Jack L. LeFrock

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 limbs 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).

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) (Table 1). 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). Table 1. Infectious Diseases Society of America–United States Public Health Service Grading System for Ranking Recommendations in Clinical Guidelines

Activity of nine antimicrobial agents against Lancefield group C and group G streptococci.

The activity of nine antimicrobial agents against 44 strains of group C and group G streptococci was studied using a microtiter broth dilution technique. Several antimicrobial agents, including third-generation cephalosporins, the newer semisynthetic penicillins, and erythromycin, exhibited good activity against the organisms. Occasional tolerance to various agents was observed. No cross-tolerance was observed in this study.

The relation between aerobic fecal and oropharyngeal microflora in hospitalized patients

The aerobic fecal and oropharyngeal bacterial flora was examined in 75 patients hospitalized, but not given antibiotics; in 70 patients given antibiotics during hospitalization and in 25 nonhospitalized controls. In all subjects, when first examined, normal throat flora were predominant. At the end of 21 days, however, a gram-negative bacilli became predominant in 17 (22.7%) of the Hospital Group and 33 (47.1%) of the Antibiotic Group. Newly appearing genera of gram-negative bacilli in the pharynx were almost always represented those present in the fecal flora. The Hospital Group all had recognizable components of the normal oropharyngeal flora present at 21 days, but 12 (17.1%) of the Antibiotic Group had no demonstrable normal oropharyngeal flora at 21 days. The findings suggest that hospitalization alone can be associated with the appearance of gram-negative bacilli in the oropharynx, and that the intestinal tract is their most likely point of origin.

Cefuroxime: antimicrobial activity, Pharmacology, and clinical efficacy.

The antimicrobial activity, pharmacology, toxicity, and clinical efficacy of cefuroxime are reviewed. Cefuroxime has a second-generation cephalosporin spectrum of activity similar to cefamandole. Addition of a methoxyimino side chain has enhanced its beta-lactamase stability. Cefuroxime is active against certain cephalothin-, cefamandole-, and gentamicin-resistant bacteria. Cefuroxime has an extended half-life which allows dosing every 8 h. If penetrates into bodily tissues and fluids, including the cerebrospinal fluid, in therapeutic concentrations. Cefuroxime has been used successfully in the treatment of meningitis; sepsis; urinary tract, bone and joint, pulmonary, skin, and soft tissue infections; and gonorrhea. Competitive pricing of cefuroxime should provide a cost-effective substitute for cefamandole and, in certain situations, third-generation cephalosporins.

The impact of hospitalization on the aerobic fecal microflora.

Quantitative bacteriological analysis of the aerobic fecal microflora of 75 patients indicated that, at the time of admission to hospital, Escherichia coli were the predominant fecal aerotolerant bacteria. Subsequent fecal samples showed a progressive supplantation of E coli by Klebsiella, Enterobacter and Proteus. At the end of 21 days of hospitalization, E coli remained predominant in only 30 patients. None of the patients had received antibiotics, undergone surgery or been subjected to x-ray studies of the gastrointestinal tract. The cause of the change of fecal flora in these patients is unknown, and no change of flora was observed in a control group of nonhospitalized persons, also studied for 21 days. The appearance of Klebsiella, Enterobacter and Proteus as predominant in the fecal flora of hospitalized patients may be an important factor in the natural history of hospital-associated infections.

Enterococcal superinfection and colonization with aztreonam therapy.

Patients were given aztreonam (SQ 26,776) parenterally for the treatment of various gram-negative infections. During or shortly after therapy, 8 (17.8%) of 45 patients became infected with or colonized by enterococcus. These eight cases included eight urinary tract isolates; one of these cases subsequently developed bacteremia. Five patients required further antimicrobial therapy directed against enterococcus. Patients receiving aztreonam are at risk for the development of enterococcal superinfection or colonization.

Gram-negative Bacillary Meningitis

The incidence of gram-negative bacillary meningitis has increased significantly in the past two decades. Approximately two thirds of all reported cases have occurred after neurosurgical procedures. With the development of the newer cephalosporins, the overall mortality rate has decreased from 40 to 80 per cent to 10 to 20 per cent.

Disulfiram-like reactions with newer cephalosporins: cefmenoxime

A 54-year-old woman with recurrent adenocarcinoma of the uterus was treated with new third-generation cephalosporin, cefmenoxime, for a urinary tract infection. She received an alcohol-containing tylenol elixir while receiving the drug on two occasions. A disulfiram-like reaction was noticed each time. Such reactions have been described in patients receiving certain drugs such as 5-nitroimidazoles, nitrofurans, sulfonylureas and certain newer cephalosporins with a methyltetrazolethiol side chain. This is the first report of a disulfiram-like reaction with cefmenoxime. The mechanism, causes, and significance of disulfiram-like reactions are discussed.

Antimicrobial activities of BMY-28142, cefbuperazone, and cefpiramide compared with those of other cephalosporins.

The antimicrobial activities of BMY-28142, cefbuperazone (BMY-25182; formerly T-1982), and cefpiramide (WY-44635; formerly SM-1652) were compared with those of cefmenoxime, cefoperazone, cefotaxime, ceftizoxime, and moxalactam. BMY-28142 was the most active cephalosporin against the majority of aerobic and facultatively anaerobic microorganisms studied. Its spectrum of activity was very similar to that of cefotaxime. However, BMY-28142, cefbuperazone, cefmenoxime, cefotaxime, ceftizoxime, and moxalactam were equivalent in activity and rate of killing against members of the family Enterobacteriaceae. Cefpiramide was considerably less active than the other cephalosporins against the Enterobacteriaceae.