DAIR for Infected Total Hip Arthroplasty - Does the Operative Approach Influence the Functional Result?

University Hospital, Akershus

Status: Completed

Conditions: Hip Prosthesis Infection; Arthroplasty Complications

Treatments: Procedure: Posterior approach to the hip joint; Procedure: Transgluteal approach to the hip joint

Study type: Observational

Funder types: Other

Identifiers

NCT03161990

287901

Details and patient eligibility

About

The functional outcome and quality of life after treatment for an infected hip arthroplasty have been found to be significantly worse compared to an uncomplicated arthroplasty. However, the type of revision surgery chosen to treat the infection plays a role for the functional outcome. The concept of DAIR (debridement, antibiotics and implant retention) has been shown to yield god results with respect to infection control in cases of early infection with a stable implant and better functional results than a to-stage revision. In patients where infection control was achieved after just one DAIR procedure the functional outcome was comparable to an uncomplicated primary arthroplasty. However, it is not known if the operative approach used for the primary and revision surgery plays a role for the functional result after treatment of an infected total hip arthroplasty with DAIR. The project's aim is to investigate if the choice of the operative approach (transgluteal or posterior) for the primary hip replacement and the revision surgery has an influence on the functional result after debridement and implant retention for an infected total hip replacement.

Full description

Potential study participants will be identified in the Norwegian Arthroplasty Register. Patients who have been revised once for an infected total hip arthroplasty with debridement and implant retention and in whom either the transgluteal og posterior operative approach was used in both procedures will be selected. The potential participants will be contacted by letter. They will be asked for written informed consent and to fill out three questionnaires: the Hip Disability Osteoarthritis Score (HOOS), which also allows for the calculation of the Western Ontario and McMaster Universities osteoarthritis index (WOMAC), the EQ-5D (quality of life) and a questionnaire asking about confirmation that the patient only has been revised once for his/her infected arthroplasty, about limping, other complications (nerve injury, dislocation, reoperation for other causes than infection), if the infection is considered to have been eradicated and overall satisfaction. The data recorded in the Norwegian Arthroplasty Register will be used in a multiple linear regression analysis to evaluate if the surgical approach is an independent factor influencing the outcome measures.

Enrollment: 226 patients

Sex: All

Ages: 18+ years old

Volunteers: No Healthy Volunteers

Inclusion criteria

• The infected total hip arthroplasty has only been revised once.
• The revision procedure was a debridement and implant retention.
• Both, the primary and the revision procedure were performed through the same surgical approach; either the transgluteal or the posterior approach.

Exclusion criteria

• No written informed consent.

Trial design

226 participants in 2 patient groups

Transgluteal approach to the hip joint

Description:

Patients who have been revised once for an infected total hip replacement with debridement and implant retention and in whom both the primary hip arthroplasty and the revision procedure were performed through a transgluteal approach.

Treatment:

Procedure: Transgluteal approach to the hip joint

Posterior approach to the hip joint

Description:

Patients who have been revised once for an infected total hip replacement with debridement and implant retention and in whom both the primary hip arthroplasty and the revision procedure were performed through a posterior approach.

Treatment:

Procedure: Posterior approach to the hip joint