Periprosthetic Joint Infections: Clinical and Bench Research

Laurence Legout,Eric Senneville

doi:10.1155/2013/549091

Laurence Legout, Eric Senneville

Open Access

https://doi.org/10.1155/2013/549091

Copy DOI

Journal: TheScientificWorldJournal	Publication Date: Jan 1, 2013
Citations: 140	License type: CC BY 3.0

Affiliation: Centre Hospitalier de Tourcoing

Abstract

Prosthetic joint infection is a devastating complication with high morbidity and substantial cost. The incidence is low but probably underestimated. Despite a significant basic and clinical research in this field, many questions concerning the definition of prosthetic infection as well the diagnosis and the management of these infections remained unanswered. We review the current literature about the new diagnostic methods, the management and the prevention of prosthetic joint infections.

Highlights

Prosthetic joint infection (PJI) causes significant morbidity and accounts for a substantial proportion of heath care expenditures in hospital
The key of the management of PJI is the removal of infected prosthesis, recent studies suggest that the retention of the infected implants may be an acceptable option in selected patients
We compared the European recommendations to recent IDSA guidelines on the management of prosthetic joint infections [2, 7, 10], and we review the current knowledge on the management of resistant bacterial, fungal, and mycobacterial infections

Summary

Introduction

Prosthetic joint infection (PJI) causes significant morbidity and accounts for a substantial proportion of heath care expenditures in hospital. By the use of adapted perioperative antimicrobial prophylaxis, laminar airflow surgical environment has reduced the risk of infection to less than one percent for hip prosthesis and 2 percent for other prostheses [1, 2]. These rates are probably underestimated because of unrecognized infection. The key of the management of PJI is the removal of infected prosthesis, recent studies suggest that the retention of the infected implants may be an acceptable option in selected patients. The choice of antimicrobial regimens is based on the results established from experimental studies and clinical experiences. Randomized studies are lacking [1, 2, 7,8,9]

Objectives

Methods

Findings

Conclusion