Abstract
BACKGROUND:
The standard treatment of a periprosthetic infection after TKA involves a two-stage reimplantation with the intermittent implantation of spacers. Different designs of spacers have been described; currently articulating spacers and fixed spacers are used. The aim of the present study is to compare the advantages/disadvantages of the different spacers.
PATIENTS AND METHODS:
In this retrospective study we analyzed 37 cases after revision surgery of infected TKA. All patients that received spacers as part of the two-stage reimplantation were included. Exclusion criteria were massive bone loss prior to revision, because the implantation of a mobile spacer would not have been possible.
RESULTS:
The average ROM was 98.0 (± 14.9) degrees in the articulating spacer group (group 1) and 79.3(± 22.5) in the group that received the fixed spacers (group 2) before revision surgery started. At a late follow up the average ROM for group 1 was 102.0 (± 8.4) and 79.0 (± 26) for group 2.
CONCLUSION:
The use of articulating spacers in the two-stage revision for infected total knee arthroplasty is a safe alternative to fixed spacers, that equally preserves ligament balancing and has equal infection eradication rates. A long term improvement of the range of motion following reimplantation of the new joint was, however, not observed.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.