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

26Postoperative diagnosis and outcome in patients with revision arthroplasty for aseptic loosening

BACKGROUND: The most common cause of implant failure is aseptic loosening (AL), followed by prosthetic joint infection (PJI). This study evaluates the incidence of PJI among patients operated with suspected AL and whether the diagnosis of PJI was predictive of subsequent implant failure including re-infection, at 2 years of follow up. METHODS: Patients undergoing revision hip or knee arthroplasty due to presumed AL from February 2009 to September 2011 were prospectively evaluated. A sonication fluid of prosthesis and tissue samples for microbiology and histopathology at the time of the surgery were collected. Implant failure include recurrent or persistent infection, reoperation for any reason or need for chronic antibiotic suppression. RESULTS: Of 198 patients with pre-and intraoperative diagnosis of AL, 24 (12.1 %) had postoperative diagnosis of PJI. After a follow up of 31 months (IQR: 21 to 38 months), 9 (37.5 %) of 24 patients in the PJI group had implant failure compared to only 1 (1.1 %) in the 198 of AL group (p 20 CFU) and peri-prosthetic tissue culture were 87.5 % vs 66.7 %, respectively. Specificities were 100 % for both techniques (95 % CI, 97.9-100 %). A greater number of patients with PJI (79.1 %) had previous partial arthroplasty revisions than those patients in the AL group (56.9 %) (p = 0.04). In addition, 5 (55.5 %) patients with PJI and implant failure had more revision arthroplasties during the first year after the last implant placement than those patients with PJI without implant failure (1 patient; 6.7 %) (RR 3.8; 95 % CI 1.4-10.1; p = 0.015). On the other hand, 6 (25 %) patients finally diagnosed of PJI were initially diagnosed of AL in the first year after primary arthroplasty, whereas it was only 16 (9.2 %) patients in the group of true AL (RR 2.7; 95 % CI 1.2-6.1; p = 0.03). CONCLUSIONS: More than one tenth of patients with suspected AL are misdiagnosed PJI. Positive histology and positive peri-implant tissue and sonicate fluid cultures are highly predictive of implant failure in patients with PJI. Patients with greater number of partial hip revisions for a presumed AL had more risk of PJI. Early loosening is more often caused by hidden PJI than late loosening

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

Is an isolated positive sonication fluid culture in revision arthroplasties clinically relevant?

Objectives: The aim of this study was to investigate the clinical relevance of an isolated positive sonication fluid culture (SFC) in patients who underwent revision surgery of a prosthetic joint. We hypothesized that cases with a positive SFC have a higher rate of infection during follow-up compared with controls with a negative SFC.Methods: This retrospective multicentre observational study was performed within the European Study Group of Implant-Associated Infections. All patients who underwent revision surgery of a prosthetic joint between 2013 and 2019 and had a minimum follow-up of 1 year were included. Patients with positive tissue cultures or synovial fluid cultures were excluded from the study.Results: A total of 95 cases (positive SFC) and 201 controls (negative SFC) were included. Infection during follow-up occurred in 12 of 95 cases (12.6%) versus 14 of 201 controls (7.0%) (p = 0.125). In all, 79.8% of cases were with treated with antibiotics (76/95). Of the non-treated cases, 89% (17/19) had a positive SFC with a low virulent microorganism. When solely analysing patients who were not treated with antibiotics, 16% of the cases (3/19) had an infection during follow-up versus 5% of the controls (9/173) (p = 0.08).Discussion: Although not statistically significant, infections were almost twice as frequent in patients with an isolated positive SFC. These findings require further exploration in larger trials and to conclude about the potential benefit of antibiotic treatment in these cases.</p

Is an isolated positive sonication fluid culture in revision arthroplasties clinically relevant?

Objectives: The aim of this study was to investigate the clinical relevance of an isolated positive sonication fluid culture (SFC) in patients who underwent revision surgery of a prosthetic joint. We hypothesized that cases with a positive SFC have a higher rate of infection during follow-up compared with controls with a negative SFC.Methods: This retrospective multicentre observational study was performed within the European Study Group of Implant-Associated Infections. All patients who underwent revision surgery of a prosthetic joint between 2013 and 2019 and had a minimum follow-up of 1 year were included. Patients with positive tissue cultures or synovial fluid cultures were excluded from the study.Results: A total of 95 cases (positive SFC) and 201 controls (negative SFC) were included. Infection during follow-up occurred in 12 of 95 cases (12.6%) versus 14 of 201 controls (7.0%) (p = 0.125). In all, 79.8% of cases were with treated with antibiotics (76/95). Of the non-treated cases, 89% (17/19) had a positive SFC with a low virulent microorganism. When solely analysing patients who were not treated with antibiotics, 16% of the cases (3/19) had an infection during follow-up versus 5% of the controls (9/173) (p = 0.08).Discussion: Although not statistically significant, infections were almost twice as frequent in patients with an isolated positive SFC. These findings require further exploration in larger trials and to conclude about the potential benefit of antibiotic treatment in these cases.</p

Is an isolated positive sonication fluid culture in revision arthroplasties clinically relevant?

Objectives: The aim of this study was to investigate the clinical relevance of an isolated positive sonication fluid culture (SFC) in patients who underwent revision surgery of a prosthetic joint. We hypothesized that cases with a positive SFC have a higher rate of infection during follow-up compared with controls with a negative SFC.Methods: This retrospective multicentre observational study was performed within the European Study Group of Implant-Associated Infections. All patients who underwent revision surgery of a prosthetic joint between 2013 and 2019 and had a minimum follow-up of 1 year were included. Patients with positive tissue cultures or synovial fluid cultures were excluded from the study.Results: A total of 95 cases (positive SFC) and 201 controls (negative SFC) were included. Infection during follow-up occurred in 12 of 95 cases (12.6%) versus 14 of 201 controls (7.0%) (p = 0.125). In all, 79.8% of cases were with treated with antibiotics (76/95). Of the non-treated cases, 89% (17/19) had a positive SFC with a low virulent microorganism. When solely analysing patients who were not treated with antibiotics, 16% of the cases (3/19) had an infection during follow-up versus 5% of the controls (9/173) (p = 0.08).Discussion: Although not statistically significant, infections were almost twice as frequent in patients with an isolated positive SFC. These findings require further exploration in larger trials and to conclude about the potential benefit of antibiotic treatment in these cases.</p

Is an isolated positive sonication fluid culture in revision arthroplasties clinically relevant?

Objectives: The aim of this study was to investigate the clinical relevance of an isolated positive sonication fluid culture (SFC) in patients who underwent revision surgery of a prosthetic joint. We hypothesized that cases with a positive SFC have a higher rate of infection during follow-up compared with controls with a negative SFC.Methods: This retrospective multicentre observational study was performed within the European Study Group of Implant-Associated Infections. All patients who underwent revision surgery of a prosthetic joint between 2013 and 2019 and had a minimum follow-up of 1 year were included. Patients with positive tissue cultures or synovial fluid cultures were excluded from the study.Results: A total of 95 cases (positive SFC) and 201 controls (negative SFC) were included. Infection during follow-up occurred in 12 of 95 cases (12.6%) versus 14 of 201 controls (7.0%) (p = 0.125). In all, 79.8% of cases were with treated with antibiotics (76/95). Of the non-treated cases, 89% (17/19) had a positive SFC with a low virulent microorganism. When solely analysing patients who were not treated with antibiotics, 16% of the cases (3/19) had an infection during follow-up versus 5% of the controls (9/173) (p = 0.08).Discussion: Although not statistically significant, infections were almost twice as frequent in patients with an isolated positive SFC. These findings require further exploration in larger trials and to conclude about the potential benefit of antibiotic treatment in these cases.</p

Is an isolated positive sonication fluid culture in revision arthroplasties clinically relevant?

Objectives: The aim of this study was to investigate the clinical relevance of an isolated positive sonication fluid culture (SFC) in patients who underwent revision surgery of a prosthetic joint. We hypothesized that cases with a positive SFC have a higher rate of infection during follow-up compared with controls with a negative SFC.Methods: This retrospective multicentre observational study was performed within the European Study Group of Implant-Associated Infections. All patients who underwent revision surgery of a prosthetic joint between 2013 and 2019 and had a minimum follow-up of 1 year were included. Patients with positive tissue cultures or synovial fluid cultures were excluded from the study.Results: A total of 95 cases (positive SFC) and 201 controls (negative SFC) were included. Infection during follow-up occurred in 12 of 95 cases (12.6%) versus 14 of 201 controls (7.0%) (p = 0.125). In all, 79.8% of cases were with treated with antibiotics (76/95). Of the non-treated cases, 89% (17/19) had a positive SFC with a low virulent microorganism. When solely analysing patients who were not treated with antibiotics, 16% of the cases (3/19) had an infection during follow-up versus 5% of the controls (9/173) (p = 0.08).Discussion: Although not statistically significant, infections were almost twice as frequent in patients with an isolated positive SFC. These findings require further exploration in larger trials and to conclude about the potential benefit of antibiotic treatment in these cases.</p

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

Objectives: 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 %; pCombining double low line0.68). 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 %; pCombining double low line0.14), and a higher resolution of pain was observed (35 % vs. 14 %; pCombining double low line0.22) 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

Prosthetic shoulder joint infection by Cutibacterium acnes: does rifampin improve prognosis? a retrospective, multicenter, observational study.

This 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