Document Type : Mini Review


Hip and Knee Surgery, Istituto Ortopedico Rizzoli, Bologna, Italy


Background: Periprosthetic hip infections (PHIs) are troublesome complications of hip arthroplasties. The gold standard procedure for treating chronic PHI is a 2-stage approach. Recently, however, more conservative approaches have been developed to spare the osseointegrated components and avoid sequestra, bone loss, devascularization, and difficult reconstructions. The partial two-stage approach, which leaves the well-fixed component in situ and removes the loosened component, may be an effective strategy.
Objective: This paper, a narrative mini-review, analyzed the preliminary results of a partial 2-stage approach to treating chronic hip arthroplasty infections.
Methods: Pertinent papers describing the partial 2-stage approach (leaving the well-fixed component in situ and removing the loosened component) were collected and evaluated.
Results: Six main case series were selected. A total of 76 patients were included. Many patients were treated with socket removal and stem retention with quite similar surgical techniques. Many cases included highly virulent bacteria, and no pre-operative selection about comorbidities was performed. The first outcomes of this approach were promising, with a rate of infection control ranging from 81.3% to 100% at mid-term follow-up.
Conclusion: This approach proved good at mid-term follow-up; however, many concerns still exist. In particular, the indications are imprecise, and the role of biofilm is still unclear. Despite the first good outcomes, the partial 2-stage approach for chronic PHI should be validated by multicenter prospective studies.


  1. Kuzyk PR, Dhotar HS, Sternheim A, Gross AE, Safir O, Backstein D. Two-stage revision arthroplasty for management of chronic periprosthetic hip and knee infection: techniques, controversies, and outcomes. J Am Acad Orthop Surg. 2014;22(3):153-164. doi:10.5435/JAAOS-22-03-153.
  2. Berend KR, Lombardi AV Jr, Morris MJ, Bergeson AG, Adams JB, Sneller MA. Two-stage treatment of hip periprosthetic joint infection is associated with a high rate of infection control but high mortality. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2013;471(2):510-518. doi:10.1007/s11999-012-2595-x.
  3. Wolf M, Clar H, Friesenbichler J, et al. Prosthetic joint infection following total hip replacement: results of one-stage versus two-stage exchange. Int Orthop. 2014;38(7):1363-1368. doi:10.1007/s00264-014-2309-y.
  4. El-Husseiny M, Haddad FS. The Role of Highly Selective Implant Retention in the Infected Hip Arthroplasty. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2016;474(10):2157-2163. doi:10.1007/s11999-016-4936-7.
  5. Ji B, Xu B, Guo W, et al. Retention of the well-fixed implant in the single-stage exchange for chronic infected total hip arthroplasty: an average of five years of follow-up. Int Orthop. 2017;41(5):901-909. doi:10.1007/s00264-016-3291-3.
  6. Anagnostakos K, Jung J, Kelm J, Schmitt E. Two-stage treatment protocol for isolated septic acetabular cup loosening. Hip Int. 2010;20(3):320-326. doi:10.1177/112070001002000305.
  7. Chen KH, Tsai SW, Wu PK, Chen CF, Wang HY, Chen WM. Partial component-retained two-stage reconstruction for chronic infection after uncemented total hip arthroplasty: results of sixteen cases after five years of follow-up. Int Orthop. 2017;41(12):2479-2486. doi:10.1007/s00264-017-3505-3.
  8. Lee YK, Lee KH, Nho JH, Ha YC, Koo KH. Retaining well-fixed cementless stem in the treatment of infected hip arthroplasty. Acta Orthop. 2013;84(3):260-264. doi:10.3109/17453674.2013.795830.
  9. Ekpo TE, Berend KR, Morris MJ, Adams JB, Lombardi AV, Jr. Partial two-stage exchange for infected total hip arthroplasty: a preliminary report. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2014;472(2):437- 448. doi:10.1007/s11999-013-3168-3.
  10. Lombardi AV Jr, Berend KR, Adams JB. Partial two-stage exchange of the infected total hip replacement using disposable spacer moulds. Bone Joint J. 2014;96-b(11 Suppl A):66-69. doi:10.1302/0301-620X.96B11.34360.
  11. Fukui K, Kaneuji A, Ueda S, Matsumoto T. Should well-fixed uncemented femoral components be revised in infected hip arthroplasty? Report of five trial cases. J Orthop. 2016;13(4):437- 442. doi:10.1016/j.jor.2015.09.006.
  12. Yan Z, Fang R, Liu T. Partial component-retained two-stage reconstruction for chronic infection after uncemented total hip arthroplasty: good or bad? Int Orthop. 2018;42(3):729-730. doi:10.1007/s00264-017-3748-z.
  13. Liebs TR. CORR Insights((R)): The Role of Highly Selective Implant Retention in the Infected Hip Arthroplasty. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2016;474(10):2164-2167. doi:10.1007/s11999-016-4987-9.
  14. Marczak D, Synder M, Sibinski M, Wasko M, Polguj M, Kowalczewski J. Comparison of patients treated with or without a spacer in two stage revision hip arthroplasty for periprosthetic joint infection. J Infect. 2016;73(5):520-522. doi:10.1016/j.jinf.2016.09.006.