Pseudomonas aeruginosa prosthetic joint-infection outcomes: Prospective, observational study on 43 patients

ObjectivesAnalysis the outcomes of Pseudomonas aeruginosa prosthetic joint infection (PJI), and of their clinical and microbiological characteristics, surgical strategies and antibiotic treatments.MethodsMonocenter cohort study in a Bone-and-Joint-Infection Referral Center (08/2004 to 10/2018) including all consecutive P. aeruginosa PJIs. Data were extracted from the prospective database, including the following events: relapses, new PJIs, related deaths.ResultsMedian [IQR]: among the 43 patients included (28 females; 72 [63–80] years old; 27 hip, 15 knee, and 1 shoulder PJIs), 29 (67%) had underlying comorbidities, 12 (28%) had previously been treated for another PJI and 9 (21%) had undergone previous surgeries for their P. aeruginosa PJI. Eleven (26%) PJIs were polymicrobial, 16 (37%) strains were wild type, 8 (19%) ciprofloxacin-resistant. PJIs were classified as late chronic (n = 33), early postoperative (n = 9) or acute hematogenous infection (n = 1). Forty patients underwent surgery: 27 one-stage and 5 two-stage exchanges, 3 debridement and implant retention, and 5 other surgical strategies. Antibiotic treatments were: 29 received 41 [37–43] days of combination therapy (IV anti-pseudomonal β-lactam and 3–5 days of amikacin, then β-lactam and oral ciprofloxacin), followed by oral ciprofloxacin for a total of 12 weeks; 10 received only IV antibiotics for 83 [77–86] days, including 37 [32–46] days of combination therapy; 49 days of ceftazidime alone for 1. During follow-up lasting 33 [24–64.5] months, 2 relapses, 3 new PJIs, and 2 related deaths occurred. Thirty-three (82%) patients and 93% of those managed with one-stage exchange experienced no event.ConclusionOutcomes of our cohort’s P. aeruginosa PJIs—predominantly monomicrobial, chronic, ciprofloxacin-susceptible, treated with one-stage exchange and prolonged IV antibiotics—were 82% favorable

One- and two-stage surgical revision of peri-prosthetic joint infection of the hip: a pooled individual participant data analysis of 44 cohort studies.

One-stage and two-stage revision strategies are the two main options for treating established chronic peri-prosthetic joint infection (PJI) of the hip; however, there is uncertainty regarding which is the best treatment option. We aimed to compare the risk of re-infection between the two revision strategies using pooled individual participant data (IPD). Observational cohort studies with PJI of the hip treated exclusively by one- or two-stage revision and reporting re-infection outcomes were retrieved by searching MEDLINE, EMBASE, Web of Science, The Cochrane Library, and the WHO International Clinical Trials Registry Platform; as well as email contact with investigators. We analysed IPD of 1856 participants with PJI of the hip from 44 cohorts across four continents. The primary outcome was re-infection (recurrence of infection by the same organism(s) and/or re-infection with a new organism(s)). Hazard ratios (HRs) for re-infection were calculated using Cox proportional frailty hazards models. After a median follow-up of 3.7 years, 222 re-infections were recorded. Re-infection rates per 1000 person-years of follow-up were 16.8 (95% CI 13.6-20.7) and 32.3 (95% CI 27.3-38.3) for one-stage and two-stage strategies respectively. The age- and sex-adjusted HR of re-infection for two-stage revision was 1.70 (0.58-5.00) when compared with one-stage revision. The association remained consistently absent after further adjustment for potential confounders. The HRs did not vary importantly in clinically relevant subgroups. Analysis of pooled individual patient data suggest that a one-stage revision strategy may be as effective as a two-stage revision strategy in treating PJI of the hip

Infections de prothèses articulaires à streptocoque du groupe B (étude rétrospective portant sur 20 cas)

PARIS7-Villemin (751102101) / SudocPARIS-BIUM (751062103) / SudocSudocFranceF

Antibiotic Therapy for Prosthetic Joint Infections: An Overview

Prosthetic joint infection (PJI) is a severe complication after arthroplasty. Its management combines surgical intervention, whose type depends on the clinical situation, and prolonged high-dose antibiotics adapted to the responsible microorganism(s) and the patient. Antibiotics are only one part of the therapeutic regimen and are closely related to the surgical strategy. Their efficacy depends to a large extent on the choice and quality of the surgical procedure, and the quality of the microbiological diagnosis. Although guidelines have been published, many aspects of antibiotic therapy remain poorly established. Choosing the optimal agent(s) is one aspect, with others being optimization of drugs’ pharmacokinetic/pharmacodynamic parameters, the choice of administration route, use of monotherapy or combination regimens, therapeutic drug-monitoring and patient education to improve compliance and tolerance. Herein, we address PJI management based on recent literature data, guidelines and the experience of our referral center for complex bone-and-joint infections

Antibiotic Therapy for Prosthetic Joint Infections: An Overview

Prosthetic joint infection (PJI) is a severe complication after arthroplasty. Its management combines surgical intervention, whose type depends on the clinical situation, and prolonged high-dose antibiotics adapted to the responsible microorganism(s) and the patient. Antibiotics are only one part of the therapeutic regimen and are closely related to the surgical strategy. Their efficacy depends to a large extent on the choice and quality of the surgical procedure, and the quality of the microbiological diagnosis. Although guidelines have been published, many aspects of antibiotic therapy remain poorly established. Choosing the optimal agent(s) is one aspect, with others being optimization of drugs’ pharmacokinetic/pharmacodynamic parameters, the choice of administration route, use of monotherapy or combination regimens, therapeutic drug-monitoring and patient education to improve compliance and tolerance. Herein, we address PJI management based on recent literature data, guidelines and the experience of our referral center for complex bone-and-joint infections

Campylobacter infection after prosthetic joint surgery

Few cases of Campylobacter prosthetic joint infection (PJI) have been reported so far. We describe the demographic characteristics, underlying conditions, clinical features, treatment, and outcome of 8 patients with Campylobacter PJI in our hospital. All strains were confirmed at the French National Reference Center for Campylobacter and Helicobacter. Seven patients were infected with C. fetus and 1 with C. jejuni. Most patients were elderly and immunocompromised. Four had bacteremia, one of these with a pacemaker endocarditis. All the patients received at least 3 months of antibiotic treatment and 6 were treated surgically. The outcome was favorable at 2 years of follow-up in all except for 1 patient. Campylobacter PJI cases are rare but likely to become more frequent. C. fetus bacteremia should motivate physicians to look for a secondary localization such as a Campylobacter PJI

<i>Cutibacterium acnes</i> Prosthetic Joint Infections: Is Rifampicin-Combination Therapy Beneficial?

No consensus has been reached on the optimal antibiotic regimen to treat Cutibacterium acnes PJIs (Ca-PJIs). In vitro studies showed excellent rifampicin efficacy against biofilm-associated C. acnes infections, but clinical studies did not confirm the superiority of rifampicin-combined therapy over monotherapy. This prospective cohort study was undertaken to analyze the outcomes of 70 patients who underwent exchange arthroplasty for chronic monomicrobial Ca-PJI and were treated with rifampicin or without between 2004 and 2019. The 37 patients treated from January 2004 to August 2014 were prescribed rifampicin-combination therapy and the 33 treated from September 2014 to December 2019 received monotherapy without rifampicin. The primary endpoint was the 2-year Kaplan–Meier-estimated reinfection-free probability, including relapses and new-pathogen PJIs. The 2-year reinfection-free rate was high and not different for patients who had received rifampicin or not (89.2% vs. 93.8%, respectively; p = 0.524). None of the patients relapsed and six developed new-pathogen PJIs. Our results do not support a benefit of rifampicin-combination therapy for patients who underwent exchange arthroplasty for chronic Ca-PJIs

Acute Kidney Injury After High Doses of Amoxicillin

International audienc

Continuous Clindamycin Infusion, an Innovative Approach to Treating Bone and Joint Infections ▿

The feasibility, safety, and efficacy of prolonged, continuous, intravenous clindamycin therapy were retrospectively evaluated for 70 patients treated for bone and joint infections, 40% of whom were treated as outpatients. The median treatment duration was 40 days, the median daily clindamycin dose was 2,400 mg, and three moderate-grade adverse events occurred. The median serum clindamycin concentrations on days 3 to 14 and days 8 to 28 were 5 and 6.2 mg/liter, respectively; the median concentration was significantly lower (P < 0.02) in patients treated with rifampin (5.3 mg/liter) than in those not treated with rifampin (8.9 mg/liter). Among 53 patients with a median follow-up of 30 months (range, 24 to 53 months), 49 (92%) were considered cured (1 patient had a relapse, and 3 patients had reinfections)