within 6 months of reimplantation, was evaluated based on spacer type and use of IM dowels, accounting for infection type and systemic host and local extremity grade. After exclusions for confounds, articulating spacers without IM dowels were used in 49 (57.7%) cases, articulating spacers with IM dowels in 14 cases (16.5%), and static spacers with IM dowels in 22 (25.9%) cases. Treatment success regardless of infection classification was 85.7% for articulating spacers with IM dowels, 89.8% for articulating spacers without IM dowels, and 68.2% for static spacers with IM dowels (P = .074). In chronically infected poor hosts with compromised extremities, treatment success remained highest in patients with articulating spacers with (90.9%) or without (92.9%) IM dowels compared with static spacers with IM dowels (68.4%) (P = .061). Findings suggest that the use of IM dowels did not enhance infection eradication above and beyond that observed for articulating spacers alone, including in the worst cases involving chronically infected poor hosts with compromised extremities.</description><subject>antibiotic spacer</subject><subject>intramedullary dowel</subject><subject>knee infection</subject><subject>knee revision</subject><subject>periprosthetic joint infection</subject><subject>two-stage treatment</subject><issn>0883-5403</issn><issn>1532-8406</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2019</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><recordid>eNp9kMFu1DAQhi1ERZfCC3BAPnJJsMdO4khIaNWWtqJSpXY5W15nXLzKxovtpeqlz46jXThyGmnmm18zHyEfOKs54-3nTW1i_lkD433NmpoBvCIL3giolGTta7JgSomqkUyckrcpbRjjvGnkG3IqOFcgmVqQl4tAl1P2ax-yt_RmytFscdiPo4nP9CI84ZjoMiWfMvUTvYxm8NZkPz0W1qHNPkzzYPUUqodsHpHeYzq2XYj0AXdz7ipkM9LvEyJdlptj2I0m5eev78iJM2PC98d6Rn58u1ydX1e3d1c358vbykrGcoUCDbQGe4UgezRMyU4OTkiUUigmHLfgEJ1F6N3QtbBWMPTdYDpwHUgjzsinQ-4uhl97TFlvfbJYvpww7JMG6DsOrepUQeGA2hhSiuj0LvptsaE507N3vdGzdz1716zRxXtZ-njM36-Lvn8rf0UX4MsBKD7xt8eok_U4WRx8LLr0EPz_8v8A4CKWBA</recordid><startdate>201910</startdate><enddate>201910</enddate><creator>Zielinski, Matthew R.</creator><creator>Ziemba-Davis, Mary</creator><creator>Warth, Lucian C.</creator><creator>Keyes, Brian J.</creator><creator>Meneghini, R. Michael</creator><general>Elsevier Inc</general><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7X8</scope><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9602-3925</orcidid></search><sort><creationdate>201910</creationdate><title>Do Antibiotic Intramedullary Dowels Assist in Eradicating Infection in Two-Stage Resection for Septic Total Knee Arthroplasty?</title><author>Zielinski, Matthew R. ; Ziemba-Davis, Mary ; Warth, Lucian C. ; Keyes, Brian J. ; Meneghini, R. Michael</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c400t-e3ea26ae98e249ea08474df34e443803f1c2feefce29fd762b82d97da72f724a3</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2019</creationdate><topic>antibiotic spacer</topic><topic>intramedullary dowel</topic><topic>knee infection</topic><topic>knee revision</topic><topic>periprosthetic joint infection</topic><topic>two-stage treatment</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Zielinski, Matthew R.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Ziemba-Davis, Mary</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Warth, Lucian C.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Keyes, Brian J.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Meneghini, R. Michael</creatorcontrib><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><jtitle>The Journal of arthroplasty</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Zielinski, Matthew R.</au><au>Ziemba-Davis, Mary</au><au>Warth, Lucian C.</au><au>Keyes, Brian J.</au><au>Meneghini, R. Michael</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Do Antibiotic Intramedullary Dowels Assist in Eradicating Infection in Two-Stage Resection for Septic Total Knee Arthroplasty?</atitle><jtitle>The Journal of arthroplasty</jtitle><addtitle>J Arthroplasty</addtitle><date>2019-10</date><risdate>2019</risdate><volume>34</volume><issue>10</issue><spage>2461</spage><epage>2465</epage><pages>2461-2465</pages><issn>0883-5403</issn><eissn>1532-8406</eissn><abstract>Evidence suggests approximately 40% of intramedullary (IM) canals are culture positive at resection for infected knee arthroplasty. While commonly utilized, no clinical data on the efficacy of antibiotic-eluding IM dowels exist. We quantified treatment success with and without the use of antibiotic-eluding IM dowels in two-stage treatment of periprosthetic knee infection using static and articulating antibiotic cement spacers. 109 consecutive patients who underwent two-stage treatment for periprosthetic knee infection were reviewed. Treatment failure, defined as repeat resection before reimplantation or recurrent infection within 6 months of reimplantation, was evaluated based on spacer type and use of IM dowels, accounting for infection type and systemic host and local extremity grade. After exclusions for confounds, articulating spacers without IM dowels were used in 49 (57.7%) cases, articulating spacers with IM dowels in 14 cases (16.5%), and static spacers with IM dowels in 22 (25.9%) cases. Treatment success regardless of infection classification was 85.7% for articulating spacers with IM dowels, 89.8% for articulating spacers without IM dowels, and 68.2% for static spacers with IM dowels (P = .074). In chronically infected poor hosts with compromised extremities, treatment success remained highest in patients with articulating spacers with (90.9%) or without (92.9%) IM dowels compared with static spacers with IM dowels (68.4%) (P = .061). Findings suggest that the use of IM dowels did not enhance infection eradication above and beyond that observed for articulating spacers alone, including in the worst cases involving chronically infected poor hosts with compromised extremities.</abstract><cop>United States</cop><pub>Elsevier Inc</pub><pmid>31182408</pmid><doi>10.1016/j.arth.2019.05.022</doi><tpages>5</tpages><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9602-3925</orcidid><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 0883-5403
ispartof The Journal of arthroplasty, 2019-10, Vol.34 (10), p.2461-2465
issn 0883-5403
1532-8406
language eng
recordid cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_2297126878
source Access via ScienceDirect (Elsevier)
subjects antibiotic spacer
intramedullary dowel
knee infection
knee revision
periprosthetic joint infection
two-stage treatment
title Do Antibiotic Intramedullary Dowels Assist in Eradicating Infection in Two-Stage Resection for Septic Total Knee Arthroplasty?
url https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2024-12-18T04%3A52%3A02IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Do%20Antibiotic%20Intramedullary%20Dowels%20Assist%20in%20Eradicating%20Infection%20in%20Two-Stage%20Resection%20for%20Septic%20Total%20Knee%20Arthroplasty?&rft.jtitle=The%20Journal%20of%20arthroplasty&rft.au=Zielinski,%20Matthew%20R.&rft.date=2019-10&rft.volume=34&rft.issue=10&rft.spage=2461&rft.epage=2465&rft.pages=2461-2465&rft.issn=0883-5403&rft.eissn=1532-8406&rft_id=info:doi/10.1016/j.arth.2019.05.022&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E2297126878%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=2297126878&rft_id=info:pmid/31182408&rft_els_id=S0883540319304966&rfr_iscdi=true