AIM: To analyse the management of patients treated with linezolid for orthopaedic infections. METHODS: Twenty-two patients with orthopaedic related infections receiving a course of linezolid were reviewed retrospectively. Patients were classified into either post trauma, post arthroplasty and non trauma related infections. A diagnosis of infection was based on clinical findings, positive microbiological specimens, and positive signs of infection on radiological imaging and raised inflammatory markers. Pathogens isolated, inflammatory markers both at presentation and at final follow up, length of linezolid treatment, adverse drug reactions, concomitant anti-microbial therapy, length of hospital stay and any surgical interventions were recorded. RESULTS: Infections were classified as post arthroplasty (n = 10), post trauma surgery (n = 8) or non-trauma related infections (n = 4). Twenty patients (91%) underwent surgical intervention as part of their treatment. The number of required surgical procedures ranged from 1 to 6 (mean = 2.56). Mean total length of stay per admission was 28.5 d (range 1-160 d). Furthermore, the mean duration of treatment with linezolid of patients who had resolution of symptoms was 31 d (range 10-84 d). All patients within this group were discharged on oral linezolid. Pathogens isolated included methicillin resistant Staphylococcus aureus, coagulase negative staphylococci, coliforms, enterococcus, Staphylococcus epidermidis, streptococcus viridans, Escherichia coli, group B streptococcus and pseudomonas. An overall 77% of patients demonstrated resolution of infections at follow-up, with mean C-reactive protein reducing from 123 mg/L to 13.2 mg/L. CONCLUSION: This study demonstrates that the use of linezolid offers excellent efficacy in orthopaedic related infections when used alongside appropriate surgical management.
AIM: To analyse the management of patients treated with linezolid for orthopaedic infections. METHODS: Twenty-two patients with orthopaedic related infections receiving a course of linezolid were reviewed retrospectively. Patients were classified into either post trauma, post arthroplasty and non trauma related infections. A diagnosis of infection was based on clinical findings, positive microbiological specimens, and positive signs of infection on radiological imaging and raised inflammatory markers. Pathogens isolated, inflammatory markers both at presentation and at final follow up, length of linezolid treatment, adverse drug reactions, concomitant anti-microbial therapy, length of hospital stay and any surgical interventions were recorded. RESULTS: Infections were classified as post arthroplasty (n = 10), post trauma surgery (n = 8) or non-trauma related infections (n = 4). Twenty patients (91%) underwent surgical intervention as part of their treatment. The number of required surgical procedures ranged from 1 to 6 (mean = 2.56). Mean total length of stay per admission was 28.5 d (range 1-160 d). Furthermore, the mean duration of treatment with linezolid of patients who had resolution of symptoms was 31 d (range 10-84 d). All patients within this group were discharged on oral linezolid. Pathogens isolated included methicillin resistant Staphylococcus aureus, coagulase negative staphylococci, coliforms, enterococcus, Staphylococcus epidermidis, streptococcus viridans, Escherichia coli, group B streptococcus and pseudomonas. An overall 77% of patients demonstrated resolution of infections at follow-up, with mean C-reactive protein reducing from 123 mg/L to 13.2 mg/L. CONCLUSION: This study demonstrates that the use of linezolid offers excellent efficacy in orthopaedic related infections when used alongside appropriate surgical management.
Authors: Thomas E Dobbs; Mukesh Patel; Ken B Waites; Stephen A Moser; Alan M Stamm; Craig J Hoesley Journal: J Clin Microbiol Date: 2006-09 Impact factor: 5.948
Authors: Matthew E Falagas; Ilias I Siempos; Panayiotis J Papagelopoulos; Konstantinos Z Vardakas Journal: Int J Antimicrob Agents Date: 2007-01-03 Impact factor: 5.283
Authors: Matteo Bassetti; Francesco Vitale; Giovanna Melica; Elda Righi; Antonio Di Biagio; Luigi Molfetta; Francesco Pipino; Mario Cruciani; Dante Bassetti Journal: J Antimicrob Chemother Date: 2005-02-10 Impact factor: 5.790
Authors: Thomas Bradbury; Thomas K Fehring; Michael Taunton; Arlen Hanssen; Khalid Azzam; Javad Parvizi; Susan M Odum Journal: J Arthroplasty Date: 2009-06-24 Impact factor: 4.757