Search

Background: Single-stage hardware removal and total hip arthroplasty is a complex surgical procedure, comparable to revision surgery. The purpose of the current study is to evaluate single-stage hardware removal and THA outcomes, compare this technique with a matched control group that has undergone primary THA and assess the risk of periprosthetic joint infection with a 24-month minimum follow-up., Methods: This study included all those cases treated with THA and concomitant hardware removal from 2008 to 2018. The control group was selected on a 1:1 ratio among patients who underwent THA for primary OA. The Harris Hip (HHS) and University of California at Los Angeles Activity (UCLA) scores, infection rate and early and delayed surgical complications were recorded., Results: One hundred and twenty-three consecutive patients (127 hips) were included, and the same number of patients was assigned to the control group. The final functional scores were comparable between the two groups; a longer operative time and transfusion rate were recorded in the study group. Finally, an increased incidence of overall complications was reported (13.8% versus 2.4%), but no cases of early or delayed infection were found., Conclusions: Single-stage hardware removal and THA is a safe and effective but technically demanding technique, with a higher incidence of overall complications, making it more similar to revision THA than to primary THA.

Peri-prosthetic joint infections (PJIs) dramatically affect human health, as they are associated with high morbidity and mortality rates. Two-stage revision arthroplasty is currently the gold standard treatment for PJI and consists of infected implant removal, an accurate debridement, and placement of antimicrobial impregnated poly-methyl-metha-acrylate (PMMA) spacer. The use of antibiotic-loaded PMMA (ALPMMA) spacers have showed a success rate that ranges from 85% to 100%. ALPMMA spacers, currently available on the market, demonstrate a series of disadvantages, closely linked to a low propensity to customize, seen as the ability to adapt to the patients' anatomical characteristics, with consequential increase of surgical complexity, surgery duration, and post-operative complications. Conventionally, ALPMMA spacers are available only in three or four standard sizes, with the impossibility of guaranteeing the perfect matching of ALPMMA spacers with residual bone (no further bone loss) and gap filling. In this paper, a 3D model of an ALPMMA spacer is introduced to evaluate the cause- effect link between the geometric characteristics and the correlated clinical improvements. The result is a multivariable-oriented design able to effectively manage the size, alignment, stability, and the patients' anatomical matching. The preliminary numerical results, obtained by using an "ad hoc" 3D virtual planning simulator, clearly point out that to restore the joint line, the mechanical and rotational alignment and the surgeon's control on the thicknesses (distal and posterior thicknesses) of the ALPMMA spacer is mandatory. The numerical simulations campaign involved nineteen patients grouped in three different scenarios (Case N° 1, Case N° 2 and Case N° 3) whose 3D bone models were obtained through an appropriate data management strategy. Each scenario is characterized by a different incidence rate. In particular, the observed rates of occurrence are, respectively, equal to 17% (Case N° 1), 74% (Case N° 2), and 10% (Case N° 3).