Prophylactic use of antibiotics for procedures after total joint replacement

Association between dental procedures and periprosthetic joint infection: A case-crossover study

BACKGROUND

Although the risk of dental procedures as a cause of bacteremia has been recognized, evidence regarding the association between dental procedures and late periprosthetic joint infection (LPJI) is scarce. We sought to determine whether dental procedures are associated with an increased risk of LPJI.

METHODS

The study was conducted under a case-crossover design using a large claims database in Japan. We identified adult patients who had undergone dental procedures and were hospitalized for LPJI between April 2014 and September 2021. Exposure to dental procedures was assessed during a case period of 1-4 weeks, with two control periods of 9-12 weeks and 17-20 weeks, preceding LPJI hospital admission. Conditional logistic regression models were used to calculate the odds ratios (ORs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) of LPJI associated with dental procedures in the case period compared with the two control periods.

RESULTS

In total, 241 patients with LPJI were included in the case-crossover study. At least one dental procedure was performed in 46 patients (19.1%) in the hazard period and in 75 patients (31.1%) in the control periods. The OR for LPJI with dental procedures was 0.96 (95% CI, 0.61-1.53; p = 0.88). Findings were robust in several sensitivity analyses, including stratification by whether the dental procedure included antibiotic prophylaxis.

CONCLUSIONS

This study suggests that dental procedures are not associated with increased risk of LPJI, and will raise questions about the recommendation for antibiotic prophylaxis before dental procedures.

Invasive Gastrointestinal Endoscopy Following Total Joint Arthroplasty Increases the Risk for Periprosthetic Joint Infection

BACKGROUND

The safety of postoperative colonoscopy and endoscopy following total joint arthroplasty (TJA) remains largely unknown. The objective of this study was to characterize the effect of gastrointestinal endoscopic procedures after TJA on the risk of postoperative periprosthetic joint infection (PJI).

METHODS

Using a large national database, patients who underwent an endoscopic procedure (colonoscopy or esophagogastroduodenoscopy (EGD)) within 12 months after primary TJA were identified and matched in a 1:1 fashion based on procedure (primary total knee arthroplasty (TKA) vs. total hip arthroplasty (THA), age, sex, Charlson Comorbidity Index (CCI), and smoking status with patients who did not undergo endoscopy. A total of 142,055 patients who underwent endoscopy within 12 months following TJA (96,804 TKA and 45,251 THA) were identified and matched. The impact of timing of endoscopy relative to TJA on postoperative outcomes was assessed. Pre-operative comorbidity profiles and 1-year complications were compared. Statistical analyses included Chi-squared tests and multivariate logistic regressions with outcomes considered significant at P <0.05.

RESULTS

Multivariate analyses revealed that endoscopy within 2 months following TKA and 1 month of THA was associated with a significantly increased odds of periprosthetic joint infection (Odds Ratio (OR): 1.29 [1.08-1.53]; P=.004; OR: 1.41 [1.01-1.90]; P=0.033, respectively). Patients who underwent endoscopy greater than 2 months from the timing of their TKA and 1 month from THA were not at significantly greater risk of developing PJI.

CONCLUSION

This data suggests that invasive endoscopic procedures should be delayed if possible by at least 2 months following TKA and 1 month following THA to minimize the risk of PJI.

Outcomes of Concurrent Endocarditis and Periprosthetic Joint Infection: A Retrospective Case Series of 16 Patients

Introduction

Concurrent diagnosis of periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) of total hip arthroplasty (THA) or total knee arthroplasty (TKA) with infectious endocarditis is a devastating clinical scenario infrequently documented in the literature. To date, no studies have fully described the orthopedic and infectious outcomes of patients with these concurrent diagnoses. The purpose of this study was to conduct a case series of patients with these diagnoses and document the orthopedic and infectious outcomes so that surgeons may effectively counsel patients regarding the gravity of the condition and the expected course of treatment.

Methods

This study is a retrospective case series using patient data from five hospitals within an academic healthcare system in the northeastern United States. Cases of concurrent endocarditis and THA or TKA PJI with a minimum of one-year follow-up were identified from January 2000 to January 2021. Basic statistics such as means, standard deviations, and percentages were used to identify trends within our series. Kaplan-Meier survivorship curves with log-rank tests were performed to determine if there were any differences in two-year mortality and joint survival (defined as needing explant) between patients who had cardiac surgery prior to surgical management for their PJI and those who had surgical management for PJI prior to cardiac surgery.

Results

A total of 18 joints in 16 patients with endocarditis and concurrent TKA or THA PJI were identified. All PJIs were managed surgically, with 14/18 (77.77%) of joint infections initially being managed by debridement, antibiotics, and implant retention (DAIR) and 4/18 (22.22%) of joint infections initially being managed by explant. Within the first six months of PJI diagnosis, 25% (4/16) of patients died of complications related to their infection, and one additional patient died of bacteremia just over a year after the initial PJI diagnosis. Of the 18 PJIs, 72.23% (13/18) had treatment failure, defined as any outcome equal to or worse than requiring chronic suppressive antibiotics for the infection. Due to low statistical power, we were not able to identify any differences in two-year mortality from PJI diagnosis (p=0.311) or joint survival (in terms of requiring explant) (p=0.420) depending on whether cardiac surgery or DAIR was performed first.

Conclusions

Concurrent infectious endocarditis and prosthetic joint infection is associated with high morbidity and mortality. Patients with these concurrent infections should be counseled that not only the associated mortality rate is high, but also the surgical treatment of their PJI has a high rate of treatment failure, including an explant following an initial DAIR, an explant with retained spacer, or a requirement of lifelong antibiotic suppression.

Risk of Periprosthetic Joint Infection in Patients With Total Knee Arthroplasty Undergoing Colonoscopy: A Nationwide Propensity Score Matched Study

BACKGROUND

The post-colonoscopy periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) risk in patients with total prosthetic knee joints has limited research. The present study investigated the PJI risk and determined the risk factors for post-colonoscopy PJI in total knee arthroplasty (TKA) recipients. The hypothesis was that colonoscopy is associated with an increased PJI risk in patients with total prosthetic knee joints. This study can potentially help guide the decision making for prophylactic antibiotic use for colonoscopy.

METHODS

This nationwide matched cohort study used claims data from the Health Insurance Review and Assessment Service database and enrolled patients who underwent unilateral TKA between 2008 and 2016. The history of diagnostic colonoscopy was investigated at least 1 year postoperatively. The propensity score was matched between colonoscopy and non-colonoscopy cohorts, and the post-colonoscopy PJI risk was compared. The PJI risk following invasive colonoscopic procedures, including biopsy, polypectomy, and mucosal or submucosal resection, was investigated, and the risk factors for post-colonoscopy PJI were determined.

RESULTS

In total, 45,612 and 211,841 patients were matched in the colonoscopy and control cohorts, respectively. The colonoscopy cohort had greater 9-month and 1-year PJI risks from the index colonoscopy date than the matched controls (9 months: hazard ratio [HR] 1.836, P = .006; 1 year: HR 1.822, P = .031). Invasive colonoscopic procedures did not increase the PJI risk at any time point post-colonoscopy. The only significant risk factor for PJI was post-traumatic arthritis (adjusted HR 4.034, P = .023).

CONCLUSION

Colonoscopy was associated with an increased PJI risk in TKA recipients, regardless of concomitant invasive colonoscopic procedures.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

III, Prognostic.

Oral health implications in total hip and knee arthroplasty patients: A review

Over the past two decades, oral health has emerged as a health care priority. Historically, patients greater than 65 years of age, the economically disadvantaged, members of racial or ethnic minority groups, or the disabled or home bound have experienced significant barriers to routine dental care. The connection between oral health care and periprosthetic joint infections (PJI) continues to be of importance to the orthopedic surgeon, as such infections are significantly morbid and costly. This review aims to introduce the importance of oral health as a small but crucial portion of an arthroplasty patient's overall perioperative management.

Is there a Role for Antibiotic Prophylaxis Prior to Dental Procedures in Patients with Total Joint Arthroplasty? A Systematic Review of the Literature

Background: The indication of prophylactic antibiotics prior to dental procedures for non-infected causes in order to reduce the risk of haematogenous periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) remains as controversial. We performed a systematic review of the literature assessing the relationship between PJI and invasive dental procedures and whether there is evidence to support the use of antibiotic prophylaxis. Methods: This review was conducted in accordance with the 2009 Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis (PRISMA) statement. MEDLINE, EMBASE and the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews were searched for studies focusing on dental procedures after TJA, reporting on PJI as an outcome. The methodological quality was assessed with the Newcastle-Ottawa quality assessment scale for case-control and cohort studies and by the tool proposed by Murad et al. for observational studies. Results: Our systematic literature review yielded 90 individual studies, of which 9 met the inclusion criteria. The overall infection rate ranged from 0.26% to 2.12%. Of these, cases associated with a dental procedure ranged from 0% to 15.9%. Five of the studies described cases in which antibiotic prophylaxis was administered; however, no clear algorithm regarding type and dosage of antibiotic was mentioned. When assessing the methodological quality of the evidence, all studies had an overall low to moderate quality. Conclusion: The current systematic review, mostly composed of low-quality studies, suggests that there is no direct evidence to indicate prophylactic antibiotics prior to dental procedures in patients with TJA. In line with the current guidelines, no prophylaxis should be used on interventions for non-infected causes, except for occasional unusual situations, which can then be judged individually.

Antimicrobial effect of anesthetic-eluting ultra-high molecular weight polyethylene for post-arthroplasty antibacterial prophylaxis

Despite being a relatively safe surgery, total joint replacement is often associated with two major complications-severe post-operative pain and periprosthetic joint infection. Local sustained delivery of therapeutics to the surgical site has a potential to address these complications more effectively than current clinical approaches. Given that several analgesics were shown to possess antibacterial activity, we propose here to use analgesic-loaded ultra-high molecular weight polyethylene (UHMWPE) as a delivery vehicle to provide antimicrobial effect after an arthroplasty. Three commonly used anesthetics, lidocaine, bupivacaine, and ropivacaine, were analyzed in order to reveal the drug with the highest antibacterial activity against methicillin-sensitive Staphylococcus aureus. Having shown highest antibacterial activity in the bacterial susceptibility tests, bupivacaine was chosen to be incorporated into UHMWPE to provide antibacterial properties. Bupivacaine-loaded UHMWPE possessed moderate dose-dependent antimicrobial properties, decreasing the S. aureus proliferation rate by up to 70%. Biofilm formation was also substanitally inhibited during the first 9 h of culture as quantified by bacterial counts and SEM. This proof-of-concept study is first of its kind to demonstrate that analgesic-loaded UHMWPE can be used as part of a multimodal antimicrobial therapy. © 2019 Orthopaedic Research Society. Published by Wiley Periodicals, Inc. J Orthop Res.

Implant Infection and Infection Resistant Materials: A Mini Review

Implant infection is an aggressive, often irreducible post-surgical infection. It remains the primary cause of implant failure. Bacterial contamination during surgery and subsequent adhesion onto biomaterial surface of opportunistic microorganisms, such as staphylococcal species, exopolysaccharidic slimes or specific adhesins, initiates the implant infection.

Pathogenesis of periprosthestic infection is the focus of studies aimed at developing infection resistant materials.

Antibiotic prophylaxis is not indicated prior to dental procedures for prevention of periprosthetic joint infections

Background and purpose - To minimize the risk of hematogenous periprosthetic joint infection (HPJI), international and Dutch guidelines recommended antibiotic prophylaxis prior to dental procedures. Unclear definitions and contradictory recommendations in these guidelines have led to unnecessary antibiotic prescriptions. To formulate new guidelines, a joint committee of the Dutch Orthopaedic and Dental Societies conducted a systematic literature review to answer the following question: can antibiotic prophylaxis be recommended for patients (with joint prostheses) undergoing dental procedures in order to prevent dental HPJI? Methods - The Medline, Embase, and Cochrane databases were searched for randomized controlled trials (RCTs), reviews, and observational studies up to July 2015. Studies were included if they involved patients with joint implants undergoing dental procedures, and either considered HPJI as an outcome measure or described a correlation between HPJI and prophylactic antibiotics. A guideline was formulated using the GRADE method and AGREE II guidelines. Results - 9 studies were included in this systematic review. All were rated "very low quality of evidence". Additional literature was therefore consulted to address clinical questions that provide further insight into pathophysiology and risk factors. The 9 studies did not provide evidence that use of antibiotic prophylaxis reduces the incidence of dental HPJI, and the additional literature supported the conclusion that antibiotic prophylaxis should be discouraged in dental procedures. Interpretation - Prophylactic antibiotics in order to prevent dental HPJI should not be prescribed to patients with a normal or an impaired immune system function. Patients are recommended to maintain good oral hygiene and visit the dentist regularly.

Screening Patients Undergoing Total Hip or Knee Arthroplasty with Perioperative Urinalysis and the Effect of a Practice Change on Antimicrobial Use

OBJECTIVE

To identify predictors of treatment for urinary tract infections (UTI) among patients undergoing total hip (THA) or knee (TKA) arthroplasties and to assess an intervention based on these predictors.

DESIGN

We conducted a retrospective cohort study of 200 consecutive patients undergoing THA/TKA between February 21, 2011, and June 30, 2011, to identify predictors of treatment for UTI and a prospective cohort study of 50 patients undergoing these procedures between May 21, 2012, and July 17, 2012, to assess the association of signs or symptoms and UTI treatment. We then conducted a before-and-after study to assess whether implementing an intervention affected the frequency of treatment for UTI before or after THA/TKA.

SETTING

The orthopedics department of a university health center.

PATIENTS

Patients undergoing THA or TKA.

INTERVENTION

Surgeons revised their UTI screening and treatment practices.

RESULTS

Positive leukocyte esterase (P<.0001; P<.0001) and urine white blood cell count>5 (P=.01; P=.01) were associated with preoperative or postoperative UTI treatment. In the prospective study, 12 patients (24%) had signs and symptoms consistent with UTI. The number of patients treated for presumed UTI decreased 80.2% after the surgeons changed their practices, and surgical site infection (SSI) rates, including prosthetic joint infections (PJIs), did not increase.

CONCLUSIONS

Urine leukocyte esterase and white blood cell count were the strongest predictors of treatment for UTI before or after THA/TKA. The intervention was associated with a significant decrease in treatment for UTI, and SSI/PJI rates did not increase.

Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol 2017;38:281–286

Prosthetic Joint Infection Following Invasive Dental Procedures and Antibiotic Prophylaxis in Patients With Hip or Knee Arthroplasty

OBJECTIVES

We aimed to clarify whether invasive dental treatment is associated with increased risk of prosthetic joint infection (PJI) and whether prophylactic antibiotics may lower the infection risk remain unclear.

DESIGN

Retrospective cohort study.

PARTICIPANTS

All Taiwanese residents (N=255,568) who underwent total knee or hip arthroplasty between January 1, 1997, and November 30, 2009, were screened.

METHODS

The dental cohort consisted of 57,066 patients who received dental treatment and were individually matched 1:1 with the nondental cohort by age, sex, propensity score, and index date. The dental cohort was further divided by the use or nonuse of prophylactic antibiotics. The antibiotic and nonantibiotic subcohorts comprised 6,513 matched pairs.

RESULTS

PJI occurred in 328 patients (0.57%) in the dental subcohort and 348 patients (0.61%) in the nondental subcohort, with no between-cohort difference in the 1-year cumulative incidence (0.6% in both, P=.3). Multivariate-adjusted Cox regression revealed no association between dental procedures and PJI. Furthermore, PJI occurred in 13 patients (0.2%) in the antibiotic subcohort and 12 patients (0.18%) in the nonantibiotic subcohorts (P=.8). Multivariate-adjusted analyses confirmed that there was no association between the incidence of PJI and prophylactic antibiotics.

CONCLUSIONS

The risk of PJI is not increased following dental procedure in patients with hip or knee replacement and is unaffected by antibiotic prophylaxis.

Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol. 2017;38:154–161

Antibiotic Prophylaxis During Dental Procedures in Patients with Prosthetic Joints

In patients with artificial joints, the need for antimicrobial prophylaxis during dental procedures is often raised. The present document describes the pathogenic mechanisms and epidemiological data on the subject of periprosthetic joint infections (PJI) after dental procedures. The document reflects the opinion and recommendations of the expert group 'Infection' of Swiss Orthopaedics. Microorganisms belonging to oral flora can seed haematogenously to an artificial joint. The proof of a causative relation with dental procedures is not possible, because the responsible bacteraemia can originate from the oral cavity at any time, irrespective of when the dental procedure occurs. Good oral hygiene is associated with a lower risk for PJI. Transient bacteraemia occurs during daily oral hygiene activity (e.g., tooth brushing) and thus the cumulative risk for a haematogenous PJI from tooth brushing is higher than that from a dental procedure. PJI after a dental procedure are rarely reported. On the basis of an epidemiological model, several thousand patients with artificial joints must receive antimicrobial prophylaxis to prevent a single PJI. Considering this ratio, the number of adverse events due to the antimicrobial compound exceeds the benefit of administering it by a large magnitude. Therefore, as a rule for the vast majority of cases, antimicrobial prophylaxis during dental procedures is not recommended. It is important that a patient has a good oral health status before joint implantation and that good oral hygiene is continuously maintained in patients with artificial joints.

Group C streptococcal septic arthritis of a prosthetic hip joint following dental treatment

We report a case of a prosthetic joint infection occurring secondary to group C Streptococcus following dental treatment in a 66-year-old woman. This patient presented 11 years following a right hip resurfacing procedure with increasing pain and difficulty mobilising the right hip. An ultrasound and MRI scan identified a collection in the right hip joint, which was subsequently aspirated. Cultures revealed a group C Streptococcus. Extensive washout and surgical debridement of the hip joint was undertaken and the patient was treated with a protracted course of antibiotics. At 1 year follow-up, the patient demonstrated no evidence of recurrent infection. We discuss the evidence underlying prophylactic antibiotic usage regarding dental procedures in the prevention of septic arthritis in patients with prosthetic joints. We also review the spectrum of diseases caused by this organism.

Streptococcus gordonii prosthetic joint infection in the setting of vigorous dental flossing

A 65-year-old woman with osteoarthritis, who underwent knee replacement 5 years prior, developed sudden onset knee pain and swelling. She had voluntarily starting a vigorous dental flossing regimen prior to the onset of symptoms. The patient underwent right knee arthrotomy, irrigation and debridement of right total knee arthroplasty and exchange of polyethylene with retention of the prosthesis. Intraoperative cultures grew Streptococcus gordonii. She was treated with 6 weeks of ceftriaxone and was later placed on oral antibiotic suppression.

Genitourinary Procedures as Risk Factors for Prosthetic Hip or Knee Infection: A Hospital-Based Prospective Case-Control Study

Antibiotic prophylaxis during genitourinary procedures was not associated with a statistically significant reduction in risk for prosthetic joint infection in our study. Current policies for administering antibiotic prophylaxis to patients with prosthetic hip or knee arthroplasty undergoing genitourinary procedures should be reconsidered.

Background. The purpose of this study was to determine the risk of prosthetic joint infection (PJI) as a complication of routine genitourinary (GU) procedures in patients with total hip arthroplasty (THA) or total knee arthroplasty (TKA) and to study the impact of antibiotic prophylaxis administered prior to these procedures.

Methods. We conducted a prospective, single-center, case-control study between December 1, 2001 and May 31, 2006. Case patients were hospitalized with total hip or knee PJI. Control subjects underwent a THA or TKA and were hospitalized during the same period on the same orthopedic floor without a PJI. Data regarding demographic features and potential risk factors were collected. The outcome measure was the odds ratio (OR) of PJI after GU procedures performed within 2 years of admission.

Results. A total of 339 case patients and 339 control subjects were enrolled in the study. Of these, 52 cases (15%) and 55 controls (16%) had undergone a GU procedure in the preceding 2 years. There was no increased risk of PJI for patients undergoing a GU procedure with or without antibiotic prophylaxis (adjusted OR [aOR] = 1.0, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.2–4.5, P = .95 and aOR = 1.0, 95% CI = 0.6–1.7, P = .99, respectively). Results were similar in a subset of patients with a joint age less than 6 months, less than 1 year, or greater than 1 year.

Conclusions. Genitourinary procedures were not risk factors for subsequent PJI. The use of antibiotic prophylaxis before GU procedures did not decrease the risk of subsequent PJI in our study.

Antibiotic prophylaxis for preventing infectious complications in orthognathic surgery

BACKGROUND

Orthognathic surgery (OS) is a term that refers to many elective surgical techniques to correct facial deformity; the associated malocclusion and functional disorders related to the stomatognathic system. Whilst such surgery is classed as "clean-contaminated", the usefulness of and the most appropriate regimen for antibiotic prophylaxis in these patients are still debated.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effects of antibiotic prophylaxis for preventing surgical site infection (SSI) in people undergoing orthognathic surgery.

SEARCH METHODS

In June 2014, we searched the Cochrane Wounds Group Specialised Register; the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) (The Cochrane Library); Ovid MEDLINE; Ovid MEDLINE (In-Process & Other Non-Indexed Citations); Ovid EMBASE; and EBSCO CINAHL. We also searched Google Scholar and performed manual searches in journals relevant to the topic, conference proceedings and lists of references of potentially included articles. We did not restrict the search and study selection with respect to language, date of publication or study setting.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) involving people undergoing orthognathic surgery comparing one regimen of antibiotic prophylaxis with any other regimen or placebo. The primary outcome was SSI, and secondary outcomes were systemic infections, adverse events, duration of hospital stay and health-related quality of life. Two review authors screened articles independently.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Data were abstracted independently by two review authors, and agreement was checked. Risk of bias was assessed using the Cochrane risk of bias tool. Antibiotic regimens were classified as preoperative (one dose before surgery), short-term (before or during surgery and/or during the same day of surgery) and long-term (before or during surgery and longer than one day after surgery) antibiotic prophylaxis. Random-effects meta-analyses using inverse variance methods were undertaken when possible. We report risk ratios (RRs) and their corresponding 95% confidence intervals (CIs).

MAIN RESULTS

A total of 11 trials were included in this review. Most of the studies had an unclear risk of bias prompting us to downgrade the quality of evidence for our outcomes. Seven of these trials provided evidence for the main comparison and the primary outcome and these were pooled. Overall, long-term antibiotic prophylaxis probably reduces the risk of SSI (plausible effects range between a 76% to a 0.26% relative reduction in SSI with long-term antibiotic prophylaxis) (472 participants; RR 0.42, 95% CI 0.24 to 0.74; moderate-quality evidence). There is uncertainty surrounding the relative effects of short-term antibiotics compared with a single dose (220 participants; RR 0.34, 95% CI 0.09 to 1.22; low-quality evidence). No reports described adverse effects associated with the drugs in those trials that reported in this outcome. None of these trials assessed or reported data regarding other outcomes, and information was insufficient to show whether a specific antibiotic is better than another.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

For people undergoing orthognathic surgery, long term antibiotic prophylaxis decreases the risk of SSI compared with short-term antibiotic prophylaxis and the is uncertainty of whether short-term antibiotic prophylaxis decreases SSi risk relative to a single pre-operative dose of prophylactic antibiotics.

Biomaterial-associated infection: locating the finish line in the race for the surface

Biomaterial-associated infections occur on both permanent implants and temporary devices for restoration or support of human functions. Despite increasing use of biomaterials in an aging society, comparatively few biomaterials have been designed that effectively reduce the incidence of biomaterial-associated infections. This review provides design guidelines for infection-reducing strategies based on the concept that the fate of biomaterial implants or devices is a competition between host tissue cell integration and bacterial colonization at their surfaces.

Increased risk of prosthetic joint infection associated with esophago-gastro-duodenoscopy with biopsy

BACKGROUND

There are no prospective data regarding the risk of prosthetic joint infection following routine gastrointestinal endoscopic procedures. We wanted to determine the risk of prosthetic hip or knee infection following gastrointestinal endoscopic procedures in patients with joint arthroplasty.

METHODS

We conducted a prospective, single-center, case-control study at a single, tertiary-care referral center. Cases were defined as adult patients hospitalized for prosthetic joint infection of the hip or knee between December 1, 2001 and May 31, 2006. Controls were adult patients with hip or knee arthroplasties but without a diagnosis of joint infection, hospitalized during the same time period at the same orthopedic hospital. The main outcome measure was the odds ratio (OR) of prosthetic joint infection after gastrointestinal endoscopic procedures performed within 2 years before admission.

RESULTS

339 cases and 339 controls were included in the study. Of these, 70 cases (21%) cases and 82 controls (24%) had undergone a gastrointestinal endoscopic procedure in the preceding 2 years. Among gastrointestinal procedures that were assessed, esophago-gastro-duodenoscopy (EGD) with biopsy was associated with an increased risk of prosthetic joint infection (OR = 3, 95% CI: 1.1-7). In a multivariable analysis adjusting for sex, age, joint age, immunosuppression, BMI, presence of wound drain, prior arthroplasty, malignancy, ASA score, and prothrombin time, the OR for infection after EGD with biopsy was 4 (95% CI: 1.5-10).

INTERPRETATION

EGD with biopsy was associated with an increased risk of prosthetic joint infection in patients with hip or knee arthroplasties. This association will need to be confirmed in other epidemiological studies and adequately powered prospective clinical trials prior to recommending antibiotic prophylaxis in these patients.

Diagnosis and management of prosthetic joint infection: clinical practice guidelines by the Infectious Diseases Society of America

These guidelines are intended for use by infectious disease specialists, orthopedists, and other healthcare professionals who care for patients with prosthetic joint infection (PJI). They include evidence-based and opinion-based recommendations for the diagnosis and management of patients with PJI treated with debridement and retention of the prosthesis, resection arthroplasty with or without subsequent staged reimplantation, 1-stage reimplantation, and amputation.

Antimicrobial prophylaxis in noncardiac prosthetic device recipients

BACKGROUND

Secondary antimicrobial prophylaxis involves the use of ≥ 1 antimicrobial agent just prior to the time when a diagnostic/therapeutic procedure, which may induce infection, is to be performed. In the context of this article, antimicrobial agent(s) are administered to patients with ≥ 1 implanted prosthetic device in order to prevent metastatic seeding of the device(s) during bacteremia induced by a diagnostic/therapeutic procedure. Antimicrobial agents used in this context are only administered periprocedurally. Secondary antimicrobial prophylaxis of endocarditis in recipients of cardiac prosthetic materials (including valves, shunts, conduits, and patches) has been reasonably well established. However, secondary antimicrobial prophylaxis in recipients of other types of prosthetic devices has been the subject of much controversy, with a wide variety of recommendations being made.

OBJECTIVES

The purpose of this article was to conduct a narrative review of the published literature on the topic of secondary antimicrobial prophylaxis in recipients of noncardiac prosthetic devices and make evidence-based recommendations for each type of device, where possible.

METHODS

Medline/PubMed and EMBASE databases were searched for English-language articles published from 1950 to the present (January 2012). Search terms included "prophylaxis," "antibiotics," "antimicrobials," "prosthetic devices," "prosthesis-related infections," "bacteremia," the names of the individual types of prosthetic devices, and the names of the individual procedures potentially inducing bacteremia. Articles dealing with any aspect relevant to this topic were eligible for review. The bibliographies of retrieved articles were also carefully scanned to identify any articles not previously identified.

RESULTS

Based on review of the available literature, secondary antimicrobial prophylaxis is justified in only a few specific circumstances. For recipients of prosthetic vascular grafts/stents, hemodialysis arteriovenous shunts, and ventriculoatrial/ventriculovenous shunts, prophylaxis is warranted during the initial 6 months, initial 6 weeks, and at all times after implantation/revision, respectively, when dental procedures capable of inducing high-level bacteremia are planned. Prosthetic joint recipients should receive prophylaxis in the following 3 circumstances: 1) patient is to undergo dental procedure(s) capable of inducing high-level bacteremia plus either the patient is still within 2 years of device implantation/revision or the patient has ≥ 1 risk factor for hematogenous prosthetic joint infection; 2) patient is to undergo genitourinary tract procedure(s) capable of inducing high-level bacteremia plus the patient has ≥ 1 risk factor for high-risk bacteriuria; and 3) patient is to undergo perforating dermatologic surgery on the oral mucosa or at skin sites at increased risk for surgical site infection plus patient has ≥ 1 risk factor for hematogenous prosthetic joint infection. The data are inadequate to justify secondary antimicrobial prophylaxis for recipients of other types of prosthetic devices. On the basis of 9 surveys of prescriber behavior, it is apparent that there exists, over a wide geographic area, a wide disconnect between clinical practice and the secondary antimicrobial prophylaxis guidelines issued by the professional organizations representing these prescribers. Antimicrobial agent overuse was especially problematic among orthopedic and colorectal surgeons, urologists, and family practitioners. Dentists and maxillofacial surgeons followed guidelines more closely.

CONCLUSION

Device-, procedure-, and patient characteristic-dependent factors elicited over many years have narrowed down the secondary antimicrobial prophylaxis recommendations for noncardiac prosthetic devices to a small number. Despite this, physician prescribers frequently do not follow prophylaxis guidelines established by their own professional organizations. Risk-benefit and cost-effectiveness studies have found that no prophylaxis is actually superior to universal prophylaxis, likely due to known antimicrobial toxicities, such as anaphylactic/anaphylactoid reactions and Clostridium difficile-associated disease. Much work remains in establishing and extending the scientific basis for secondary antimicrobial prophylaxis and transforming this knowledge into appropriate action by the clinician.

Antimicrobial prophylaxis in adults

Antimicrobial prophylaxis is commonly used by clinicians for the prevention of numerous infectious diseases, including herpes simplex infection, rheumatic fever, recurrent cellulitis, meningococcal disease, recurrent uncomplicated urinary tract infections in women, spontaneous bacterial peritonitis in patients with cirrhosis, influenza, infective endocarditis, pertussis, and acute necrotizing pancreatitis, as well as infections associated with open fractures, recent prosthetic joint placement, and bite wounds. Perioperative antimicrobial prophylaxis is recommended for various surgical procedures to prevent surgical site infections. Optimal antimicrobial agents for prophylaxis should be bactericidal, nontoxic, inexpensive, and active against the typical pathogens that can cause surgical site infection postoperatively. To maximize its effectiveness, intravenous perioperative prophylaxis should be administered within 30 to 60 minutes before the surgical incision. Antimicrobial prophylaxis should be of short duration to decrease toxicity and antimicrobial resistance and to reduce cost.

Should patients with hip joint prosthesis receive antibiotic prophylaxis before dental treatment?

The safety committee of the American Academy of Orthopedic Surgeons (AAOS) recommended in 2009 that clinicians should consider antibiotic prophylaxis for all patients with total joint replacement before any invasive procedure that may cause bacteremia. This has aroused confusion and anger among dentists asking for the evidence. The present review deals with different aspects of the rationale for this recommendation giving attention to views both in favor of and against it.

Risk of revision for infection in primary total hip and knee arthroplasty in patients with rheumatoid arthritis compared with osteoarthritis: a prospective, population-based study on 108,786 hip and knee joint arthroplasties from the Norwegian Arthroplasty Register

OBJECTIVE

To compare differences in the risk of revision for infection and changes in risk over time and in time from primary surgery to revision for infection after total hip replacement (THR) and total knee replacement (TKR) in rheumatoid arthritis (RA) and osteoarthritis (OA) patients.

METHODS

In the Norwegian Arthroplasty Register, 6,629 and 102,157 primary total joint replacements in patients with RA and OA, respectively, were identified from 1987 (1994 for knees) until 2008. Survival analyses with revision due to infection as the end point were performed using Kaplan-Meier methods for constructing survival curves and multiple Cox regression to calculate relative risk (RR) estimates for diagnosis, age, sex, and year of primary surgery. An extended Cox model was used to estimate RR within different followup intervals.

RESULTS

RA patients with TKR had a 1.6 times higher risk of revision for infection than OA patients, whereas there was no difference in the THRs. In the THRs, we found a higher risk of revision for infection from 2001 onward, whereas the development for TKRs was the opposite. These time effects affected the RA and OA groups equally. The risk of revision for infection from 6 years postoperatively on was higher in RA patients.

CONCLUSION

The overall risk of revision for infection after TKR was higher in RA patients. The risk of late infection leading to revision of the TKR and THR was higher in RA patients than in OA patients. After the year 2000, the RR of revision for infection in RA compared with OA remained unchanged.

Relationship between perioperative urinary tract infection and deep infection after joint arthroplasty

Surgical wound infection is a serious and potentially catastrophic complication after joint arthroplasty. Urinary tract infection is a common infection that creates a potential reservoir of resistant pathogens and increases patient morbidity. We asked whether treated preoperative and postoperative urinary tract infections are risk factors for deep joint infection. We examined the medical records of 19,735 patients. The minimum had joint infections develop. Of these, three had preoperative and four had postoperative urinary tract infections. The majority of bacteria were not enteric. The bacteria in the two types of infections were not identical. Control subjects were randomly selected from a list of patients matched with patients having infections. Of these, eight had preoperative and one had postoperative urinary tract infections. We found no association between the preoperative urinary tract infection (odds ratio, 0.341; 95% confidence interval, 0.086-1.357) or postoperative urinary tract infection (odds ratio, 4.222; 95% confidence interval, 0.457-38.9) and wound infection. Only one of the 58 patients with wound infections had a urinary tract infection with the same bacteria in both infections. Given the infection rate was very low (0.29%), the power of the study was only 25%. Although limited, the data suggest patients with urinary tract infections had no more likelihood of postoperative infection. We believe treated urinary tract infection should not be a reason to delay or postpone surgery.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level III, therapeutic study.

Antibiotic prophylaxis before invasive dental procedures in patients with arthroplasties of the hip and knee

More than a million hip replacements are carried out each year worldwide, and the number of other artificial joints inserted is also rising, so that infections associated with arthroplasties have become more common. However, there is a paucity of literature on infections due to haematogenous seeding following dental procedures. We reviewed the published literature to establish the current knowledge on this problem and to determine the evidence for routine antibiotic prophylaxis prior to a dental procedure.

We found that antimicrobial prophylaxis before dental interventions in patients with artificial joints lacks evidence-based information and thus cannot be universally recommended.

The evidence base for the efficacy of antibiotic prophylaxis in dental practice

INTRODUCTION

People with various medical conditions and devices are suggested candidates for receiving antibiotic prophylaxis before undergoing dental procedures. This practice is controversial, however, owing to the lack of proof of efficacy. The authors conducted a qualitative, systematic review to determine the level of evidence for this practice and whether antibiotic prophylaxis prevents distant site infections in these patients.

METHODS

The authors selected eight groups of patients with specific medical conditions and devices who often are given antibiotic prophylaxis before undergoing invasive dental procedures. The conditions and devices were cardiac-native heart valve disease, prosthetic heart valves and pacemakers; hip, knee and shoulder prosthetic joints; renal dialysis shunts; cerebrospinal fluid shunts; vascular grafts; immunosuppression secondary to cancer and cancer chemotherapy; systemic lupus erythematosus; and insulin-dependent (type 1) diabetes mellitus. The authors thoroughly searched the literature for the years 1966 through 2005 for references indicating some level of support for this practice and graded each publication on the basis of level of evidence.

RESULTS

The authors found formal recommendations in favor of antibiotic prophylaxis for only three of the eight medical conditions: native heart disease, prosthetic heart valves and prosthetic joints. They found no prospective randomized clinical trials and only one clinical study of antibiotic prophylaxis. Only one systematic review and two case series provided weak, if any, support for antibiotic prophylaxis in patients with cardiac conditions. The authors found little or no evidence to support this practice or to demonstrate that it prevents distant site infections for any of these eight groups of patients.

CONCLUSIONS

No definitive, scientific basis exists for the use of prophylactic antibiotics before dental procedures for these eight groups of patients.

Socioeconomic issues and demographics of total knee arthroplasty revision

Despite rising numbers of total knee arthroplasty revision (TKAR) procedures there remains a paucity of information regarding the relationships between total knee arthroplasty failure and socioeconomic and educational status, demographics, general health and functional disability. We performed a multicenter prospective study of 290 consecutive TKAR patients in order to determine whether they differed from the population they were drawn from in terms of socioeconomic or educational status, race or gender. Secondary aims were to establish the relative comorbid status of this population, social supports and their general health status compared to national norms and their modes of failure. Our cohort consisted of 137 males and 153 females with a mean age of 68.6 years (range, 34-85 years), substantial overall functional disability according to the SF-36 and a large average number of comorbidities at baseline. We found a relative overrepresentation of patients of comparatively low socioeconomic and educational status and also of Caucasian patients in the TKAR population. This large prospective investigation demonstrates demographic features associated with TKA failure and provides a platform for further investigations on the effect demographic characteristics have on the outcomes of TKAR.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Prognostic Study, Level II (Lesser quality prospective study). See Guidelines for Authors for a complete description of the Levels of Evidence.

Prosthetic joint infections

Success in the treatment of infected orthopedic prosthesis requires the best surgical approach in combination with prolonged optimum targeted antimicrobial therapy. In choosing the surgical option, one must consider the type of infection, condition of the bone stock and soft tissue, the virulence and antimicrobial susceptibility of the pathogen, the general health and projected longevity of the patient, and the experience of the surgeon. If surgery is not possible, an alternative is long-term oral antimicrobial suppression to maintain a functioning prosthesis. Treatment must be individualized for a specific infection in a specific patient.

Clinical features remain important for the diagnosis of infective endocarditis in the modern era

BACKGROUND

Infective endocarditis (IE) can be difficult to diagnose, due to multiple (often non-specific) presenting features.

AIM

To assess the predictive accuracy of classical clinical features and blood investigations readily available at the time of presentation.

DESIGN

Cross-sectional analysis.

METHODS

We studied 29 IE cases and 79 controls (clinically suspicious contemporaneous cases where IE was subsequently excluded) from a hospital-based group of patients referred to a cardiac department with possible infective endocarditis. Patients were identified from the echocardiography database. Cases were defined by final diagnosis. Symptoms, signs, risk factors for IE and blood investigations were recorded from case notes and examined by univariate and multivariate analyses.

RESULTS

The sensitivity, specificity, and positive and negative predictive values of transthoracic echocardiography (TTE) for detection of IE in clinically suspected cases were 71%, 98%, 57% and 99%, respectively. Univariate analyses revealed a significant association between IE and several clinical features. Under multivariate analysis, previous heart valve surgery (OR 13.3, 90%CI 3.2-55.6), positive blood cultures (OR 17.2, 90%CI 4.9-58.8), signs of embolism (OR 11.4, 90%CI 3.0-43.5), a new, altered or changing murmur (OR 10.3, 90%CI 2.8-38.5) and splenomegaly (OR 18.2, 90%CI 3.6-90.9) were independent predictors for IE.

DISCUSSION

Clinical features at presentation continue to be important for the diagnosis of IE. Features such as positive blood cultures, signs of embolism and a changing heart murmur should be used to guide investigation and treatment of IE prior to echocardiography, or when TTE is negative.

Reducing the risk of deep wound infection in primary joint arthroplasty with antibiotic bone cement

Despite significant advances in intraoperative antimicrobial procedures, deep wound infection remains the most serious complication associated with primary, cemented total joint arthroplasty. A systematic review was conducted to evaluate studies of antibiotic bone cement prophylaxis for reducing the risk of deep wound infection. The literature included 22 articles providing estimates of the prophylactic effectiveness of antibiotic cement. In reducing deep wound infection, antibiotic cement was consistently superior to plain cement, similar to systematic antiobiotics, and independent and additive in effect when combined with other prophylactic measures. Randomized controlled trials in particular had important methodological limitations. However, the collective results nearly unanimously favored prophylactic use of antibiotic cement in primary arthoplasty procedures.

Das infizierte Implantat

Periprosthetic infection is a significant complication in joint replacement surgery and develops in 0.5-2% of cases. Staphylococcus aureus and commensal microorganisms of the skin, especially coagulase-negative staphylococci, as well as a broad spectrum of other potential pathogens typically already colonize the surface of the foreign body at the time of implantation. Specific mechanisms such as bacterial adhesion to host factors absorbed in the material, biofilm formation, and a metabolic adaptation of adherent microorganisms play a particularly important role in the pathogenesis and course of the disease. Microbiological diagnosis requires to some extent complex culture procedures of puncture specimens or tissue removed during surgery; this can be supplemented by modern molecular testing. Antimicrobial treatment must be conceived as a synopsis of clinical picture, confirmed pathogen, and the intended surgical procedure on an individual basis and is routinely administered as combination therapy for several weeks, sometimes also as sequential therapy. Validated preventive measures in joint replacement surgery include mandatory perioperative antibiotic prophylaxis and other additional measures.

Acute pasteurella multocida in total knee arthroplasty

Pasturella multocida is a rare cause of joint sepsis in total joint arthroplasty, and all case reports have identified a distant source of infection from an animal bite that has caused potential hematogenous seeding of the prosthesis. We report a case in which no potential distal wound source was found and the only likely etiology was local wound seeding from an old injury. In that injury, a saddle stirrup had caused a severe traumatic soft tissue injury as a horse had rolled over the patient. We draw attention to the fact that this particular bacteria is virulent in producing septic contamination of a total joint prosthesis, and aggressive treatment is indicated when such infection is identified.

Antibiotics in cutaneous medicine: an update

Antibiotics play a vital role in contemporary cutaneous medicine and surgery. They are prescribed more commonly than perhaps any other group of medications with the exception of the corticosteroids. This review discusses the major oral antibacterial agents used in dermatology today, including the beta-lactams, macrolides, tetracyclines, quinolones, sulfonamides, clindamycin, and rifampin.