Nikolai M Kliushin1, Artem M Ermakov1, Tatiana A Malkova2. 1. Russian Ilizarov Scientific Centre for Restorative Traumatology and Orthopaedics, 6, M. Ulianova st., Kurgan, 640014, Russian Federation. 2. Russian Ilizarov Scientific Centre for Restorative Traumatology and Orthopaedics, 6, M. Ulianova st., Kurgan, 640014, Russian Federation. tmalkova@mail.ru.
Abstract
PURPOSE: This study aimed to delineate the infecting micro-organisms identified at the first-time revision for infected THA, analyze pre-operative versus intra-operative findings, as well as intra-operative ones against re-infection micro-organisms. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Microbiological laboratory findings were studied in 73 patients (mean age, 51.93 ± 10.9 years) with chronic periprosthetic hip infection pre-operatively and intra-operatively. Forty-three patients had a two-stage revision THA while 30 patients were treated with a modified resection arthroplasty using the Ilizarov apparatus. Re-infection developed in 29 cases. Its microbial species were identified. RESULTS: Pre-operative findings on micro-organisms coincided 50.7 % with the intra-operative ones. Bacterial growth in the intra-operative tests was detected in 72 (98.5 %) cases. Gram-positive single genus infection was identified in 35 patients (48 %); microbe associations were present in 33 patients (45 %). Staphylococcus species prevailed. Gram-negative infection was detected in 5.5 % of cases. One case (1.5 %) did not have any microbe growth. Re-infection happened in 10 cases (23.2 %) in a two-stage revision THA. In the resection arthroplasty group, early re-infection was observed in 63.3 % of cases. Among a total of 29 re-infection cases, staphylococcus species were identified in 19 cases, present either in associations or as single germs. CONCLUSION: Intra-operative microbiological tests at the first-time revision for infected THR detect a reliable spectrum of micro-organisms to assess microbial resistance to antibiotics, develop treatment protocols, and for prognostic purposes. Preventive measures at primary THR and strategies to fight periprosthetic infection and reinfection should be targeted on staphylococci.
PURPOSE: This study aimed to delineate the infecting micro-organisms identified at the first-time revision for infected THA, analyze pre-operative versus intra-operative findings, as well as intra-operative ones against re-infection micro-organisms. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Microbiological laboratory findings were studied in 73 patients (mean age, 51.93 ± 10.9 years) with chronic periprosthetic hip infection pre-operatively and intra-operatively. Forty-three patients had a two-stage revision THA while 30 patients were treated with a modified resection arthroplasty using the Ilizarov apparatus. Re-infection developed in 29 cases. Its microbial species were identified. RESULTS: Pre-operative findings on micro-organisms coincided 50.7 % with the intra-operative ones. Bacterial growth in the intra-operative tests was detected in 72 (98.5 %) cases. Gram-positive single genus infection was identified in 35 patients (48 %); microbe associations were present in 33 patients (45 %). Staphylococcus species prevailed. Gram-negative infection was detected in 5.5 % of cases. One case (1.5 %) did not have any microbe growth. Re-infection happened in 10 cases (23.2 %) in a two-stage revision THA. In the resection arthroplasty group, early re-infection was observed in 63.3 % of cases. Among a total of 29 re-infection cases, staphylococcus species were identified in 19 cases, present either in associations or as single germs. CONCLUSION: Intra-operative microbiological tests at the first-time revision for infected THR detect a reliable spectrum of micro-organisms to assess microbial resistance to antibiotics, develop treatment protocols, and for prognostic purposes. Preventive measures at primary THR and strategies to fight periprosthetic infection and reinfection should be targeted on staphylococci.
Entities:
Keywords:
Chronic periprosthetic infection; Microbes; Re-infection; Total hip arthroplasty
Authors: Karl Koenig; James I Huddleston; Heather Huddleston; William J Maloney; Stuart B Goodman Journal: J Arthroplasty Date: 2012-01-14 Impact factor: 4.757
Authors: S Klouche; P Leonard; V Zeller; L Lhotellier; W Graff; P Leclerc; P Mamoudy; E Sariali Journal: Orthop Traumatol Surg Res Date: 2012-02-24 Impact factor: 2.256
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: Hussein Darwiche; Wael K Barsoum; Alison Klika; Viktor E Krebs; Robert Molloy Journal: Clin Orthop Relat Res Date: 2010-09 Impact factor: 4.176
Authors: Richard J Holleyman; Paul Baker; Andre Charlett; Kate Gould; David J Deehan Journal: Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc Date: 2015-04-01 Impact factor: 4.342
Authors: Miguel M Gomez; Timothy L Tan; Jorge Manrique; Gregory K Deirmengian; Javad Parvizi Journal: J Bone Joint Surg Am Date: 2015-09-16 Impact factor: 5.284
Authors: Steven M Kurtz; Edmund Lau; Jordana Schmier; Kevin L Ong; Ke Zhao; Javad Parvizi Journal: J Arthroplasty Date: 2008-04-10 Impact factor: 4.757
Authors: Henry Zheng; Adrian G Barnett; Katharina Merollini; Alex Sutton; Nicola Cooper; Tony Berendt; Jennie Wilson; Nicholas Graves Journal: BMJ Open Date: 2014-03-06 Impact factor: 2.692
Authors: Dariusz Marczak; Marek Synder; Marcin Sibiński; Michał Polguj; Julian Dudka; Jacek Kowalczewski Journal: Int Orthop Date: 2017-05-18 Impact factor: 3.075