Advertisement for orthosearch.org.uk
Results 1 - 2 of 2
Results per page:
Orthopaedic Proceedings
Vol. 101-B, Issue SUPP_14 | Pages 81 - 81
1 Dec 2019
Maurer S Moter A Kursawe L Kuster SP Bartik B Rahm S Zinkernagel A Zbinden R Zingg P Achermann Y
Full Access

Aim

Periprosthetic joint infections (PJI) are increasing due to our elderly population with the need of a joint prosthesis. These infections are difficult to treat, because bacteria form biofilms within one day on the orthopedic implant surface. Notably, most of the current available antibiotics do not penetrate the biofilm or are not active against the sessile forms of bacteria. Therefore, prevention is key. In the current paradigm, bacteria from the skin surface or dermis - such as Staphylococcus aureus, coagulase-negative staphylococci, or Cutibacterium sp. – contaminate the periimplant tissue during surgery. Cutibacterium avidum, which has increasingly been reported in hip PJIs, colonizes the skin in the groin area in 32.3%. We were wondering if standard skin antisepsis before hip arthroplasty is effective to eliminate C. avidum colonization in the surgical field.

Method

In a single-center, prospective study, we preoperatively screened all patients undergoing a hip arthroplasty through a direct anterior approach for different skin bacteria in the groin area. Only in patients colonized with C. avidum, we intraoperatively searched for persistent bacterial growth during and after triple skin antisepsis with povidone-iodine/alcohol. For that, we collected skin scrapings after first and third antisepsis and biopsies from the dermis at the surgical incision and evaluated bacterial growth and species. In addition, thin sections of the dermis biopsies were submitted to Fluorescence in situ Hybridization (FISH) using pan-bacteria probe EUB338.


Orthopaedic Proceedings
Vol. 91-B, Issue SUPP_I | Pages 128 - 128
1 Mar 2009
Dora C Altwegg M Gerber C Böttger E Zbinden R
Full Access

A significant portion of prosthetic joint infections with biofilm-embedded bacteria may not be adequately sampled by standard periprosthetic tissue collection techniques. The aim of the present study was to combine ultrasonication sampling procedures with standard in-traoperative sampling and cultural techniques.

A total of 69 patients with implants to be removed were included in this study; a prosthetic joint infection was diagnosed or rejected according to a standardized clinical score. Intra-operative tissue specimens were cultured using standard techniques; implants were subjected to ultrasonication and sonicates used for inoculation of cultures and broad-range eubacterial PCR.

According to the clinical score, a prosthetic joint infection was present in 14 of the 69 patients. 11/14 had positive cultures for tissue samples, 13/14 had positive cultures when considering in addition the results from sonicate cultures. Sonicate PCR was positive in 12/13, and negative in 1/13 (excluding one infection due to Candida albicans). Ultrasonication improved sensitivity of culture from 78.6% to 92.9%; sensitivity and specificity of PCR from sonicates was 92,3% and 100%, respectively.

Combined with serially sampled periprosthetic tissue, ultrasonication of implants may help to increase the sensitivity of laboratory investigations based on cultural procedures. PCR analyses did not improve sensitivity although implementation of PCR may aid in improving the specificity of cultural detection.