Journal of Bone and Joint Infection
Journal of Bone and Joint Infection
JBJI
Articles | Volume 10, issue 3
Articles | Volume 10, issue 3
https://doi.org/10.5194/jbji-10-185-2025
© Author(s) 2025. This work is distributed under
the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.
https://doi.org/10.5194/jbji-10-185-2025
© Author(s) 2025. This work is distributed under
the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.
Articles | Volume 10, issue 3
Original full-length article
 | 
02 Jun 2025
Original full-length article |  | 02 Jun 2025

One- versus two-stage septic hip and knee revision surgery: a comparative cohort outcome study with short- to mid-term follow-up

Michelle M. J. Jacobs, Petra J. C. Heesterbeek, Karin Veerman, and Jon H. M. Goosen

Viewed

Total article views: 131 (including HTML, PDF, and XML)
HTML PDF XML Total Supplement BibTeX EndNote
117 13 1 131 2 0 0
  • HTML: 117
  • PDF: 13
  • XML: 1
  • Total: 131
  • Supplement: 2
  • BibTeX: 0
  • EndNote: 0
Views and downloads (calculated since 02 Jun 2025)
Cumulative views and downloads (calculated since 02 Jun 2025)

Viewed (geographical distribution)

Total article views: 131 (including HTML, PDF, and XML) Thereof 131 with geography defined and 0 with unknown origin.
Country # Views %
  • 1
1
 
 
 
 
Latest update: 06 Jun 2025
Download
Short summary
We compared the outcomes of one-stage and two-stage revision surgeries for periprosthetic joint infections of the knee and hip joints. Patients in both groups had similar reinfection rates and functional recovery, but two-stage hip patients experienced more complications, partly due to the temporary use of cement spacers. Our findings suggest that one-stage revision may be a viable alternative to two-stage revision, potentially reducing complications without increasing reinfection risk.
Read more
Share