Advertisement for orthosearch.org.uk
Results 1 - 3 of 3
Results per page:
The Bone & Joint Journal
Vol. 101-B, Issue 5 | Pages 621 - 624
1 May 2019
Pumberger M Bürger J Strube P Akgün D Putzier M

Aims. During revision procedures for aseptic reasons, there remains a suspicion that failure may have been the result of an undetected subclinical infection. However, there is little evidence available in the literature about unexpected positive results in presumed aseptic revision spine surgery. The aims of our study were to estimate the prevalence of unexpected positive culture using sonication and to evaluate clinical characteristics of these patients. Patients and Methods. All patients who underwent a revision surgery after instrumented spinal surgery at our institution between July 2014 and August 2016 with spinal implants submitted for sonication were retrospectively analyzed. Only revisions presumed as aseptic are included in the study. During the study period, 204 spinal revisions were performed for diagnoses other than infection. In 38 cases, sonication cultures were not obtained, leaving a study cohort of 166 cases. The mean age of the cohort was 61.5 years (. sd. 20.4) and there were 104 female patients. Results. Sonication cultures were positive in 75 cases (45.2%). Hardware failure was the most common indication for revision surgery and revealed a positive sonication culture in 26/75 cases (35%) followed by adjacent segment disease (ASD) in 23/75 cases (30%). Cutibacterium acnes and Staphylococcus epidermidis were the most commonly isolated microorganisms, observed in 45% and 31% of cases, respectively. C. acnes was isolated in 65.2% of cases when the indication for revision surgery was ASD. Conclusion. Infection must always be considered as a possibility in the setting of spinal revision surgery, especially in the case of hardware failure, regardless of the lack of clinical signs. Sonication should be routinely used to isolate microorganisms adherent to implants. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2019;101-B:621–624


The Bone & Joint Journal
Vol. 102-B, Issue 7 | Pages 899 - 903
1 Jul 2020
Bürger J Palmowski Y Strube P Perka C Putzier M Pumberger M

Aims. To evaluate the histopathological examination of peri-implant tissue samples as a technique in the diagnosis of postoperative spinal implant infection (PSII). Methods. This was a retrospective analysis. Patients who underwent revision spinal surgery at our institution were recruited for this study. PSII was diagnosed by clinical signs, histopathology, and microbiological examination of intraoperatively collected samples. Histopathology was defined as the gold standard. The sensitivity for histopathology was calculated. A total of 47 patients with PSII and at least one microbiological and histopathological sample were included in the study. Results. PSII occurred in approximately 28% of the study population. Histopathology showed a sensitivity of 51.1% in the diagnosis of PSII. The most commonly found pathogens were Cutibacterium acnes and gram-positive staphylococci. Conclusion. Histopathology has low sensitivity for detecting PSII. In particular, infections caused by low-virulence microorganisms are insufficiently detected by histopathology. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2020;102-B(7):899–903


The Bone & Joint Journal
Vol. 101-B, Issue 3 | Pages 246 - 252
1 Mar 2019
Iwata E Scarborough M Bowden G McNally M Tanaka Y Athanasou NA

Aims

The aim of this study was to determine the diagnostic utility of histological analysis in spinal biopsies for spondylodiscitis (SD).

Patients and Methods

Clinical features, radiology, results of microbiology, histology, and laboratory investigations in 50 suspected SD patients were evaluated. In 29 patients, the final (i.e. treatment-based) diagnosis was pyogenic SD; in seven patients, the final diagnosis was mycobacterial SD. In pyogenic SD, the neutrophil polymorph (NP) infiltrate was scored semi-quantitatively by determining the mean number of NPs per (×400) high-power field (HPF).