Comparing Articulating Spacers for Periprosthetic Joint Infection After Primary Total Hip Arthroplasty: All-Cement Versus Real-Component Articulating Spacers

Kugelman, David; Roof, Mackenzie A.; Egol, Alexander J.; Guanche, Isabella; Chen, Antonia F.; Schwarzkopf, Ran; Aggarwal, Vinay K.

doi:10.1016/j.arth.2021.12.008

Cited by 2 publications

(2 citation statements)

References 28 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…In a systematic review [ 84 ] comparing 394 patients receiving autoclaved components and 173 patients with spacers made from new components, Spinarelli et al showed that reinfection rates were similar in both groups, and postoperative ROM was greater in patients with autoclaved components. Another recent study revealed that real-component spacers significantly improved patient comfort compared to all-cement articulating ones [ 85 ]. Citak et al [ 37 ] analyzed 1631 infected THAs and revealed that preformed articulating spacers were not superior to hand-made spacers in terms of functional outcomes and infection eradication.…”

Section: Comparison Of Clinical Outcomesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Articulating spacers: what are available and how to utilize them?

Chen

2023

Arthroplasty

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) is the most devastating complication following total joint arthroplasty (TJA) and is posing a global healthcare challenge as the demand for TJA mounts. Two-stage exchange arthroplasty with the placement of antibiotic-loaded spacers has been shown to be efficacious against chronic PJI. This study aimed to review the key concepts, types, and outcome evaluations of articulating spacers in the two-stage exchange for PJI. Previous studies indicated that articulating spacers have been widely used due to better functional improvement and a comparable infection control rate relative to static spacers. Several types of articulating spacers are reportedly available, including hand-made spacers, spacers fashioned from molds, commercially preformed spacers, spacers with additional metal or polyethylene elements, new or autoclaved prosthesis, custom-made articulating spacers, and 3D printing-assisted spacers. However, limited evidence suggested no significant difference in clinical outcomes among the different subtypes of articulating spacers. Surgeons should be familiar with different treatment strategies when using various spacers to know which is the most appropriate.

show abstract

Section: Comparison Of Clinical Outcomesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Articulating spacers: what are available and how to utilize them?

Chen

2023

Arthroplasty

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The highlights of the last session of the 2021 Members Meeting, were 2 papers presented by Ran Schwarzkopf, MD and Bryan D. Springer, MD. Dr Schwarzkopf compared outcomes of all cement articulating spacers vs those for real component spacers [6]. He and Dr Vinay Aggarwal, the Principal Investigator, concluded that while both groups had similar reinfection and reoperation rates, the real component spacer groups had shorter lengths of stay and were more likely to be discharged to home.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Editorial: The 2021 Hip Society Members Meeting and 2022 Awards

Macaulay¹,

Engh²

2022

The Journal of Arthroplasty

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Comparing Articulating Spacers for Periprosthetic Joint Infection After Primary Total Hip Arthroplasty: All-Cement Versus Real-Component Articulating Spacers

Cited by 2 publications

References 28 publications

Articulating spacers: what are available and how to utilize them?

Articulating spacers: what are available and how to utilize them?

Editorial: The 2021 Hip Society Members Meeting and 2022 Awards

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About