9 September 2010
| |
9 September 2010
|
|
ISSN 1449-1907 |
Int J Med Sci 2009; 6:287-295 ©Ivyspring International Publisher Review Revision of late periprosthetic infections of total hip endoprostheses: pros and cons of different concepts Department of Joint Replacement, General and Rheumatic Orthopaedics, Orthopaedic Clinic Markgröningen gGmbH, Kurt-Lindemann-Weg 10, 71706 Markgröningen, Germany Many concepts have been devised for the treatment of late periprosthetic infections of total hip prostheses. A two-stage revision with a temporary antibiotic-impregnated cement spacer and a cemented prosthesis appears to be the most preferred procedure although, in recent times, there seems to be a trend towards cementless implants and a shorter period of antibiotic treatment. Because of the differences in procedure, not only between studies but also within studies, it cannot be decided which period of parenteral antibiotic treatment and which spacer period is the most suitable. The fact that comparable rates of success can be achieved with different treatment regimens emphasises the importance of surgical removal of all foreign materials and the radical debridement of all infected and ischaemic tissues and the contribution of these crucial procedures to the successful treatment of late periprosthetic infections. Keywords: periprosthetic infections, hip endoprostheses How
to cite this article:
Fink B. Revision of late periprosthetic infections of total hip endoprostheses: pros and cons of different concepts. Int J Med Sci 2009; 6:287-295. Available from http://www.medsci.org/v06p0287.htm |