Clinical characteristics, etiology, and initial management strategy of newly diagnosed periprosthetic joint infection: A multicenter, prospective observational cohort study of 783 patients

Background Periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) is a devastating complication of joint replacement surgery. Most observational studies of PJI are retrospective or single-center, and reported management approaches and outcomes vary widely. We hypothesized that there would be substantial heterogeneity in PJI management and that most PJIs would present as late acute infections occurring as a consequence of bloodstream infections. Methods The Prosthetic joint Infection in Australia and New Zealand, Observational (PIANO) study is a prospective study at 27 hospitals. From July 2014 through December 2017, we enrolled all adults with a newly diagnosed PJI of a large joint. We collected data on demographics, microbiology, and surgical and antibiotic management over the first 3 months postpresentation. Results We enrolled 783 patients (427 knee, 323 hip, 25 shoulder, 6 elbow, and 2 ankle). The mode of presentation was late acute (>30 days postimplantation and 30 days postimplantation with ≥30 days of symptoms; 148, 19%). Debridement, antibiotics, irrigation, and implant retention constituted the commonest initial management approach (565, 72%), but debridement was moderate or less in 142 (25%) and the polyethylene liner was not exchanged in 104 (23%). Conclusions In contrast to most studies, late acute infection was the most common mode of presentation, likely reflecting hematogenous seeding. Management was heterogeneous, reflecting the poor evidence base and the need for randomized controlled trials

The Australasian COVID-19 Trial (ASCOT) to assess clinical outcomes in hospitalised patients with SARS-CoV-2 infection (COVID-19) treated with lopinavir/ritonavir and/or hydroxychloroquine compared to standard of care: A structured summary of a study protocol for a randomised controlled trial

Objectives: To determine if lopinavir/ritonavir +/- hydroxychloroquine will reduce the proportion of participants who survive without requiring ventilatory support, 15 days after enrolment, in adult participants with non-critically ill SARS-CoV-2 infection. Trial design: ASCOT is an investigator-initiated, multi-centre, open-label, randomised controlled trial. Participants will have been hospitalised with confirmed COVID-19, and will be randomised 1:1:1:1 to receive lopinavir /ritonavir, hydroxychloroquine, both or neither drug in addition to standard of care management. Participants: Participants will be recruited from >80 hospitals across Australia and New Zealand, representing metropolitan and regional centres in both public and private sectors. Admitted patients will be eligible if aged ≥ 18 years, have confirmed SARS-CoV-2 by nucleic acid testing in the past 12 days and are expected to remain an inpatient for at least 48 hours from the time of randomisation. Potentially eligible participants will be excluded if admitted to intensive care or requiring high level respiratory support, are currently receiving study drugs or their use is contraindicated due to allergy, drug interaction or comorbidities (including baseline QTc prolongation of 470ms for women or 480ms for men), or death is anticipated imminently

Oral versus parenteral antimicrobials for the treatment of cellulitis : a randomized non-inferiority trial

Objectives To determine whether outcomes for patients with cellulitis treated with oral antimicrobials are as good as for those who are treated with parenteral antimicrobials.Methods A prospective randomized non-inferiority trial was conducted at a tertiary teaching hospital in Melbourne, Australia. Participants were patients referred by the emergency department for treatment of uncomplicated cellulitis with parenteral antimicrobials. Patients were randomized to receive either oral cefalexin or parenteral cefazolin. Parenteral antimicrobials were changed to oral after the area of cellulitis ceased progressing. The primary outcome was days until no advancement of the area of cellulitis. A non-inferiority margin of 15% was set for the oral arm compared with the parenteral arm. Secondary outcomes were failure of treatment, pain, complications and satisfaction with care. This trial is registered with the Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry (ACTRN12611000685910).Results Twenty-four patients were randomized to oral antimicrobials and 23 to parenteral antimicrobials. Mean days to no advancement of cellulitis was 1.29 (SD 0.62) for the oral arm and 1.78 (SD 1.13) for the parenteral arm, with a mean difference of −0.49 (95% CI: −1.02 to +0.04). The upper limit of the 95% CI of the difference in means of +0.04 was below the 15% non-inferiority margin of +0.27 days, indicating non-inferiority. More patients failed treatment in the parenteral arm (5 of 23, 22%) compared with the oral arm (1 of 24, 4%), although this difference was not statistically significant (P = 0.10). Pain, complications and satisfaction with care were similar for both groups.Conclusions Oral antimicrobials are as effective as parenteral antimicrobials for the treatment of uncomplicated cellulitis