The epidemiology of fracture-related infections in Germany

The epidemiology of fracture-related infection (FRI) is unknown, which makes it difficult to estimate future demands and evaluate progress in infection prevention. Therefore, we aimed to determine the nationwide burden’s development over the last decade as a function of age group and gender. FRI prevalence as a function of age group and gender was quantified based on annual ICD-10 diagnosis codes from German medical institutions between 2008 through 2018, provided by the Federal Statistical Office of Germany (Destatis). The prevalence of FRI increased by 0.28 from 8.4 cases per 100,000 inhabitants to 10.7 cases per 100,000 inhabitants between 2008 and 2018. The proportion of fractures resulting in FRI increased from 1.05 to 1.23%. Gender distribution was equal. Patients aged 60–69 years and 70–79 years comprised the largest internal proportion with 20.2% and 20.7%, respectively, whereby prevalence increased with age group. A trend towards more diagnoses in older patients was observed with a growth rate of 0.63 for patients older than 90 years. Increasing rates of fracture-related infection especially in older patients indicate an upcoming challenge for stakeholders in health care systems. Newly emerging treatment strategies, prevention methods and interdisciplinary approaches are strongly required

Antibiotikaeinsatz zu Prophylaxe und empirischer Therapie von frakturassoziierten Infektionen in Deutschland

Hintergrund Antibiotika (AB) spielen eine wichtige Rolle in der Prophylaxe und Behandlung von Infektionen in der Unfallchirurgie. Dennoch scheint es gerade bei der Infektionsprophylaxe nach offenen Frakturen und auch bei der empirischen Therapie von frakturassoziierten Infektionen (FRI) große Unterschiede zwischen einzelnen Kliniken zu geben. Methodik An deutschen Universitäts- und berufsgenossenschaftlichen Kliniken wurde eine Umfrage zu Prophylaxe und empirischer AB-Therapie von FRI durchgeführt. Die AB-Regime wurden mit dem Resistenzprofil der Erreger bei 86 FRI-Patienten verglichen, um die theoretische Wirksamkeit der jeweiligen Therapien zu ermitteln. Ergebnisse Von 71 Kliniken antworteten insgesamt 44 (62,0 %). Bei geschlossenen Frakturen zeigte sich mit der Verwendung von Cephalosporinen in 95,5 % der Kliniken ein einheitliches Bild. Für offene Frakturen wurden 8 verschiedene AB-Regime berichtet, wobei Aminopenicilline/β-Lactamase-Inhibitor (BLI) (31,8 %) am häufigsten genannt wurden. Für die empirische Therapie der FRI wurden 12 verschiedene AB-Regime angegeben, am häufigsten Aminopenicilline/BLI (31,8 %), Cephalosporine (31,8 %) und Ampicillin/Sulbactam + Vancomycin (9,1 %). Hinsichtlich der empirischen Therapie der FRI zeigten sich niedrige Sensibilitätsraten für Cephalosporine (65,1 %) bzw. Aminopenicillinen/BLI (74,4 %). Für die Kombination Vancomycin + Meropenem ergab sich mit 91,9 % die höchste hypothetische Sensibilität. Diskussion Im Abgleich mit dem vorliegenden, einrichtungsspezifischen Keimspektrum erscheint die Kombinationstherapie Vancomycin + Meropenem für die empirische Therapie sinnvoll, sollte jedoch Patienten mit mehrfachen Revisionseingriffen oder septischen Infektionsverläufen vorbehalten bleiben, um die Selektion hochresistenter Keime zu vermeiden

Treatment of Periprosthetic Joint Infection and Fracture-Related Infection With a Temporary Arthrodesis Made by PMMA-Coated Intramedullary Nails – Evaluation of Technique and Quality of Life in Implant-Free Interval

Background: Antimicrobial coating of intramedullary nails with polymethyl methacrylate (PMMA) bone cement promises infection control and stabilization for subsequent bone healing. However, when removing the implant, bone cement can debond and remain in the medullary cavity of the long bones, representing a nidus for reinfection. This work presents a technique comprising reinforcement of PMMA-coated intramedullary nails with cerclage wire to prevent such problems in patients treated for fracture-related infection (FRI) or knee periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) with a static spacer as temporary arthrodesis allowing weight-bearing in the implant-free interval. Outcomes of this surgical treatment were evaluated in terms of (i) associated complications and (ii) patient-reported quality of life. Methods: In this retrospective case series, 20 patients with PJI (n = 14, 70%) and FRI (n = 6, 30%) treated with PMMA-coated intramedullary nails reinforced with cerclage wire between January 2021 and July 2021 were included. Quality of life during the implant-free interval was evaluated with the EQ-5D, SF-36, and an ICD-10 based psychological symptom rating and compared with previously analyzed cohorts of successfully treated PJI and FRI patients in whom eradication of infection and stable bone consolidation was achieved. Results: Complications during the implant-free interval comprised a broken nail in one case (5.0%) and a reinfection in one case (5.0%). Coating-specific side effects and cement debonding during removal did not occur. The mean physical health component score of SF-36 was 26.1 ± 7.6, and the mean mental health component score reached a value of 47.1 ± 18.6. The mean EQ-5D index value was 0.36 ± 0.32 and the mean EQ-5D visual analogue scale rating was 47.4 ± 19.4. The scores were significantly lower than those in the successfully treated FRI cohort but not in the PJI cohort. The mean ICD-10-based symptom rating scores revealed psychological symptom burden on the depression scale and enhanced levels of anxiety in comparison with healed FRI and PJI patients. Conclusion: Reinforcement of PMMA bone cement-coated implants seems to be a reasonable treatment option to create a temporary arthrodesis, preventing detachment of the bone cement when the implant was removed. Level of Evidence: IV

Increased incidence of vertebral fractures in German adults from 2009 to 2019 and the analysis of secondary diagnoses, treatment, costs, and in-hospital mortality

The aim of this cross-sectional study was to present the nationwide rates of hospitalized patients with vertebral fractures over one decade and to comprehensively analyze the treatment characteristics and direct costs incurred in 2019. Therefore, the trends in the incidence rate were quantified based on annual ICD-10 diagnosis codes from all German medical facilities between 2009 and 2019, provided by the Federal Statistical Office (Destatis). The ICD-10 Codes “S12.0-2; S22.0-; S32.0-, and S32.1-2” were evaluated. The relative change from 2009 through 2019 was determined. Using data from the Institute for Hospital Remuneration Systems (InEK) for 2019 the secondary diagnoses, OPS-codes, intensive care unit (ICU) treatment, in-hospital mortality, the proportion of G-DRGs and cumulative costs were evaluated. The documented number of vertebral fractures increased by 45.6% between 2009 and 2019 to an incidence of 150.7 per 100,000 inhabitants. The lumbar spine was most commonly affected with an incidence of 70.5/100,000 inhabitants in 2019 (46.8% of all vertebral fractures). The highest increases were seen in the numbers of subaxial cervical fractures (+ 121.2%) and sacral fractures (+ 306.6%). Of all vertebral fractures in 2019, 63.7% were diagnosed in women and 69.0% in patients aged 70 years or older. Osteoporosis was documented in 17.9% of cases as a concomitant diagnosis. In 10.1% of all cases, an ICU treatment was documented. The in-hospital mortality was 2.0% in 2019. I68D was the most frequently used G-DRG code, accounting for 33.3% of cases. The total direct costs for inpatient treatment in 2019 amounted to €589,205,715. The evaluation of 955,091 vertebral fractures showed a sharp increase in the nation-wide incidence rate. The presented age and sex distribution, the comorbidity profile and the in-hospital mortality rate indicate the importance of comprehensive geriatric assessment and emphasize the need for spinal care centers to be established

A Comprehensive Report of German Nationwide Inpatient Data on the Post-COVID-19 Syndrome Including Annual Direct Healthcare Costs

Background: The aim of this study was to provide a comprehensive overview of German nationwide data including (i) the number of hospitalized Post-COVID Syndrome (PCS) cases including in-hospital mortality rates and intensive care unit treatments, (ii) the main common concomitant diagnoses associated with PCS, (iii) the most frequently performed treatment procedures, and (iv) the annual direct healthcare costs. Methods: The incidence was calculated based on annual ICD-10 diagnosis codes “U09.9!, Post-COVID-19 condition”. Data on concomitant diagnoses, treatment procedures, treatment in an intensive care unit (ICU), in-hospital mortality, the proportion of G-DRGs, and cumulative costs were assessed based on the Institute for the Hospital Remuneration System (InEK) data for 2019. Results: A total of 29,808 PCS inpatients could be identified yielding a prevalence of 5.5%. In total, 1330 (4.5%) in-hospital deaths were recorded, and 5140 (17.2%) patients required ICU treatment. The majority of patients (18.6%) were aged 65–74 years. The most common concomitant diagnoses included pneumonia, critical illness polyneuropathy, dyspnea, chronic fatigue syndrome, and pulmonary embolisms. The most frequently performed procedures were computed tomography of the thorax with contrast medium, whole-body plethysmography, and the monitoring of respiration, heart, and circulation. The cost per case of the G-DRG codes that were analyzed ranged from € 620 ± 377 (E64D, Respiratory insufficiency, one day of occupancy) to € 113,801 ± 27,939 (A06B, Ventilation > 1799 h with complex OR procedure). Total cumulative direct healthcare costs of € 136,608,719 were calculated, resulting in mean costs of € 4583 per case. Conclusion: Post-COVID Syndrome is of major public health importance with substantial financial implications. The present article can support stakeholders in health care systems to foresee future needs and adapt their resource management. Consensus diagnostic criteria and rehabilitation guidelines are highly warranted

Long-term patient-related quality of life outcomes and ICD-10 symptom rating (ISR) of patients with pyogenic vertebral osteomyelitis: What is the psychological impact of this life-threatening disease?

Purpose We aimed to evaluate the long-term impact of the treatment of pyogenic vertebral osteomyelitis (VO) on functional outcomes and patients' quality of life (QoL) with a special focus on psychological well-being. Methods A total of 156 patients with VO with a minimum clinical follow-up of 12 months were retrospectively identified and asked to participate. Patient-reported outcome measures were evaluated with the EuroQol five-dimension questionnaire (EQ-5D) and German Short-Form 36 (SF-36) outcome instruments as well as with an ICD-10 based symptom rating (ISR) and compared to normative data. Spine-specific outcomes were assessed with the Core Outcome Measure Index and the Oswestry disability index (ODI) or the Neck disability index (NDI), respectively. Results From n = 156 eligible patients, n = 129 patients could be contacted and n = 40 returned questionnaires, yielding a response rate of 31.0%. The mean time from hospital discharge to follow-up was 83.0 ± 3.8 (13–193) months. Spine-specific outcomes showed mild to moderate disability. The mean physical health component score of the SF-36 (37.1 ± 16.7), the mean mental health component score (38.2 ± 14.0) and the mean EQ-5D VAS rating (57.1 ± 21.5) were significantly lower in comparison with the scores of an age-matched reference population (all p < 0.05). The mean total score of the ISR was 0.53 ± 0.23. On average, the cohort did not cross the threshold of clinically relevant symptom burden on any subscale. Conclusion Even almost seven years on average after completed treatment of VO, patients report impaired QoL. Assessment of psychological disorders should be implemented in clinical practice and future prospective studies

The Epidemiology of Spondylodiscitis in Germany: A Descriptive Report of Incidence Rates, Pathogens, In-Hospital Mortality, and Hospital Stays between 2010 and 2020

Background: Spondylodiscitis can lead to significant morbidity and mortality. Understanding its up-to-date epidemiological characteristics and trends is important to improve patient care. Methods: This study analyzed trends in the incidence rate of spondylodiscitis cases in Germany between 2010 and 2020, as well as the pathogens, in-hospital mortality rate, and length of hospital stay. Data were obtained from the Federal Statistical Office and the Institute for the Hospital Remuneration System database. The ICD-10 codes “M46.2-”, “M46.3-” and “M46.4-” were evaluated. Results: The incidence rate of spondylodiscitis increased to 14.4/100,000 inhabitants, with 59.6% cases occurring in patients 70 years or older and affecting mainly the lumbar spine (56.2%). Absolute case numbers increased from 6886 by 41.6% to 9753 in 2020 (IIR = 1.39, 95% CI 0.62–3.08). Staphylococci and Escherichia coli were the most coded pathogens. The proportion of resistant pathogens was 12.9%. In-hospital mortality rates increased to a maximum of 64.7/1000 patients in 2020, intensive care unit treatment was documented in 2697 (27.7%) cases, and the length of stay per case was 22.3 days. Conclusion: The sharply increasing incidence and in-hospital mortality rate of spondylodiscitis highlights the need for patient-centered therapy to improve patient outcomes, especially in the geriatric, frail population, which is prone to infectious diseases

Aktuelle Praxis der empirischen Antibiotikatherapie bei Spondylodiszitis

Hintergrund und Fragestellung Bei der pyogenen Spondylodiszitis gewinnen Infektionen mit Koagulase-negativen Staphylokokken zunehmend an Bedeutung. Eine empirische Antibiose ist insbesondere bei Patienten mit schweren oder progredienten neurologischen Ausfällen sowie hämodynamischer Instabilität und im Falle von kulturnegativen Spondylodiszitiden notwendig. Ob es in Deutschland einheitliche, an das Resistenzprofil angepasste Standards der empirische Antibotikatherapie gibt, ist unklar. Studiendesign und Untersuchungsmethoden Es wurde an deutschen Universitäts- und berufsgenossenschaftlichen Kliniken, jeweils in den Fachbereichen Orthopädie und Unfallchirurgie, eine Umfrage zur empirischen Antibiotikatherapie bei pyogener Spondylodiszitis durchgeführt. Die Umfrageergebnisse wurden auf das Resistenzprofil der Erreger von 45 Spondylodiszitispatienten, die zwischen 2013 und 2020 in unserer Klinik behandelt wurden, angewandt. Dadurch wurden potenzielle Sensibilitäts- und Resistenzraten für die angegebenen antibiotischen Therapien errechnet. Ergebnisse Von den 71 angefragten Kliniken antworteten insgesamt 44 (62,0 %). Sechzehn verschiedene Antibiotikatherapien wurden als jeweiliger Standard berichtet. Darunter wurden 14 verschiedene Kombinationstherapien als Therapiestandard angegeben. Die am häufigsten angegebenen empirischen Substanzen, nämlich Amoxicillin-Clavulansäure oder Ampicillin/Sulbactam (29,5 %) und Cephalosporine (18,2 %) zeigten in Bezug auf das zuvor veröffentliche Resistenzprofil hohe potenzielle Resistenzraten von 20,0 % bzw. 35,6 %. Die höchsten potenziellen Sensibilitätsraten wurden durch die Kombinationen Vancomycin + Ampicillin/Sulbactam (91,1 % sensible Erreger), Vancomycin + Piperacillin/Tazobactam (91,1 % sensible Erreger) und Ampicillin/Sulbactam + Teicoplanin (95,6 % sensible Erreger) erreicht. Eine dieser Kombinationen wurde von drei Kliniken (6,8 %) als Standard angegeben. Schlussfolgerung Die deutschlandweite Umfrage zur empirischen Antibiose bei pyogener Spondylodiszitis hat eine große Heterogenität der Standardtherapien ergeben. Eine Kombination aus einem Breitspektrum-β-Laktam-Antibiotikum mit einem zusätzlichen Glykopeptidantibiotikum kann sinnvoll sein

The Prophylactic Effect of Single vs. Dual Antibiotic-Loaded Bone Cement against Periprosthetic Joint Infection Following Hip Arthroplasty for Femoral Neck Fracture: An Analysis of the German Arthroplasty Registry

Background: Antibiotic-loaded bone cement in arthroplasties is currently experiencing increased usage. Therefore, single and double antibiotic-loaded bone cements are commercially available and used in orthopedic surgery. The aim of this investigation was to compare the clinical use of single compared to dual antibiotic-loaded bone cement for implant fixation after femoral neck fracture. Further infection rates were to be compared in (partial) arthroplasty for the treatment of femoral neck fracture for both treatment options. Methods: On the basis of the German Arthroplasty Registry (EPRD), all cases of femoral neck fracture treated with hemiarthroplasty (HA), or total hip arthroplasty (THA) with single and dual antibiotic-loaded bone cement, were included into the data analysis. The infection risk was compared using Kaplan-Meier estimates. Results: In total, 26,845 cases (HA 76.3%—THA: 23.7%) with femoral neck fracture were included. Within recent years, an increasing usage of dual antibiotic-loaded cement in Germany, with a current proportion of 7.30% in arthroplasty procedures for femoral neck fracture treatment, has been observed. In patients treated with HA, the proportion of dual antibiotic-loaded cement was 7.86%, while in those treated with THA, 5.46% of all prostheses were fixated with a two antibiotic component cement. For all arthroplasty procedures using single antibiotic-loaded bone cement after six months 1.8%, after one year 1.9%, and after five years 2.3%, of the cases failed due to periprosthetic joint infection (PJI), while in the same time period, in cases with dual antibiotic-loaded bone cement 1.5%, 1.5% and 1.5% suffered from infection (p = 0.34). A infection rate of 1.1% after HA with dual antibiotic-loaded bone cement was reported, compared to a 2.1% infection rate whilst using single antibiotic-loaded bone cement after five years (p = 0.098). The number required for treatment when using HA was 91. Conclusions: The use of dual antibiotic-loaded bone cement is increasingly used in arthroplasty procedures after femoral neck fractures. It demonstrates a reduction of PJI after HA and seems, therefore, to be a useful method for the prevention of infection, especially in patients with increased risk factors for PJI

Is There a Difference in Clinical Features, Microbiological Epidemiology and Effective Empiric Antimicrobial Therapy Comparing Healthcare-Associated and Community-Acquired Vertebral Osteomyelitis?

Background: Empiric antibiotic therapy for suspected vertebral osteomyelitis (VO) should be initiated immediately in severely ill patients, and might be necessary for culture-negative VO. The current study aimed to identify differences between community-acquired (CA) and healthcare-associated (HA) VO in terms of clinical presentation, causative pathogens, and antibiotic susceptibility. Methods: Cases of adult patients with VO treated at a German university orthopaedic trauma center between 2000 and 2020 were retrospectively reviewed. Patient history was used to distinguish between CA and HA VO. Susceptibility of antibiotic regimens was assessed based on antibiograms of the isolated pathogens. Results: A total of 155 patients (with a male to female ratio of 1.3; and a mean age of 66.1 ± 12.4 years) with VO were identified. In 74 (47.7%) patients, infections were deemed healthcare-associated. The most frequently identified pathogens were Staphylococcus aureus (HAVO: 51.2%; CAVO: 46.8%), and Coagulase-negative Staphylococci (CoNS, HAVO: 31.7%; CAVO: 21.3%). Antibiograms of 45 patients (HAVO: n = 22; CAVO: n = 23) were evaluated. Significantly more methicillin-resistant isolates, mainly CoNS, were found in the HAVO cohort (27.3%). The highest rate of resistance was found for cefazolin (HAVO: 45.5%; CAVO: 26.1%). Significantly higher rates of resistances were seen in the HAVO cohort for mono-therapies with meropenem (36.4%), piperacillin–tazobactam (31.8%), ceftriaxone (27.3%), and co-amoxiclav (31.8%). The broadest antimicrobial coverage was achieved with either a combination of piperacillin–tazobactam + vancomycin (CAVO: 100.0%; HAVO: 90.9%) or meropenem + vancomycin (CAVO: 100.0%; HAVO: 95.5%). Conclusion: Healthcare association is common in VO. The susceptibility pattern of underlying pathogens differs from CAVO. When choosing an empiric antibiotic, combination therapy must be considered