Industrially Prefabricated Cement Spacers: Do Vancomycin- and Gentamicin-impregnated Spacers Offer Any Advantage?

Background Industrially preformed antibiotic-loaded cement spacers are useful to facilitate the second stage of two-stage exchange arthroplasty for infected THAs and TKAs. However, whether gentamicin alone or a combination of antibiotics (such as vancomycin and gentamicin) is more effective is not k...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Clinical orthopaedics and related research 2014-03, Vol.472 (3), p.923-932
Hauptverfasser: Corona, Pablo S., Barro, Victor, Mendez, Marye, Cáceres, Enric, Flores, Xavier
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
container_end_page 932
container_issue 3
container_start_page 923
container_title Clinical orthopaedics and related research
container_volume 472
creator Corona, Pablo S.
Barro, Victor
Mendez, Marye
Cáceres, Enric
Flores, Xavier
description Background Industrially preformed antibiotic-loaded cement spacers are useful to facilitate the second stage of two-stage exchange arthroplasty for infected THAs and TKAs. However, whether gentamicin alone or a combination of antibiotics (such as vancomycin and gentamicin) is more effective is not known. Questions/purposes We therefore sought to compare industrially prefabricated spacers containing either gentamicin or gentamicin and vancomycin with respect to (1) infection control, (2) complications, and (3) quality of life, pain, and patient satisfaction. Methods We performed a review of 51 patients with chronic infections treated at one center using either gentamicin or vancomycin and gentamicin-prefabricated spacers. The former were used exclusively from January 2006 until May 2009, and the latter from June 2009 until July 2011, and there was no overlap. We collected data on demographics, immunologic status (McPherson classification), prosthetic joint infection location, type of prosthesis, microbiologic results, and time between stages. We evaluated the primary outcome of infection control or recurrence after at least 12 months followup. We also recorded complications. Each patient completed a quality-of-life survey, VAS, and a self-administered satisfaction scale. Results The overall infection control rate was 83% after a mean followup of 35 months (range, 12.4–64.7 months). There were no differences between gentamicin and vancomycin and gentamicin spacers in terms of infection eradication (80 % versus 85 %, respectively; p = 0.73), nor in terms of complications, quality of life, pain, or satisfaction scores. Conclusions Prefabricated, antibiotic-loaded cement spacers has been proven effective for infection control in TKAs and THAs but with the numbers available, we did not find any differences between a gentamicin or vancomycin and gentamicin-prefabricated spacer, and therefore, we are unable to validate the superiority of the combination of vancomycin and gentamicin over gentamicin alone. Because of the higher costs involved with vancomycin and gentamicin spacers, and the potential risks of unselective use of vancomycin, further comparative studies are necessary to evaluate their role in the treatment of infected THAs or TKAs. Level of Evidence Level III, therapeutic study. See the Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.
doi_str_mv 10.1007/s11999-013-3342-7
format Article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>proquest_pubme</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_pubmedcentral_primary_oai_pubmedcentral_nih_gov_3916603</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>3208722461</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c470t-a7d45d03d22e6ed2d25a91ac18fd9999097b83efdb57e91c19225df3011b72523</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNp1kVtLAzEQhYMoWi8_wBcJ-BzNTHa7jQ9KqVcQFLzgW8gm2brSzdZkK_Tfm9oq-uBTGOY7ZyZzCNkHfgScF8cRQErJOAgmRIasWCM9yHHAAASukx7nXDKJ8LJFtmN8S6XIctwkW5hBhoJjj7zfeDuLXaj1ZDKn98FVugy10Z2zdOQa5zv6MNXGhXhCz1v6rL1pm7mpPaPaW3qVAN3Ui7pupsGN_ZdyJaF3VeUCHfo5HdoPndCxO9slG5WeRLe3enfI0-XF4-ia3d5d3YyGt8xkBe-YLmyWWy4sous7ixZzLUEbGFQ2fVpyWZQD4Spb5oWTYEAi5rYSHKAsMEexQ06XvtNZ2Thr0qZBT9Q01I0Oc9XqWv3t-PpVjdsPJST0-1wkg8OVQWjfZy526q2dBZ92VpDJPB0Q5CBRsKRMaGNM9_uZAFwtUlLLlFRKSS1SUkXSHPxe7UfxHUsCcAnE1PJjF36N_tf1E06pnr4</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Open Access Repository</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>1495423198</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Industrially Prefabricated Cement Spacers: Do Vancomycin- and Gentamicin-impregnated Spacers Offer Any Advantage?</title><source>MEDLINE</source><source>Springer Nature - Complete Springer Journals</source><source>Elektronische Zeitschriftenbibliothek - Frei zugängliche E-Journals</source><source>PubMed Central</source><creator>Corona, Pablo S. ; Barro, Victor ; Mendez, Marye ; Cáceres, Enric ; Flores, Xavier</creator><creatorcontrib>Corona, Pablo S. ; Barro, Victor ; Mendez, Marye ; Cáceres, Enric ; Flores, Xavier</creatorcontrib><description>Background Industrially preformed antibiotic-loaded cement spacers are useful to facilitate the second stage of two-stage exchange arthroplasty for infected THAs and TKAs. However, whether gentamicin alone or a combination of antibiotics (such as vancomycin and gentamicin) is more effective is not known. Questions/purposes We therefore sought to compare industrially prefabricated spacers containing either gentamicin or gentamicin and vancomycin with respect to (1) infection control, (2) complications, and (3) quality of life, pain, and patient satisfaction. Methods We performed a review of 51 patients with chronic infections treated at one center using either gentamicin or vancomycin and gentamicin-prefabricated spacers. The former were used exclusively from January 2006 until May 2009, and the latter from June 2009 until July 2011, and there was no overlap. We collected data on demographics, immunologic status (McPherson classification), prosthetic joint infection location, type of prosthesis, microbiologic results, and time between stages. We evaluated the primary outcome of infection control or recurrence after at least 12 months followup. We also recorded complications. Each patient completed a quality-of-life survey, VAS, and a self-administered satisfaction scale. Results The overall infection control rate was 83% after a mean followup of 35 months (range, 12.4–64.7 months). There were no differences between gentamicin and vancomycin and gentamicin spacers in terms of infection eradication (80 % versus 85 %, respectively; p = 0.73), nor in terms of complications, quality of life, pain, or satisfaction scores. Conclusions Prefabricated, antibiotic-loaded cement spacers has been proven effective for infection control in TKAs and THAs but with the numbers available, we did not find any differences between a gentamicin or vancomycin and gentamicin-prefabricated spacer, and therefore, we are unable to validate the superiority of the combination of vancomycin and gentamicin over gentamicin alone. Because of the higher costs involved with vancomycin and gentamicin spacers, and the potential risks of unselective use of vancomycin, further comparative studies are necessary to evaluate their role in the treatment of infected THAs or TKAs. Level of Evidence Level III, therapeutic study. See the Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0009-921X</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1528-1132</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1007/s11999-013-3342-7</identifier><identifier>PMID: 24142302</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Boston: Springer US</publisher><subject>Adult ; Aged ; Aged, 80 and over ; Arthroplasty, Replacement, Hip - adverse effects ; Arthroplasty, Replacement, Hip - instrumentation ; Arthroplasty, Replacement, Knee - adverse effects ; Arthroplasty, Replacement, Knee - instrumentation ; Bone Cements - adverse effects ; Bone Cements - therapeutic use ; Chi-Square Distribution ; Clinical Research ; Coated Materials, Biocompatible ; Conservative Orthopedics ; Device Removal ; Female ; Gentamicins - adverse effects ; Gentamicins - therapeutic use ; Hip Prosthesis - adverse effects ; Humans ; Infection ; Knee Prosthesis - adverse effects ; Male ; Medicine ; Medicine &amp; Public Health ; Middle Aged ; Orthopedics ; Pain Measurement ; Pain, Postoperative - diagnosis ; Pain, Postoperative - etiology ; Patient Satisfaction ; Prosthesis-Related Infections - diagnosis ; Prosthesis-Related Infections - microbiology ; Prosthesis-Related Infections - surgery ; Quality of Life ; Recurrence ; Reoperation ; Retrospective Studies ; Sports Medicine ; Surgery ; Surgical Orthopedics ; Surveys and Questionnaires ; Time Factors ; Treatment Outcome ; Vancomycin - adverse effects ; Vancomycin - therapeutic use</subject><ispartof>Clinical orthopaedics and related research, 2014-03, Vol.472 (3), p.923-932</ispartof><rights>The Association of Bone and Joint Surgeons® 2013</rights><rights>The Association of Bone and Joint Surgeons 2014</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c470t-a7d45d03d22e6ed2d25a91ac18fd9999097b83efdb57e91c19225df3011b72523</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c470t-a7d45d03d22e6ed2d25a91ac18fd9999097b83efdb57e91c19225df3011b72523</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3916603/pdf/$$EPDF$$P50$$Gpubmedcentral$$H</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3916603/$$EHTML$$P50$$Gpubmedcentral$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>230,314,723,776,780,881,27901,27902,41464,42533,51294,53766,53768</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24142302$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Corona, Pablo S.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Barro, Victor</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Mendez, Marye</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Cáceres, Enric</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Flores, Xavier</creatorcontrib><title>Industrially Prefabricated Cement Spacers: Do Vancomycin- and Gentamicin-impregnated Spacers Offer Any Advantage?</title><title>Clinical orthopaedics and related research</title><addtitle>Clin Orthop Relat Res</addtitle><addtitle>Clin Orthop Relat Res</addtitle><description>Background Industrially preformed antibiotic-loaded cement spacers are useful to facilitate the second stage of two-stage exchange arthroplasty for infected THAs and TKAs. However, whether gentamicin alone or a combination of antibiotics (such as vancomycin and gentamicin) is more effective is not known. Questions/purposes We therefore sought to compare industrially prefabricated spacers containing either gentamicin or gentamicin and vancomycin with respect to (1) infection control, (2) complications, and (3) quality of life, pain, and patient satisfaction. Methods We performed a review of 51 patients with chronic infections treated at one center using either gentamicin or vancomycin and gentamicin-prefabricated spacers. The former were used exclusively from January 2006 until May 2009, and the latter from June 2009 until July 2011, and there was no overlap. We collected data on demographics, immunologic status (McPherson classification), prosthetic joint infection location, type of prosthesis, microbiologic results, and time between stages. We evaluated the primary outcome of infection control or recurrence after at least 12 months followup. We also recorded complications. Each patient completed a quality-of-life survey, VAS, and a self-administered satisfaction scale. Results The overall infection control rate was 83% after a mean followup of 35 months (range, 12.4–64.7 months). There were no differences between gentamicin and vancomycin and gentamicin spacers in terms of infection eradication (80 % versus 85 %, respectively; p = 0.73), nor in terms of complications, quality of life, pain, or satisfaction scores. Conclusions Prefabricated, antibiotic-loaded cement spacers has been proven effective for infection control in TKAs and THAs but with the numbers available, we did not find any differences between a gentamicin or vancomycin and gentamicin-prefabricated spacer, and therefore, we are unable to validate the superiority of the combination of vancomycin and gentamicin over gentamicin alone. Because of the higher costs involved with vancomycin and gentamicin spacers, and the potential risks of unselective use of vancomycin, further comparative studies are necessary to evaluate their role in the treatment of infected THAs or TKAs. Level of Evidence Level III, therapeutic study. See the Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.</description><subject>Adult</subject><subject>Aged</subject><subject>Aged, 80 and over</subject><subject>Arthroplasty, Replacement, Hip - adverse effects</subject><subject>Arthroplasty, Replacement, Hip - instrumentation</subject><subject>Arthroplasty, Replacement, Knee - adverse effects</subject><subject>Arthroplasty, Replacement, Knee - instrumentation</subject><subject>Bone Cements - adverse effects</subject><subject>Bone Cements - therapeutic use</subject><subject>Chi-Square Distribution</subject><subject>Clinical Research</subject><subject>Coated Materials, Biocompatible</subject><subject>Conservative Orthopedics</subject><subject>Device Removal</subject><subject>Female</subject><subject>Gentamicins - adverse effects</subject><subject>Gentamicins - therapeutic use</subject><subject>Hip Prosthesis - adverse effects</subject><subject>Humans</subject><subject>Infection</subject><subject>Knee Prosthesis - adverse effects</subject><subject>Male</subject><subject>Medicine</subject><subject>Medicine &amp; Public Health</subject><subject>Middle Aged</subject><subject>Orthopedics</subject><subject>Pain Measurement</subject><subject>Pain, Postoperative - diagnosis</subject><subject>Pain, Postoperative - etiology</subject><subject>Patient Satisfaction</subject><subject>Prosthesis-Related Infections - diagnosis</subject><subject>Prosthesis-Related Infections - microbiology</subject><subject>Prosthesis-Related Infections - surgery</subject><subject>Quality of Life</subject><subject>Recurrence</subject><subject>Reoperation</subject><subject>Retrospective Studies</subject><subject>Sports Medicine</subject><subject>Surgery</subject><subject>Surgical Orthopedics</subject><subject>Surveys and Questionnaires</subject><subject>Time Factors</subject><subject>Treatment Outcome</subject><subject>Vancomycin - adverse effects</subject><subject>Vancomycin - therapeutic use</subject><issn>0009-921X</issn><issn>1528-1132</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2014</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>EIF</sourceid><sourceid>BENPR</sourceid><recordid>eNp1kVtLAzEQhYMoWi8_wBcJ-BzNTHa7jQ9KqVcQFLzgW8gm2brSzdZkK_Tfm9oq-uBTGOY7ZyZzCNkHfgScF8cRQErJOAgmRIasWCM9yHHAAASukx7nXDKJ8LJFtmN8S6XIctwkW5hBhoJjj7zfeDuLXaj1ZDKn98FVugy10Z2zdOQa5zv6MNXGhXhCz1v6rL1pm7mpPaPaW3qVAN3Ui7pupsGN_ZdyJaF3VeUCHfo5HdoPndCxO9slG5WeRLe3enfI0-XF4-ia3d5d3YyGt8xkBe-YLmyWWy4sous7ixZzLUEbGFQ2fVpyWZQD4Spb5oWTYEAi5rYSHKAsMEexQ06XvtNZ2Thr0qZBT9Q01I0Oc9XqWv3t-PpVjdsPJST0-1wkg8OVQWjfZy526q2dBZ92VpDJPB0Q5CBRsKRMaGNM9_uZAFwtUlLLlFRKSS1SUkXSHPxe7UfxHUsCcAnE1PJjF36N_tf1E06pnr4</recordid><startdate>20140301</startdate><enddate>20140301</enddate><creator>Corona, Pablo S.</creator><creator>Barro, Victor</creator><creator>Mendez, Marye</creator><creator>Cáceres, Enric</creator><creator>Flores, Xavier</creator><general>Springer US</general><general>Lippincott Williams &amp; Wilkins Ovid Technologies</general><scope>CGR</scope><scope>CUY</scope><scope>CVF</scope><scope>ECM</scope><scope>EIF</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>3V.</scope><scope>7QP</scope><scope>7RV</scope><scope>7T5</scope><scope>7X7</scope><scope>7XB</scope><scope>88E</scope><scope>8AO</scope><scope>8FI</scope><scope>8FJ</scope><scope>8FK</scope><scope>ABUWG</scope><scope>AFKRA</scope><scope>BENPR</scope><scope>CCPQU</scope><scope>FYUFA</scope><scope>GHDGH</scope><scope>H94</scope><scope>K9.</scope><scope>KB0</scope><scope>M0S</scope><scope>M1P</scope><scope>NAPCQ</scope><scope>PQEST</scope><scope>PQQKQ</scope><scope>PQUKI</scope><scope>PRINS</scope><scope>5PM</scope></search><sort><creationdate>20140301</creationdate><title>Industrially Prefabricated Cement Spacers: Do Vancomycin- and Gentamicin-impregnated Spacers Offer Any Advantage?</title><author>Corona, Pablo S. ; Barro, Victor ; Mendez, Marye ; Cáceres, Enric ; Flores, Xavier</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c470t-a7d45d03d22e6ed2d25a91ac18fd9999097b83efdb57e91c19225df3011b72523</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2014</creationdate><topic>Adult</topic><topic>Aged</topic><topic>Aged, 80 and over</topic><topic>Arthroplasty, Replacement, Hip - adverse effects</topic><topic>Arthroplasty, Replacement, Hip - instrumentation</topic><topic>Arthroplasty, Replacement, Knee - adverse effects</topic><topic>Arthroplasty, Replacement, Knee - instrumentation</topic><topic>Bone Cements - adverse effects</topic><topic>Bone Cements - therapeutic use</topic><topic>Chi-Square Distribution</topic><topic>Clinical Research</topic><topic>Coated Materials, Biocompatible</topic><topic>Conservative Orthopedics</topic><topic>Device Removal</topic><topic>Female</topic><topic>Gentamicins - adverse effects</topic><topic>Gentamicins - therapeutic use</topic><topic>Hip Prosthesis - adverse effects</topic><topic>Humans</topic><topic>Infection</topic><topic>Knee Prosthesis - adverse effects</topic><topic>Male</topic><topic>Medicine</topic><topic>Medicine &amp; Public Health</topic><topic>Middle Aged</topic><topic>Orthopedics</topic><topic>Pain Measurement</topic><topic>Pain, Postoperative - diagnosis</topic><topic>Pain, Postoperative - etiology</topic><topic>Patient Satisfaction</topic><topic>Prosthesis-Related Infections - diagnosis</topic><topic>Prosthesis-Related Infections - microbiology</topic><topic>Prosthesis-Related Infections - surgery</topic><topic>Quality of Life</topic><topic>Recurrence</topic><topic>Reoperation</topic><topic>Retrospective Studies</topic><topic>Sports Medicine</topic><topic>Surgery</topic><topic>Surgical Orthopedics</topic><topic>Surveys and Questionnaires</topic><topic>Time Factors</topic><topic>Treatment Outcome</topic><topic>Vancomycin - adverse effects</topic><topic>Vancomycin - therapeutic use</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Corona, Pablo S.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Barro, Victor</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Mendez, Marye</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Cáceres, Enric</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Flores, Xavier</creatorcontrib><collection>Medline</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE (Ovid)</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Corporate)</collection><collection>Calcium &amp; Calcified Tissue Abstracts</collection><collection>Nursing &amp; Allied Health Database</collection><collection>Immunology Abstracts</collection><collection>Health &amp; Medical Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>Medical Database (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Pharma Collection</collection><collection>Hospital Premium Collection</collection><collection>Hospital Premium Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni) (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central UK/Ireland</collection><collection>ProQuest Central</collection><collection>ProQuest One Community College</collection><collection>Health Research Premium Collection</collection><collection>Health Research Premium Collection (Alumni)</collection><collection>AIDS and Cancer Research Abstracts</collection><collection>ProQuest Health &amp; Medical Complete (Alumni)</collection><collection>Nursing &amp; Allied Health Database (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Health &amp; Medical Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Medical Database</collection><collection>Nursing &amp; Allied Health Premium</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic Eastern Edition (DO NOT USE)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic UKI Edition</collection><collection>ProQuest Central China</collection><collection>PubMed Central (Full Participant titles)</collection><jtitle>Clinical orthopaedics and related research</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Corona, Pablo S.</au><au>Barro, Victor</au><au>Mendez, Marye</au><au>Cáceres, Enric</au><au>Flores, Xavier</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Industrially Prefabricated Cement Spacers: Do Vancomycin- and Gentamicin-impregnated Spacers Offer Any Advantage?</atitle><jtitle>Clinical orthopaedics and related research</jtitle><stitle>Clin Orthop Relat Res</stitle><addtitle>Clin Orthop Relat Res</addtitle><date>2014-03-01</date><risdate>2014</risdate><volume>472</volume><issue>3</issue><spage>923</spage><epage>932</epage><pages>923-932</pages><issn>0009-921X</issn><eissn>1528-1132</eissn><abstract>Background Industrially preformed antibiotic-loaded cement spacers are useful to facilitate the second stage of two-stage exchange arthroplasty for infected THAs and TKAs. However, whether gentamicin alone or a combination of antibiotics (such as vancomycin and gentamicin) is more effective is not known. Questions/purposes We therefore sought to compare industrially prefabricated spacers containing either gentamicin or gentamicin and vancomycin with respect to (1) infection control, (2) complications, and (3) quality of life, pain, and patient satisfaction. Methods We performed a review of 51 patients with chronic infections treated at one center using either gentamicin or vancomycin and gentamicin-prefabricated spacers. The former were used exclusively from January 2006 until May 2009, and the latter from June 2009 until July 2011, and there was no overlap. We collected data on demographics, immunologic status (McPherson classification), prosthetic joint infection location, type of prosthesis, microbiologic results, and time between stages. We evaluated the primary outcome of infection control or recurrence after at least 12 months followup. We also recorded complications. Each patient completed a quality-of-life survey, VAS, and a self-administered satisfaction scale. Results The overall infection control rate was 83% after a mean followup of 35 months (range, 12.4–64.7 months). There were no differences between gentamicin and vancomycin and gentamicin spacers in terms of infection eradication (80 % versus 85 %, respectively; p = 0.73), nor in terms of complications, quality of life, pain, or satisfaction scores. Conclusions Prefabricated, antibiotic-loaded cement spacers has been proven effective for infection control in TKAs and THAs but with the numbers available, we did not find any differences between a gentamicin or vancomycin and gentamicin-prefabricated spacer, and therefore, we are unable to validate the superiority of the combination of vancomycin and gentamicin over gentamicin alone. Because of the higher costs involved with vancomycin and gentamicin spacers, and the potential risks of unselective use of vancomycin, further comparative studies are necessary to evaluate their role in the treatment of infected THAs or TKAs. Level of Evidence Level III, therapeutic study. See the Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.</abstract><cop>Boston</cop><pub>Springer US</pub><pmid>24142302</pmid><doi>10.1007/s11999-013-3342-7</doi><tpages>10</tpages><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 0009-921X
ispartof Clinical orthopaedics and related research, 2014-03, Vol.472 (3), p.923-932
issn 0009-921X
1528-1132
language eng
recordid cdi_pubmedcentral_primary_oai_pubmedcentral_nih_gov_3916603
source MEDLINE; Springer Nature - Complete Springer Journals; Elektronische Zeitschriftenbibliothek - Frei zugängliche E-Journals; PubMed Central
subjects Adult
Aged
Aged, 80 and over
Arthroplasty, Replacement, Hip - adverse effects
Arthroplasty, Replacement, Hip - instrumentation
Arthroplasty, Replacement, Knee - adverse effects
Arthroplasty, Replacement, Knee - instrumentation
Bone Cements - adverse effects
Bone Cements - therapeutic use
Chi-Square Distribution
Clinical Research
Coated Materials, Biocompatible
Conservative Orthopedics
Device Removal
Female
Gentamicins - adverse effects
Gentamicins - therapeutic use
Hip Prosthesis - adverse effects
Humans
Infection
Knee Prosthesis - adverse effects
Male
Medicine
Medicine & Public Health
Middle Aged
Orthopedics
Pain Measurement
Pain, Postoperative - diagnosis
Pain, Postoperative - etiology
Patient Satisfaction
Prosthesis-Related Infections - diagnosis
Prosthesis-Related Infections - microbiology
Prosthesis-Related Infections - surgery
Quality of Life
Recurrence
Reoperation
Retrospective Studies
Sports Medicine
Surgery
Surgical Orthopedics
Surveys and Questionnaires
Time Factors
Treatment Outcome
Vancomycin - adverse effects
Vancomycin - therapeutic use
title Industrially Prefabricated Cement Spacers: Do Vancomycin- and Gentamicin-impregnated Spacers Offer Any Advantage?
url https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-02-02T01%3A31%3A24IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_pubme&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Industrially%20Prefabricated%20Cement%20Spacers:%20Do%20Vancomycin-%20and%20Gentamicin-impregnated%20Spacers%20Offer%20Any%20Advantage?&rft.jtitle=Clinical%20orthopaedics%20and%20related%20research&rft.au=Corona,%20Pablo%20S.&rft.date=2014-03-01&rft.volume=472&rft.issue=3&rft.spage=923&rft.epage=932&rft.pages=923-932&rft.issn=0009-921X&rft.eissn=1528-1132&rft_id=info:doi/10.1007/s11999-013-3342-7&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_pubme%3E3208722461%3C/proquest_pubme%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=1495423198&rft_id=info:pmid/24142302&rfr_iscdi=true