BACKGROUND: One proposed strategy to increase the success of irrigation and debridement with implant retention for the treatment of acute periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) is the use of dissolvable antibiotic-impregnated calcium sulfate beads to provide a local depot of antibiotics. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the outcome of such an approach. METHODS: Thirty-two patients with acute hematogenous (18 patients; 1 bilateral) or acute postoperative (14 patients) PJIs who underwent irrigation and debridement with implant retention and addition of antibiotic-impregnated calcium sulfate beads were retrospectively reviewed. PJI followed 27 total knee arthroplasties and 6 total hip arthroplasties. The most common infecting organisms were methicillin-sensitive Staphylococcus aureus (13 of 33) and Streptococcus (9 of 33). The primary outcome parameter was recurrence of infection according to the Musculoskeletal Infection Society criteria. Patients were followed up for a minimum of 3 months or until failure. RESULTS: At a mean of 12.7 months (range, 3-30 months), 16 of the 33 patients failed (48%). Acute hematogenous and acute postoperative PJI had similar failure rates at 47% and 50%, respectively (P = .88). Seven failures required a 2-stage exchange, while 8 patients were treated with chronic antibiotic suppression, being unwilling or unable to undergo further surgical intervention. CONCLUSION: The addition of antibiotic-impregnated calcium sulfate beads does not appear to improve outcomes of irrigation and debridement with implant retention in the setting of acute hematogenous or acute postoperative PJI. Given the short follow-up in this report, this represents a best-case scenario and the overall failure rate may be higher with further follow-up.

Study Design. A retrospective, cohort study of 84 patients with deep spine infection managed at a major tertiary hospital over 14 years with a minimum follow up of 2 years. Objective. To determine the role of instrumentation in spines with deep infection. Summary of Background Data. It is often believed that implants should not be inserted in patients with deep spine infection because of the risk of persistent or recurrent infection. However, there are often concerns about spinal stability and a paucity of evidence to guide clinical practice in this field. Methods. We compared the mortality, reoperation, and reinfection rates in patients with spine infection treated with antibiotics alone, antibiotics with debridement, and antibiotics with debridement and instrumentation. Significant outcome predictors were determined using multivariable logistic regression model. Results. Forty-nine males and 35 females with a mean age was 62.0 years had spine infection affecting the lumbar spine predominantly. The most common form of infection was osteomyelitis and spondylodiscitis (69.4%). Staphylococcus aureus was the most common causative organism (61.2%). There was no difference in terms of reoperation or relapse for patients treated with antibiotics alone, antibiotics with debridement, or antibiotics with debridement and instrumentation. However, compared with antibiotics alone, the crude inhospital mortality was lower for patients treated with instrumentation (odds ratio, OR, 0.82; P = 0.01), and antibiotics with debridement (OR 0.80; P = 0.02). Conclusion. Spinal instrumentation in an infected spine is safe and not associated with higher reoperation or relapse rates. Mortality is lower for patients treated with instrumentation.

Background: Postoperative instrumented spine infection (PISI) is a severe complication of invasive spine procedures. Methods: Retrospective study of patients treated for PISI between 1st January 2008 and 31st December 2012 in a French University Hospital. The objectives of this study were to describe the outcome of patients treated with debridement-irrigation, antibiotic therapy and implant retention (DAIR) within three months after the occurrence of PISI and to identify factors associated with relapse. Results: Among 4290 patients who underwent spinal arthrodesis surgery during the 5-year study period, 129 had PISI treated by debridement-irrigation in the first three months (3.0%, 95% confidence interval [95%CI]: 2.5-3.5). Fifty-two (40%) were female and the median age was 57 years. Fourteen patients (10.8%) had diabetes and 73 (56.6%) had a BMI (Body Mass Index) ≥25 kg/m2. Staphylocccus aureus, enterobacteria or polymicrobial infections were identified in 44.0, 18.0 and 13.0% of cases, respectively. One hundred and six patients (82.2%) and one hundred and twenty-one patients (93.8%) were cured after one DAIR and after two DAIR, respectively. In multivariate logistic analysis, polymicrobial infection was associated with relapse (Odd Ratio [OR] = 3.81; 95%CI: 1.06-13.66; p = .03), while a BMI ≥25 kg/m2 was a protective factor (OR =0.25; 95%CI: 0.07-0.89; p = .03). Conclusion: DAIR may be effective for PISI when performed within the first 3 months after onset of infection. Relapses are significantly associated with polymicrobial infection and negatively associated with moderate overweight. These results need to be confirmed in future prospective studies.

Clinical and microbiological characteristics of patients with Bacteroides prosthetic joint infection (PJI) have not been well described in the literature. The aim of this retrospective cohort study was to assess the outcome of patients with Bacteroides PJI and to review risk factors associated with failure of therapy. Between 1/1969 and 12/2012, 20 episodes of Bacteroides PJI in 17 patients were identified at our institution. The mean age of the patients in this cohort at the time of diagnosis was 55.6 years; 59% (n=10) had knee involvement. Twenty four percent (n=4) had diabetes mellitus, and 24% had a history of either gastrointestinal (GI) or genitourinary (GU) pathology prior to the diagnosis of PJI. Thirty five percent (n=6) were immunosuppressed. The initial medical/surgical strategy was resection arthroplasty (n=9, 50%) or debridement and implant retention (n=5, 28%). Thirty seven percent (n=7) were treated with metronidazole. Eighty percent (n=4) of patients that failed therapy had undergone debridement and retention of their prosthesis, as compared to none of those treated with resection arthroplasty. Seventy percent (n=14) of patient episodes were infection free at their last date of follow up. In conclusion, a significant proportion of patients with Bacteroides PJI are immunosuppressed and have an underlying GI or GU tract pathology. Retention and debridement of the prosthesis is associated with a higher risk of treatment failure.

Discontinuing routine processing of screening urine cultures prior to elective joint arthroplasty resulted in substantial reduction in urine cultures ordered and antimicrobial prescriptions for asymptomatic bacteriuria, without any significant impact on incidence of prosthetic joint infection. This simple change would be scalable across institutions with potential for significant healthcare savings.

BACKGROUND: While periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) has a huge impact on patient function and health, only a few studies have investigated its impact on mortality. The purpose of this large-scale study was to (1) determine the rate and trends of in-hospital mortality for PJI and (2) compare the in-hospital mortality rate of patients with PJI and those undergoing revision arthroplasty for aseptic failure and patients undergoing other nonorthopedic major surgical procedures. METHODS: Data from the Nationwide Inpatient Sample from 2002 to 2010 were analyzed to determine the risk of in-hospital mortality for PJI patients compared with aseptic revision arthroplasty. The Elixhauser comorbidity index was used to obtain patient comorbidities. Multiple logistic regression analyses were used to examine whether PJI and other patient-related factors were associated with mortality. RESULTS: PJI was associated with an increased risk (odds ratio, 2.05; P < .0001) of in-hospital mortality (0.77%) compared with aseptic revisions (0.38%). The in-hospital mortality rate of revision total hip arthroplasties with PJI was higher than those for interventional coronary procedures (1.22%; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.20-1.24), cholecystectomy (1.13%; 95% CI, 1.11-1.15), kidney transplant (0.70%; 95% CI, 0.61-0.79), and carotid surgery (0.89%; 95% CI, 0.86-0.93). CONCLUSION: Patients undergoing treatment for PJI have a 2-fold increase in in-hospital mortality for each surgical admission compared to aseptic revisions. Considering that PJI cases often have multiple admissions and that this analysis is by surgical admission, the risk of mortality will accumulate for every additional surgery. Surgeons should be cognizant of the potentially fatal outcome of PJI and the importance of infection control to reduce the risk of mortality.

Abstract. Fungal microorganisms are still a rare cause of bone and joint infections. We report a new case of knee prosthetic joint infection due to Candida albicans in a patient with a previous two-stage right knee arthroplasty for septic arthritis due to S. epidermidis occurred several months ago. Moreover, the treatment in 76 cases of Candida prosthetic joint infection has been discussed. Forty patients were female and mean age at diagnosis was 65.7 (± SD 18) yrs. No risk factors for candidal infection were found in 25 patients. Infection site was the knee in 38 patients and hip in 36; pain was present in 44 patients and swelling in 24. The most frequent species was C. albicans, followed by C. parapsilosis. Eleven patients were only treated with antifungal drugs being the outcome favourable in all of them. Two-stage exchange arthroplasty was performed in 30 patients, and resection arthroplasty in other 30; in three patients one-stage exchange arthroplasty was done. A favourable outcome was found in 58 patients after antifungal plus surgical treatment, in 11 after antifungal treatment alone and in one after surgery alone. The type of treatment is still not clearly defined and an algorithm for treatment in fungal PJI should be established, but various types of surgical procedures may be applied.

Background Implant-associated infections are still a feared complication in the field of orthopedics. Bacteria attach to the implant surface and form so-called biofilm colonies that are often difficult to diagnose and treat. Since the majority of studies focus on prosthetic joint infections (PJIs) of the hip and knee, current treatment options (eg, antibiotic prophylaxis) of implant-associated infections have mostly been adapted according to these results. Objective The aim of this study was to evaluate patients with surgical site infections following instrumented stabilization of the spine with regard to detected bacteria species and the course of the disease. Patients and methods We performed a retrospective single-center analysis of implant-associated infections of the spine from 2010 to 2014. A total of 138 patients were included in the study. The following parameters were evaluated: C-reactive protein serum concentration, microbiological evaluation of tissue samples, the time course of the disease, indication for instrumented stabilization of the spine, localization of the infection, and the number of revision surgeries required until cessation of symptoms. Results Coagulase-negative Staphylococcus spp. were most commonly detected (n=69, 50%), followed by fecal bacteria (n=46, 33.3%). In 23.2% of cases, no bacteria were detected despite clinical suspicion of an infection. Most patients suffered from degenerative spine disorders (44.9%), followed by spinal fractures (23.9%), non-degenerative scoliosis (20.3%), and spinal tumors (10.1%). Surgical site infections occurred predominantly within 3 months (64.5%), late infections after 2 years were rare (4.3%), in particular when compared with PJIs. Most cases were successfully treated after 1 revision surgery (60.9%), but there were significant differences between bacteria species. Fecal bacteria were more difficult to treat and often required more than 1 revision surgery. Conclusion In summary, we were able to demonstrate significant differences between spinal implant-associated infections and PJIs. These aspects should be considered early on in the treatment of surgical site infections following instrumented stabilization of the spine.

Background Prosthetic joint infection (PJI) is a major complication of total hip and total knee arthroplasty (THA, TKA). Although mycobacteria are rarely the causative pathogens, it is important to recognize and treat them differently from non-mycobacterial infections. This study aimed to compare the clinical characteristics, associated factors and long-term outcomes of mycobacterial and non-mycobacterial PJI. Methods We conducted a retrospective case-control study of patients aged ≥18 years who were diagnosed with PJI of the hip or knee at Siriraj Hospital from January 2000 to December 2012. Patient characteristics, clinical data, treatments and outcomes were evaluated. Results A total of 178 patients were included, among whom 162 had non-mycobacterial PJI and 16 had mycobacterial PJI. Rapidly growing mycobacteria (RGM) (11) and M. tuberculosis (MTB) (5) were the causative pathogens of mycobacterial PJI. PJI duration and time until onset were significantly different between mycobacterial and non-mycobacterial PJI. Infection within 90 days of arthroplasty was significantly associated with RGM infection (OR 21.86; 95% CI 4.25–112.30; p < .001). Implant removal was associated with improved favorable outcomes at 6 months (OR 5.96; 95% CI 1.88–18.88; p < .01) and 12 months (OR 3.96; 95% CI 1.15–13.71; p = .03) after the infection. Conclusions RGM were the major pathogens of early onset PJI after THA and TKA. Both a high clinical index of suspicion and mycobacterial cultures are recommended when medically managing PJI with negative cultures or non-response to antibiotics. Removal of infected implants was associated with favorable outcomes.

Obtaining reliable cultures during revision arthroplasty is important to adequately diagnose and treat a prosthetic joint infection (PJI). The influence of antimicrobial prophylaxis on culture results remains unclear. Since withholding prophylaxis increases the risk for surgical site infections, clarification on this topic is critical. A systematic review was performed with the following research question: in patients who undergo revision surgery of a prosthetic joint, does preoperative antimicrobial prophylaxis affect the culture yield of intraoperative samples in comparison with nonpreoperative antimicrobial prophylaxis? Seven articles were included in the final analysis. In most studies, standard diagnostic culture techniques were used. In patients with a PJI, pooled analysis showed a culture yield of 88% (145/165) in the prophylaxis group versus 95% (344/362) in the nonprophylaxis group (P = 0.004). Subanalysis of patients with chronic PJIs showed positive cultures in 88% (78/89) versus 91% (52/57), respectively (P = 0.59). In patients with a suspected chronic infection, a maximum difference of 4% in culture yield between the prophylaxis and nonprophylaxis groups was observed. With the use of standard culture techniques, antimicrobial prophylaxis seems to affect cultures in a minority of patients. Along with the known risk of surgical site infections due to inadequate timing of antimicrobial prophylaxis, we discourage the postponement of prophylaxis until tissue samples are obtained in revision surgery. Future studies are necessary to conclude whether the small percentage of false-negative cultures after prophylaxis can be further reduced with the use of more-sensitive culture techniques, like sonication.