Mechanical failure due to dislocation, fracture and acetabular wear as well as persistence of infection are the main complications associated with the use of hip spacers in the treatment of periprosthetic joint infections (PJI).

We have developed a novel, custom-made spacer as part of two-stage septic hip replacement and present the two- to five-year results after reimplantation.

We prospectively examined a total of 73 patients over our study period in whom our new spacer technique was used. The technique includes a dual mobility inlay and a cemented straight stem in combination with antibiotic-loaded PMMA bone cement which allows full weight bearing meanwhile the interim period. The follow-up ranged between 24 and 60 months after reimplantation as second stage of a two-stage approach. The patients were contacted as part of the follow-up using a questionnaire concerning reoperation, reinfection as well as hip function by using the Harris Hip Score.

72 patients (98,6%) could be reimplanted, one patient is still using the spacer prothesis for 45 months because of excellent functional results with a Harris Hip Score of 95, nevertheless reimplantation is planned. The reinfection rate was less than 7% after reimplantation. The dislocation rate was 5%, and in total there was an overall complication rate of less than 10%. The Harris Hip Score was significantly improved.

The ENDO spacer surgical technique is a promising option in the treatment of periprosthetic joint infections (PJI) for two-stage septic exchange with a low dislocation rate and good infection control after reimplantation. In addition, it enables early mobilization with the possibility of full weight-bearing in the interval between spacer implantation and reimplantation.

Introduction: Periprosthetic infection is still the most severe complication in THA. In spite of vigorous efforts over the last decades the problem has not been Solved nor minimized. Standardised procedures for prophylaxis and treatment have long been established. Reported results reach into the mid 80% but did not improve remarkably in the last ten years. Our latest follow-up reveals a success rate of 88.6%. A close analysis of the involved unsatisfying cases will help to improve future results.

Material and Methods: 105 consecutive one stage exchanges of THA for periprosthetic infection in 1996 were investigated after 7 years through questionnaire, telephone interview and clinical examination. An overall success rate of 88.6% was found and the failures were analysed. Criteria like age, co morbidities, ASA, duration of infection anamnesis, number of infection related interventions, lab-findings, local findings like fistulas, x-ray rating, operation time, surgeon, complication postoperative and the bacteria involved were compared.

Results: In general it shows that the most desolate cases in all categories line up for a primary failure. The ASA rating is remarkably higher and local findings like fistulas are present in nearly all patients. The bacteria involved are staphylococci in 70%. Over 50% had a combination of two or more pathogens and two patients showed an additional pathogen in the samples taken during the operation. The pattern of the involved bacteria is remarkably severe. But there are also three cases where no sign of higher risk or lower chances could be detected.

Conclusions: Knowing about causes of failure in the specific one stage exchange situation does lead to adaptation in the concept of treatment for those specific cases. With successful application, better results through individual therapy-concepts will be possible.