Treatment and outcome of fracture-related infection of the clavicle

Introduction: The number of operatively treated clavicle fractures has increased over the past decades. Consequently, this has led to an increase in secondary procedures required to treat complications such as fracture-related infection (FRI). The primary objective of this study was to assess the clinical and functional outcome of patients treated for FRI of the clavicle. The secondary objectives were to evaluate the healthcare costs and propose a standardized protocol for the surgical management of this complication. Methods: All patients with a clavicle fracture who underwent open reduction and internal fixation (ORIF) between 1 January 2015 and 1 March 2022 were retrospectively evaluated. This study included patients with an FRI who were diagnosed and treated according to the recommendations of a multidisciplinary team at the University Hospitals Leuven, Belgium. Results: We evaluated 626 patients with 630 clavicle fractures who underwent ORIF. In total, 28 patients were diagnosed with an FRI. Of these, eight (29%) underwent definitive implant removal, five (18%) underwent debridement, antimicrobial treatment and implant retention, and fourteen patients (50%) had their implant exchanged in either a single-stage procedure, a two-stage procedure or after multiple revisions. One patient (3.6%) underwent resection of the clavicle. Twelve patients (43%) underwent autologous bone grafting (tricortical iliac crest bone graft (n = 6), free vascularized fibular graft (n = 5), cancellous bone graft (n = 1)) to reconstruct the bone defect. The median follow-up was 32.3 (P25-P75: 23.9–51.1) months. Two patients (7.1%) experienced a recurrence of infection. The functional outcome was satisfactory, with 26 out of 28 patients (93%) having full range of motion. The median healthcare cost was € 11.506 (P25-P75: € 7.953–23.798) per patient. Conclusion: FRI is a serious complication that can occur after the surgical treatment of clavicle fractures. In our opinion, when treated adequately using a multidisciplinary patient-specific approach, the outcome of patients with an FRI of the clavicle is good. The median healthcare costs of these patients are up to 3.5 times higher compared to non-infected operatively treated clavicle fractures. Although not studied individually, we consider factors such as the size of the bone defect, condition of the soft tissue, and patient demand important when it comes to guiding our surgical decision making in cases of osseous defects.</p

Treatment and outcome of fracture-related infection of the clavicle

Introduction: The number of operatively treated clavicle fractures has increased over the past decades. Consequently, this has led to an increase in secondary procedures required to treat complications such as fracture-related infection (FRI). The primary objective of this study was to assess the clinical and functional outcome of patients treated for FRI of the clavicle. The secondary objectives were to evaluate the healthcare costs and propose a standardized protocol for the surgical management of this complication. Methods: All patients with a clavicle fracture who underwent open reduction and internal fixation (ORIF) between 1 January 2015 and 1 March 2022 were retrospectively evaluated. This study included patients with an FRI who were diagnosed and treated according to the recommendations of a multidisciplinary team at the University Hospitals Leuven, Belgium. Results: We evaluated 626 patients with 630 clavicle fractures who underwent ORIF. In total, 28 patients were diagnosed with an FRI. Of these, eight (29%) underwent definitive implant removal, five (18%) underwent debridement, antimicrobial treatment and implant retention, and fourteen patients (50%) had their implant exchanged in either a single-stage procedure, a two-stage procedure or after multiple revisions. One patient (3.6%) underwent resection of the clavicle. Twelve patients (43%) underwent autologous bone grafting (tricortical iliac crest bone graft (n = 6), free vascularized fibular graft (n = 5), cancellous bone graft (n = 1)) to reconstruct the bone defect. The median follow-up was 32.3 (P25-P75: 23.9–51.1) months. Two patients (7.1%) experienced a recurrence of infection. The functional outcome was satisfactory, with 26 out of 28 patients (93%) having full range of motion. The median healthcare cost was € 11.506 (P25-P75: € 7.953–23.798) per patient. Conclusion: FRI is a serious complication that can occur after the surgical treatment of clavicle fractures. In our opinion, when treated adequately using a multidisciplinary patient-specific approach, the outcome of patients with an FRI of the clavicle is good. The median healthcare costs of these patients are up to 3.5 times higher compared to non-infected operatively treated clavicle fractures. Although not studied individually, we consider factors such as the size of the bone defect, condition of the soft tissue, and patient demand important when it comes to guiding our surgical decision making in cases of osseous defects.</p

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

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