Advertisement for orthosearch.org.uk
Results 1 - 4 of 4
Results per page:
Bone & Joint Research
Vol. 12, Issue 9 | Pages 546 - 558
12 Sep 2023
Shen J Wei Z Wang S Wang X Lin W Liu L Wang G

Aims. This study aimed to evaluate the effectiveness of the induced membrane technique for treating infected bone defects, and to explore the factors that might affect patient outcomes. Methods. A comprehensive search was performed in PubMed, Embase, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials databases between 1 January 2000 and 31 October 2021. Studies with a minimum sample size of five patients with infected bone defects treated with the induced membrane technique were included. Factors associated with nonunion, infection recurrence, and additional procedures were identified using logistic regression analysis on individual patient data. Results. After the screening, 44 studies were included with 1,079 patients and 1,083 segments of infected bone defects treated with the induced membrane technique. The mean defect size was 6.8 cm (0.5 to 30). After the index second stage procedure, 85% (797/942) of segments achieved union, and 92% (999/1,083) of segments achieved final healing. The multivariate analysis with data from 296 patients suggested that older age was associated with higher nonunion risk. Patients with external fixation in the second stage had a significantly higher risk of developing nonunion, increasing the need for additional procedures. The autografts harvested from the femur reamer-irrigator-aspirator increased nonunion, infection recurrence, and additional procedure rates. Conclusion. The induced membrane technique is an effective technique for treating infected bone defects. Internal fixation during the second stage might effectively promote bone healing and reduce additional procedures without increasing infection recurrence. Future studies should standardize individual patient data prospectively to facilitate research on the affected patient outcomes. Cite this article: Bone Joint Res 2023;12(9):546–558


Bone & Joint Research
Vol. 8, Issue 11 | Pages 526 - 534
1 Nov 2019
Yang C Wang J Yin Z Wang Q Zhang X Jiang Y Shen H

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 two-stage exchange, was associated with a reduced rate of infection recurrence. This proposed protocol appears to be safe and effective, especially in patients with negative culture results prior to the first-stage operation. Cite this article: Bone Joint Res 2019;8:526–534


Bone & Joint Research
Vol. 8, Issue 11 | Pages 526 - 534
1 Nov 2019
Yang C Wang J Yin Z Wang Q Zhang X Jiang Y Shen H

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 two-stage exchange, was associated with a reduced rate of infection recurrence. This proposed protocol appears to be safe and effective, especially in patients with negative culture results prior to the first-stage operation. Cite this article: Bone Joint Res 2019;8:526–534


Bone & Joint Research
Vol. 7, Issue 7 | Pages 447 - 456
1 Jul 2018
Morgenstern M Vallejo A McNally MA Moriarty TF Ferguson JY Nijs S Metsemakers W

Objectives

As well as debridement and irrigation, soft-tissue coverage, and osseous stabilization, systemic antibiotic prophylaxis is considered the benchmark in the management of open fractures and considerably reduces the risk of subsequent fracture-related infections (FRI). The direct application of antibiotics in the surgical field (local antibiotics) has been used for decades as additional prophylaxis in open fractures, although definitive evidence confirming a beneficial effect is scarce. The purpose of the present study was to review the clinical evidence regarding the effect of prophylactic application of local antibiotics in open limb fractures.

Methods

A comprehensive literature search was performed in PubMed, Web of Science, and Embase. Cohort studies investigating the effect of additional local antibiotic prophylaxis compared with systemic prophylaxis alone in the management of open fractures were included and the data were pooled in a meta-analysis.