Gorane Euba

Early prosthetic joint infection: outcomes with debridement and implant retention followed by antibiotic therapy

Recent expert reviews recommend a conservative surgical strategy - debridement and irrigation, antibiotics and implant retention (DAIR) - for most early post-surgical prosthetic joint infections (PJI). However, differences exist in published series regarding success rates with DAIR, and the size of most series is small. In this prospective multicenter cohort study of early PJI managed by DAIR, factors associated with failure of the DAIR were analyzed. Out of 139 early PJI, 117 cases managed with DAIR were studied For 67 patients (57.3%), infection was cured and the implant was salvaged with definite antimicrobial therapy. In 35 (29.9%) DAIR failed and removal of the prosthesis was necessary during follow-up. Finally, 15 patients (12.8%) needed chronic suppressive antimicrobial therapy due to suspected or confirmed persistent infection. Infections due to methicillin-resistant S. aureus (72.7% failed; p 0.05) and those treated at one of the hospitals (80.0% failed; p <0.05) had worse outcomes, but only this last variable was associated with treatment failure following multivariate analysis. Seventy-four per cent of patients who were successfully treated by DAIR and only 32.7% of the failures were able to walk without help or with one stick at the last follow-up visit (p <0.05). In conclusion, a substantial proportion of patients with an early PJI may be successfully treated with DAIR and definite antimicrobial therapy. In more than half of these, the infection can be cured. Since identification of factors associated with failure of DAIR is not simple, we recommend offering DAIR to most patients with early PJI.

Changing Trends in the Epidemiology of Pyogenic Vertebral Osteomyelitis: The Impact of Cases with No Microbiologic Diagnosis

OBJECTIVES The observed higher incidence of pyogenic vertebral osteomyelitis (PVO) may entail an increasing number of patients with no microbiologic diagnosis. The true incidence of these cases, how exhaustive the etiologic diagnostic efforts must be, and the usefulness of an empirical antibiotic therapy are not well defined. METHODS Retrospective analysis of all cases of vertebral osteomyelitis in our center (1991-2009) and retrospective analysis of cases of PVO (2005-2009). Clinical data, diagnostic procedures, treatment, and outcome were reviewed. A comparative analysis between microbiologically confirmed PVO (MCPVO) and probable PVO (PPVO) was performed. RESULTS Increasing incidence of PVO (+0.047 episodes/100,000 inhabitants-year). During the last decade, there was an increase of PPVO (+0.059 episodes/100,000 inhabitants-year) with stable incidence of MCPVO. During 2005-2009, there were 72 patients [47 (65%) MCPVO and 25 (35%) PPVO]. 60% men; mean age was 66 years. Bacteremia was found in 59%. Computed tomographic guided vertebral biopsy, positive in 7/36 (19%), was more successful among patients with bacteremia. Among MCPVO, there was an increasing proportion of less virulent bacteria. Cases of MCPVO presented more frequently with sepsis, fever, and high acute-phase reactants, and PPVO cases were mostly treated with oral fluoroquinolones plus rifampin. No differences were found between both groups in outcome (93% success, 22% sequelae). CONCLUSIONS An epidemiologic change of PVO is suggested by a higher incidence of PPVO and the isolation of less virulent microorganisms among MCPVO. In this setting, the availability of an oral and effective empirical antibiotic therapy may challenge an exhaustive prosecution of the etiology.

Acute haematogenous prosthetic joint infection: prospective evaluation of medical and surgical management

The optimum treatment for prosthetic joint infections has not been clearly defined. We report our experience of the management of acute haematogenous prosthetic joint infection (AHPJI) in patients during a 3-year prospective study in nine Spanish hospitals. Fifty patients, of whom 30 (60%) were female, with a median age of 76 years, were diagnosed with AHPJI. The median infection-free period following joint replacement was 4.9 years. Symptoms were acute in all cases. A distant previous infection and/or bacteraemia were identified in 48%. The aetiology was as follows: Staphylococcus aureus, 19; Streptococcus spp., 14; Gram-negative bacilli, 12; anaerobes, two; and mixed infections, three. Thirty-four (68%) patients were treated with a conservative surgical approach (CSA) with implant retention, and 16 had prosthesis removal. At 2-year follow-up, 24 (48%) were cured, seven (14%) had relapsed, seven (14%) had died, five (10%) had persistent infection, five had re-infection, and two had an unknown evolution. Overall, the treatment failure rates were 57.8% in staphylococcal infections and 14.3% in streptococcal infections. There were no failures in patients with Gram-negative bacillary. By multivariate analysis, CSA was the only factor independently associated with treatment failure (OR 11.6; 95% CI 1.29-104.8). We were unable to identify any factors predicting treatment failure in CSA patients, although a Gram-negative bacillary aetiology was a protective factor. These data suggest that although conservative surgery was the only factor independently associated with treatment failure, it could be the first therapeutic choice for the management of Gram-negative bacillary and streptococcal AHPJI, and for some cases with acute S. aureus infections.

Infecciones relacionadas con las prótesis articulares

La infeccion de protesis articular es un problema creciente de salud publica. El cuerpo extrano determina la formacion de biocapas bacterianas que son resistentes a los mecanismos de defensa y a los antibioticos. El 60% estan causadas por estafilococos. La infeccion suele producirse en el quirofano o en el postoperatorio inmediato y, mas raramente, por via hematogena. Se distinguen la infeccion posquirurgica precoz (IPP), la infeccion cronica tardia (ICT), la infeccion hematogena aguda (IHA) y la forma de cultivos intraoperatorios positivos (CIOP). En las IPP e IHA la precocidad diagnostica es decisiva para intentar salvar la protesis y en la ICT el problema estriba en el diagnostico diferencial con el aflojamiento aseptico. La combinacion de rifampicina-levofloxacino 8 semanas es el tratamiento de eleccion para las IPP e IHA causadas por estafilococos sensibles, tratadas con desbridamiento y retencion de protesis. En las ICT se requiere recambio protesico y una antibioticoterapia de 6 semanas.

Efficacy of linezolid alone and in combination with rifampin in staphylococcal experimental foreign-body infection

OBJECTIVES The knowledge about efficacy of linezolid alone or in combination with rifampin in device infections is limited. We test their in vitro and in vivo efficacy in a rat model of foreign-body infection by methicillin-susceptible S. aureus. METHODS In vitro studies for logarithmic and stationary bacteria were performed. In vivo efficacy (decrease in bacterial counts in tissue cage fluid) was evaluated at: (i) after 7-day therapy (groups: linezolid, cloxacillin, rifampin, linezolid-rifampin and cloxacillin-rifampin); and (ii) after 10-day therapy (groups: rifampin and linezolid-rifampin). RESULTS After 7-day therapy all groups were significantly better than controls; linezolid (Delta log cfu/ml: -0.59, no resistant strains) and cloxacillin (-0.85) were the least effective therapy; linezolid was significantly less active (P<0.05) than rifampin (-1.22, resistance 90%), cloxacillin-rifampin (-1.3) and linezolid-rifampin (-1.14). After 10-day therapy linezolid-rifampin was the most effective treatment (Delta log -1.44, no resistance, P<0.05); in contrast, rifampin resulted ineffective (Delta log 0.1) due to the growth of resistant strains (100%). CONCLUSIONS Linezolid alone showed moderate efficacy, whereas its combination with rifampin prevented the emergence of rifampin resistance. The efficacy of linezolid-rifampin combination was initially similar to that of rifampin alone, but in contrast to rifampin, it increased over time revealing the impact of protection against rifampin resistance and the benefits of rifampin activity.

Efficacy of tigecycline alone and with rifampin in foreign-body infection by methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus

OBJECTIVES Tigecycline appears as an alternative therapy against methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) with limited clinical experience. We evaluate the efficacy of tigecycline and its combination with rifampin in comparison to that for vancomycin in a rat model of foreign-body infection by MRSA. METHODS A tissue-cage infection model were used; therapy with tigecycline, vancomycin, rifampin, tigecycline plus rifampin and vancomycin plus rifampin was administered intraperitoneally for 7 days. The antibiotic efficacy was evaluated in the tissue-cage fluid and in the coverslips (attached bacteria); the emergence of resistance was screened. RESULTS Among monotherapies rifampin was the best treatment (decrease in log CFU/ml of tissue-cage fluid, 2.75) (P < 0.05). The addition of rifampin improved the efficacy of vancomycin (decrease, 2.28) and tigecycline (decrease, 1.56) in solitary; there were not significantly differences between tigecycline-rifampin (decrease, 3.39) and vancomycin-rifampin (decrease, 3.70), but only the latter was better than rifampin alone (P < 0.05). Resistant strains were only detected using rifampin alone. CONCLUSIONS tigecycline alone was the least effective treatment. Tigecycline-rifampin prevented the emergence of rifampin resistance, thus allowing the benefits of rifampin over time against staphylococcal foreign-body infections, but its efficacy needs to be evaluated in comparison with other anti-MRSA combined therapies.

Linezolid in late-chronic prosthetic joint infection caused by gram-positive bacteria

Linezolid may be an interesting alternative for prosthetic joint infection (PJI) due to its bioavailability and its antimicrobial spectrum. However, experience in this setting is scarce. The aim of the study was to assess linezolids clinical and microbiological efficacy, and also its tolerance. This was a prospective, multicenter, open-label, non-comparative study of 25 patients with late-chronic PJI caused by Gram-positive bacteria managed with a two-step exchange procedure plus 6 weeks of linezolid. Twenty-two (88%) patients tolerated linezolid without major adverse effects, although a global decrease in the platelet count was observed. Three patients were withdrawn because of major toxicity, which reversed after linezolid stoppage. Among patients who completed treatment, 19 (86%) demonstrated clinical and microbiological cure. Two patients presented with clinical and microbiological failure, and one showed clinical cure and microbiological failure. In conclusion, linezolid showed good results in chronic PJI managed with a two-step exchange procedure. Tolerance seems acceptable, though close surveillance is required.

High doses of levofloxacin vs moxifloxacin against staphylococcal experimental foreign-body infection: The effect of higher MIC-related pharmacokinetic parameters on efficacy

OBJECTIVES Since levofloxacin at high doses was the best therapy in staphylococcal tissue-cage model of foreign-body infection, we hypothesized that moxifloxacin with higher ratio of area under the concentration-time curve to the MIC (AUC/MIC) would provide better results. METHODS MICs, MBCs, MPCs (mutant prevention concentration) and 24h kill-curves were determined in the log and stationary phases. Using the aforementioned model, we tested the efficacy of levofloxacin 100mg/kg/d, moxifloxacin 40mg/kg/d and moxifloxacin 80mg/kg/d; they were equivalent to human levels for 1000mg/d, 400mg/d and 800mg/d, respectively. We screened for the appearance of resistant strains. RESULTS MICs and MBCs in logarithmic and stationary phases and MPCs of levofloxacin were 0.5, 1 and 4, 0.8microg/ml, respectively, and those of moxifloxacin 0.12, 0.25 and 2, 0.25microg/ml. AUC/MIC were 234 (levofloxacin), 431 (moxifloxacin 40) and 568 (moxifloxacin 80). Bacterial counts decreases in tissue-cage fluids (means of logCFU/ml) were -1.81 (n=25), -1.31 (23), and -1.46 (20), respectively; for controls it was 0.24 (22). All groups were better than controls (p<0.05); no differences between them existed. CONCLUSIONS Moxifloxacin with higher AUC/MIC ratio did not improve the efficacy of high doses of levofloxacin.