The Microbiological Etiology of Fracture-Related Infection

Purpose: Fracture-related infection (FRI) is an important complication related to orthopaedic trauma. Although the scientific interest with respect to the diagnosis and treatment of FRI is increasing, data on the microbiological epidemiology remains limited. Therefore, the primary aim of this study was to evaluate the microbiological epidemiology related to FRI, including the association with clinical symptoms and antimicrobial susceptibility data. The secondary aim was to analyze whether there was a relationship between the time to onset of infection and the microbiological etiology of FRI. Methods: FRI patients treated at the University Hospitals of Leuven, Belgium, between January 1st 2015 and November 24th 2019 were evaluated retrospectively. The microbiological etiology and antimicrobial susceptibility data were analyzed. Patients were classified as having an early ( 10 weeks) FRI. Results: One hundred ninety-one patients with 194 FRIs, most frequently involving the tibia (23.7%) and femur (18.6%), were included. Staphylococcus aureus was the most frequently isolated pathogen, regardless of time to onset (n=61; 31.4%), followed by S. epidermidis (n=50; 25.8%) and non-epidermidis coagulase-negative staphylococci (n=35; 18.0%). Polymicrobial infections (n=49; 25.3%), mainly involving Gram negative bacilli (GNB) (n=32; 65.3%), were less common than monomicrobial infections (n=138; 71.1%). Virulent pathogens in monomicrobial FRIs were more likely to cause pus or purulent discharge (n=45;54.9%; p=0.002) and fistulas (n=21;25.6%; p=0.030). Susceptibility to piperacillin/tazobactam for GNB was 75.9%. Vancomycin covered 100% of Gram positive cocci. Conclusion: This study revealed that in early FRIs, polymicrobial infections and infections including Enterobacterales and enterococcal species were more frequent. A time-based FRI classification is not meaningful to estimate the microbiological epidemiology and cannot be used to guide empiric antibiotic therapy. Large multicenter prospective studies are necessary to gain more insight into the added value of (broad) empirical antibiotic therapy

Corrigendum to:Validation of the diagnostic criteria of the consensus definition of fracture-related infection Injury (2022);53, pages 1867-1879 (Injury (2022) 53(6) (1867–1879), (S0020138322002091), (10.1016/j.injury.2022.03.024))

The authors regret that Michael H. J. Verhofstad was incorrectly affiliated to the University Medical Center Utrecht in The Netherlands. He is affiliated to the Trauma Research Unit Department of Surgery, Erasmus MC, University Medical Center Rotterdam, Rotterdam, The Netherlands. The authors would like to apologise for any inconvenience caused.</p

Validation of the diagnostic criteria of the consensus definition of fracture-related infection

Background: The recently developed fracture-related infection (FRI) consensus definition, which is based on specific diagnostic criteria, has not been fully validated in clinical studies. We aimed to determine the diagnostic performance of the criteria of the FRI consensus definition and evaluated the effect of the combination of certain suggestive and confirmatory criteria on the diagnostic performance. Methods: A multicenter, multi-national, retrospective cohort study was performed. Patients were subdivided into an FRI or a control group, according to the treatment they received and the recommendations from a multidisciplinary team (‘intention to treat’). Exclusion criteria were patients with an FRI diagnosed outside the study period, patients younger than 18 years of age, patients with pathological fractures or patients with fractures of the skull, cervical, thoracic and lumbar spine. Minimum follow up for all patients was 18 months. Results: Overall, 637 patients underwent revision surgery for suspicion of FRI. Of these, 480 patients were diagnosed with FRI, treated accordingly, and included in the FRI group. The other 157 patients were included in the control group. The presence of at least one confirmatory sign was associated with a sensitivity of 97.5%, a specificity of 100% and a high discriminatory value (AUROC 0.99, p < 0.001). The presence of a clinical confirmatory criterion or, if not present, at least one positive culture was associated with the highest diagnostic performance (sensitivity: 98.6%, specificity: 100%, AUROC: 0.99 (p < 0.001)). In the subgroup of patients without clinical confirmatory signs at presentation, specificities of at least 95% were found for the clinical suggestive signs of fever, wound drainage, local warmth and redness. Conclusions: The presence of at least one confirmatory criterion identifies the vast majority of patients with an FRI and was associated with an excellent diagnostic discriminatory value. Therefore, our study validates the confirmatory criteria of the FRI consensus definition. Infection is highly likely in case of the presence of a single positive culture with a virulent pathogen. When certain clinical suggestive signs (e.g., wound drainage) are observed (individually or in combination and even without a confirmatory criterion), it is more likely than not, that an infection is present

What is the diagnostic value of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention criteria for surgical site infection in fracture-related infection?

Background: Fracture-related infection (FRI) remains one of the most challenging complications in orthopaedic trauma surgery. An early diagnosis is of paramount importance to guide treatment. The primary aim of this study was to compare the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) criteria for the diagnosis of organ/space surgical site infection (SSI) to the recently developed diagnostic criteria of the FRI consensus definition in operatively treated fracture patients.   Methods: This international multicenter retrospective cohort study evaluated 257 patients with 261 infections after operative fracture treatment. All patients included in this study were considered to have an FRI and treated accordingly (‘intention to treat’). The minimum follow-up was one year. Infections were scored according to the CDC criteria for organ/space SSI and the diagnostic criteria of the FRI consensus definition.   Results: Overall, 130 (49.8%) FRIs were captured when applying the CDC criteria for organ/space SSI, whereas 258 (98.9%) FRIs were captured when applying the FRI consensus criteria. Patients could not be classified as having an infection according to the CDC criteria mainly due to a lack of symptoms within 90 days after the surgical procedure (n = 96; 36.8%) and due to the fact that the surgery was performed at an anatomical localization not listed in the National Healthcare Safety Network (NHSN) operative procedure code mapping (n = 37; 14.2%).    Conclusion: This study confirms the importance of standardization with respect to the diagnosis of FRI. The results endorse the recently developed FRI consensus definition. When applying these diagnostic criteria, 98.9% of the infections that occured after operative fracture treatment could be captured. The CDC criteria for organ/space SSI captured less than half of the patients with an FRI requiring treatment, and seemed to have less diagnostic value in this patient population

Diagnosis of fracture-related infection in patients without clinical confirmatory criteria:an international retrospective cohort study

Background: fracture-related infection (FRI) remains a serious complication in orthopedic trauma. To standardize daily clinical practice, a consensus definition was established, based on confirmatory and suggestive criteria. In the presence of clinical confirmatory criteria, the diagnosis of an FRI is evident, and treatment can be started. However, if these criteria are absent, the decision to surgically collect deep tissue cultures can only be based on suggestive criteria. The primary study aim was to characterize the subpopulation of FRI patients presenting without clinical confirmatory criteria (fistula, sinus, wound breakdown, purulent wound drainage or presence of pus during surgery). The secondary aims were to describe the prevalence of the diagnostic criteria for FRI and present the microbiological characteristics, both for the entire FRI population. Methods: a multicenter, retrospective cohort study was performed, reporting the demographic, clinical and microbiological characteristics of 609 patients (with 613 fractures) who were treated for FRI based on the recommendations of a multidisciplinary team. Patients were divided in three groups, including the total population and two subgroups of patients presenting with or without clinical confirmatory criteria. Results: clinical and microbiological confirmatory criteria were present in 77g and 87g of the included fractures, respectively. Of patients, 23g presented without clinical confirmatory criteria, and they mostly displayed one (31g) or two (23g) suggestive clinical criteria (redness, swelling, warmth, pain, fever, new-onset joint effusion, persisting/increasing/new-onset wound drainage). The prevalence of any suggestive clinical, radiological or laboratory criteria in this subgroup was 85g, 55g and 97g, respectively. Most infections were monomicrobial (64g) and caused by Staphylococcus aureus. Conclusion: clinical confirmatory criteria were absent in 23g of the FRIs. In these cases, the decision to operatively collect deep tissue cultures was based on clinical, radiological and laboratory suggestive criteria. The combined use of these criteria should guide physicians in the management pathway of FRI. Further research is needed to provide guidelines on the decision to proceed with surgery when only these suggestive criteria are present.</p

General treatment principles for fracture-related infection: recommendations from an international expert group

Fracture-related infection (FRI) remains a challenging complication that creates a heavy burden for orthopaedic trauma patients, their families and treating physicians, as well as for healthcare systems. Standardization of the diagnosis of FRI has been poor, which made the undertaking and comparison of studies difficult. Recently, a consensus definition based on diagnostic criteria for FRI was published. As a well-established diagnosis is the first step in the treatment process of FRI, such a definition should not only improve the quality of published reports but also daily clinical practice. The FRI consensus group recently developed guidelines to standardize treatment pathways and outcome measures. At the center of these recommendations was the implementation of a multidisciplinary team (MDT) approach. If such a team is not available, it is recommended to refer complex cases to specialized centers where a MDT is available and physicians are experienced with the treatment of FRI. This should lead to appropriate use of antimicrobials and standardization of surgical strategies. Furthermore, an MDT could play an important role in host optimization. Overall two main surgical concepts are considered, based on the fact that fracture fixation devices primarily target fracture consolidation and can be removed after healing, in contrast to periprosthetic joint infection were the implant is permanent. The first concept consists of implant retention and the second consists of implant removal (healed fracture) or implant exchange (unhealed fracture). In both cases, deep tissue sampling for microbiological examination is mandatory. Key aspects of the surgical management of FRI are a thorough debridement, irrigation with normal saline, fracture stability, dead space management and adequate soft tissue coverage. The use of local antimicrobials needs to be strongly considered. In case of FRI, empiric broad-spectrum antibiotic therapy should be started after tissue sampling. Thereafter, this needs to be adapted according to culture results as soon as possible. Finally, a minimum follow-up of 12 months after cessation of therapy is recommended. Standardized patient outcome measures purely focusing on FRI are currently not available but the patient-reported outcomes measurement information system (PROMIS) seems to be the preferred tool to assess the patients’ short and long-term outcome. This review summarizes the current general principles which should be considered during the whole treatment process of patients with FRI based on recommendations from the FRI Consensus Group. Level of evidence: Level V

Bacteriophage Application for Difficult-To-Treat Musculoskeletal Infections: Development of a Standardized Multidisciplinary Treatment Protocol

Bacteriophage therapy has recently attracted increased interest, particularly in difficult-to-treat infections. Although it is not a novel concept, standardized treatment guidelines are currently lacking. We present the first steps towards the establishment of a &ldquo;multidisciplinary phage task force&rdquo; (MPTF) and a standardized treatment pathway, based on our experience of four patients with severe musculoskeletal infections. After review of their medical history and current clinical status, a multidisciplinary team found four patients with musculoskeletal infections eligible for bacteriophage therapy within the scope of Article 37 of the Declaration of Helsinki. Treatment protocols were set up in collaboration with phage scientists and specialists. Based on the isolated pathogens, phage cocktails were selected and applied intraoperatively. A draining system allowed postoperative administration for a maximum of 10 days, 3 times per day. All patients received concomitant antibiotics and their clinical status was followed daily during phage therapy. No severe side-effects related to the phage application protocol were noted. After a single course of phage therapy with concomitant antibiotics, no recurrence of infection with the causative strains occurred, with follow-up periods ranging from 8 to 16 months. This study presents the successful outcome of bacteriophage therapy using a standardized treatment pathway for patients with severe musculoskeletal infection. A multidisciplinary team approach in the form of an MPTF is paramount in this process

Exploring Parental Expectations and Experiences Around "Gentle" and "Standard" Caesarean Section

"Gentle" or "natural" cesarean sections are implemented to improve parental satisfaction. The objective of this study was to investigate whether there is a need for adopting such a gentle approach.status: accepte