Prevention of late PJI

Long-term antibacterial activity of silver-containing hydroxyapatite coatings against Staphylococcus aureus in vitro and invivo

BACKGROUND

The potential of silver-containing hydroxyapatite (Ag-HA) coatings to prevent orthopaedic implant-associated infection was explored previously; however, the resistance of Ag-HA coatings to late-onset orthopaedic infections is unknown. This study aimed to evaluate the long-term Ag+ elution and antibacterial properties of the Ag-HA coatings through in vitro and in vivo experiments.

METHODS

Ag-HA-coated disc specimens were immersed in fetal bovine serum (FBS) for six months. Ag concentration was measured over time using inductively coupled plasma-mass spectrometry to evaluate Ag release. The hydroxyapatite (HA)- or Ag-HA-coated disc specimens were immersed in FBS for 3 months to elute Ag+ for in vitro experiments. Methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) suspensions were inoculated onto each disc; after 48 h, the number of colonies and the biofilm volume were measured. HA- or Ag-HA-coated disc specimens were inserted under the skin of Sprague-Dawley rats for three months for in vivo experiments. In in vivo experiment 1, specimens were inoculated with MRSA and the number of colonies was counted after 48 h. In in vivo experiment 2, the specimens were inoculated with bioluminescent S. aureus Xen36 cells, and bioluminescence was measured using an in vivo imaging system.

RESULTS

The Ag-HA-coated disc specimens continued to elute Ag+ after six months. The biofilm volume in the Ag-HA group was lower than in the HA group. In in vitro and in vivo experiment 1, the bacterial counts in the Ag-HA group were lower than those in the HA group. In in vivo experiment 2, the bioluminescence in the Ag-HA group was lower than that in the HA group on days 1-7 after inoculation.

CONCLUSIONS

The Ag-HA-coated discs continued to elute Ag+ for a long period and exhibited antibacterial activity and inhibition of biofilm formation against S. aureus. The Ag-HA coatings have the potential to reduce late-onset orthopaedic implant-associated infections.

Dyslipidaemia is associated with Cutibacterium acnes hip and knee prosthetic joint infection

PURPOSE

Optimization of medical factors including diabetes and obesity is a cornerstone in the prevention of prosthetic joint infection (PJI). Dyslipidaemia is another component of metabolic syndrome which has not been thoroughly investigated as an individual, modifiable risk factor. This study examined the association of dyslipidaemia with PJI caused by the lipophilic microbe Cutibacterium acnes (C. acnes).

METHODS

A retrospective chart review examined patients with positive C. acnes culture at hip or knee arthroplasty explantation. A control group with methicillin-sensitive Staphylococcus aureus (MSSA) positive cultures at explantation was matched for age, sex, and surgical site, as well as a second control group with no infection. A total of 80 patients were included, 16 with C. acnes, 32 with MSSA, and 32 with no infection. All patients had a lipid panel performed within one year of surgery. Lipid values and categories were compared using multinomial logistic regressions.

RESULTS

High or borderline triglycerides (TG) (relative risk ratio (RRR) = 0.13; P = 0.013) and low high-density lipoprotein (HDL) (RRR = 0.13; P = 0.025) were significantly associated with C. acnes PJI compared to MSSA-PJI. High or borderline TG (RRR = 0.21; P = 0.041) and low HDL (RRR = 0.17; P = 0.043) were also associated with a greater probability of C. acnes infection compared to no infection.

CONCLUSIONS

The presence of elevated TG and low HDL were both associated at a statistically significant level with C. acnes hip or knee PJI compared to controls with either MSSA PJI or no infection. This may represent a specific risk factor for C. acnes PJI that is modifiable.

Indications for medical antibiotic prophylaxis and potential targets for antimicrobial stewardship intervention: a narrative review

BACKGROUND

Most of the antimicrobial stewardship (AMS) literature has focused on antimicrobial consumption for the treatment of infections, for the prophylaxis of surgical site infection and for the prevention of endocarditis. The role of AMS for medical antibiotic prophylaxis (AP) has not been adequately addressed.

AIMS

To identify targets for AMS interventions for medical AP in adult patients.

SOURCES

Targeted searches were conducted in PubMed.

CONTENT

The various indications for medical AP and relevant evidence from practice guidelines are outlined. The following were identified as potential targets for AMS interventions: (a) addressing under-utilization of antibiotic-sparing strategies (e.g. for recurrent urinary tract infections, recurrent soft-tissue infections, recurrent exacerbations associated with bronchiectasis or chronic obstructive pulmonary disease), (b) reducing unnecessary AP beyond recommended indications (e.g. for acute pancreatitis, bite wounds, or urinary catheter manipulations), (c) reducing the use of AP with a broader spectrum than necessary, (d) reducing the use of AP for longer than the recommended duration (e.g. AP for prevention of osteomyelitis in open fractures or AP in high-risk neutropenia), (e) evaluating the role of antibiotic cycling to prevent the emergence of resistance during prolonged AP (e.g. in recurrent urinary tract infections or prophylaxis for spontaneous bacterial peritonitis), and (f) addressing research gaps regarding appropriate indications or antibiotic regimens for medical prophylaxis.

IMPLICATIONS

This review summarizes current trends in AP and proposes targets for AMS interventions.

Review of Guidelines for Dental Antibiotic Prophylaxis for Prevention of Endocarditis and Prosthetic Joint Infections and Need for Dental Stewardship

Dentists prescribe 10% of all outpatient antibiotic prescriptions, writing more than 25.7 million prescriptions per year. Many are for prophylaxis in patients with prosthetic joint replacements; the American Dental Society states that "in general," prophylactic antibiotics are not recommended to prevent prosthetic joint infections. Orthopedic surgeons are concerned with the risk of implant infections following a dental procedure and, therefore, see high value and low risk in recommending prophylaxis. Patients are "stuck in the middle," with conflicting recommendations from orthopedic surgeons (OS) and dentists. Unnecessary prophylaxis and fear of lawsuits amongst private practice dentists and OS has not been addressed. We review The American Heart Association/American College of Cardiology, American Dental Association, and American Association of Orthopedic Surgeons' guidelines on dental antibiotic prophylaxis for the prevention of endocarditis and prosthetic joint infections. We provide experience on how to engage private-practice dentists and OS in dental stewardship using a community-based program.

Progress in Prevention, Diagnosis, and Treatment of Periprosthetic Joint Infection

Periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) after joint replacement surgery is a severe complication associated with high morbidity and increased treatment costs. More than 25% of joint implant failures are attributed to PJI. PJI diagnosis and treatment methods have substantially improved in recent years. However, the prevalence of PJI remains high, primarily due to the increased prevalences of obesity, diabetes, and other underlying conditions. Moreover, increasing elderly prefers to total joint replacement surgery. However, due to frailty and comorbidities, most are at increased risk of infectious arthritis and artificial joint infection (PJI). Therefore, PJI management for the elderly requires multilevel and multiangle intervention. In this review, we summarize the risk factors and diagnostic methods currently available for PJI and discuss the current PJI prevention and treatment interventions, especially the management in older adults.

Persistent Wound Drainage After Total Joint Arthroplasty: A Narrative Review

BACKGROUND

Persistent wound drainage after total joint arthroplasty (TJA) is an important complication with potential substantial adverse consequences, in particular periprosthetic joint infection.

METHODS

This review evaluated the available literature regarding several issues in the field of persistent wound drainage after TJA and offers a classification of persistent wound drainage and an algorithmic approach to the decision-making process.

RESULTS

Available literature addressing the diagnosis and treatment of persistent wound drainage after TJA is scarce and an evidence-based clinical guideline is lacking. This is partially caused by the absence of a universally accepted definition of persistent wound drainage. In patients with persistent wound drainage, clinical signs and serological tests can be helpful in the diagnosis of a developing infection. Regarding the treatment of persistent wound drainage, nonsurgical treatment consists of absorbent dressings, pressure bandages, and temporary joint immobilization. Surgical treatment is advised when wound drainage persists for more than 5-7 days and consists of open debridement with irrigation and exchange of modular components and antimicrobial treatment.

CONCLUSION

Based on this literature review, we proposed a classification and algorithmic approach for the management of patients with persistent wound drainage after TJA. Hopefully, this offers the orthopedic surgeon a practical clinical guideline by finding the right balance between overtreatment and undertreatment, weighing the risks and benefits. However, this classification and algorithmic approach should first be evaluated in a prospective trial.

Rheumatoid Arthritis, Disease Modifying Agents, and Periprosthetic Joint Infection: What Does a Joint Surgeon Need to Know?

The incidence of periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) among patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) is 1.6× greater than in patients undergoing the same procedure for osteoarthritis. This higher risk "may" be due to the immunosuppressive therapies for RA patients including corticosteroids, such as prednisone, and disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (DMARDs), such as methotrexate. There is a debate about the role of DMARDs in increasing the incidence of subsequent PJI. Studies show conflicting results, with some demonstrating no significant increase in the rates of PJI and some finding otherwise. The International Consensus Meeting on PJI recommended that DMARDs should be halted prior to an elective total joint arthroplasty based on their half-life. Moreover, the International Consensus Meeting stated that cessation of immunosuppressant medications should be performed in consultation with and under the direction of the treating physician. In this review, we aimed to provide an introduction to the available treatment options and cover the recommendations on the treatment protocols for RA patients who undergo elective total joint arthroplasty.

Total knee arthroplasty and infection: how surgeons can reduce the risks

Total joint arthroplasty (TJA) is one of the most common orthopaedic procedures. Nevertheless, several complications can lead to implant failure.

Peri-prosthetic joint infections (PJI) certainly represent a significant challenge in TJA, constituting a major cause of prosthetic revision. The surgeon may have an important role in reducing the PJI rate by limiting the impact of significant risk factors associated to either the patient, the operative environment or the post-operative care.

In the pre-operative period, several preventive measures may be adopted to manage reversible medical comorbidities. Other recognised pre-operative risk factors are urinary tract infections, intra-articular corticosteroid injections and nasal colonisation with Staphylococcus (S.) aureus, particularly the methicillin-resistant strain (MRSA).

In the intra-operative setting, protective measures for PJI include antibiotic prophylaxis, surgical-site antisepsis and use of pre-admission chlorhexidine washing and pulsed lavage during surgery. In this setting, the use of plastic adhesive drapes and sterile stockinette, as well as using personal protection systems, do not clearly reduce the risk of infection. On the contrary, using sterile theatre light handles and splash basins as well as an increased traffic in the operating room are all associated with an increased risk for PJI.

In the post-operative period, other infections causing transient bacteraemia, blood transfusion and poor wound care are considered as risk factors for PJI.

Cite this article: Ratto N, Arrigoni C, Rosso F, Bruzzone M, Dettoni F, Bonasia DE, Rossi R. Total knee arthroplasty and infection: how surgeons can reduce the risks. EFORT Open Rev 2016;1: 339-344 DOI: 10.1302/2058-5241.1.000032.

2-stage revision of 120 deep infected hip and knee prostheses using gentamicin-PMMA beads

Background and purpose - A 2-stage revision is the most common treatment for late deep prosthesis-related infections and in all cases of septic loosening. However, there is no consensus about the optimal interval between the 2 stages. Patients and methods - We retrospectively studied 120 deep infections of total hip (n = 95) and knee (n = 25) prostheses that had occurred over a period of 25 years. The mean follow-up time was 5 (2-20) years. All infections had been treated with extraction, 1 or more debridements with systemic antibiotics, and implantation of gentamicin-PMMA beads. There had been different time intervals between extraction and reimplantation: median 14 (11-47) days for short-term treatment with uninterrupted hospital stay, and 7 (3-22) months for long-term treatment with temporary discharge. We analyzed the outcome regarding resolution of the infection and clinical results. Results - 88% (105/120) of the infections healed, with no difference in healing rate between short- and long-term treatment. 82 prostheses were reimplanted. In the most recent decade, we treated patients more often with a long-term treatment but reduced the length of time between the extraction and the reimplantation. More reimplantations were performed in long-term treatments than in short-term treatments, despite more having difficult-to-treat infections with worse soft-tissue condition. Interpretation - Patient, wound, and infection considerations resulted in an individualized treatment with different intervals between stages. The 2-stage revision treatment in combination with local gentamicin-PMMA beads gave good results even with difficult prosthesis infections and gentamicin-resistant bacteria.

A clinical perspective on musculoskeletal infection treatment strategies and challenges

Orthopaedic implants improve the quality of life of patients, but the risk of postoperative surgical site infection poses formidable challenges for clinicians. Future directions need to focus on prevention and treatment of infections associated with common arthroplasty procedures, such as the hip, knee, and shoulder, and nonarthroplasty procedures, including trauma, foot and ankle, and spine. Novel prevention methods, such as nanotechnology and the introduction of antibiotic-coated implants, may aid in the prevention and early treatment of periprosthetic joint infections with goals of improved eradication rates and maintaining patient mobility and satisfaction.

The use of prophylactic antibiotics prior to dental procedures in patients with prosthetic joints: Evidence-based clinical practice guideline for dental practitioners--a report of the American Dental Association Council on Scientific Affairs

BACKGROUND

A panel of experts (the 2014 Panel) convened by the American Dental Association Council on Scientific Affairs developed an evidence-based clinical practice guideline (CPG) on the use of prophylactic antibiotics in patients with prosthetic joints who are undergoing dental procedures. This CPG is intended to clarify the "Prevention of Orthopaedic Implant Infection in Patients Undergoing Dental Procedures: Evidence-based Guideline and Evidence Report," which was developed and published by the American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons and the American Dental Association (the 2012 Panel).

TYPES OF STUDIES REVIEWED

The 2014 Panel based the current CPG on literature search results and direct evidence contained in the comprehensive systematic review published by the 2012 Panel, as well as the results from an updated literature search. The 2014 Panel identified 4 case-control studies.

RESULTS

The 2014 Panel judged that the current best evidence failed to demonstrate an association between dental procedures and prosthetic joint infection (PJI). The 2014 Panel also presented information about antibiotic resistance, adverse drug reactions, and costs associated with prescribing antibiotics for PJI prophylaxis.

PRACTICAL IMPLICATIONS AND CONCLUSIONS

The 2014 Panel made the following clinical recommendation: In general, for patients with prosthetic joint implants, prophylactic antibiotics are not recommended prior to dental procedures to prevent prosthetic joint infection. The practitioner and patient should consider possible clinical circumstances that may suggest the presence of a significant medical risk in providing dental care without antibiotic prophylaxis, as well as the known risks of frequent or widespread antibiotic use. As part of the evidence-based approach to care, this clinical recommendation should be integrated with the practitioner's professional judgment and the patient's needs and preferences.