Aims. Gram-negative periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) has been poorly studied despite its rapidly increasing incidence. Treatment with one-stage revision using intra-articular (IA) infusion of antibiotics may offer a reasonable alternative with a distinct advantage of providing a means of delivering the drug in high concentrations. Carbapenems are regarded as the last line of defense against severe Gram-negative or polymicrobial infection. This study presents the results of one-stage revision using intra-articular carbapenem infusion for treating Gram-negative PJI, and analyzes the characteristics of bacteria distribution and drug sensitivity. Methods. We retrospectively reviewed 32 patients (22 hips and 11 knees) who underwent single-stage revision combined with IA carbapenem infusion between November 2013 and March 2020. The IA and intravenous (IV) carbapenem infusions were administered for a single Gram-negative infection, and IV vancomycin combined with IA carbapenems and vancomycin was applied for polymicrobial infection including Gram-negative bacteria. The bacterial community distribution, drug sensitivity, infection control rate, functional recovery, and complications were evaluated. Reinfection or death caused by PJI was regarded as a treatment failure. Results. Gram-negative PJI was mainly caused by Escherichia coli (8/34), Enterobacter cloacae (7/34), and Klebsiella pneumoniae (5/34). Seven cases (7/32) involved polymicrobial PJIs. The resistance rates of penicillin, cephalosporin, quinolones, and sulfonamides were > 10%, and all penicillin and partial cephalosporins (first and second generation) were > 30%. Of 32 cases, treatment failed to eradicate infection in only three cases (9.4%), at a mean follow-up of 55.1 months (SD 25 to 90). The mean postoperative Harris Hip Score and Hospital for Special Surgery knee score at the most recent follow-up were 81 (62 to 91) and 79 (56 to 89), respectively. One patient developed a fistula, and another presented with a local rash on an infected joint. Conclusion. The use of IA carbapenem delivered alongside one-stage revision effectively controlled Gram-negative infection and obtained acceptable clinical outcomes with few complications. Notably, first- and second-generation cephalosporins and penicillin should be administrated with caution, due to a high incidence of resistance. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2023;105-B(3):284–293

Aims

The management of periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) after total knee arthroplasty (TKA) is challenging. The correct antibiotic management remains elusive due to differences in epidemiology and resistance between countries, and reports in the literature. Before the efficacy of surgical treatment is investigated, it is crucial to analyze the bacterial strains causing PJI, especially for patients in whom no organisms are grown.

Antibiotic resistance represents a threat to human health. It has been suggested that by 2050, antibiotic-resistant infections could cause ten million deaths each year. In orthopaedics, many patients undergoing surgery suffer from complications resulting from implant-associated infection. In these circumstances secondary surgery is usually required and chronic and/or relapsing disease may ensue. The development of effective treatments for antibiotic-resistant infections is needed. Recent evidence shows that bacteriophage (phages; viruses that infect bacteria) therapy may represent a viable and successful solution. In this review, a brief description of bone and joint infection and the nature of bacteriophages is presented, as well as a summary of our current knowledge on the use of bacteriophages in the treatment of bacterial infections. We present contemporary published in vitro and in vivo data as well as data from clinical trials, as they relate to bone and joint infections. We discuss the potential use of bacteriophage therapy in orthopaedic infections. This area of research is beginning to reveal successful results, but mostly in nonorthopaedic fields. We believe that bacteriophage therapy has potential therapeutic value for implant-associated infections in orthopaedics.

Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2021;103-B(2):234–244.

Aims

The diagnosis of periprosthetic joint infection can be difficult due to the high rate of culture-negative infections. The aim of this study was to assess the use of next-generation sequencing for detecting organisms in synovial fluid.

Prophylactic antibiotics can decrease the risk of wound infection and have been routinely employed in orthopaedic surgery for decades. Despite their widespread use, questions still surround the selection of antibiotics for prophylaxis, timing and duration of administration. The health economic costs associated with wound infections are significant, and the judicious but appropriate use of antibiotics can reduce this risk.

This review examines the evidence behind commonly debated topics in antibiotic prophylaxis and highlights the uses and advantages of some commonly used antibiotics.

Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2016;98-B:1014–19.

Little information is available about several important aspects of the treatment of melioidosis osteomyelitis and septic arthritis.

We undertook a retrospective review of 50 patients with these conditions in an attempt to determine the effect of location of the disease, type of surgical intervention and duration of antibiotic treatment on outcome, particularly complications and relapse.

We found that there was a 27.5% risk of osteomyelitis of the adjacent bone in patients with septic arthritis in the lower limb. Patients with septic arthritis and osteomyelitis of an adjacent bone were in hospital significantly longer (p = 0.001), needed more operations (p = 0.031) and had a significantly higher rate of complications and re-presentation (p = 0.048).

More than half the patients (61%), most particularly those with multifocal bone and joint involvement, and those with septic arthritis and osteomyelitis of an adjacent bone who were treated operatively, needed more visits to theatre.

Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2015;97-B:277–82.

This study evaluates the long-term survival of spinal implants after surgical site infection (SSI) and the risk factors associated with treatment failure.

A Kaplan-Meier survival analysis was carried out on 43 patients who had undergone a posterior spinal fusion with instrumentation between January 2006 and December 2008, and who consecutively developed an acute deep surgical site infection. All were appropriately treated by surgical debridement with a tailored antibiotic program based on culture results for a minimum of eight weeks.

A ‘terminal event’ or failure of treatment was defined as implant removal or death related to the SSI. The mean follow-up was 26 months (1.03 to 50.9). A total of ten patients (23.3%) had a terminal event. The rate of survival after the first debridement was 90.7% (95% confidence interval (CI) 82.95 to 98.24) at six months, 85.4% (95% CI 74.64 to 96.18) at one year, and 73.2% (95% CI 58.70 to 87.78) at two, three and four years. Four of nine patients required re-instrumentation after implant removal, and two of the four had a recurrent infection at the surgical site. There was one recurrence after implant removal without re-instrumentation.

Multivariate analysis revealed a significant risk of treatment failure in patients who developed sepsis (hazard ratio (HR) 12.5 (95% confidence interval (CI) 2.6 to 59.9); p < 0.001) or who had > three fused segments (HR 4.5 (95% CI 1.25 to 24.05); p = 0.03). Implant survival is seriously compromised even after properly treated surgical site infection, but progressively decreases over the first 24 months.

Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2013;95-B:1121–6.

We undertook a retrospective case-control study to assess the clinical variables associated with infections in open fractures. A total of 1492 open fractures were retrieved; these were Gustilo and Anderson grade I in 663 (44.4%), grade II in 370 (24.8%), grade III in 310 (20.8%) and unclassifiable in 149 (10.0%). The median duration of prophylaxis was three days (interquartile range (IQR) 1 to 3), and the median number of surgical interventions was two (1 to 9). We identified 54 infections (3.6%) occurring at a median of ten days (IQR 5 to 20) after trauma. Pathogens intrinsically resistant to the empirical antibiotic regimen used (enterococci, Enterobacter spp, Pseudomonas spp) were documented in 35 of 49 cases (71%). In multivariable regression analyses, grade III fractures and vascular injury or compartment syndrome were significantly associated with infection. Overall, compared with one day of antibiotic treatment, two to three days (odds ratio (OR) 0.6 (95% confidence interval (CI) 0.2 to 2.0)), four to five days (OR 1.2 (95% CI 0.3 to 4.9)), or > five days (OR 1.4 (95% CI 0.4 to 4.4)) did not show any significant differences in the infection risk. These results were similar when multivariable analysis was performed for grade III fractures only (OR 0.3 (95% CI 0.1 to 3.4); OR 0.6 (95% CI 0.2 to 2.1); and OR 1.7 (95% CI 0.5 to 6.2), respectively).

Infection in open fractures is related to the extent of tissue damage but not to the duration of prophylactic antibiotic therapy. Even for grade III fractures, a one-day course of prophylactic antibiotics might be as effective as prolonged prophylaxis.

Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2013;95-B:831–7.