Addition of antibiotics to the bone cement decreases the incidence of infection. However, the antibiotic is only partially released. Ultrasound may increase the antibiotic release and furthermore the effectiveness of the antibiotic might be enhanced by the so-called bio-acoustic effect. The objective of this study was twofold. The first aim was to evaluate to what extent antibiotic release from bone cement could be increased by ultrasound. The second aim was to investigate the viability of bacteria when antibiotic release from bone cements was combined with ultrasound. Cylindrical bone cement samples of Palacos R-G (loaded with gentamicin) and Copal (loaded with gentamicin and clindamycin) were insonated and antibiotic release was compared with uninsonated samples. In addition, identical samples were used in combination with cultures of bacteria derived from prosthesis-related infections. The viability of these bacteria was determined with and without ultrasound, using unloaded Palacos R as a control. There was a trend of increased gentamicin release under influence of ultrasound. Clindamycin release from Copal was significantly increased. Ultrasound alone did not affect bacterial viability, but the application of ultrasound in combination with antibiotic-loaded bone cements reduced both planktonic and biofilm bacterial viability. The release of antibiotics from bone cement was increased by the application of ultrasound. Antibiotic release in combination with ultrasound increases the antimicrobial efficacy against a variety of clinical isolates. The enhanced efficacy against bacteria in the biofilm mode of growth, especially against a gentamicin-resistant strain, is clinically important with regard to the treatment of infected joint prostheses. Ultrasound may also be applied in the early postoperative period to prevent infections, because planktonic bacteria present in the wound and wound area due to inevitable contamination during surgery can then be more effectively prevented from forming a biofilm.
Copal bone cement loaded with gentamicin and clindamicin was developed recently as a response to the emerging occurrence of gentamicin-resistant strains in periprothetic infections. The objective of this study was to compare the in vitro antibiotic release and antimicrobial efficacy of gentamicin/clindamicin-loaded Copal bone cement and gentamicin-loaded Palacos R-G bone cement, as well as biofilm formation on these cements. In order to determine antibiotic release, cement blocks were placed in phosphate buffer and aliquots were taken at designated times for measurement of antibiotic release. In addition, the bone cement discs were pressed on agar to study the effects of antibiotic release on bacterial growth. Biofilm formation on the different bone cements was also investigated after 1 and 7 days using plate counting and confocal laser scanning microscopy (CLSM). Experiments were done with a gentamicin-sensitive S. aureus and a gentamicin-resistant CNS. Antibiotic release after 672 h from Copal bone cement was more extensive (65% of the clindamycin and 41% of the gentamicin incorporated) than from Palacos R-G (4% of the gentamicin incorporated). The higher antibiotic release from Copal resulted in a stronger and more prolonged inhibition of bacterial growth on agar. Plate counting and CLSM of biofilms grown on the bone cements showed that antibiotic release reduced bacterial viability, most notably close to the cement surface. Moreover, the gentamicin-sensitive S. aureus formed gentamicin-resistant small colony variants on Palacos R-G, and therefore, Copal was much more effective in decreasing biofilm formation than Palacos R-G. Biofilm formation on bone cement could be more effectively reduced by incorporation of a second antibiotic, next to gentamicin. Antibiotic release from the cements had a stronger effect on bacteria close to the cement than on bacteria at the outer surface of the bio-film. Clinically, bone cement with two antibiotics may be more effective than cement loaded with only gentamicin. The clinical efficacy of antibiotic loaded bone cements in combination with systemic antibiotics can be explained because antibiotics released from cements kill predominantly the bacteria in the bottom of the biofilm, whereas systemic antibiotics can only deal with bacteria at the outer surface of the biofilm.
Clinical experience indicates the beneficial effects of antibiotic-loaded bone cement. Although