Search

Background: A preoperative pathogen detection is considered a prerequisite before undergoing one-stage exchange for prosthetic joint infection (PJI) according to most guidelines. This study compares patients with and without preoperative pathogen detection undergoing one-stage exchange for PJI of the hip. The authors put up the hypothesis that a preoperative pathogen detection is no prerequisite in selected cases undergoing one-stage exchange. Methods: 30 consecutive patients with PJI of the hip, treated with one-stage exchange, between 2011 and 2021, were retrospectively included. Mean age was 70 years and mean follow-up 2.1 ± 1.8 years. PJI was defined according to the European Bone and Joint Infection Society. One-stage exchange was performed in (1) chronic PJI longer than 4 weeks, (2) well-retained bone condition, (3) absence of multiple prior revisions for PJI (≤ 2) with absence of difficult-to-treat pathogens in the past, and (4) necessity/preference for early mobility due to comorbidities/age. Results: One-stage exchange was performed in 20 patients with and in 10 without a preoperative pathogen detection. Age (71 years, 68 years, p = 0.519), sex (50% and 30% males, p = 0.440), American Society of Anesthesiologists Score (2.2, 2.4, p = 0.502), and Charlson Comorbidity Index (3, 4, p = 0.530) did not differ among the two groups. No significant differences were noted concerning preoperative CRP (15 mg/l, 43 mg/l, p = 0.228), synovial cell count (15.990/nl, 5.308/nl, p = 0.887), radiological signs of loosening (55%, 50%, p = 0.999), and intraoperative histopathology. Except a higher rate of coagulase-negative staphylococci (70%, 20%, p = 0.019) in patients with a preoperative pathogen detection, no significant differences in pathogen spectrum were identified among groups. Revision for PJI recurrence was performed in one patient with an initial preoperative pathogen detection (3.3%). Additional revisions were performed for dislocation in two and postoperative hematoma in one patient. Revision rate for both septic and aseptic causes (p = 0.999), stay in hospital (16 and 15 days, p = 0.373) and modified Harris Hip Score (60, 71, p = 0.350) did not differ between groups. Conclusion: Patients with and without a preoperative pathogen detection did not show significant differences concerning baseline characteristics, clinical and functional outcomes at 2 years. An absent preoperative pathogen detection is no absolute contraindication for one-stage exchange in chronic PJI, if involving good bone quality and absence of multiple prior revisions. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose: The main requirement for performing the one-stage septic exchange is the pre-operative identification of the pathogen and its susceptibility. The purpose of this study is to evaluate the success rate with special focus on reinfection in a cohort of patients who underwent one-stage septic knee or hip revision for pre-operative culture-negative PJI. Methods: We retrospectively analyzed 640 patients treated by one-stage revision for chronic knee or hip PJI between January 1, 2016, and December 31, 2018. Only cases with pre-operative culture-negative PJI, with culture-negative synovial aspirations and one negative open biopsy, were analyzed. We evaluated the septic and aseptic complication and the rate of complication-free survival defined as the time from the date of first operation and the date of complication events. Results: A total of 22 patients fulfilled the inclusion and were enrolled. The mean age of the group was 73.2 ± 9.8 years, with a median ASA score of 3 (range 3–4). After mean follow-up of 3.6 ± 2.6 years, 86.4% (19 out of 22) of patients reported no complications. Two patients (9.1%) after one-stage hip required revision arthroplasty due to septic failure, while one patient (4.5%) with one-stage knee had revision for femoral component aseptic loosening. Conclusion: Our analysis suggests that the absence of pre-operative pathogen detection may not be contraindication to the one-stage revision in selected patients. The one-stage exchange might be considered in patients with pre-operative negative cultures in presence of ASA > 3 and multiple comorbidities that are not able to tolerate multiple surgeries. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction: Fracture-related infection (FRI) represents a challenging clinical scenario. Limited evidence exists regarding treatment failure after initial management of FRI. The objective of our investigation was to determine incidence and risk factors for treatment failure in FRI. Materials and methods: We conducted a retrospective review of patients treated for FRI between 2011 and 2015 at three level 1 trauma centers. One hundred and thirty-four patients treated for FRI were identified. Demographic and clinical variables were extracted from the medical record. Treatment failure was defined as the need for repeat debridement or surgical revision seven or more days after the presumed final procedure for infection treatment. Univariate comparisons were conducted between patients who experienced treatment failure and those who did not. Multivariable logistic regression was conducted to identify independent associations with treatment failure. Results: Of the 134 FRI patients, 51 (38.1%) experienced treatment failure. Patients who failed were more likely to have had an open injury (31% versus 17%; p = 0.05), to have undergone implant removal (p = 0.03), and additional index I&D procedures (3.3 versus 1.6; p < 0.001). Most culture results identified a single organism (62%), while 15% were culture negative. Treatment failure was more common in culture-negative infections (p = 0.08). Methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) was the most common organism associated with treatment failure (29%; p = 0.08). Multivariate regression demonstrated a statistically significant association between treatment failure and two or more irrigation and debridement (I&D) procedures (OR 13.22, 95% CI 4.77–36.62, p < 0.001) and culture-negative infection (OR 4.74, 95% CI 1.26–17.83, p = 0.02). Conclusions: The rate of treatment failure following FRI continues to be high. Important risk factors associated with treatment failure include open fracture, implant removal, and multiple I&D procedures. While MRSA remains common, culture-negative infection represents a novel risk factor for failure, suggesting aggressive treatment of clinically diagnosed cases remains critical even without positive culture data. Level of evidence: Retrospective cohort study; Level III. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction: Different approaches have been proposed for bacterial identification in patients with a suspected periprosthetic joint infection (PJI). If a one-stage procedure is considered, a higher rate of preoperative bacterial identification can be achieved if biopsy is included in the diagnostic work-up. The performance of open biopsy (OB) in the context of PJI has not been clearly determined yet. The purpose of this study was to determine the value of an OB added to two consecutive culture-negative joint aspirations during PJI workup. Materials and methods: We retrospectively analyzed the OB data from a single institution. Patients under PJI work-up of the hip or knee with two culture-negative periprosthetic aspirations who underwent OB were included. Sensitivity and specificity were calculated using the musculoskeletal infection society (MSIS) criteria as gold standard. Patients undergoing urgent irrigation and debridement and patients with history of surgery to the affected joint in the prior 6 weeks were excluded. Results: 126 patients were included in this study. 62 (49.2%) patients had prior revisions, 48 of them due to PJI. The sensitivity and specificity of OB was 69.4% and 89.1%, respectively. The OB procedure led to the identification of the causative germ in 50 out of 126 (40%) cases so they could undergo one-stage (septic) exchange. Conclusion: The OB is a valuable resource if preoperative synovial fluid cultures are negative, a high suspicion of infection persists and a one-stage procedure is preferred. It intends bacteria identification and allows surgeons to evaluate prosthetic complications for further surgical procedures. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Endophthalmitis is a potentially blinding intraocular infection following intraocular surgery or trauma. Prompt diagnosis and treatment are important in preventing devastating visual complications. Procalcitonin (PCT) is a promising biomarker for diagnosing bacterial infections. The aim of the study was to measure vitreous PCT in infectious endophthalmitis and assess its utility as a biomarker. Methods: In this prospective study, vitreous was collected from patients with non-infectious retinal disorders and infectious endophthalmitis. PCT was measured using the Human Procalcitonin ELISA Kit. The diagnostic performance of PCT was calculated via receiver operating characteristic curves. Results: The study included three groups: patients with non-infectious retinal conditions, culture-positive endophthalmitis, and culture-negative endophthalmitis. The average PCT was 75.74 ± 26.8 pg mL−1, 100.24 ± 12.9 pg mL−1, and 126.41 ± 26.47 pg mL−1 in control, culture-negative, and culture-positive endophthalmitis, respectively. There was a significant difference in the vitreous PCT in the study and control groups (p = 0.04), but not between culture-positive and culture-negative endophthalmitis (p = 0.65). The sensitivity (66.7%) and specificity (65%) for PCT with a cut-off of ≤ 54.88 pg mL−1(p = 0.31) implied that its diagnostic accuracy was not significant. But there was a significant difference in gram-negative (68.2 ± 16.5 pg mL−1) and gram-positive (175.09 ± 45 pg mL−1) (p = 0.02) bacterial infections; the sensitivity and specificity were 70%, with a cut-off of ≤ 82.3 pg mL−1. Conclusions: This study showed that vitreous procalcitonin concentration might not be a suitable biomarker for diagnosing culture-negative endophthalmitis though it could help distinguish between gram-positive and gram-negative infections. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose: Lack of peri-operative microbiological evidence is an unfavourable factor in one-stage revision. The objective of this study was to figure out whether being culture-negative was an unfavourable factor for periprosthetic hip joint infection (PHJI) in patients undergoing two-stage revision.Methods: Records of PHJI patients treated between October 2003 and December 2016 were reviewed at our institution. Information such as microbiological data, clinical outcomes, and other details of patients' clinical courses were recorded.Results: A total of the 58 cases were reviewed. The median follow-up duration was 68.5 months. The infection control rate of PHJI was 93.1% after two-stage revision. Kaplan-Meier analysis showed no significant difference in infection control rates between culture-negative and culture-positive groups. Culture-positive sinus secretions were significantly associated with an increased rate of reinfection (P = 0.039).Conclusions: Two-stage revision had a high success rate for eradication of PHJI. Culture-negative PHJI had a comparable outcome with culture-positive PHJI. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

We describe a case of Q-fever endocarditis with severe destruction of the aortic valve with perivalvular abscess formation and cardiac failure. The patient needed urgent operative treatment and postoperative critical care. All specimens sent for microbiological examination were negative. Molecular analysis, including fluorescence in situ hybridization of aortic valve tissue combined with PCR and sequencing, led to the correct diagnosis and to appropriate anti-infective treatment. The patient subsequently recovered from complex cardiovascular surgery. This is the first report on Q-fever endocarditis that was rapidly diagnosed using these methods. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Published guidelines for the treatment of healthcare-associated pneumonia (HCAP) recommend initial broad-spectrum antibiotics with appropriate de-escalation based on culture results. Guideline recommendations are based on data from intubated patients, in whom cultures are easily obtained. The approach to antibiotic de-escalation for culture-negative patients has not been addressed. Consequently, there are no published reports that describe the current standard of practice. Patients and methods: All patients admitted to a university hospital with a diagnosis of HCAP, as defined by use of a pneumonia orderset, were identified retrospectively over a 2-year period. Antibiotics prescribed on admission, during hospital stay, and on discharge were recorded. De-escalation was defined as a change in the initial antibiotic therapy from broad- to narrow-spectrum coverage within 14 days of the initial prescription. The Pneumonia Severity Index was used for risk-adjustment. Results: A total of 102 patients were included in the analysis; of these, 72% ( n = 73) were culture-negative. There were more males in the culture-negative than culture-positive group; otherwise, baseline characteristics were similar. Antibiotic therapy was de-escalated in 75% of the culture-negative group and 77% of the culture-positive group ( p = 1.00). Culture-negative patients were de-escalated approximately 1 day earlier than culture-positive patients (3.93 vs. 5.04 days, p = 0.03). Culture-negative patients who were de-escalated had a shorter length of hospitalization, lower hospital costs, and lower mortality rates. In 70% of the culture-negative patients, a respiratory fluoroquinolone was chosen for de-escalation. Conclusion: In this single-center study, most of the patients with culture-negative HCAP were safely de-escalated to a respiratory fluoroquinolone. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]