Two-stage revision surgery to treat an infected hip implant. A comparison between a custom-made spacer and a...

A retrospective study was conducted to evaluate the results of two-stage surgical treatment for infected hip implant using two different spacers in antibiotic-impregnated cement, one custom-made and one pre-formed. Out of a total of 20 patients treated between 1995 and 2003, the temporary implant of one custom-made spacer was carried out in 8 cases, while in the remaining 12 cases we resorted to using a pre-formed spacer (Spacer G). In both groups we observed one recurrence of infection, for an overall 90% success rate in terms of eradication of the infection. Custom-made spacers had a greater incidence of local complications (1 breakage, 1 dislocation, 1 sinking of the revision stem) as compared to pre-formed ones (1 dislocation). The clinical results evaluated using the Harris Hip Score showed a statistically significant difference (p < 0.05) in both groups as compared to the preoperative score. The use of a pre-formed spacer, although more costly as compared to that custom-made one, was advantageous in some ways, for example in terms of standardization of the implant method, the lower incidence of mechanical complications and the better functional results.