首页> 美国卫生研究院文献>International Journal of Medical Sciences >Rationale for one stage exchange of infected hip replacement using uncemented implants and antibiotic impregnated bone graft
【2h】

Rationale for one stage exchange of infected hip replacement using uncemented implants and antibiotic impregnated bone graft

机译:使用非骨水泥植入物和抗生素浸渍的骨移植物进行感染性髋关节置换的一阶段交换的基本原理

代理获取
本网站仅为用户提供外文OA文献查询和代理获取服务,本网站没有原文。下单后我们将采用程序或人工为您竭诚获取高质量的原文,但由于OA文献来源多样且变更频繁,仍可能出现获取不到、文献不完整或与标题不符等情况,如果获取不到我们将提供退款服务。请知悉。

摘要

Infection of a total hip replacement (THR) is considered a devastating complication, necessitating its complete removal and thorough debridement of the site. It is undoubted that one stage exchange, if successful, would provide the best benefit both for the patient and the society. Still the fear of re-infection dominates the surgeons´ decisions and in the majority of cases directs them to multiple stage protocols. However, there is no scientifically based argument for that practice. Successful eradication of infection with two stage procedures is reported to average 80% to 98%. On the other hand a literature review of Jackson and Schmalzried (CORR 2000) summarizing the results of 1,299 infected hip replacements treated with direct exchange (almost exclusively using antibiotic loaded cement), reports of 1,077 (83%) having been successful. The comparable results suggest, that the major factor for a successful outcome with traditional approaches may be found in the quality of surgical debridement and dead space management. Failures in all protocols seem to be caused by small fragments of bacterial colonies remaining after debridement, whereas neither systemic antibiotics nor antibiotic loaded bone cement (PMMA) have been able to improve the situation significantly.Reasons for failure may be found in the limited sensitivity of traditional bacterial culturing and reduced antibiotic susceptibility of involved pathogens, especially considering biofilm formation.Whenever a new prosthesis is implanted into a previously infected site the surgeon must be aware of increased risk of failure, both in single or two stage revisions. Eventual removal therefore should be easy with low risk of additional damage to the bony substance. On the other hand it should also have potential of a good long term result in case of success. Cemented revisions generally show inferior long term results compared to uncemented techniques; the addition of antibiotics to cement reduces its biomechanical properties. Efficient cementing techniques will result in tight bonding with the underlying bone, making eventual removal time consuming and possibly associated with further damage to the osseous structures. All these issues are likely to make uncemented revisions more desirable.Allograft bone may be impregnated with high loads of antibiotics using special incubation techniques. The storage capacities and pharmacological kinetics of the resulting antibiotic bone compound (ABC) are more advantageous than the ones of antibiotic loaded cement. ABC provides local concentrations exceeding those of cement by more than a 100fold and efficient release is prolonged for several weeks. The same time they are likely to restore bone stock, which usually is compromised after removal of an infected endoprosthesis. ABC may be combined with uncemented implants for improved long term results and easy removal in case of a failure. Specifications of appropriate designs are outlined.Based on these considerations new protocols for one stage exchange of infected TJR have been established. Bone voids surrounding the implants may be filled with antibiotic impregnated bone graft; uncemented implants may be fixed in original bone. Recent studies indicate an overall success rate of more than 90% without any adverse side effects. Incorporation of allografts appears as after grafting with unimpregnated bone grafts.Antibiotic loaded bone graft seems to provide sufficient local antibiosis for protection against colonisation of uncemented implants, the eluted amounts of antibiotics are likely to eliminate biofilm remnants, dead space management is more complete and defects may be reconstructed efficiently. Uncemented implants provide improved long term results in case of success and facilitated re-revision in case of failure. One stage revision using ABC together with uncemented implants such should be at least comparably save as multiple stage procedures, taking advantage of the obvious benefits for patients and economy.
机译:全髋关节置换术(THR)的感染被认为是一种破坏性并发症,必须彻底清除并彻底清除该部位。毫无疑问,一个阶段的交流,如果成功的话,将为患者和社会带来最大的利益。对再感染的恐惧仍然主导着外科医生的决定,并且在大多数情况下,它们会导致他们遵循多阶段方案。但是,这种做法没有科学依据。据报道,采用两阶段手术成功消除感染的平均比例为80%至98%。另一方面,Jackson和Schmalzried的文献综述(CORR 2000)总结了直接交换(几乎完全使用抗生素加载的水泥)治疗的1,299例受感染的髋关节置换的结果,已有1,077例(占83%)报告成功。可比的结果表明,使用传统方法成功治疗的主要因素可能是手术清创和死腔管理的质量。所有方案的失败似乎都是由清创后残留的细菌菌落的小片段引起的,而全身性抗生素或载有抗生素的骨水泥(PMMA)都无法显着改善这种情况。传统的细菌培养和相关病原体的抗生素敏感性降低,尤其是考虑到生物膜的形成。每当将新的假体植入先前感染的部位时,外科医生必须意识到单次或两次分期手术的失败风险增加。因此,最终清除应很容易,并且对骨质物质造成额外损害的风险较低。另一方面,如果成功的话,它也应该具有长期良好结果的潜力。与非水泥技术相比,水泥修订版的长期效果通常较差;在水泥中添加抗生素会降低其生物力学性能。高效的胶结技术将导致与下层骨的紧密粘合,最终导致去除时间很耗时,并可能进一步损害骨结构。所有这些问题都有可能使非骨水泥的修复更加理想。使用特殊的孵育技术,同种异体移植骨可能会被高剂量的抗生素浸渍。所得到的抗生素骨化合物(ABC)的储存容量和药理动力学比载有抗生素的水泥更有利。 ABC所提供的局部浓度比水泥高出100倍以上,有效释放时间延长了数周。他们有可能同时恢复骨骼,这通常在移除受感染的内置假体后会受到损害。 ABC可以与非骨水泥植入物结合使用,以改善长期效果并在失败的情况下轻松移除。概述了适当设计的规范。基于这些考虑,已经建立了用于感染TJR的一级交换的新协议。植入物周围的骨空隙可能充满了抗生素浸渍的骨移植物;非骨水泥植入物可以固定在原始骨骼中。最近的研究表明,总体成功率超过90%,没有任何不良副作用。同种异体移植物的合并似乎是在未浸渍的骨移植物移植后出现的。加载抗生素的骨移植物似乎提供了足够的局部抗菌作用,以防止未粘合的植入物定植,抗生素的洗脱量可能消除了生物膜残留物,死腔管理更完整和缺陷可以有效地重建。如果成功,未粘固的植入物可改善长期效果,如果失败,可促进重新翻修。使用ABC结合非骨水泥植入物进行一期翻修,至少应可比较地节省为多阶段手术,同时充分利用对患者和经济的明显好处。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
代理获取

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号