A Randomized Trial of Static and Articulating Spacers for the Treatment of Infection Following Total Knee Arthroplasty.

BACKGROUND There is no consensus whether the interim antibiotic spacer utilized in the 2-stage exchange arthroplasty should immobilize the joint or allow for motion. The purpose of this multicenter, randomized clinical trial was to compare static and articulating spacers as part of the 2-stage exchange arthroplasty for the treatment of chronic periprosthetic joint infection complicating total knee arthroplasty as defined with use of Musculoskeletal Infection Society criteria. METHODS Sixty-eight patients undergoing 2-stage exchange arthroplasty were randomized to either a static (32 patients) or an articulating (36 patients) spacer. An a priori power analysis determined that 28 patients per group would be necessary to detect a 13° difference in range of motion between groups. Six patients were excluded after randomization, 6 died, and 7 were lost to follow-up before 2 years. RESULTS Patients in the static group had a hospital length of stay that was 1 day greater than the articulating group after stage 1 (6.1 compared with 5.1 days; 95% confidence interval [CI], 5.3 to 6.9 days and 4.6 to 5.6 days, respectively; p = 0.032); no other differences were noted perioperatively. At a mean of 3.5 years (range, 2.0 to 6.4 years), 49 patients were available for evaluation. The mean motion arc was 113.0° (95% CI, 108.4° to 117.6°) in the articulating spacer group, compared with 100.2° (95% CI, 94.2° to 106.1°) in the static spacer group (p = 0.001). The mean Knee Society Score was higher in the articulating spacer cohort (79.4 compared with 69.8 points; 95% CI, 72.4 to 86.3 and 63.6 to 76.1, respectively; p = 0.043). Although not significantly different with the sample size studied, static spacers were associated with a greater need for an extensile exposure at the time of reimplantation (16.7% compared with 4.0%; 95% CI, 0.6% to 38.9% and 0.5% to 26.3%, respectively; p = 0.189) and a higher rate of reoperation (25.0% compared with 8.0%; 95% CI, 9.8% to 46.7% and 1.0% to 26.0%, respectively; p = 0.138). CONCLUSIONS Articulating spacers provided significantly greater range of motion and higher Knee Society scores at a mean of 3.5 years. Static spacers were associated with a longer hospital stay following removal of the infected implant. When the soft-tissue envelope allows and if there is adequate osseous support, an articulating spacer is associated with improved outcomes. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE Therapeutic Level I. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

[1]  Li Sun,et al.  Short‐term Follow‐up of Antibiotic‐loaded Articulating Cement Spacers in Two‐stage Revision of Infected Total Knee Arthroplasty: A Case Series , 2018, Orthopaedic surgery.

[2]  H. Ding,et al.  Comparison of the efficacy of static versus articular spacers in two-stage revision surgery for the treatment of infection following total knee arthroplasty: a meta-analysis , 2017, Journal of Orthopaedic Surgery and Research.

[3]  C. Pramesh,et al.  Common pitfalls in statistical analysis: Intention-to-treat versus per-protocol analysis , 2016, Perspectives in clinical research.

[4]  W. Kohrt,et al.  Predicting Functional Performance and Range of Motion Outcomes After Total Knee Arthroplasty , 2014, American journal of physical medicine & rehabilitation.

[5]  G. Scuderi**,et al.  Articulating vs. Static antibiotic impregnated spacers in revision total knee arthroplasty for sepsis. A systematic review. , 2014, The Journal of arthroplasty.

[6]  Michael A Mont,et al.  Systematic review comparing static and articulating spacers used for revision of infected total knee arthroplasty. , 2014, The Journal of arthroplasty.

[7]  Gwo-Chin Lee,et al.  Use of static or articulating spacers for infection following total knee arthroplasty: a systematic literature review. , 2013, The Journal of bone and joint surgery. American volume.

[8]  S. Sporer,et al.  Serum and synovial fluid analysis for diagnosing chronic periprosthetic infection in patients with inflammatory arthritis. , 2012, The Journal of bone and joint surgery. American volume.

[9]  J. Parvizi,et al.  New Definition for Periprosthetic Joint Infection: From the Workgroup of the Musculoskeletal Infection Society , 2011, Clinical orthopaedics and related research.

[10]  Tain‐Hsiung Chen,et al.  Comparison of articulating and static spacers regarding infection with resistant organisms in total knee arthroplasty , 2011, Acta orthopaedica.

[11]  B. Masri,et al.  Durable Infection Control and Function With the PROSTALAC Spacer in Two-stage Revision for Infected Knee Arthroplasty , 2011, Clinical orthopaedics and related research.

[12]  A. Lombardi,et al.  Intraoperative Molds to Create an Articulating Spacer for the Infected Knee Arthroplasty , 2011, Clinical orthopaedics and related research.

[13]  Javad Parvizi,et al.  Limitations of the Knee Society Score in evaluating outcomes following revision total knee arthroplasty. , 2010, The Journal of bone and joint surgery. American volume.

[14]  T. Yoon,et al.  Comparison of static and mobile antibiotic-impregnated cement spacers for the treatment of infected total knee arthroplasty , 2010, International Orthopaedics.

[15]  S. Odum,et al.  Functional advantage of articulating versus static spacers in 2-stage revision for total knee arthroplasty infection. , 2007, The Journal of arthroplasty.

[16]  K. Chiu,et al.  Antibiotic-loaded cement articulating spacer for 2-stage reimplantation in infected total knee arthroplasty: a simple and economic method. , 2007, The Journal of arthroplasty.

[17]  W. J. Hart,et al.  Two-stage revision of infected total knee replacements using articulating cement spacers and short-term antibiotic therapy. , 2006, The Journal of bone and joint surgery. British volume.

[18]  Y. Konttinen,et al.  Spacer prostheses in two-stage revision of infected knee arthroplasty , 2006, International Orthopaedics.

[19]  D. Choon,et al.  Midterm Results of Cemented Press Fit Condylar Sigma Total Knee Arthroplasty System , 2005, Journal of orthopaedic surgery.

[20]  R. Pitto,et al.  Pre-formed articulating knee spacer in two-stage revision for the infected total knee arthroplasty , 2005, International Orthopaedics.

[21]  J. Cuckler The infected total knee: management options. , 2005, The Journal of arthroplasty.

[22]  A. Hofmann,et al.  Treatment of Infected Total Knee Arthroplasty Using an Articulating Spacer: 2- to 12-Year Experience , 2005, Clinical orthopaedics and related research.

[23]  D. Berry,et al.  Mid-Term to Long-Term Followup of Two-stage Reimplantation for Infected Total Knee Arthroplasty , 2004, Clinical orthopaedics and related research.

[24]  R. Uhl,et al.  Antibiotic-loaded articulating cement spacer in the 2-stage exchange of infected total knee arthroplasty. , 2004, The Journal of arthroplasty.

[25]  M. Ritter,et al.  Predicting Range of Motion After Total Knee Arthroplasty: Clustering, Log-Linear Regression, and Regression Tree Analysis , 2003, The Journal of bone and joint surgery. American volume.

[26]  R. Emerson,et al.  Comparison of a Static with a Mobile Spacer in Total Knee Infection , 2002, Clinical orthopaedics and related research.

[27]  S. Odum,et al.  Articulating Versus Static Spacers in Revision Total Knee Arthroplasty for Sepsis , 2000, Clinical orthopaedics and related research.

[28]  R. McGraw,et al.  The PROSTALAC functional spacer in two-stage revision for infected knee replacements. Prosthesis of antibiotic-loaded acrylic cement. , 2000, The Journal of bone and joint surgery. British volume.

[29]  R Y Liow,et al.  The reliability of the American Knee Society Score , 2000, Acta orthopaedica Scandinavica.

[30]  T. Bauer,et al.  Results of 2-stage reimplantation for infected total knee arthroplasty. , 1998, The Journal of arthroplasty.

[31]  T. Fehring,et al.  Bone loss associated with the use of spacer blocks in infected total knee arthroplasty. , 1997, Clinical orthopaedics and related research.

[32]  G. Scuderi**,et al.  2-Stage Reimplantation for Infected Total Knee Replacement , 1996, Clinical orthopaedics and related research.

[33]  P. Lotke,et al.  The results of spacer block technique in revision of infected total knee arthroplasty. , 1989, Clinical orthopaedics and related research.

[34]  J. Ruth,et al.  Two-stage reimplantation in infected total knee arthroplasty. , 1988, Clinical orthopaedics and related research.

[35]  J. Insall,et al.  Two-stage reimplantation for the salvage of infected total knee arthroplasty. , 1983, The Journal of bone and joint surgery. American volume.

[36]  M. Ritter,et al.  Predictive range of motion after total knee replacement. , 1979, Clinical orthopaedics and related research.