Advertisement for orthosearch.org.uk
Results 1 - 3 of 3
Results per page:

Aims

Treatment outcomes for methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) using systemic vancomycin and antibacterial cement spacers during two-stage revision arthroplasty remain unsatisfactory. This study explored the efficacy and safety of intra-articular vancomycin injections for PJI control after debridement and cement spacer implantation in a rat model.

Methods

Total knee arthroplasty (TKA), MRSA inoculation, debridement, and vancomycin-spacer implantation were performed successively in rats to mimic first-stage PJI during the two-stage revision arthroplasty procedure. Vancomycin was administered intraperitoneally or intra-articularly for two weeks to control the infection after debridement and spacer implantation.


Bone & Joint Research
Vol. 10, Issue 3 | Pages 156 - 165
1 Mar 2021
Yagi H Kihara S Mittwede PN Maher PL Rothenberg AC Falcione ADCM Chen A Urish KL Tuan RS Alexander PG

Aims

Periprosthetic joint infections (PJIs) and osteomyelitis are clinical challenges that are difficult to eradicate. Well-characterized large animal models necessary for testing and validating new treatment strategies for these conditions are lacking. The purpose of this study was to develop a rabbit model of chronic PJI in the distal femur.

Methods

Fresh suspensions of Staphylococcus aureus (ATCC 25923) were prepared in phosphate-buffered saline (PBS) (1 × 109 colony-forming units (CFUs)/ml). Periprosthetic osteomyelitis in female New Zealand white rabbits was induced by intraosseous injection of planktonic bacterial suspension into a predrilled bone tunnel prior to implant screw placement, examined at five and 28 days (n = 5/group) after surgery, and compared to a control aseptic screw group. Radiographs were obtained weekly, and blood was collected to measure ESR, CRP, and white blood cell (WBC) counts. Bone samples and implanted screws were harvested on day 28, and processed for histological analysis and viability assay of bacteria, respectively.


Bone & Joint Research
Vol. 8, Issue 5 | Pages 199 - 206
1 May 2019
Romanò CL Tsuchiya H Morelli I Battaglia AG Drago L

Implant-related infection is one of the leading reasons for failure in orthopaedics and trauma, and results in high social and economic costs. Various antibacterial coating technologies have proven to be safe and effective both in preclinical and clinical studies, with post-surgical implant-related infections reduced by 90% in some cases, depending on the type of coating and experimental setup used. Economic assessment may enable the cost-to-benefit profile of any given antibacterial coating to be defined, based on the expected infection rate with and without the coating, the cost of the infection management, and the cost of the coating. After reviewing the latest evidence on the available antibacterial coatings, we quantified the impact caused by delaying their large-scale application. Considering only joint arthroplasties, our calculations indicated that for an antibacterial coating, with a final user’s cost price of €600 and able to reduce post-surgical infection by 80%, each year of delay to its large-scale application would cause an estimated 35 200 new cases of post-surgical infection in Europe, equating to additional hospital costs of approximately €440 million per year. An adequate reimbursement policy for antibacterial coatings may benefit patients, healthcare systems, and related research, as could faster and more affordable regulatory pathways for the technologies still in the pipeline. This could significantly reduce the social and economic burden of implant-related infections in orthopaedics and trauma.

Cite this article: C. L. Romanò, H. Tsuchiya, I. Morelli, A. G. Battaglia, L. Drago. Antibacterial coating of implants: are we missing something? Bone Joint Res 2019;8:199–206. DOI: 10.1302/2046-3758.85.BJR-2018-0316.