Browsing by Subject "Two-stage"

Now showing 1 - 3 of 3
  • Thumbnail Image
    Item
    Complications and Outcomes Associated with Two-Stage Treatment of Periprosthetic Total Knee Infection
    (2022-07-22) Thomas, Jacob; Ziemba-Davis, Mary; Meneghini, R. Michael
    Background and Hypothesis: Periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) is treated with implant resection, debridement, and component reimplantation after infection eradication. Treatment consists of either a single surgery or two-stage surgery with intravenous antibiotic therapy between stages. We replicated a recent study which concluded two-stage treatment is associated with high morbidity, hypothesizing that complication rates would be similar, but that morbidity is not always conclusively a consequence of two-stage treatment for PJI Project Methods: Prospectively documented data on all primary and revision knees undergoing two-stage treatment for PJI by a single surgeon were retrospectively reviewed. Surgical complications were quantified for the interstage and post-reimplantation periods. Chi-squared tests were used to compare current findings to published findings. Results: Patient demographics and comorbidities were equivalent in the two studies (p ≥ .137). More complex infections characterized the current study as evidenced by significantly more polymicrobial infections (p < .001) and greater use of static spacers due to bone loss (p = .002). Nonetheless, only 1.5% of cases in the current study did not undergo component reimplantation compared to 7.8% in the comparison study (p = .129). There were no differences in the number of additional interstage and post-reimplantation septic surgeries (p ≥ .492). Using a proposed system which penalizes additional operations required to eradicate infection, treatment success rates at minimum one year follow-up were 64% and 71%, respectively (p = .473). Without these penalties, treatment success in the current study was 95.6% (equivalent proportion not available for comparison study). All-cause mortality was statistically equivalent in the two studies (15.6 versus 7.6%, p = .144) but no deaths from PJI were observed in the current study (unknown for comparison study). Potential Impact: Study findings suggest that morbidity attributed to two-stage treatment reflect the inherent complexity of this patient group, and not the two-stage treatment itself.
  • Thumbnail Image
    Item
    Complications and Outcomes Associated with Two-Stage Treatment of Periprosthetic Total Knee Infection
    (2024-04-19) Thomas, Jacob; Ziemba-Davis, Mary; Buller, Leonard T.; Meneghini, R. Michael
    Background: Chronic periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) has been traditionally treated with two-stage revision. However, single-stage treatment is gaining popularity based on claims of decreased morbidity and mortality. This study sought to evaluate whether two-stage treatment for chronic knee PJI is associated with high morbidity and complication rates compared to existing literature. Methods: Prospectively collected data on all two-stage knee revisions were retrospectively reviewed (n=97). Modern perioperative optimization protocols were implemented during the interstage and post-reimplantation periods. Surgical complications were quantified for interstage and post-reimplantation periods. Chi-squared tests compared current findings to published data. Results: Patient sex and age were equivalent, with more current smokers in the present study (P=.001) and more renal failure (P=.002) in the comparison study. Infection complexity in the current study is indicated by 84% late chronic infections in compromised (McPherson) hosts (70%) with 14% polymicrobial infections (unknown for comparison). One percent of cases in the current study did not undergo component reimplantation compared to 8.2% in the comparison study (P=.015). There were no differences in interstage and post-reimplantation septic surgeries (P=.566). Within a year of reimplantation, 9% versus 29% underwent septic reoperation (P=.0002). Using a proposed system from the comparison study penalizing additional operations required to eradicate infection, treatment success rates at minimum one-year follow-up were 56% (current study) and 51% (comparison study) (P=.412). Without these penalties, treatment success in the current study was 64% (unknown for comparison). All-cause mortality rates were the same in both samples (13.4%); however, 9/13 deaths in the current study were unrelated to PJI (unknown for comparison). No patients in the current sample died within the first postoperative year compared to 6.7% in the comparison (P=.024). Conclusion: Study data suggest morbidity attributed to two-stage treatment for PJI reflects the inherent complexity of this patient group, and not the two-stage treatment itself.
  • Thumbnail Image
    Item
    Two-stage revision anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction reduces failure risk but leads to lesser clinical outcomes than single-stage revision after primary anterior cruciate ligament graft failure: a retrospective cohort study
    (Springer Nature, 2025-01-15) Ifarraguerri, Anna M.; Graham, George D.; White, Alexander B.; Berk, Alexander N.; Gachigi, Kennedy K.; Siparsky, Patrick N.; Trofa, David P.; Piasecki, Dana P.; Fleischli, James E.; Saltzman, Bryan M.; Orthopaedic Surgery, School of Medicine
    Background: There are no studies that compare the outcomes and complications of single-versus two-stage revision anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction (ACLR) after primary ACLR failure. This purpose of this study is to examine clinical and functional outcomes and complications associated with single and two-stage revision ACLR after primary ACLR failure. Methods: All patients who underwent single or two-stage revision ACLR after primary ACLR failure between 2012 and 2021 with a minimum of a 2 year follow-up were included. Patients were excluded if they were not treated at our single academic institution, had inadequate follow-up, or had incomplete medical records. Revision intraoperative data, concomitant injuries, and complications were collected by chart review. Return to sport, numerical pain rating scale (NPRS) score, Knee injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (KOOS), and Veteran Rands 12-item health survey (VR-12 scores) were collected. Results: The final analysis included 176 patients. A total of 147 (83.5%) had a single-stage revision ACLR (87 male, 60 female), and 29 (16.5%) had a two-stage revision ACLR (13 male, 16 female). Two-stage revision ACLR was significantly associated with anterior knee pain [odds ratio (OR) 4.36; 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.5 to 12.65; P = 0.007] but with lower failure rates (OR 0.12, 95% CI 0.02 to 0.9; P = 0.04). On multivariate analysis, a two-stage revision ACLR reduced the risk of graft failure by 85% (OR 0.15; 95% CI 0.02 to 1.17; P = 0.07). Two-stage revision ACLR was significantly associated with a lower KOOS pain score (OR -11.7; 95% CI -22.35 to -1.04; P = 0.031), KOOS symptoms score (OR -17.11; 95% CI -28.85 to -5.36; P = 0.004), KOOS Activities of Daily Living (ADL) score (OR -11.15; 95% CI -21.71 to -0.59; P = 0.039) and Veterans RAND 12-Item Health Survey (VR-12) physical component score (OR -9.99; 95% CI -15.77 to -4.22; P = 0.001). Conclusions: The clinical outcomes and subjective patient scores significantly differed between the single-stage and two-stage revision ACLR after primary ACLR failure. Patients with a two-stage revision ACLR had a significantly reduced risk of revision graft failure but higher rates of postoperative anterior knee pain, lower pain scores, and lesser knee functional scores than single-stage revision patients.