Re-Infection Outcomes following One- and Two-Stage Surgical Revision of Infected Hip Prosthesis:A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

The two-stage revision strategy has been claimed as being the "gold standard" for treating prosthetic joint infection. The one-stage revision strategy remains an attractive alternative option; however, its effectiveness in comparison to the two-stage strategy remains uncertain.To compare the effectiveness of one- and two-stage revision strategies in treating prosthetic hip infection, using re-infection as an outcome.Systematic review and meta-analysis.MEDLINE, EMBASE, Web of Science, Cochrane Library, manual search of bibliographies to March 2015, and email contact with investigators.Cohort studies (prospective or retrospective) conducted in generally unselected patients with prosthetic hip infection treated exclusively by one- or two-stage revision and with re-infection outcomes reported within two years of revision. No clinical trials were identified.Data were extracted by two independent investigators and a consensus was reached with involvement of a third. Rates of re-infection from 38 one-stage studies (2,536 participants) and 60 two-stage studies (3,288 participants) were aggregated using random-effect models after arcsine transformation, and were grouped by study and population level characteristics.In one-stage studies, the rate (95% confidence intervals) of re-infection was 8.2% (6.0-10.8). The corresponding re-infection rate after two-stage revision was 7.9% (6.2-9.7). Re-infection rates remained generally similar when grouped by several study and population level characteristics. There was no strong evidence of publication bias among contributing studies.Evidence from aggregate published data suggest similar re-infection rates after one- or two-stage revision among unselected patients. More detailed analyses under a broader range of circumstances and exploration of other sources of heterogeneity will require collaborative pooling of individual participant data.PROSPERO 2015: CRD42015016559

Recombination between Polioviruses and Co-Circulating Coxsackie A Viruses: Role in the Emergence of Pathogenic Vaccine-Derived Polioviruses

Ten outbreaks of poliomyelitis caused by pathogenic circulating vaccine-derived polioviruses (cVDPVs) have recently been reported in different regions of the world. Two of these outbreaks occurred in Madagascar. Most cVDPVs were recombinants of mutated poliovaccine strains and other unidentified enteroviruses of species C. We previously reported that a type 2 cVDPV isolated during an outbreak in Madagascar was co-circulating with coxsackieviruses A17 (CA17) and that sequences in the 3′ half of the cVDPV and CA17 genomes were related. The goal of this study was to investigate whether these CA17 isolates can act as recombination partners of poliovirus and subsequently to evaluate the major effects of recombination events on the phenotype of the recombinants. We first cloned the infectious cDNA of a Madagascar CA17 isolate. We then generated recombinant constructs combining the genetic material of this CA17 isolate with that of the type 2 vaccine strain and that of the type 2 cVDPV. Our results showed that poliovirus/CA17 recombinants are viable. The recombinant in which the 3′ half of the vaccine strain genome had been replaced by that of the CA17 genome yielded larger plaques and was less temperature sensitive than its parental strains. The virus in which the 3′ portion of the cVDPV genome was replaced by the 3′ half of the CA17 genome was almost as neurovirulent as the cVDPV in transgenic mice expressing the poliovirus cellular receptor gene. The co-circulation in children and genetic recombination of viruses, differing in their pathogenicity for humans and in certain other biological properties such as receptor usage, can lead to the generation of pathogenic recombinants, thus constituting an interesting model of viral evolution and emergence