Search

Aims: This work aimed at answering the following research questions: 1) What is the rate of mechanical complications, nonunion and infection for head/neck femoral fractures, intertrochanteric fractures, and subtrochanteric fractures in the elderly USA population? and 2) Which factors influence adverse outcomes? Methods: Proximal femoral fractures occurred between 1 January 2009 and 31 December 2019 were identified from the Medicare Physician Service Records Data Base. The Kaplan-Meier method with Fine and Gray sub-distribution adaptation was used to determine rates for nonunion, infection, and mechanical complications. Semiparametric Cox regression model was applied incorporating 23 measures as covariates to identify risk factors. Results: Union failure occured in 0.89% (95% confidence interval (CI) 0.83 to 0.95) after head/neck fracturs, in 0.92% (95% CI 0.84 to 1.01) after intertrochanteric fracture and in 1.99% (95% CI 1.69 to 2.33) after subtrochanteric fractures within 24 months. A fracture-related infection was more likely to occur after subtrochanteric fractures than after head/neck fractures (1.64% vs 1.59%, hazard ratio (HR) 1.01 (95% CI 0.87 to 1.17); p < 0.001) as well as after intertrochanteric fractures (1.64% vs 1.13%, HR 1.31 (95% CI 1.12 to 1.52); p < 0.001). Anticoagulant use, cerebrovascular disease, a concomitant fracture, diabetes mellitus, hypertension, obesity, open fracture, and rheumatoid disease was identified as risk factors. Mechanical complications after 24 months were most common after head/neck fractures with 3.52% (95% CI 3.41 to 3.64; currently at risk: 48,282). Conclusion: The determination of complication rates for each fracture type can be useful for informed patient-clinician communication. Risk factors for complications could be identified for distinct proximal femur fractures in elderly patients, which are accessible for therapeutical treatment in the management. Cite this article: Bone Jt Open 2023;4(10):801–807.

Diagnosis of bone and joint infections can be difficult. In recent years there has been great progress in defining how we diagnose fracture-related infection (FRI) and prosthetic joint infection (PJI). Definitions have been proposed based on the best evidence from the literature, including well-established tests performed before and during surgery. These allow surgeons to make better decisions for treatment and to counsel patients. This paper presents the elements of the International Consensus Definition of FRI and the European Bone & Joint Infection Society Definition of Prosthetic Joint Infection (PJI), together with the current knowledge on how these definitions can help in clinical practice. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Periprosthetic joint infections (PJI) and fracture-related infections (FRI) of the distal femur (DF) may result in massive bone defects. Treatment options include articulated silver-coated (SC) megaprosthesis (MP) in the context of a two-stage protocol. However, there is limited evidence in the literature on this topic. A retrospective review of the prospectively maintained databases of three Institutions was performed. Forty-five patients were included. The mean follow-up time was 43 ± 17.1 months. Eight (17.8%) patients had a recurrent infection. The estimated recurrence-free survival rate was 91.1% (93.5% PJI vs. 85.7% FRI) 2 years following MP implantation, and 75.7% (83.2% PJI vs. 64.3% FRI; p = 0.253) after 5 years. No statistically relevant difference was found according to the initial diagnosis (PJI vs. FRI). Among possible risk factors, only resection length was found to significantly worsen the outcomes in terms of infection control (p = 0.031). A total of eight complications not related to infection were found after reimplantation, but only five of them required further surgery. Above-the-knee amputation was performed in two cases (4.4%), both for reinfection. Articulated DF SC MP in a two-stage protocol is a safe and effective treatment for chronic knee infection with severe bone loss. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Currently, accurate diagnosis and successful treatment of infection after fracture fixation (IAFF) still impose great challenges. According to the onset of infection symptoms after implantation, IAFF is classified as early infection (<2 weeks), delayed infection (2∼10 weeks) and late infection (>10 weeks). Confirmation of IAFF should be supported by histopathological tests of intraoperative specimens which confirm infection, cultures from at least two suspected infection sites which reveal the same pathogen, a definite sinus or fistula which connects directly the bone or the implant, and purulent drainage from the wound or presence of pus during surgery. Diagnosis of IAFF is built on comprehensive assessment of medical history, clinical signs and symptoms of the patient, and imaging and laboratory tests. The gold standard of diagnosis is histopathological tests. Treatment of IAFF consists of radical debridement, adequate irrigation, implant handling, systematic and local antibiotics, reconstruction of osseous and/or soft tissue defects, and functional rehabilitation of an affected limb. Early accurate diagnosis and appropriate treatment of IAFF play a key role in increasing the cure rate, reducing infection recurrence and disability risk, restoring limb function and improving quality of life of the patient. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction: Fracture-related infection (FRI) is an important complication following surgical fracture management. Key to successful treatment is an accurate diagnosis. To this end, microbiological identification remains the gold standard. Although a structured approach towards sampling specimens for microbiology seems logical, there is no consensus on a culture protocol for FRI. The aim of this study is to evaluate the effect of a structured microbiology sampling protocol for fracture-related infections compared to ad-hoc culture sampling.Methods: We conducted a pre-/post-implementation cohort study that compared the effects of implementation of a structured FRI sampling protocol. The protocol included strict criteria for sampling and interpretation of tissue cultures for microbiology. All intraoperative samples from suspected or confirmed FRI were compared for culture results. Adherence to the protocol was described for the post-implementation cohort.Results: In total 101 patients were included, 49 pre-implementation and 52 post-implementation. From these patients 175 intraoperative culture sets were obtained, 96 and 79 pre- and post-implementation respectively. Cultures from the pre-implementation cohort showed significantly more antibiotic use during culture sampling (P =  0.002). The post-implementation cohort showed a tendency more positive culture sets (69% vs. 63%), with a significant difference in open wounds (86% vs. 67%, P =  0.034). In all post-implementation culture sets causative pathogens were cultured more than once per set, in contrast to pre-implementation. Despite stricter tissue sampling and culture interpretation criteria, the number of polymicrobial infections was similar in both cohorts, approximately 29% of all culture sets and 44% of all positive culture sets. Significantly more polymicrobial cultures were found in early infections in the post-implementation cohort (P =  0.048). This indicates a better yield in the new protocol.Conclusion: A standardised protocol for intraoperative sampling for bacterial identification in FRI is superior than an ad-hoc approach. It has a positive effect on both surgeon and microbiologist by increasing awareness about the problem at hand. This resulted in more microbiologically confirmed infections and more certainty when identifying causative pathogens. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose: Complete fracture healing is crucial for positive patient outcome. A major complication in fracture treatment is non-union. Infection is among the main causes of non-union and hence of osteosynthesis failure. For the treatment of non-union, it is crucial to understand whether a fracture is not healing because of an underlying septic process, since the surgical approach to non-unions definitely differs according to whether the fracture is infected or aseptic. We aimed to assess the diagnostic performance of 2-deoxy-2-[18F]fluoro-D-glucose positron emission tomography-computed tomography ([18F]FDG PET/CT) in the evaluation of infection as possible cause of non-union. Methods: We retrospectively evaluated images of 47 patients treated in our trauma center who, between January 2011 and June 2017, underwent preoperative [18F]FDG PET/CT aiming to exclude infection in non-union. Clinical data, diagnostic examinations, laboratory and microbiology results, and patient outcome were collected and analyzed. [18F]FDG PET/CT images were visually and semiquantitatively evaluated using the maximum standardized uptake value (SUVmax). Imaging findings, as assessed by an experienced nuclear medicine physician and an experienced musculoskeletal radiologist, were compared with intraoperative microbiological culture results, which were used for final diagnosis (reference standard). The diagnostic performance of [18F]FDG PET/CT in detecting infected non-union was assessed. Results: Twenty-two patients were not infected, while the remaining 25 had positive intraoperative microbiological results. C-reactive protein (CRP) was within the normal range in 13 cases (five with a final diagnosis of infection) and higher than normal in 25 patients (13 with a final diagnosis of infection). Infection was correctly detected on visual analysis of PET/CT images in 23 cases, while 2/25 infected patients had no significant [18F]FDG uptake and were considered false negatives. In seven cases, [18F]FDG PET/CT showed false positive results; 15/22 disease-free patients were correctly diagnosed. The diagnostic accuracy of [18F]FDG PET/CT in the final diagnosis of infection was 81% (38/47); its sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, and negative predictive value were 92%, 68%, 77%, and 88% respectively. The likelihood ratio for a positive test (LR+) was 2.89 and for a negative test, 0.12. Pretest probability of disease was 53%. Post-test probability based on LR+ was 77%. Conclusion: [18F]FDG PET/CT is a promising tool for diagnoses of infected non-unions. Both PET and CT images should be interpreted to achieve a high sensitivity (92%) and a very good negative post-test probability (12%). [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Bone and joint infections are common worldwide and cause considerable morbidity for the patient. Despite recent advances, they are difficult and expensive to treat. Regardless of the infection type (septic arthritis, osteomyelitis, fracture-related infections, or periprosthetic joint infection), patients may suffer from chronic ill health, multiple revision surgeries and prolonged hospital stay. An accurate diagnosis is the first step for successful treatment and infection control. However, due to the lack of a single test providing 100% accuracy, interdisciplinary teamwork is needed to diagnose bone and joint infections more precisely. Nevertheless, the diagnosis remains very challenging, especially in infections caused by low virulence organisms. This review will describe the diagnostic methods for septic arthritis, osteomyelitis, fracture-related infections and periprosthetic joint infections in current use in clinical practice. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose: 18F-Fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography (18F-FDG PET/CT) is frequently used to diagnose fracture-related infections (FRIs), but its diagnostic performance in this field is still unknown. The aims of this study were: (1) to assess the diagnostic performance of qualitative assessment of 18F-FDG PET/CT scans in diagnosing FRI, (2) to establish the diagnostic performance of standardized uptake values (SUVs) extracted from 18F-FDG PET/CT scans and to determine their associated optimal cut-off values, and (3) to identify variables that predict a false-positive (FP) or false-negative (FN) 18F-FDG PET/CT result. Methods: This retrospective cohort study included all patients with suspected FRI undergoing 18F-FDG PET/CT between 2011 and 2017 in two level-1 trauma centres. Two nuclear medicine physicians independently reassessed all 18F-FDG PET/CT scans. The reference standard consisted of the result of at least two deep, representative microbiological cultures or the presence/absence of clinical confirmatory signs of FRI (AO/EBJIS consensus definition) during a follow-up of at least 6 months. Diagnostic performance in terms of sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value (PPV) and negative predictive value (NPV) was calculated. Additionally, SUVs were measured on 18F-FDG PET/CT scans. Volumes of interest were drawn around the suspected and corresponding contralateral areas to obtain absolute values and ratios between suspected and contralateral areas. A multivariable logistic regression analysis was also performed to identify the most important predictor(s) of FP or FN 18F-FDG PET/CT results. Results: The study included 156 18F-FDG PET/CT scans in 135 patients. Qualitative assessment of 18F-FDG PET/CT scans showed a sensitivity of 0.89, specificity of 0.80, PPV of 0.74, NPV of 0.91 and diagnostic accuracy of 0.83. SUVs on their own resulted in lower diagnostic performance, but combining them with qualitative assessments yielded an AUC of 0.89 compared to an AUC of 0.84 when considering only the qualitative assessment results (p = 0.007). 18F-FDG PET/CT performed <1 month after surgery was found to be the independent variable with the highest predictive value for a false test result, with an absolute risk of 46% (95% CI 27–66%), compared with 7% (95% CI 4–12%) in patients with 18F-FDG PET/CT performed 1–6 months after surgery. Conclusion: Qualitative assessment of 18F-FDG PET/CT scans had a diagnostic accuracy of 0.83 and an excellent NPV of 0.91 in diagnosing FRI. Adding SUV measurements to qualitative assessment provided additional accuracy in comparison to qualitative assessment alone. An interval between surgery and 18F-FDG PET/CT of <1 month was associated with a sharp increase in false test results. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

• Is the first study to conduct matching between open and closed fractures to avoid bias that could increase the infection risk owing to factors other than open fracture. • Open fractures were found to be a risk factor associated with fracture related infection with a 5.48 times higher probability of FRI than closed fractures (odds ratio 5.41 (95% confidence interval [CI] 1.55–18.85). • Multivariate analysis showed that the OKS score was 3 points lower for open fractures (95% CI -5.530–-0.478) than closed ones, the minimal clinical difference for the OKS is 5 points so this statistical difference does not represent a clinical difference. • Comparing functional outcome between infected and uninfected patients we got that the median OKS decreased 9,69 points IC 95% [ (-14,13–(-5,25)], P = 0,000 this is a clinical and statistically significant difference. Open tibial plateau fractures are complex injuries that require specialized management to prevent complications. The objective of this study was to compare the infection risk and functional outcomes between open and closed tibial plateau fractures. In this multicenter cohort study the propensity score matching was used to pair participants according to age, sex, and Schatzker classification. 190 patients were followed for 1 year postoperatively. The Fracture-Related Infection (FRI) Consensus Group criteria was used to diagnose infection. Knee functionality was measured using the Oxford Knee Score scale (OKS). The proportion of open fractures was 5.1%, and the overall incidence rate of FRI was 8% with 14% of them represented by open fractures and 4% for closed fractures (p = 0.014). Open fractures were found to be a risk factor associated with FRI, with a 5.48 times higher probability of FRI than closed fractures (odds ratio 5.41, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.55–18.85). Among the study population, 50% had satisfactory functional outcomes of the knee (median OKS 45, IQR = 3). The median OKS was 44 (IQR = 11) in open fractures and 46 (IQR = 7) in closed ones (p = 0.03). Multivariate analysis showed that the OKS was 3 points lower for open fractures (95% CI -5.530–-0.478) than closed ones, and the score was 9.7 points lower for FRI. Open TPF is a risk factor that increases the probability of fracture related infections. Functional outcomes were excellent for both open and closed TPF, with a slight difference numerical that was under the minimal clinical difference (MCID). The presence of FRI significantly decreases the functional outcome. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]