PURPOSE: Empirical broad-spectrum antibiotic treatment for orthopaedic implant infections after surgical lavage is common practice while awaiting microbiological results, but lacks evidence. METHODS: This was a single-centre cohort study from 1996 to 2010 with a follow-up of two years. RESULTS: We retrieved 342 implant infections and followed them up for a median of 3.5 years (61 recurred, 18%). Infected implants were arthroplasties (n = 186), different plates, nails or other osteosyntheses. The main pathogens were S. aureus (163, 49 methicillin-resistant) and coagulase-negative staphylococci (60, 45 methicillin-resistant). Median duration of empirical antibiotic coverage after surgical drainage was three days before switching to targeted therapy. Vancomycin was the most frequent initial empirical agent (147), followed by intravenous co-amoxiclav (44). Most empirical antibiotic regimens (269, 79%) proved sensitive to the causative pathogen, but were too broad in 111 episodes (32%). Cephalosporins and penicillins were used only in 44 and ten cases, respectively, although they would have covered 59% of causative pathogens identified later. Multivariate Cox regression analysis showed that neither susceptible antibiotic coverage (compared to non-susceptible; hazard ratio 0.7, 95% confidence interval 0.4-1.2) nor broad-spectrum use (hazard ratio 1.1, 0.8-1.5) changed remission rates. CONCLUSIONS: Provided that surgical drainage is performed, broad-spectrum antibiotic coverage does not enhance remission of orthopaedic implant infections during the first three days. If empirical agents are prescribed from the first day of infection, narrow-spectrum penicillins or cephalosporins can be considered to avoid unnecessary broad-spectrum antibiotic use.
PURPOSE: Empirical broad-spectrum antibiotic treatment for orthopaedic implant infections after surgical lavage is common practice while awaiting microbiological results, but lacks evidence. METHODS: This was a single-centre cohort study from 1996 to 2010 with a follow-up of two years. RESULTS: We retrieved 342 implant infections and followed them up for a median of 3.5 years (61 recurred, 18%). Infected implants were arthroplasties (n = 186), different plates, nails or other osteosyntheses. The main pathogens were S. aureus (163, 49 methicillin-resistant) and coagulase-negative staphylococci (60, 45 methicillin-resistant). Median duration of empirical antibiotic coverage after surgical drainage was three days before switching to targeted therapy. Vancomycin was the most frequent initial empirical agent (147), followed by intravenous co-amoxiclav (44). Most empirical antibiotic regimens (269, 79%) proved sensitive to the causative pathogen, but were too broad in 111 episodes (32%). Cephalosporins and penicillins were used only in 44 and ten cases, respectively, although they would have covered 59% of causative pathogens identified later. Multivariate Cox regression analysis showed that neither susceptible antibiotic coverage (compared to non-susceptible; hazard ratio 0.7, 95% confidence interval 0.4-1.2) nor broad-spectrum use (hazard ratio 1.1, 0.8-1.5) changed remission rates. CONCLUSIONS: Provided that surgical drainage is performed, broad-spectrum antibiotic coverage does not enhance remission of orthopaedic implant infections during the first three days. If empirical agents are prescribed from the first day of infection, narrow-spectrum penicillins or cephalosporins can be considered to avoid unnecessary broad-spectrum antibiotic use.
Authors: Ilker Uçkay; Stephan Harbarth; Robin Peter; Daniel Lew; Pierre Hoffmeyer; Didier Pittet Journal: Expert Rev Anti Infect Ther Date: 2010-06 Impact factor: 5.091
Authors: Ricardo Sousa; Alexandre Pereira; Marta Massada; Manuel Vieira da Silva; Rui Lemos; José Costa e Castro Journal: Acta Orthop Belg Date: 2010-04 Impact factor: 0.500
Authors: Douglas R Osmon; Elie F Berbari; Anthony R Berendt; Daniel Lew; Werner Zimmerli; James M Steckelberg; Nalini Rao; Arlen Hanssen; Walter R Wilson Journal: Clin Infect Dis Date: 2013-01 Impact factor: 9.079
Authors: S H Sheehy; B A Atkins; P Bejon; I Byren; D Wyllie; N A Athanasou; A R Berendt; M A McNally Journal: J Infect Date: 2010-03-15 Impact factor: 6.072
Authors: G Cranny; R Elliott; H Weatherly; D Chambers; N Hawkins; L Myers; M Sculpher; A Eastwood Journal: Health Technol Assess Date: 2008-01 Impact factor: 4.014
Authors: Elie F Berbari; Camelia Marculescu; Irene Sia; Brian D Lahr; Arlen D Hanssen; James M Steckelberg; Rachel Gullerud; Douglas R Osmon Journal: Clin Infect Dis Date: 2007-09-26 Impact factor: 9.079
Authors: María Galán-Olleros; Javier Marco; David Oteo; Rafael Cristóbal-Bilbao; Elena Manrique; Roberto García-Maroto; Fernando Marco; Juan Luis Cebrián-Parra Journal: Ann Surg Oncol Date: 2020-07-13 Impact factor: 5.344
Authors: O Robineau; E Talagrand-Reboulh; B Brunschweiler; F Jehl; E Beltrand; F Rousseau; N Blondiaux; A Grillon; C Joseph; P Lambotte; P Boyer; Eric Senneville Journal: Eur J Clin Microbiol Infect Dis Date: 2021-05-20 Impact factor: 3.267
Authors: Ilker Uçkay; Dominique Holy; Madlaina Schöni; Felix W A Waibel; Tudor Trache; Jan Burkhard; Thomas Böni; Benjamin A Lipsky; Martin C Berli Journal: Endocrinol Diabetes Metab Date: 2021-02-09