Chronic prosthetic joint infections with a draining sinus. Who should receive suppressive antibiotic treatment?

The benefit of suppressive antibiotic treatment in inoperable patients with a chronic periprosthetic joint infection and a sinus tract is unknown. Some physicians prefer to just let the sinus drain, while others prefer antibiotic treatment. In this viewpoint article we discuss the advantages and disadvantages of suppressive antibiotic treatment in this particular patient group.</p

Chronic prosthetic joint infections with a draining sinus. Who should receive suppressive antibiotic treatment?

The benefit of suppressive antibiotic treatment in inoperable patients with a chronic periprosthetic joint infection and a sinus tract is unknown. Some physicians prefer to just let the sinus drain, while others prefer antibiotic treatment. In this viewpoint article we discuss the advantages and disadvantages of suppressive antibiotic treatment in this particular patient group.</p

Chronic prosthetic joint infections with a draining sinus. Who should receive suppressive antibiotic treatment?

The benefit of suppressive antibiotic treatment in inoperable patients with a chronic periprosthetic joint infection and a sinus tract is unknown. Some physicians prefer to just let the sinus drain, while others prefer antibiotic treatment. In this viewpoint article we discuss the advantages and disadvantages of suppressive antibiotic treatment in this particular patient group.</p

Chronic prosthetic joint infections with a draining sinus. Who should receive suppressive antibiotic treatment?

The benefit of suppressive antibiotic treatment in inoperable patients with a chronic periprosthetic joint infection and a sinus tract is unknown. Some physicians prefer to just let the sinus drain, while others prefer antibiotic treatment. In this viewpoint article we discuss the advantages and disadvantages of suppressive antibiotic treatment in this particular patient group.</p

Chronic prosthetic joint infections with a draining sinus. Who should receive suppressive antibiotic treatment?

The benefit of suppressive antibiotic treatment in inoperable patients with a chronic periprosthetic joint infection and a sinus tract is unknown. Some physicians prefer to just let the sinus drain, while others prefer antibiotic treatment. In this viewpoint article we discuss the advantages and disadvantages of suppressive antibiotic treatment in this particular patient group.</p

Chronic prosthetic joint infections with a draining sinus. Who should receive suppressive antibiotic treatment?

The benefit of suppressive antibiotic treatment in inoperable patients with a chronic periprosthetic joint infection and a sinus tract is unknown. Some physicians prefer to just let the sinus drain, while others prefer antibiotic treatment. In this viewpoint article we discuss the advantages and disadvantages of suppressive antibiotic treatment in this particular patient group.</p

Prosthetic Shoulder Joint Infection by Cutibacterium acnes: Does Rifampin Improve Prognosis? A Retrospective, Multicenter, Observational Study

Cutibacterium acnes; Infecció articular protèsica; Tractament quirúrgic i mèdicCutibacterium acnes; Infección articular protésica; Tratamiento quirúrgico y médicoCutibacterium acnes; Prosthetic joint infection; Surgical and medical treatmentThis retrospective, multicenter observational study aimed to describe the outcomes of surgical and medical treatment of C. acnes-related prosthetic joint infection (PJI) and the potential benefit of rifampin-based therapies. Patients with C. acnes-related PJI who were diagnosed and treated between January 2003 and December 2016 were included. We analyzed 44 patients with C. acnes-related PJI (median age, 67.5 years (IQR, 57.3–75.8)); 75% were men. The majority (61.4%) had late chronic infection according to the Tsukayama classification. All patients received surgical treatment, and most antibiotic regimens (43.2%) included β-lactam. Thirty-four patients (87.17%) were cured; five showed relapse. The final outcome (cure vs. relapse) showed a nonsignificant trend toward higher failure frequency among patients with previous prosthesis (OR: 6.89; 95% CI: 0.80–58.90) or prior surgery and infection (OR: 10.67; 95% IC: 1.08–105.28) in the same joint. Patients treated with clindamycin alone had a higher recurrence rate (40.0% vs. 8.8%). Rifampin treatment did not decrease recurrence in patients treated with β-lactams. Prior prosthesis, surgery, or infection in the same joint might be related to recurrence, and rifampin-based combinations do not seem to improve prognosis. Debridement and implant retention appear a safe option for surgical treatment of early PJI.This work received no specific funding from the public, private, or not-for-profit sectors

The efficacy of suppressive antibiotic treatment in patients managed non-operatively for periprosthetic joint infection and a draining sinus

Eficacia; Tratamiento antibiótico; Infección articularEficàcia; Tractament antibiòtic; Infecció articularEfficacy; Antibiotic treatment; Joint infectionObjectives: Patients with prosthetic joint infections (PJIs) not suitable for curative surgery may benefit from suppressive antibiotic therapy (SAT). However, the usefulness of SAT in cases with a draining sinus has never been investigated. Methods: A multicentre, retrospective observational cohort study was performed in which patients with a PJI and a sinus tract were eligible for inclusion if managed conservatively and if sufficient follow-up data were available (i.e. at least 2 years). SAT was defined as a period of > 6 months of oral antibiotic therapy. Results: SAT was initiated in 63 of 72 (87.5 %) included patients. Implant retention during follow-up was the same in patients receiving SAT vs. no SAT (79.4 % vs. 88.9 %; p=0.68). In total, 27 % of patients using SAT experienced side effects. In addition, the occurrence of prosthetic loosening in initially fixed implants, the need for surgical debridement, or the occurrence of bacteremia during follow-up could not be fully prevented with the use of SAT, which still occurred in 42 %, 6.3 %, and 3.2 % of cases, respectively. However, the sinus tract tended to close more often (42 % vs. 13 %; p=0.14), and a higher resolution of pain was observed (35 % vs. 14 %; p=0.22) in patients receiving SAT. Conclusions: SAT is not able to fully prevent complications in patients with a draining sinus. However, it may be beneficial in a subset of patients, particularly in those with pain or the hindrance of a draining sinus. A future prospective study, including a higher number of patients not receiving SAT, is needed

Lower Success Rate of Debridement and Implant Retention in Late Acute versus Early Acute Periprosthetic Joint Infection Caused by Staphylococcus spp. Results from a Matched Cohort Study

Background Surgical debridement, antibiotics and implant retention (DAIR) is currently recommended by international guidelines for both early acute (postsurgical) and late acute (hematogenous) periprosthetic joint infections (PJIs). However, due to a different pathogenesis of infection, a different treatment strategy may be needed. Questions/purposes (1) Compared with early acute PJIs, are late acute PJIs associated with a higher risk of DAIR failure? (2) When stratified by microorganism, is the higher risk of failure in late acute PJI associated with Staphylocococcus aureus infection? (3) When analyzing patients with S. aureus infection, what factors are independently associated with DAIR failure? Methods In this multicenter observational study, early acute and late acute PJIs treated with DAIR were retrospectively evaluated and matched according to treating center, year of diagnosis, and infection-causing microorganism. If multiple matches were available, the early acute PJI diagnosed closest to the late acute PJI was selected. A total of 132 pairs were included. Treatment success was defined as a retained implant during follow-up without the need for antibiotic suppressive therapy. Results Late acute PJIs had a lower treatment success (46% [60 of 132]) compared with early acute PJIs (76% [100 of 132]), OR 3.9 [95% CI 2.3 to 6.6]; p <0.001), but the lower treatment success of late acute PJIs was only observed when caused by Staphylococcus spp (S. aureus: 34% versus 75%; p <0.001; coagulase-negative staphylococci: 46% versus 88%; p = 0.013, respectively). On multivariable analysis, late acute PJI was the only independent factor associated with an unsuccessful DAIR when caused by S. aureus (OR 4.52 [95% CI 1.79 to 11.41]; p <0.001). Conclusions Although DAIR seems to be a successful therapeutic strategy in the management of early acute PJI, its use in late acute PJI should be reconsidered when caused by Staphylococcus spp. Our results advocate the importance of isolating the causative microorganism before surgery