There is a considerable challenge in treating bone infections and orthopaedic device-associated infection (ODAI), partly due to impaired penetration of systemically administrated antibiotics at the site of infection. This may be circumvented by local drug administration. Knowledge of the release kinetics from any carrier material is essential for proper application. Ceftriaxone shows a particular constant release from calcium sulphate (CaSO4) in vitro, and is particularly effective against streptococci and a large portion of Gram-negative bacteria. We present the clinical release kinetics of ceftriaxone-loaded CaSO4 applied locally to treat ODAI. A total of 30 operations with ceftriaxone-loaded CaSO4 had been performed in 28 patients. Ceftriaxone was applied as a single local antibiotic in 21 operations and combined with vancomycin in eight operations, and in an additional operation with vancomycin and amphotericin B. Sampling of wound fluid was performed from drains or aspirations. Ceftriaxone concentrations were measured by liquid chromatography with tandem mass spectrometry (LC-MS/MS).Aims
Methods
Objectives. The optimal protocol for antibiotic loading in the articulating cement spacers for the treatment of prosthetic joint infection (PJI) remains controversial. The objective of the present study was to investigate the effectiveness of articulating cement spacers loaded with a new combination of antibiotics. Methods. A retrospective cohort study involving 114 PJI cases treated with implantation of an articulating cement spacer between 2005 and 2016 was performed. The treatment outcomes of the conventional protocol (i.e. gentamicin and vancomycin (GV protocol)) were compared with those reported using the sophisticated antibiotic-loading protocol (i.e. vancomycin, meropenem, and amphotericin (VMA protocol)). Results. There were 62 and 52 PJI cases treated with the GV and VMA protocols, respectively. Antimicrobial susceptibility testing revealed that 22/78 of all isolates (28.2%) in this series were resistant to gentamicin, whereas there were no vancomycin-, meropenem-, or amphotericin-resistant strains. The overall infection recurrence rates were 17.7% (11/62) and 1.9% (1/52), respectively (p = 0.006). In patients with a negative preoperative culture, there was no infection recurrence reported in the VMA cohort (0/45 (0%) vs 10/54 (18.5%) in the GV cohort; p = 0.002). Multivariate analysis indicated that the VMA protocol correlated with a decreased risk of infection recurrence compared with the GV protocol (p = 0.025). Conclusion. The sophisticated VMA protocol for the loading of antibiotics in articulating cement spacers, as part of a
Objectives. The optimal protocol for antibiotic loading in the articulating cement spacers for the treatment of prosthetic joint infection (PJI) remains controversial. The objective of the present study was to investigate the effectiveness of articulating cement spacers loaded with a new combination of antibiotics. Methods. A retrospective cohort study involving 114 PJI cases treated with implantation of an articulating cement spacer between 2005 and 2016 was performed. The treatment outcomes of the conventional protocol (i.e. gentamicin and vancomycin (GV protocol)) were compared with those reported using the sophisticated antibiotic-loading protocol (i.e. vancomycin, meropenem, and amphotericin (VMA protocol)). Results. There were 62 and 52 PJI cases treated with the GV and VMA protocols, respectively. Antimicrobial susceptibility testing revealed that 22/78 of all isolates (28.2%) in this series were resistant to gentamicin, whereas there were no vancomycin-, meropenem-, or amphotericin-resistant strains. The overall infection recurrence rates were 17.7% (11/62) and 1.9% (1/52), respectively (p = 0.006). In patients with a negative preoperative culture, there was no infection recurrence reported in the VMA cohort (0/45 (0%) vs 10/54 (18.5%) in the GV cohort; p = 0.002). Multivariate analysis indicated that the VMA protocol correlated with a decreased risk of infection recurrence compared with the GV protocol (p = 0.025). Conclusion. The sophisticated VMA protocol for the loading of antibiotics in articulating cement spacers, as part of a
Prosthetic joint infection (PJI) is the most common cause of arthroplasty failure. However, infection is often difficult to detect by conventional bacterial cultures, for which false-negative rates are 23% to 35%. In contrast, 16S rRNA metagenomics has been shown to quantitatively detect unculturable, unsuspected, and unviable pathogens. In this study, we investigated the use of 16S rRNA metagenomics for detection of bacterial pathogens in synovial fluid (SF) from patients with hip or knee PJI. We analyzed the bacterial composition of 22 SF samples collected from 11 patients with PJIs (first- and second-stage surgery). The V3 and V4 region of bacteria was assessed by comparing the taxonomic distribution of the 16S rDNA amplicons with microbiome sequencing analysis. We also compared the results of bacterial detection from different methods including 16S metagenomics, traditional cultures, and targeted Sanger sequencing.Objectives
Methods
Prosthetic joint infection (PJI) diagnosis is a major challenge in orthopaedics, and no reliable parameters have been established for accurate, preoperative predictions in the differential diagnosis of aseptic loosening or PJI. This study surveyed factors in synovial fluid (SF) for improving PJI diagnosis. We enrolled 48 patients (including 39 PJI and nine aseptic loosening cases) who required knee/hip revision surgery between January 2016 and December 2017. The PJI diagnosis was established according to the Musculoskeletal Infection Society (MSIS) criteria. SF was used to survey factors by protein array and enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay to compare protein expression patterns in SF among three groups (aseptic loosening and first- and second-stage surgery). We compared routine clinical test data, such as C-reactive protein level and leucocyte number, with potential biomarker data to assess the diagnostic ability for PJI within the same patient groups.Objectives
Methods
