Long Term Results of Two-Stage Revision for Chronic Periprosthetic Hip Infection: A Multicenter Study

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

All changes made, paper seems fine for publication

Author Response

Thank you!

Reviewer 2 Report

Thank you for you answers. I have a few additional minor comments before publication.

1. Resistance microorganism were considered the ESKAPE microorganisms, but please add also in the tekst how resistance was defined, for example; methicillin resistance for S aureus. In your response you also indicated that methicillin resistance for S epidermidis was considered a resistant microorganism, but this organism is not part of the ESKAPE microorganism. So please clarify, and add the exact definition in the text.
2. Figure 1, there are some typo’s in the Figure: Cornebacterium should be: Corynebacterium (same for Figure 2).Psuedomonas should be Pseudomonas.
3. Concerning the limitations: i) availability of MSIS criteria prior to 2011, ii) missing of important variables associated with failure in literature , andiii) the lack of multivariate analysis: All these limitations need to be mentioned in the discussion section of the paper.
4. Numbers at risk: add a row below the figure, in which the number of patients per time point were available (for example if a patient already failed or died, the numbers at risk for the outcome parameters decreases).
5. The hypothesis that I mentioned concerning the higher failer rate in MRSA infections should be addressed in the discussion section and it should be mentioned that this is not consistent with current literature.

Author Response

Thank you, Please see attached file

Author Response File: Author Response.docx