Diabetic foot infections. Bacteriology and activity of 10 oral antimicrobial agents against bacteria isolated from consecutive cases

[In vitro activity of ertapenem against strains isolated from diabetic foot infections]

OBJECTIVE

The authors aimed to evaluate the in vitro activity of ertapenem against bacterial strains isolated from diabetic foot infections (DFI).

METHODOLOGY

All diabetic patients hospitalized for a first episode of DFI (stages 2 to 4, according to the International Working Group of Diabetic Foot Classification) were selected in the Nîmes University hospital between January 2005 to December 2005. MICs were determined using both E-test strips and dilution methods on bacterial strains isolated from foot samples.

RESULTS

Two hundred and fifty-two bacteria (154 Gram-positive cocci including 94 Staphylococcus aureus, 80 Gram-negative bacilli with 56 Enterobacteriaceae, and 18 anaerobes) were studied. Ertapenem was active against all Streptococcus spp., Enterobacteriaceae, anaerobes, and also against 89.8% of methicillin-susceptible S. aureus isolates. However, this antibiotic was active only against 31.5% of Staphylococcus epidermidis, 21.8% of Enterococcus faecalis, and 15.8% of Pseudomonas aeruginosa.

CONCLUSION

Our results indicate that ertapenem may be a useful agent to treat patients suffering from DFI after bacterial identification.

Novel antibiotics for the management of diabetic foot infections

Foot infections are a major cause of morbidity in diabetic patients. Staphylococcus aureus is the most important pathogen in mild infections; moderate to severe infections are frequently polymicrobial. Multidrug resistance is an increasing problem in isolates from diabetic feet. Worldwide, up to 30% of patients with diabetic foot infection (DFI) are colonised with methicillin-resistant S. aureus (MRSA), whilst extended-spectrum beta-lactamase-producing Gram-negative bacteria are also common in some countries. This emergence of drug resistance has coincided with the launch or imminent availability of many new antibiotics. Most of these were developed to target multidrug-resistant Gram-positive bacteria, although some have a spectrum of activity that includes Gram-negative bacteria and anaerobes. There is a variable amount of experience with these agents in treating skin and skin-structure infections (SSSIs), especially for DFI. However, at least some have a spectrum of activity and/or pharmacological properties that suggest that they may be of value in managing DFIs. The aim of this paper is to review evidence for the efficacy of new antibiotics in the management of SSSIs, including any data relating specifically to the diabetic foot, and to consider where they might fit into the therapeutic armory against DFI.

In vitro activities of doripenem and six comparator drugs against 423 aerobic and anaerobic bacterial isolates from infected diabetic foot wounds

Against 182 anaerobe and 241 aerobe strains obtained from diabetic foot infections, doripenem was the most active carbapenem against Pseudomonas aeruginosa (MIC(90), 2 microg/ml), more active than imipenem against Proteus mirabilis, and ertapenem was more active against Escherichia coli and Klebsiella spp. The MIC(50) and MIC(90) values were < or =0.125 microg/ml for methicillin-sensitive Staphylococcus aureus and all streptococci and 0.25/1 for Bacteroides fragilis.

Nursing staff knowledge of multi-resistant bacterial infections

OBJECTIVE: To assess professional nurses', associate degree prepared nurses', licensed practical nurses', and nursing assistants' knowledge of the causes of multi-resistant bacterial infections, the risks theses infections pose to health care providers, the chain of transmission of these infections, and patients' susceptibility to colonization of these multi-resistant bacterial infections. METHODS: This descriptive study was conducted in a major general hospital in Minas Gerais, Brazil. The sample consisted of 42 nursing staff from a medical clinical unit. Descriptive statistics were used to analyze and present the data. RESULTS: Nursing staff had unsatisfactory knowledge of the causes of multi-resistant bacterial infections, the chain of transmission of multi-resistant bacterial infections, and patients' susceptibility to colonization of multi-resistant bacterial infections. However, the majority of participants had some knowledge about the risks that multi-resistant bacterial infections posed to health care providers. CONCLUSION: Lack of knowledge among nursing staff compromise adherence to preventive measures and nursing management of multi-resistant bacterial infections.

Isolamento e perfil de suscetibilidade de bactérias de pé diabético e úlcera de estase venosa de pacientes admitidos no pronto-socorro do principal hospital universitário do estado de Goiás, Brasil

CONTEXTO: Lesões infectadas de membros inferiores (úlceras diabéticas e úlceras de estase venosa) são causa de grande sofrimento e incapacitação funcional com impacto social, econômico e aumento do risco de complicações severas. OBJETIVO: Caracterizar a microbiota e determinar o perfil de suscetibilidade antimicrobiana das bactérias isoladas de lesões de membros inferiores secundárias a úlcera de estase venosa e pé diabético. MÉTODOS: Foram incluídos no estudo pacientes portadores de lesões de membros inferiores, sendo diabéticos, e pacientes com úlcera de estase venosa, atendidos em um serviço de urgência de um hospital universitário de Goiânia (GO), no período de fevereiro de 2005 a agosto de 2006. A coleta de material foi realizada com swab de algodão para realização de cultura e teste de sensibilidade antimicrobiana, empregando-se técnicas preconizadas. RESULTADOS: Das amostras analisadas, foi detectada a presença de bactérias em 88,46%. Os cocos gram-positivos foram caracterizados como Staphylococcus aureus e Staphylococcus epidermidis. Dentre os bastonetes gram-negativos, detectou-se Pseudomonas aeruginosa,Escherichia coli,Proteus mirabilis e Enterobacter sp. CONCLUSÕES: Os microrganismos isolados das lesões de membros inferiores (pé diabético e úlcera de estase venosa) incluíram bactérias gram-positivas e negativas, sendo Staphylococcus aureus,Pseudomonas aeruginosa e Escherichia coli as mais freqüentes, com elevada resistência a diversos antimicrobianos.

Treating diabetic foot infections with sequential intravenous to oral moxifloxacin compared with piperacillin–tazobactam/amoxicillin–clavulanate

OBJECTIVES

Complicated skin and skin structure infections (cSSSIs), including diabetic foot infections (DFIs), are often polymicrobial, requiring combination or broad-spectrum therapy. Moxifloxacin, a broad-spectrum fluoroquinolone, is approved for cSSSI and can be administered by either intravenous (iv) or oral routes. To assess the efficacy of moxifloxacin for treating DFIs, we analysed a subset of patients with these infections who were enrolled in a prospective, double-blind study that compared the efficacy of moxifloxacin with piperacillin-tazobactam and amoxicillin-clavulanate.

METHODS

Patients>or=18 years of age with a DFI requiring initial iv therapy were randomized to either moxifloxacin (400 mg/day) or piperacillin-tazobactam (3.0/0.375 g every 6 h) for at least 3 days followed by moxifloxacin (400 mg/day orally) or amoxicillin-clavulanate (800 mg every 12 h orally), if appropriate, for 7-14 days. DFI was usually defined as any foot infection plus a history of diabetes. Our primary efficacy outcome was the clinical response of the infection at test-of-cure (TOC), 10-42 days post-therapy.

RESULTS

Among 617 patients enrolled in the original study, 78 with DFIs were evaluable for treatment efficacy. Clinical cure rates at TOC were similar for moxifloxacin and piperacillin-tazobactam/amoxicillin-clavulanate (68% versus 61%) for patients with investigator-defined infection (P=0.54). Overall pathogen eradication rates in the microbiologically-valid population were 69% versus 66% for moxifloxacin and comparator, respectively (P=1.00).

CONCLUSIONS

Intravenous+/-oral moxifloxacin was as effective as iv piperacillin-tazobactam+/-amoxicillin-clavulanate in treating moderate-to-severe DFIs. Moxifloxacin may have potential as a monotherapy regimen for DFIs.

Empirical therapy for diabetic foot infections: are there clinical clues to guide antibiotic selection?

Initial antibiotic therapy for diabetic foot infections is usually empirical. Several principles may help to avoid selecting either an unnecessarily broad or inappropriately narrow regimen. First, clinically severe infections require broad-spectrum therapy, while less severe infections may not. Second, aerobic Gram-positive cocci, particularly Staphylococcus aureus (including methicillin-resistant S. aureus (MRSA) for patients at high-risk) should always be covered. Third, therapy should also be targeted at aerobic Gram-negative pathogens if the infection is chronic or has failed to respond to previous antibiotic therapy. Fourth, anti-anaerobe agents should be considered for necrotic or gangrenous infections on an ischaemic limb. Parenteral therapy is needed for severe infections, but oral therapy is adequate for most mild or moderate infections.

Optimising Antimicrobial Therapy in Diabetic Foot Infections

Foot infections are common and the most serious lower extremity complication contributing to amputations, particularly in patients with diabetes mellitus. Infection is most often a consequence of foot ulcerations, which typically follows trauma to a neuropathic foot. Foot infections may be classified as mild, moderate and severe; this largely determines the approach to therapy. Gram-positive bacteria are the sole causative pathogens for most mild and moderate infections. These infections can usually be treated with culture-based narrow-spectrum antibacterials along with appropriate surgical debridement in an outpatient setting. In contrast, severe infections are often polymicrobial, requiring hospitalisation and treatment with broad-spectrum antibacterials along with appropriate medical and surgical interventions. The initial empirical antibacterial regimen may be tailored based on the results of culture and sensitivity tests from properly obtained specimens. Several antibacterial regimens have demonstrated effectiveness in randomised controlled trials, but no single regimen has shown superiority. Managing diabetic foot osteomyelitis is particularly controversial and requires reliable cultures to select an appropriate antibacterial regimen. Surgical resection of the infected and necrotic bone favours a good outcome in chronic osteomyelitis. The recommended duration of antibacterial therapy ranges from 1 to 4 weeks for soft tissue infection, to >6 weeks for unresected osteomyelitis. The incidence of meticillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus infection is increasing in both the healthcare setting and the community. This should be considered when selecting an antibacterial, especially if the patient does not improve with initial antibacterial therapy. Certain other organisms, such as Pseudomonas aeruginosa and Enterococcus spp., while potentially pathogenic, are often colonisers that do not require targeted therapy.

In vitro activities of dalbavancin and 12 other agents against 329 aerobic and anaerobic gram-positive isolates recovered from diabetic foot infections

Tests of dalbavancin's in vitro activity against 209 aerobic and 120 anaerobic isolates from pretreatment diabetic foot infections showed an MIC(90) of < or =0.125 microg/ml against methicillin-susceptible Staphylococcus aureus (MSSA), methicillin-resistant S. aureus (MRSA), and 120 anaerobes (Clostridium perfringens, other clostridia, Peptoniphilus asaccharolyticus, Finegoldia magna, and Anaerococcus prevotii), compared to respective MIC(90)s for MSSA and MRSA of 0.5 and 1 microg/ml for vancomycin, 4 and 4 microg/ml for linezolid, 0.5 and 0.5 microg/ml for daptomycin, and 0.25 and >8 microg/ml for clindamycin.

In vitro activity of ceftobiprole against aerobic and anaerobic strains isolated from diabetic foot infections

Against 443 aerobic and anaerobic bacteria isolated from diabetic foot infections, ceftobiprole MICs (microg/ml) at which 90% of the isolates tested were inhibited were as follows: methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus, 1; methicillin-susceptible S. aureus and Staphylococcus lugdunensis, 0.5; Anaerococcus prevotii, 0.125; Finegoldia magna, 0.5; Peptoniphilus asaccharolyticus, 1; Peptostreptococcus anaerobius, 4; Escherichia coli and Enterobacter species, 0.125; Klebsiella species, 2; and Pseudomonas aeruginosa, 8.

Diabetic foot disorders. A clinical practice guideline (2006 revision)

The prevalence of diabetes mellitus is growing at epidemic proportions in the United States and worldwide. Most alarming is the steady increase in type 2 diabetes, especially among young and obese people. An estimated 7% of the US population has diabetes, and because of the increased longevity of this population, diabetes-associated complications are expected to rise in prevalence. Foot ulcerations, infections, Charcot neuroarthropathy, and peripheral arterial disease frequently result in gangrene and lower limb amputation. Consequently, foot disorders are leading causes of hospitalization for persons with diabetes and account for billion-dollar expenditures annually in the US. Although not all foot complications can be prevented, dramatic reductions in frequency have been achieved by taking a multidisciplinary approach to patient management. Using this concept, the authors present a clinical practice guideline for diabetic foot disorders based on currently available evidence, committee consensus, and current clinical practice. The pathophysiology and treatment of diabetic foot ulcers, infections, and the diabetic Charcot foot are reviewed. While these guidelines cannot and should not dictate the care of all affected patients, they provide evidence-based guidance for general patterns of practice. If these concepts are embraced and incorporated into patient management protocols, a major reduction in diabetic limb amputations is certainly an attainable goal.

Optimal management of uncomplicated skin and skin structure infections of the lower extremity

Uncomplicated skin and skin structure infections of the lower extremity are almost always curable when properly diagnosed and promptly treated with antibiotics, but they can cause serious complications if not treated appropriately. These infections are caused often by Staphylococcus aureus and less commonly by Streptococcus pyogenes. Initial treatment is usually empiric. Although the most suitable oral treatment is likely cephalosporin, other options include beta-lactamase inhibitor-penicillin combinations and penicillinase-resistant penicillins. In some cases, incision and drainage or debridement may be required.

A clinico-microbiological study of diabetic foot ulcers in an Indian tertiary care hospital

OBJECTIVE

To determine the microbiological profile and antibiotic susceptibility patterns of organisms isolated from diabetic foot ulcers. Also, to assess potential risk factors for infection of ulcers with multidrug-resistant organisms (MDROs) and the outcome of these infections.

RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS

Pus samples for bacterial culture were collected from 80 patients admitted with diabetic foot infections. All patients had ulcers with Wagner's grade 3-5. Fifty patients (62.5%) had coexisting osteomyelitis. Gram-negative bacilli were tested for extended spectrum beta-lactamase (ESBL) production by double disc diffusion method. Staphylococcal isolates were tested for susceptibility to oxacillin by screen agar method, disc diffusion, and mec A-based PCR. Potential risk factors for MDRO-positive samples were explored.

RESULTS

Gram-negative aerobes were most frequently isolated (51.4%), followed by gram-positive aerobes and anaerobes (33.3 and 15.3%, respectively). Seventy-two percent of patients were positive for MDROs. ESBL production and methicillin resistance was noted in 44.7 and 56.0% of bacterial isolates, respectively. MDRO-positive status was associated with presence of neuropathy (P = 0.03), osteomyelitis (P = 0.01), and ulcer size >4 cm(2) (P < 0.001) but not with patient characteristics, ulcer type and duration, or duration of hospital stay. MDRO-infected patients had poor glycemic control (P = 0.01) and had to be surgically treated more often (P < 0.01).

CONCLUSIONS

Infection with MDROs is common in diabetic foot ulcers and is associated with inadequate glycemic control and increased requirement for surgical treatment. There is a need for continuous surveillance of resistant bacteria to provide the basis for empirical therapy and reduce the risk of complications.

Diagnosis and treatment of diabetic foot infections

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: 1. Foot infections in patients with diabetes cause substantial morbidity and frequent visits to health care professionals and may lead to amputation of a lower extremity. 2. Diabetic foot infections require attention to local (foot) and systemic (metabolic) issues and coordinated management, preferably by a multidisciplinary foot-care team (A-II). The team managing these infections should include, or have ready access to, an infectious diseases specialist or a medical microbiologist (B-II). 3. The major predisposing factor to these infections is foot ulceration, which is usually related to peripheral neuropathy. Peripheral vascular disease and various immunological disturbances play a secondary role. 4. Aerobic Gram-positive cocci (especially Staphylococcus aureus) are the predominant pathogens in diabetic foot infections. Patients who have chronic wounds or who have recently received antibiotic therapy may also be infected with Gram-negative rods, and those with foot ischemia or gangrene may have obligate anaerobic pathogens. 5. Wound infections must be diagnosed clinically on the basis of local (and occasionally systemic) signs and symptoms of inflammation. Laboratory (including microbiological) investigations are of limited use for diagnosing infection, except in cases of osteomyelitis (B-II). 6. Send appropriately obtained specimens for culture before starting empirical antibiotic therapy in all cases of infection, except perhaps those that are mild and previously untreated (B-III). Tissue specimens obtained by biopsy, ulcer curettage, or aspiration are preferable to wound swab specimens (A-I). 7. Imaging studies may help diagnose or better define deep, soft-tissue purulent collections and are usually needed to detect pathological findings in bone. Plain radiography may be adequate in many cases, but MRI (in preference to isotope scanning) is more sensitive and specific, especially for detection of soft-tissue lesions (A-I). 8. Infections should be categorized by their severity on the basis of readily assessable clinical and laboratory features (B-II). Most important among these are the specific tissues involved, the adequacy of arterial perfusion, and the presence of systemic toxicity or metabolic instability. Categorization helps determine the degree of risk to the patient and the limb and, thus, the urgency and venue of management. 9. Available evidence does not support treating clinically uninfected ulcers with antibiotic therapy (D-III). Antibiotic therapy is necessary for virtually all infected wounds, but it is often insufficient without appropriate wound care. 10. Select an empirical antibiotic regimen on the basis of the severity of the infection and the likely etiologic agent(s) (B-II). Therapy aimed solely at aerobic Gram-positive cocci may be sufficient for mild-to-moderate infections in patients who have not recently received antibiotic therapy (A-II). Broad-spectrum empirical therapy is not routinely required but is indicated for severe infections, pending culture results and antibiotic susceptibility data (B-III). Take into consideration any recent antibiotic therapy and local antibiotic susceptibility data, especially the prevalence of methicillin-resistant S. aureus (MRSA) or other resistant organisms. Definitive therapy should be based on both the culture results and susceptibility data and the clinical response to the empirical regimen (C-III). 11. There is only limited evidence with which to make informed choices among the various topical, oral, and parenteral antibiotic agents. Virtually all severe and some moderate infections require parenteral therapy, at least initially (C-III). Highly bioavailable oral antibiotics can be used in most mild and in many moderate infections, including some cases of osteomyelitis (A-II). Topical therapy may be used for some mild superficial infections (B-I). 12. Continue antibiotic therapy until there is evidence that the infection has resolved but not necessarily until a wound has healed. Suggestions for the duration of antibiotic therapy are as follows: for mild infections, 12 weeks usually suffices, but some require an additional 12 weeks; for moderate and severe infections, usually 24 weeks is sufficient, depending on the structures involved, the adequacy of debridement, the type of soft-tissue wound cover, and wound vascularity (A-II); and for osteomyelitis, generally at least 46 weeks is required, but a shorter duration is sufficient if the entire infected bone is removed, and probably a longer duration is needed if infected bone remains (B-II). 13. If an infection in a clinically stable patient fails to respond to 1 antibiotic courses, consider discontinuing all antimicrobials and, after a few days, obtaining optimal culture specimens (C-III). 14. Seek surgical consultation and, when needed, intervention for infections accompanied by a deep abscess, extensive bone or joint involvement, crepitus, substantial necrosis or gangrene, or necrotizing fasciitis (A-II). Evaluating the limb's arterial supply and revascularizing when indicated are particularly important. Surgeons with experience and interest in the field should be recruited by the foot-care team, if possible. 15. Providing optimal wound care, in addition to appropriate antibiotic treatment of the infection, is crucial for healing (A-I). This includes proper wound cleansing, debridement of any callus and necrotic tissue, and, especially, off-loading of pressure. There is insufficient evidence to recommend use of a specific wound dressing or any type of wound healing agents or products for infected foot wounds. 16. Patients with infected wounds require early and careful follow-up observation to ensure that the selected medical and surgical treatment regimens have been appropriate and effective (B-III). 17. Studies have not adequately defined the role of most adjunctive therapies for diabetic foot infections, but systematic reviews suggest that granulocyte colony-stimulating factors and systemic hyperbaric oxygen therapy may help prevent amputations (B-I). These treatments may be useful for severe infections or for those that have not adequately responded to therapy, despite correcting for all amenable local and systemic adverse factors. 18. Spread of infection to bone (osteitis or osteomyelitis) may be difficult to distinguish from noninfectious osteoarthropathy. Clinical examination and imaging tests may suffice, but bone biopsy is valuable for establishing the diagnosis of osteomyelitis, for defining the pathogenic organism(s), and for determining the antibiotic susceptibilities of such organisms (B-II). 19. Although this field has matured, further research is much needed. The committee especially recommends that adequately powered prospective studies be undertaken to elucidate and validate systems for classifying infection, diagnosing osteomyelitis, defining optimal antibiotic regimens in various situations, and clarifying the role of surgery in treating osteomyelitis (A-III).

Fluoroquinolones and Anaerobes

The usefulness of fluoroquinolones for the treatment of mixed aerobic and anaerobic infections has been investigated since these agents started being used in clinical practice. Newer compounds have increased in vitro activity against anaerobes, but clinically relevant susceptibility breakpoints for these bacteria have not been established. Pharmacodynamic analyses and corroboration by new data from clinical trials have enhanced our knowledge concerning the use of fluoroquinolones to treat selective anaerobic pathogens. These studies suggest that newer agents could be useful in the treatment of several types of mixed aerobic and anaerobic infections, including skin and soft-tissue, intra-abdominal, and respiratory infections. The major concerns with expanding the use of fluoroquinolones to treat anaerobic infections have been reports of increasing resistance in Bacteroides group isolates and the impact of these antibiotics on the incidence of Clostridium difficile-associated disease.

Risk factors for primary major amputation in diabetic patients

CONTEXT AND OBJECTIVE

Diabetic patients present high risk of having to undergo minor or major amputation during their lifetimes, because of ischemia or infection. The aim of this study was to identify and quantify risk factors for major amputation in diabetic patients with foot infections.

DESIGN AND SETTING

Retrospective clinical-surgical trial at the Vascular Surgery Service of Santa Casa de São Paulo.

METHODS

Ninety-nine patients with diabetic foot infections who underwent 129 hospitalizations in the Vascular Surgery Unit were analyzed in accordance with a pre-established protocol to compare two groups of diabetic patients: one that underwent major amputations and the other that underwent minor amputations or debridements. The patients were predominantly male, in their sixth decade of life, and had type 2 diabetes mellitus. Chronic arterial insufficiency, age, diabetes mellitus duration, ascending lymphangitis, calcaneal lesions, Wagner's classification, laboratory tests and different microorganisms in deep tissue cultures were the risk factors evaluated in all patients.

RESULTS

The statistically significant risk factors for major amputation included age, ascending lymphangitis (odds ratio, OR: 2.5), calcaneal lesions (OR: 10.5), Wagner grade 5 lesions (OR: 3.4), chronic arterial insufficiency without possibility of revascularization (OR: 5.4) and diabetes duration. Presence of Gram-positive microorganisms was associated with the need of major amputation. The serum urea, creatinine, glucose and white blood cell levels were not significant risk factors for major amputation.

CONCLUSIONS

The risk factors for major amputation were: age, ascending lymphangitis, calcaneal lesions, Wagner grade 5 lesions, arterial insufficiency, diabetes duration and Gram-positive microorganisms in cultures.

Treatment for diabetic foot ulcers

People with diabetes develop foot ulcers because of neuropathy (sensory, motor, and autonomic deficits), ischaemia, or both. The initiating injury may be from acute mechanical or thermal trauma or from repetitively or continuously applied mechanical stress. Patients with clinically significant limb ischaemia should be assessed by a vascular surgeon to determine the need for angioplasty, stenting, or femorodistal bypass. When infection complicates a foot ulcer, the combination can be limb or life-threatening. Infection is defined clinically, but wound cultures reveal the causative pathogens. Tissue specimens are strongly preferred to wound swabs for wound cultures. Antimicrobial therapy should be guided by culture results, and should aim to cure the infection, not to heal the wound. Alleviation of the mechanical load on ulcers (off-loading) should always be a part of treatment. Neuropathic ulcers typically heal in 6 weeks with total contact casting, because it effectively relieves pressure at the ulcer site and enforces patient compliance. The success of other approaches to off-loading similarly depends on the patients' adherence to the effectiveness of pressure relief. Surgery to heal ulcers and prevent recurrence can include tenotomy, tendon lengthening, reconstruction, or removal of bony prominences. However, these procedures may result in secondary ulceration and other complications. Ulcer recurrence rates are high, but appropriate education for patients, the provision of posthealing footwear, and regular foot care can reduce rates of re-ulceration.

Ertapenem versus piperacillin/tazobactam for diabetic foot infections (SIDESTEP): prospective, randomised, controlled, double-blinded, multicentre trial

BACKGROUND

Diabetic foot infections are a common and serious problem, yet few randomised trials of adequate quality have compared the efficacy of the various antibiotic regimens available for their treatment. Our aim was to assess the efficacy and safety of ertapenem versus piperacillin/tazobactam for foot infections.

METHODS

We did a randomised, double-blinded, multicentre trial in adults (n=586) with diabetes and a foot infection classified as moderate-to-severe and requiring intravenous antibiotics. We assigned patients intravenous ertapenem (1 g daily; n=295) or piperacillin/tazobactam (3.375 g every 6 h; n=291) given for a minimum of 5 days, after which oral amoxicillin/clavulanic acid (875/125 mg every 12 h) could be given for up to 23 days. Investigators retained the option to administer vancomycin to patients in either group to ensure adequate coverage for potentially antibiotic resistant Enterococcus spp and meticillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA). Our primary outcome was the proportion of patients with a favourable clinical response (cure or improvement) on the day that intravenous antibiotic was discontinued. Analyses were by an evaluable-patient only approach. This study is registered with , number NCT00229112.

FINDINGS

Of the 576 patients treated, 445 were available for assessment at the end of intravenous therapy. Both baseline characteristics and favourable clinical response rates were similar for the 226 who received ertapenem and the 219 who received piperacillin/tazobactam (94%vs 92%, respectively; between treatment difference 1.9%, 95% CI -2.9 to 6.9). Rates of favourable microbiological responses (eradication rates and clinical outcomes, by pathogen) and adverse events did not differ between groups.

INTERPRETATION

Clinical and microbiological outcomes for patients treated with ertapenem were equivalent to those for patients treated with piperacillin/tazobactam, suggesting that this once-daily antibiotic should be considered for parenteral therapy of diabetic foot infections, when deemed appropriate.

An open-label, randomized study comparing efficacy and safety of intravenous piperacillin/tazobactam and ampicillin/sulbactam for infected diabetic foot ulcers

BACKGROUND

Soft tissue and bone infections of the lower limb continue to be a frequent and serious complication in patients with diabetes mellitus. The best choice of antimicrobial for the empiric treatment of moderate to severe diabetic foot infections has not been established clearly.

METHODS

We conducted a prospective, randomized, open-label, multicenter trial comparing piperacillin/tazobactam (P/T) (4 g/0.5 g q8h) and ampicillin/sulbactam (A/S) (2 g/1 g q6h) as a parenteral treatment for 314 adult patients with moderate-to-severe infected diabetic foot ulcers. Patients with polymicrobial infections involving methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus also received vancomycin 1 g q12h.

RESULTS

Clinical efficacy rates (cure or improvement) were statistically equivalent overall (81% for P/T vs. 83.1% for A/S), and median duration of treatment was similar in the clinically evaluable populations (nine days for P/T, 10 days for A/S). Drug-related adverse events for both study drugs were comparable in frequency and type.

CONCLUSIONS

Although both study drugs provide safe and effective empiric treatment for moderate-to-severe infected diabetic foot ulcers, piperacillin/tazobactam has the advantage of covering Pseudomonas aeruginosa (bacteriologic success rate of 85.7%), the most commonly isolated gram-negative pathogen in this study.

Antibiotic treatment of infected diabetic foot ulcers

Antimicrobial treatment can be effective in diabetic foot ulcers. However, choosing the appropriate regimen depends on the clinical and microbial presentation. This review describes the factors practitioners need to consider.

Bacteriological study of diabetic foot infections

AIMS

The polymicrobial nature of diabetic foot infection has been well documented in the literature. Patients with diabetic foot infection not exposed to antibiotics are not well studied before. The relative frequency of bacterial isolates cultured from community-acquired foot infections that are not exposed to antimicrobial agents for 30 days is studied. In addition, the bacterial comparative in vitro susceptibility to the commonly used antibacterial agents is assessed.

METHODS

This is a prospective study in which the infected wounds of 86 consecutive diabetic patients seen in the diabetic foot clinic in Adan Teaching Hospital were cultured when visiting the clinic. The patients did not receive antimicrobial therapy 30 days prior to taking the cultures. The specimen was cultured using aerobic and anaerobic microbiological techniques. Isolates were tested for susceptibility to commonly used antimicrobial therapy.

RESULT

Staphylococcus aureus was the most common isolate, being recovered from 38.4% of cases. Other organisms were Pseudomonas aeruginosa (17.5%) and Proteus mirabilis (18%), anaerobic gram-negative organisms (10.5%), mainly Bacteroides fragilis. Imipenem, meropenem, and cefepime were the most effective agents against gram-negative organisms. Vancomycin was the most effective against gram-positive organisms.

CONCLUSION

S. aureus and P. aeruginosa were the most common causes of diabetic foot infections. Anaerobic organisms are still a common cause for infection, although the prevalence is less. These wounds may require use of combined antimicrobial therapy for initial management.

Controversies in diagnosing and managing osteomyelitis of the foot in diabetes

The optimal approach to diagnosing and managing osteomyelitis of the foot in diabetes is unclear. Diagnosis is based on clinical signs, supplemented by a variety of imaging tests. Bone biopsy is the accepted criterion standard for diagnosis but is not used by many. Management traditionally involves surgical removal of infected bone, combined with antibiotic therapy. However, recent studies have shown that antibiotics alone may apparently eliminate bone infection in many cases. There is also evidence that early amputation of infected digits is frequently noncurative. Agreement on criteria for diagnosing osteomyelitis is required, and randomized trials are urgently needed, to determine the relative benefits of various surgical interventions and the optimal deployment of antibiotics. We review the microbiology of osteomyelitis of the foot in diabetes, the benefits and limitations of various diagnostic procedures, and the evidence for the effectiveness of both surgical and nonsurgical approaches to management.

Diabetic foot ulcer and multidrug-resistant organisms: risk factors and impact

AIMS

The primary objective was to characterize factors allowing the colonization of diabetic foot wounds by multidrug-resistant organisms (MDRO), and the secondary objective was to evaluate the influence of MDRO colonization/infection on wound healing.

METHODS

In 180 patients admitted to a specialized diabetic foot unit, microbiological specimens were taken on admission. Potential risk factors for MDRO-positive specimens were examined using univariate and multivariate analyses. Prospective follow-up data from 75 patients were used to evaluate the influence of MDRO colonization/infection on time to healing.

RESULTS

Eighteen per cent of admission specimens were positive for MDRO. MDRO-positive status was not associated with patient characteristics (age, sex, type of diabetes, complications of diabetes), wound duration, or wound type (neuropathic or ischaemic). In the multivariate analysis, the only factors significantly associated with positive MDRO status on admission were a history of previous hospitalization for the same wound (21/32 compared with 48/148; P = 0.0008) or the presence of osteomyelitis (22/32 compared with 71/148; P = 0.025). In the longitudinal study of 75 wounds, MDRO-positive status on admission or during follow-up (6 months at least or until healing, mean 9 +/- 7 months) was not associated with time to healing (P = 0.71).

CONCLUSION

MDROs are often present in severe diabetic foot wounds. About one-third of patients with a history of previous hospitalization for the same wound, and 25% of patients with osteomyelitis, had MDRO-positive specimens. This suggests that hygiene measures, or isolation precautions in the case of admission of patients presenting with these characteristics, should be aggressively implemented to prevent cross-transmission. Positive MDRO status is not associated with a longer time to healing.

Pé diabético: análise bacteriológica de 141 casos

Diabetes mellitus (DM) é uma doença progressiva que apresenta complicações freqüentes, em especial a infecção nos pés. Realizamos um estudo prospectivo com 141 pacientes com DM e úlceras infectadas nos pés, conduzido no Centro Integrado de Diabetes e Hipertensão da UFC no período de março/2000 a novembro/2001. A maioria apresentava infecção avaliada como graus I e II da classificação de Wagner. As amostras foram cultivadas utilizando-se meios seletivos, e a identificação bacteriana e os antibiogramas foram realizados através de metodologia convencional e automatizados. Os patógenos mais freqüentemente isolados foram as enterobactérias (83,7%), Staphylococcus aureus (43,3%) e bactérias anaeróbias (17%). Cepas de Streptococcus pyogenes foram isoladas de 7,8% dos pacientes. Cepas produtoras de beta-lactamase de espectro ampliado e cepas de Staphylococcus aureus resistentes à oxacilina foram isoladas de 6% e 11,6% dos pacientes, respectivamente. A resistência aos antimicrobianos vem se tornando cada vez mais comum, mesmo em pacientes com infecção adquirida na comunidade. Investimentos em diagnóstico etiológico das infecções e estratégias racionais no uso de antimicrobianos fazem-se necessários na tentativa de evitar tratamentos inadequados e suas já conhecidas conseqüências.

An evidence-based approach to diabetic foot infections

Foot infections are a major complication of diabetes mellitus and contribute to the development of gangrene and lower extremity amputation. Recent evidence indicates that persons with diabetes are at greater risk for infection because of underlying neuropathy, peripheral vascular disease, and impaired responses to infecting organisms. This article reviews the underlying pathophysiology, causes, microbiology, and current management concepts for this potentially limb-threatening complication. Multidisciplinary management consisting of teams of specialists with a focus on limb preservation can make significant improvements in outcomes, including a reduction in rates of lower extremity amputation.

Diabetic foot infections and antibiotic therapy

Diabetic foot infections are associated with high morbidity and mortality rates as well as significant financial impact on the health care system. Improved patient outcomes and intelligent use of resources should determine the selection of diagnostic procedures and the therapeutic modalities used. Diabetic patients who develop lower extremity infections require a multidisciplinary approach in the management of their infections and other disorders. Aggressive surgical debridement and appropriate and adequate antibiotic therapy are necessary to successfully treat severe foot infections and permit faster recovery.

Review of the in vitro activity and potential clinical efficacy of levofloxacin in the treatment of anaerobic infections

The activity of levofloxacin against aerobic bacteria has been well documented both in vitro and clinically, but its anaerobic activity has been infrequently studied. This new fluoroquinolone exhibits good in vitro activity (MIC(S) < or =2.0 microg/mL) against many anaerobic pathogens associated with acute sinusitis, bite wounds, and other soft-tissue infections. It is less active against Bacteroides fragilis (MIC (90)=2-4 microg/mL ) and has poor inhibitory activity against non-fragilis B. fragilis group species that are associated with gastrointestinal and genitourinary tract infections. Levofloxacin does not antagonize the in vitro activity of clindamycin and metronidazole and often provides additive or synergistic activity against anaerobic bacteria with these agents. In pharmacodynamic models, levofloxacin exhibits rapid bactericidal activity at 2-4 times the MIC of anaerobic bacteria. Prolonged killing is observed when the area-under-the concentration-time-curve to MIC ratio is greater than 40. In clinical efficacy trials, levofloxacin has been effective in the treatment of patients with gynecologic, skin and skin-structure, and bone infections involving anaerobic pathogens. Both micro-biologic and pharmacodynamic studies support further evaluations of levofloxacin in the treatment of selective mixed aerobic/anaerobic infections.

Methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus in the diabetic foot clinic: a worsening problem

AIMS

To determine if there has been a change in the prevalence of pathogenic organisms in foot ulcers in diabetic patients in 2001 compared with our previous study in 1998.

METHODS

A retrospective analysis of wound swabs taken from infected foot ulcers in diabetic patients attending the outpatient clinic in the Manchester Foot Hospital over a twelve-month period. A total of 63 patients with positive wound swabs were identified.

RESULTS

Gram-positive aerobic bacteria still predominate (84.2%) and the commonest single isolate remains Staphylococcus aureus (79.0%) which is higher than we previously reported. MRSA was isolated in 30.2% of the patients which is almost double the proportion of MRSA-affected patients three years ago. This did not appear to be related to prior antibiotic usage. There was no increase in hospitalisation because of MRSA infection.

CONCLUSIONS

The problem of MRSA continues to increase despite the precautions taken to prevent MRSA spread. There is a need for a multi-centre study looking into the prevalence of MRSA in diabetic foot ulcer and how this can be reduced in the diabetic foot clinic.

Penetration of levofloxacin into skin tissue after oral administration of multiple 750 mg once-daily doses

OBJECTIVE

To probe the pharmacokinetic basis for the use of levofloxacin for complicated skin and skin-structure infections (SSSIs) at a once-daily dosage of 750 mg by investigating its penetration into skin tissue.

METHOD

Ten healthy volunteers were administered three oral, once-daily 750 mg doses of levofloxacin, and levofloxacin concentrations were subsequently measured over time (0.5-24 h) in skin-punch biopsy tissue and plasma.

RESULTS

Skin tissue concentrations consistently exceeded those in plasma at every time point, with tissue/plasma ratios of 1.37 +/- 0.81 for peak concentration and 1.97 +/- 0.35 for area under the concentration versus time curve. Three of the ten subjects reported treatment-emergent adverse events (AEs) that were considered unrelated to treatment. An 11th subject who had enrolled in the study withdrew after AEs of mild severity that were possibly related to the study drug.

CONCLUSION

The results support the clinical usage of levofloxacin 750 mg once-daily for complicated SSSIs.

Deep tissue biopsy vs. superficial swab culture monitoring in the microbiological assessment of limb-threatening diabetic foot infection

AIMS

The results of ulcer swabbing vs. deep tissue biopsy have been compared prospectively in 29 diabetic patients with limb-threatening foot infection, to investigate the effectiveness and reliability of each method, and to evaluate whether any of the two could be more suitable for the microbiological follow-up of severe lesions.

METHODS

Microbiological samples were collected by using both methods at fixed intervals after therapy commencement (i.e. at day 0, 7, 14, and 30). Statistical comparison was performed between the results of each sampling procedure after the end of follow-up.

RESULTS

At enrolment, the mean number of isolates per patient was 2.34 by swabbing and 2.07 by tissue biopsy sampling; the rate of isolation for anaerobes with the two methods was 35% and 25%, respectively; no statistical differences could be observed between the two procedures in terms of either species or frequency of isolation. Anaerobic species were never detected after the first 2 weeks of appropriate treatment, and those ulcers which were still active at day 30 yielded almost exclusively Gram-positive bacteria. At the end of follow-up, deep tissue cultures appeared to exhibit a higher diagnostic sensitivity with respect to swabs.

CONCLUSIONS

Swabbing and deep tissue cultures appear to be equally reliable for the initial monitoring of antimicrobial treatment in severe diabetic foot infection. However, our experience seems to suggest that deep tissue might be more sensitive than swabbing for monitoring those isolates that have been selected for antibiotic resistance, i.e. those from ulcers that are still active after 30 days of treatment.

Use of molecular techniques to study microbial diversity in the skin: chronic wounds reevaluated

The skin is colonized by an array of microorganisms which form its natural microflora. Disruption to the normal barrier function of the skin (due to trauma or disease) may result in invasion of the dermis by opportunistic bacteria. To date, these organisms, which may contribute to the chronicity of skin wounds, have been analyzed solely by culture methods. It is increasingly realized that standard culture methods of analysis do not accurately reflect the full diversity of complex microflora. This review discusses the limitations of traditional culture approaches and reviews recent advances in molecular microbiological techniques which facilitate a more comprehensive characterization of the microflora within clinical samples. The currently available technologies and techniques are described, as is their use in clinical practice and their potential for diagnostic screening. Chronic venous ulceration of the lower limbs is an important skin disorder in which the microflora invading the dermal tissues contribute to the observed delayed healing. Using chronic leg ulcers as a working example, we show how strict culture and molecular microbiological techniques may be employed, for the first time in combination, to definitively characterize the invading microbial community of the dermis.

Saving the diabetic foot with special reference to the patient with chronic renal failure

The chronic renal failure patient with diabetes has a lower limb amputation rate 10 times greater than the diabetic population at large. In studies of causal pathways leading to non-traumatic related lower extremity amputation, foot ulcers preceded approximately 84% of the amputations. Even though foot ulcers are more likely to develop in patients with diabetic nephropathy, they are no less likely to heal than are those in diabetic patients with normal renal function. Consequently, attempts to save the diabetic foot even in this high-risk population are justified. The pathogenesis of foot ulceration in the chronic renal failure patient with diabetes is primarily due to peripheral neuropathy. Loss of protective sensation due to sensory neuropathy combined with motor and autonomic neuropathy and macrovascular compromise result in increased risk for foot complications. Evaluation of the foot includes a selective history and a focused examination of skin integrity, presence of sensory neuropathy or vascular insufficiency, and biomechanical and footwear inspection. Effective treatment of diabetic foot complications include appropriate antibiotics (when indicated), meticulous wound care, off-loading, vascular surgery (when indicated), and selective/elective or prophylactic nonvascular surgery. Failure to heal an ulcer can often be traced to common pitfalls, which include: A "cavalier" attitude. W.N.L. exam (We Never Looked). Inadequate off-loading. Failure to establish depth of ulcer and miss "probe to bone." Non-healing means unrelieved pressure and/or no blood. Failure to correct edema. The multidisciplinary diabetic foot clinic model provides an ideal setting for early intervention, treatment, and assistance with preventive strategies.

Pharmacotherapy of lower limb diabetic ulcers

OBJECTIVE

To discuss the pathophysiology, microbiology, and pharmacotherapy of lower extremity (LE) diabetic ulcers.

DATA SOURCES

A MEDLINE search from 1966 to April 1999 was conducted. The search was limited to humans and English-language journals. Key search words included "diabetic ulcer," "fluoroquinolones," "beta-lactam," "hyperbaric oxygen," "diabetes mellitus," "diabetic foot," and "growth factor."

STUDY SELECTION

Randomized and nonrandomized studies were selected for review. Results of randomized, placebo-controlled studies were emphasized more than nonrandomized results.

DATA SYNTHESIS

LE ulcers are a common cause of hospitalization, and cause significant morbidity and mortality. Staphylococcus aureus is the most common pathogen in non-limb-threatening infections; Gram-negative bacteria and anaerobes are most prevalent in limb-threatening and life-threatening infections. Oral antibiotic therapy may be used in non-limb-threatening infections, if adequate response is achieved in 24-48 hours; otherwise, intravenous antibiotics should be started. Intravenous antibiotics should be the initial therapy for limb-threatening or life- threatening ulcers. Antimicrobial therapy of at least 10-14 days has been effective in treating LE ulcers in the absence of osteomyelitis. Growth factors offer another treatment alternative, although only becaplermin is currently approved for diabetic ulcers.

CONCLUSION

Antibiotic therapy has been effective for the treatment of LE diabetic ulcers. However, further studies are required to identify optimal antibiotics and dosage regimens. Growth factors may have a role but additional research is needed to determine when best to initiate this therapy.

Antibiotic selection for diabetic foot infections: a review

Foot infections account for about 20% of all hospitalizations in people with diabetes and at least 50% of all nontraumatic lower-limb amputations performed annually in the United States. As many as 25% of all diabetics are expected to develop severe foot problems at some point in their lifetimes. Diabetic foot infections are generally more severe and more difficult to treat than infections in nondiabetics. This is due to impaired microvascular circulation, neuropathy, anatomical alterations, and impaired immune capacity in diabetic patients. Most moderate-to-severe soft-tissue diabetic foot infections are polymicrobial (i.e., due to gram-positive, gram-negative, aerobic, and anaerobic pathogens). Empiric antibiotic therapy should include broad-spectrum antibiotics capable of covering the most common pathogens found in diabetic infections. Other factors to consider in antibiotic selection include the severity of the infection, the presence of peripheral vascular disease, and the possibility of drug-resistant organisms in the infection. This review summarizes the clinical presentation and antimicrobial therapy of diabetic foot infections.

Identification of bacteria from a non-healing diabetic foot wound by 16 S rDNA sequencing

Approximately 10-20% of diabetic foot wounds fail initial antibiotic treatment. It is generally believed that several bacterial species may be present in these types of wounds. Because some of these organisms cannot be easily cultured, proper identification is problematic and thus, appropriate treatment modalities cannot be applied. This report examined the bacterial flora present in a chronic diabetic foot wound that failed antibiotic treatment. A tissue sample was collected from the base of the wound and used for standard microbiological culturing. DNA from the sample was used to amplify bacterial 16 S rDNA gene sequences and a library of these sequences was made. The clones were placed into two major groups on the basis of their melting temperatures. Representatives of these groups were sequenced, and information was used to identify the bacteria present in the wound. The culture-based method identified a single anaerobic species, Bacteroides fragilis. The method employing rDNA sequencing identified B. fragilis as a dominant organism and Pseudomonas (Janthinobacterium) mephitica as a minor component. The results indicate that rDNA sequencing approach can be an important tool in the identification of bacteria from wounds.

Evidence-based antibiotic therapy of diabetic foot infections

In addition to proper cleansing, debridement and local wound care, foot infections in diabetic patients require carefully selected antibiotic therapy. Serious infections necessitate hospitalization for initial parenteral broad-spectrum antibiotic therapy. Appropriately selected patients with mild infections can be treated as outpatients with oral (or even topical) therapy. Initial antibiotic selection is usually empirical, but definitive therapy may be modified based on culture results and the clinical response. Therapy should nearly always be active against staphylococci and streptococci, with broader-spectrum agents indicated if Gram-negative or anaerobic organisms are likely. In infected foot tissues levels of most antibiotics, except fluoroquinolones, are often subtherapeutic. The duration of therapy ranges from a week (for mild soft tissue infections) to over 6 weeks (for osteomyelitis). Recent antibiotic trials have shown that several intravenously or orally administered agents are effective in treating these infections, with no one agent or combination emerging as optimal. Suggested regimens based on the severity of infection are provided.

Methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus: an increasing problem in a diabetic foot clinic

AIM

To study the prevalence of pathogenic organisms and the prevalence and outcome of methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) infection in foot ulcers in diabetic patients.

METHODS

A retrospective analysis of wound swabs taken from infected foot ulcers in diabetic patients, selected from an outpatient diabetic foot clinic. Seventy-five patients (79 ulcers) with positive wound swabs were included. Size of ulcer and time to healing, in particular for MRSA-infected ulcers, were measured in all patients.

RESULTS

Gram-positive aerobic bacteria were the commonest micro-organism isolated (56.7%) followed by gram-negative aerobic bacteria and anaerobes (29.8% and 13.5%, respectively). Of the gram-positive aerobes, S. aureus was found most frequently and 40% were MRSA. MRSA was isolated more commonly in patients treated with antibiotics prior to the swab compared to those who had not received antibiotics (P = 0.01). Patients whose foot ulcers were infected by MRSA had longer healing time than patients whose ulcers were infected by methicillin-sensitive S. aureus (mean (range) 35.4 (19-64) and 17.8 (8-24) weeks, respectively, P = 0.03).

CONCLUSION

MRSA infection is common in diabetic foot ulcers and is associated with previous antibiotic treatment and prolonged time to healing. Further studies are required to assess the need for antibiotics in treating foot ulcers in diabetes and to assess the optimum therapeutic approach to this problem.

Foot problems in diabetes

Prevention and care of diabetic foot complications continue to represent a major challenge to the treating clinician. Neuropathy, infection, deformity, and vascular insufficiency threaten the diabetic foot and the overall functional well being of the diabetic patient. Although foot problems in diabetes cannot be eradicated completely, the opportunity exists to diagnose and manage diabetic foot conditions effectively, to educate and motivate patients to care for their feet, to minimize complications, and to decrease health care costs.

Surgical management of diabetic foot complications: the Far North Queensland profile

BACKGROUND

Foot complications in diabetes incur huge human and medical costs. There is a high incidence of complicated diabetes mellitus in Far North Queensland, particularly in the indigenous communities.

METHODS

An audit of 51 patients admitted to Cairns Base Hospital from July 1992 to December 1994 with diabetic foot complications requiring surgical intervention was performed.

RESULTS

The majority of surgical procedures were for serious infections in neuropathic feet precipitated by minor trauma. Surgical procedures included debridement/drainage, minor amputation, major amputation and arterial bypass. Half of the patients required more than one procedure and/or multiple admissions. Average length of stay was 48 days. Indigenous patients were overrepresented in this audited group.

CONCLUSIONS

Prevention or minimization of diabetic foot complications can be achieved only through improvement in education and vigilance at all levels of the treatment process from community to hospital. Special attention to the needs of indigenous communities with a high incidence of diabetes must be a feature of any future initiatives.

Factors associated with methicillin resistance in diabetic foot infections

Methicillin-resistant staphylococcal infections often present a challenge to physicians treating patients with pedal wounds. Most methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus infections have been thought of as nosocomial in origin. Several studies have identified specific modes of transmission via hospital reservoirs such as the anterior nares of the patient, inanimate objects within close proximity of the patient, and direct contamination from health care providers. Exposure of patients to these reservoirs through hospitalization has been shown to increase the patient's risk of obtaining a methicillin-resistant S. aureus infection. Diabetic patients with a high risk for foot complications may be in greater danger of developing a methicillin-resistant S. aureus infection in that repeated hospitalizations, lengthier hospital stays, and the presence of open wounds facilitate exposure to these reservoirs.