scholarly journals REDUCED INFECTION RATE AFTER ASEPTIC REVISION TOTAL HIP ARTHROPLASTY WITH EXTENDED ORAL ANTIBIOTIC PROTOCOL

2018 ◽  
Vol 1 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Amer Mohiuddin, BS ◽  
Justin Rice, BA ◽  
Mary Ziemba-Davis, BA ◽  
R. Michael Meneghini, MD
Keyword(s):  
Total Hip Arthroplasty ◽  
Infection Rate ◽  
Hip Arthroplasty ◽  
Joint Infection ◽  
Deep Infection ◽  
Oral Antibiotic ◽  
Revision Total Hip Arthroplasty ◽  
Total Hip ◽  
Aseptic Revision ◽  
One Year

Background and Hypothesis: Periprosthetic joint infection (PJI is a leading cause of failure after aseptic revision total hip arthroplasty (RTHA). While well documented in the primary setting, perioperative antibiotic duration is not well described in RTHA where the risk of PJI was recently reported to be 8% one-year post-revision. The study purpose was to evaluate whether extended oral antibiotic prophylactic protocol minimizes PJI in aseptic RTHA patients compared to the published literature.   Project Methods: 169 consecutive aseptic RTHAs performed with modern perioperative and infection-prevention protocols by a single surgeon at a single center were retrospectively reviewed. 80% of patients were discharged on 7-day oral antibiotic prophylaxis while intra-operative cultures were incubating. Infections and reoperations were documented.   Results: Average age and BMI were 63 years and 30 kg/m2.  67% percent of patients were ASA-III/IV, signifying the severity of comorbidities in this revision cohort. There we no cases of PJI in the 90-day postoperative period. Ninety-eight percent of cases were infection free at mean follow-up of 45 months. Three (1.8%) cases underwent reoperation for deep infection at 110, 161 and 581 days.    Conclusion and Potential Impact: Our observed infection rate of 0.0% is lower than published infection rates following RTHA and a 1.5% infection rate in primary THA in patients with no identifiable risk factors for PJI.  Based on this clinically meaningful decrease in PJI in this challenging cohort, we encourage further study regarding extended antibiotic protocol weighed appropriately against potential consequences.   

Morbidly Obese vs Nonobese Aseptic Revision Total Hip Arthroplasty: Surprisingly Similar Outcomes

2016 ◽  
Vol 31 (4) ◽  
pp. 842-845 ◽  
Author(s):  
Chad D. Watts ◽  
Matthew T. Houdek ◽  
Eric R. Wagner ◽  
David G. Lewallen ◽  
Tad M. Mabry
Keyword(s):  
Total Hip Arthroplasty ◽  
Hip Arthroplasty ◽  
Morbidly Obese ◽  
Revision Total Hip Arthroplasty ◽  
Total Hip ◽  
Aseptic Revision

Aseptic revision total hip arthroplasty in the elderly

2018 ◽  
Vol 100-B (2) ◽  
pp. 143-151 ◽  
Author(s):  
P. Bovonratwet ◽  
R. Malpani ◽  
T. D. Ottesen ◽  
V. Tyagi ◽  
N. T. Ondeck ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Risk Factors ◽  
Adverse Event ◽  
Total Hip Arthroplasty ◽  
Hip Arthroplasty ◽  
National Database ◽  
Revision Total Hip Arthroplasty ◽  
Serious Adverse Event ◽  
Total Hip ◽  
Revision Tha ◽  
Aseptic Revision

AimsThe aim of this study was to compare the rate of perioperative complications following aseptic revision total hip arthroplasty (THA) in patients aged ≥ 80 years with that in those aged < 80 years, and to identify risk factors for the incidence of serious adverse events in those aged ≥ 80 years using a large validated national database.Patients and MethodsPatients who underwent aseptic revision THA were identified in the 2005 to 2015 National Surgical Quality Improvement Program (NSQIP) database and stratified into two age groups: those aged < 80 years and those aged ≥ 80 years. Preoperative and procedural characteristics were compared. Multivariate regression analysis was used to compare the risk of postoperative complications and readmission. Risk factors for the development of a serious adverse event in those aged ≥ 80 years were characterized.ResultsThe study included 7569 patients aged < 80 years and 1419 were aged ≥ 80 years. Multivariate analysis showed a higher risk of perioperative mortality, pneumonia, urinary tract infection and the requirement for a blood transfusion and an extended length of stay in those aged ≥ 80 years compared with those aged < 80 years. Independent risk factors for the development of a serious adverse event in those aged ≥ 80 years include an American Society of Anesthesiologists score of ≥ 3 and procedures performed under general anaesthesia.ConclusionEven after controlling for patient and procedural characteristics, aseptic revision THA is associated with greater risks in patients aged ≥ 80 years compared with younger patients. This is important for counselling and highlights the need for medical optimization in these vulnerable patients. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2018;100-B:143–51.

Thirty-Day Readmissions After Aseptic Revision Total Hip Arthroplasty: Rates, Predictors, and Reasons Vary by Surgical Indication

2020 ◽  
Vol 35 (12) ◽  
pp. 3673-3678
Author(s):  
Neil Pathak ◽  
Cynthia A. Kahlenberg ◽  
Harold G. Moore ◽  
Peter K. Sculco ◽  
Jonathan N. Grauer
Keyword(s):  
Total Hip Arthroplasty ◽  
Hip Arthroplasty ◽  
Surgical Indication ◽  
Revision Total Hip Arthroplasty ◽  
Total Hip ◽  
Aseptic Revision
Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document