scholarly journals Clinical Outcome of Antibiotic Suppressive Therapy in Patients with a Prosthetic Joint Infection after Hip Replacement

2019 ◽  
Vol 4 (6) ◽  
pp. 268-276 ◽  
Author(s):  
Borg Leijtens ◽  
Laura Weerwag ◽  
Berend Willem Schreurs ◽  
Bart-Jan Kullberg ◽  
Wim Rijnen
Keyword(s):  
Clinical Outcome ◽  
Prosthetic Joint Infection ◽  
Hip Replacement ◽  
Joint Infection ◽  
Suppressive Therapy ◽  
Oral Antibiotic ◽  
Oral Antibiotic Therapy ◽  
Prosthetic Joint ◽  
Increased Risk

Abstract. Introduction: In Specific cases, curative treatment of a prosthetic joint infection (PJI) cannot be accomplished due to the increased risk of major complications after prosthetic joint revision surgery. In these patients, antibiotic suppressive therapy (AST) is often used to control the infection.Aim: To describe the clinical outcome of patients with a PJI after hip replacement treated with AST.Methods: Patients in which AST for PJI was started between 2006 and 2013, were retrospectively included. Follow-up was continued until October 2018. AST has been defined as treatment with oral antibiotic therapy intended to suppress PJI. Treatment was considered successful in patients without reoperation for PJI or death related to PJI during follow-up.Results: Twenty-three patients were included. The most commonly used antibiotics were doxycycline (n=14) and cotrimoxazole (n=6). The mean duration of AST was 38 months (1-151 months). AST was considered successful in 13 patients (56.5%) after a median follow-up of 33 months. AST was least successful in PJI caused by S. aureus with 80% failures versus 33% in PJI caused by other microorganisms and in patients who had an antibiotic-free period before the start of AST with 83% failures. Two patients ended AST due to side effects.Conclusion: AST can be an alternative treatment in selected patients with a PJI after hip replacement. However, there is a persisting and considerable amount of failures, particularly in PJI caused by S. aureus and in patient with an antibiotic-free period before the start of AST.

A case of Mycobacterium fortuitum prosthetic joint infection successfully treated medically without prosthesis explantation or joint debridement

2021 ◽  
Vol 14 (8) ◽  
pp. e243675
Author(s):  
Maya Ramanathan ◽  
Folusakin Ayoade
Keyword(s):  
Prosthetic Joint Infection ◽  
Hip Replacement ◽  
Joint Infection ◽  
Degenerative Joint Disease ◽  
Joint Disease ◽  
Mycobacterium Fortuitum ◽  
Replacement Surgery ◽  
Hip Replacement Surgery ◽  
Prosthetic Joint ◽  
The Right

A 58-year-old man with a history of end-stage degenerative joint disease developed a postsurgical infection at the right hip 4 weeks after hip replacement surgery. He underwent surgical washout of the right hip without opening the joint capsule. Arthrocentesis returned positive for Mycobacterium fortuitum. He was started on antibiotics with the recommendation to remove the prosthesis. The prosthesis was retained. Based on antimicrobial susceptibilities, he was treated with 4 weeks of intravenous therapy using cefoxitin and amikacin and later switched to oral ciprofloxacin and doxycycline for 5 additional months. Eighteen months from his initial hip replacement surgery, he continues to do well. Joint aspiration culture is important to make a diagnosis of prosthetic joint infection (PJI) when periprosthetic culture is not available. In the absence of serious systemic or comorbid joint conditions, PJI due to M. fortuitum can be managed medically without having to remove the prosthesis or debride the joint.

scholarly journals 400. Comparison of Tolerance and Microbiological Efficacy of Cefepime and Piperacillin/Tazobactam in Combination with Vancomycin as Empirical Antimicrobial Therapy of Prosthetic Joint Infection: A Propensity-Matched Cohort Study

2019 ◽  
Vol 6 (Supplement_2) ◽  
pp. S204-S205
Author(s):  
Claire Triffault-Fillit ◽  
Eugenie Mabrut ◽  
Karine Corbin ◽  
Agathe Becker ◽  
Evelyne Braun ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Renal Function ◽  
Antimicrobial Therapy ◽  
Prosthetic Joint Infection ◽  
Joint Infection ◽  
Fisher Exact Test ◽  
In Vitro Susceptibility ◽  
Empirical Antimicrobial Therapy ◽  
Prosthetic Joint ◽  
Increased Risk ◽  
Baseline Renal Function

Abstract Background The use of piperacillin/tazobactam with vancomycin as empirical antimicrobial therapy (EAT) for prosthetic joint infection (PJI) has been associated with an increased risk of acute kidney injury (AKI), leading to propose cefepime as an alternative since 2017 in our reference center. The present study compared microbiological efficacy and tolerance of these two EAT strategies. Methods All adult patients with PJI empirically treated by vancomycin-cefepime (n = 89) were enrolled in a prospective observational study, and matched with vancomycin-piperacillin/tazobactam-treated historical controls (n = 89) according to a propensity score including age, baseline renal function and concomitant use of other nephrotoxics. The two groups were compared using Kaplan–Meier curve analysis and non-parametric tests (Fisher exact test and Mann–Whitney U-test) regarding: (i) the proportion efficacious empirical regimen (i.e., at least one of the two molecules active against the identified organism(s) based on in vitro susceptibility testing); and (ii) the incidence of empirical therapy-related adverse events (AE), classified according to the Common terminology criteria for AE (CTCAE). Results Among the 146 (82.0%) documented infections, the EAT was considered as efficacious in 77 (98.7%) and 65 (98.5%) of the piperacillin–tazobactam and cefepim-treated patients, respectively (P = 1.000). The rate of AE, and in particular AKI, was significantly higher in the vancomycin–piperacillin/tazobactam (n = 27 [30.3%] and 23 [25.8%%]) compared with the vancomycin-cefepim (n = 13 [14.6%] and 6 [6.7%]) group (P = 0.019 and <0.001, respectively; figure), leading to a premature EAT discontinuation in 20 (22.5%) and 5 (5.6%) patients (P = 0.002). Of note, no significant differences were observed between the two groups regarding sex (91 males; 51.1%), median age (68-year-old; IQR, 59.3–75), main comorbidities including baseline renal function and proportion of patients receiving other nephrotoxics, and vancomycin plasmatic overload. Conclusion The empirical use of vancomycin-cefepim in PJI was as efficient as vancomycin–piperacillin/tazobactam, and was associated with a significantly lower incidence of AKI. Disclosures All authors: No reported disclosures.

Outcomes of repeat two-stage exchange hip arthroplasty for prosthetic joint infection

2019 ◽  
Vol 101-B (6_Supple_B) ◽  
pp. 110-115 ◽  
Author(s):  
N. Khan ◽  
D. Parmar ◽  
M. S. Ibrahim ◽  
B. Kayani ◽  
F. S. Haddad
Keyword(s):  
Hip Arthroplasty ◽  
Prosthetic Joint Infection ◽  
Joint Infection ◽  
Antimicrobial Treatment ◽  
Successful Outcome ◽  
Two Stage ◽  
Persistent Symptoms ◽  
Prosthetic Joint ◽  
Revision Tha

Aims The increasing infection burden after total hip arthroplasty (THA) has seen a rise in the use of two-stage exchange arthroplasty and the use of increasingly powerful antibiotics at the time of this procedure. As a result, there has been an increase in the number of failed two-stage revisions during the past decade. The aim of this study was to clarify the outcome of repeat two-stage revision THA following a failed two-stage exchange due to recurrent prosthetic joint infection (PJI). Patients and Methods We identified 42 patients who underwent a two-stage revision THA having already undergone at least one previous two stage procedure for infection, between 2000 and 2015. There were 23 women and 19 men. Their mean age was 69.3 years (48 to 81). The outcome was analyzed at a minimum follow-up of two years. Results A satisfactory control of infection and successful outcome was seen in 26 patients (57%). There therefore remained persistent symptoms that either required further surgery or chronic antibiotic suppression in 16 patients (38%). One-third of patients had died by the time of two years’ follow-up. Conclusion The rate of failure and complication rate of repeat two-stage exchange THA for PJI is high and new methods of treatment including host optimization, immunomodulation, longer periods between stages, and new and more powerful forms of antimicrobial treatment should be investigated. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2019;101-B(6 Supple B):110–115.

Surgical Site Infection After Primary Hip and Knee Arthroplasty: A Cohort Study Using a Hospital Database

2015 ◽  
Vol 36 (10) ◽  
pp. 1198-1207 ◽  
Author(s):  
Leslie Grammatico-Guillon ◽  
Sabine Baron ◽  
Philippe Rosset ◽  
Christophe Gaborit ◽  
Louis Bernard ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Risk Factors ◽  
Cohort Study ◽  
Knee Arthroplasty ◽  
Prosthetic Joint Infection ◽  
Joint Infection ◽  
Public Hospitals ◽  
Prosthetic Material ◽  
Hospital Database ◽  
Prosthetic Joint

BACKGROUNDHip or knee arthroplasty infection (HKAI) leads to heavy medical consequences even if rare.OBJECTIVETo assess the routine use of a hospital discharge detection algorithm of prosthetic joint infection as a novel additional tool for surveillance.METHODSA historic 5-year cohort study was built using a hospital database of people undergoing a first hip or knee arthroplasty in 1 French region (2.5 million inhabitants, 39 private and public hospitals): 32,678 patients with arthroplasty code plus corresponding prosthetic material code were tagged. HKAI occurrence was then tracked in the follow-up on the basis of a previously validated algorithm using International Statistical Classification of Disease, Tenth Revision, codes as well as the surgical procedures coded. HKAI density incidence was estimated during the follow-up (up to 4 years after surgery); risk factors were analyzed using Cox regression.RESULTSA total of 604 HKAI patients were identified: 1-year HKAI incidence was1.31%, and density incidence was 2.2/100 person-years in hip and 2.5/100 person-years in knee. HKAI occurred within the first 30 days after surgery for 30% but more than 1 year after replacement for 29%. Patients aged 75 years or older, male, or having liver diseases, alcohol abuse, or ulcer sore had higher risk of infection. The inpatient case fatality in HKAI patients was 11.4%.CONCLUSIONSThe hospital database method used to measure occurrence and risk factors of prosthetic joint infection helped to survey HKAI and could optimize healthcare delivery.Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol 2015;36(10):1198–1207

scholarly journals Impact of Prior Intra-articular Injections on the Risk of Prosthetic Joint Infection Following Total Joint Arthroplasty: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

2021 ◽  
Vol 8 ◽  
Author(s):  
Fei Nie ◽  
Wei Li
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Prosthetic Joint Infection ◽  
Total Joint Arthroplasty ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Joint Infection ◽  
Joint Arthroplasty ◽  
Injection Group ◽  
Prosthetic Joint ◽  
Increased Risk ◽  
The Impact

Objective: The current review was designed to assess the impact of prior intra-articular injections on the risk of prosthetic joint infection (PJI) in patients undergoing total joint arthroplasty (TJA) with a focus on the timing of injection before surgery.Methods: The databases of PubMed, Embase and Google Scholar were searched up to 15th June 2021. All studies comparing the incidence of PJI with and without prior intra-articular injections were included. Risk ratios (RR) with 95% confidence intervals were calculated for PJI.Results: Nineteen studies were included. Both corticosteroids and hyaluronic acid injections were used before TJA in the included studies. Overall, comparing 127,163 patients with prior intra-articular injections and 394,104 patients without any injections, we noted a statistically significant increased risk of PJI in the injection group (RR 1.24 95% CI: 1.11, 1.38 I2 = 48% p = 0.002). On subgroup analysis, there was a statistically significant increased risk of PJI in the injection group in studies where intra-articular injections were administered &lt;12 months before surgery (RR 1.18 95% CI: 1.10, 1.27 I2 = 7% p &lt; 0.00001). Furthermore, on meta-analysis, we noted non-significant but increased risk of PJI when injections were administered 1 month (RR 1.47 95% CI: 0.88, 2.46 I2 = 77% p = 0.14), 0–3 months (RR 1.22 95% CI: 0.96, 1.56 I2 = 84% p = 0.11), and 3–6 months (RR 1.16 95% CI: 0.99, 1.35 I2 = 49% p = 0.06) before surgery.Conclusion: Our results indicate that patients with prior intra-articular injections have a small but statistically significant increased risk of PJI after TJA. Considering that PJI is a catastrophic complication with huge financial burden, morbidity and mortality; the clinical significance of this small risk cannot be dismissed. The question of the timing of injections and the risk of PJI still remains and can have a significant impact on the decision making.Systematic Review Registration: PROSPERO: CRD42021258297.

scholarly journals 381. Clinical Outcome of Polymicrobial Prosthetic Joint Infection Managed with Debridement, Antibiotics, and Implant Retention (DAIR)

2019 ◽  
Vol 6 (Supplement_2) ◽  
pp. S198-S198
Author(s):  
Babak Hooshmand ◽  
Dima Youssef ◽  
Kathleen M Riederer ◽  
Susan M Szpunar ◽  
Ashish Bhargava
Keyword(s):  
Joint Infection ◽  
Surgical Site Infections ◽  
International Classification Of Diseases ◽  
Implant Removal ◽  
Suppressive Therapy ◽  
Joint Infections ◽  
Prosthetic Joint ◽  
Prosthetic Joint Infections ◽  
Implant Retention

Abstract Background Polymicrobial (PM) prosthetic joint infections (PJIs) account for 4% to 37% of all PJIs. There is limited literature on surgical debridement, antibiotics and implant retention (DAIR) in PMPJIs. We aimed to assess clinical outcomes of PMPJIs managed with DAIR. Methods A retrospective cohort was studied at three Ascension hospitals in Detroit from January 2012 to December 2018. Cases were identified using the International Classification of Diseases, 9th and 10th Revision code specific for PJIs. Patient’s electronic medical records were reviewed. Results Twenty-six PMPJIs managed with DAIR were identified. Mean age of the infected patients was 66 years. 18 (69%) patients were female and 19 (73%) were caucasians. Infected sites were hip in 15 (58%), knee in 10 (38%) and ankle in 1 (4%) patient. 22 (85%) patients had osteoarthritis, 3 (12%) had diabetes, 3 (12%) were on steroids and 1 (4%) had rheumatoid arthritis. Symptom onset of less than a week was noted in 14 (58%) and 3 or more weeks in 8 (31%) patients. Pain, swelling and drainage were present in 21 (81%), 13 (50%) and 18 (69%) cases. Fever on admission was noted in 7 (27%) patients. 11 (42%) patients were re-admitted in the following 12 months after DAIR. 2 (19%) patients developed superficial surgical site infection (SSI) while 9 (81%) had deep SSI. Implant removal was needed in 6 (55%) patients. 5 (2 superficial and 3 deep) patients required further debridement and antibiotics. 5 (19%) had good outcome with 3–6 months of antibiotics. 3 (12%) patients required long-term chronic suppressive therapy. One patient died from a cardiac event during follow-up. Conclusion In our study, PMPJIs managed with DAIR had high readmission rates and deep surgical site infections. DAIR failure, noted in 23% of our cases, required implant removal within 12 months of follow-up. Disclosures All authors: No reported disclosures.

External validation study of hip peri-prosthetic joint infection with cemented custom-made articulating spacer (CUMARS)

2020 ◽  
pp. 112070002096066 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jonathan Quayle ◽  
Ahmed Barakat ◽  
Antonio Klasan ◽  
Aaina Mittal ◽  
Philip Stott
Keyword(s):  
Prosthetic Joint Infection ◽  
Weight Bearing ◽  
Joint Infection ◽  
External Validation ◽  
Prosthetic Joint ◽  
Articulating Spacer ◽  
Custom Made ◽  
Eradication Of Infection ◽  
Lost To Follow Up

Introduction: Peri-prosthetic joint infection (PJI) is a devastating complication after total hip arthroplasty (THA). The use of custom-made articulating spacers (CUMARS) has been described for use in the first of 2-stage treatment. We report our outcomes of managing PJI using CUMARS. Methods: Patients undergoing 1st-stage revision using the Exeter standard stem, all-polyethylene acetabulum and antibiotic-loaded cement were identified. Medical records were assessed for demographics, microbiological and operative treatment, complications, eradication of infection and reoperations. No postoperative restrictions were enforced. 2nd-stage revision was undertaken in the presence of pain or subsidence. Results: 53 patients underwent 1st-stage revision using this technique. The average follow-up was 3.9 (range 0.5–7.2) years. Infection was eradicated in 47 (88.7%) patients. 2 patients had chronic infection managed with suppressive antibiotics, 2 patients died before eradication confirmed, 1 patient had raised inflammatory markers but no positive aspiration cultures, 1 patient was lost to follow-up. Complications occurred in 5 (9.4%) patients – 4 dislocations and 1 infected haematoma. 4 patients required a repeated 1st stage. 2nd-stage revision was performed in 19 patients (35%). Conclusions: The CUMARS technique is an effective way of eradicating PJI after THA. It maintains function by providing a stable construct that permits weight-bearing. It delays or negates the need for 2nd-stage revision. Furthermore, it allows surgeons to choose between managing patients prospectively as a single-stage revision with the option of reverting to a 2nd stage.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document