BACKGROUND: Periprosthetic hip infection treatment remains a significant challenge for orthopedics. Some studies have suggested that methicillin resistance and gram-negative organism type are associated with increased treatment failure. The aim of this research is to determine if specific organisms were associated with poor outcomes in treatment for hip periprosthetic infection. METHODS: Records were reviewed of all patients between 2005 and 2015 who underwent treatment for infected partial or total hip arthroplasty. Characteristics of each patient's treatment course were determined including baseline characteristics, infecting organism(s), infection status at final follow-up, surgeries for infection, and time in hospital. Baseline characteristics and organisms that were associated with clinical outcomes in univariate analysis were incorporated into multivariable outcomes models. RESULTS: When compared with patients infected with other organism(s), patients infected with the following organisms had significantly decreased infection-free rates: Pseudomonas, methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA), and Proteus. Infection with certain organisms was associated with 1.13-2.58 additional surgeries: methicillin-sensitive S aureus, coagulase-negative Staphylococcus, MRSA, Pseudomonas, Peptostreptococcus, Klebsiella, Candida, diphtheroids, Propionibacterium acnes, and Proteus species. Specific organisms were associated with 8.56-24.54 additional days in hospital for infection: methicillin-sensitive S aureus, coagulase-negative Staphylococcus, Proteus, MRSA, Enterococcus, Pseudomonas, Klebsiella, beta-hemolytic Streptococcus, and diphtheroids. Higher comorbidity score was also associated with greater length of hospitalization. CONCLUSION: MRSA, Pseudomonas, and Proteus were associated with all 3 outcomes of lower infection-free rate, more surgery, and more time in hospital in treatment for hip periprosthetic infection. Organism-specific outcome information may help individualize patient-physician discussions about the expected course of treatment for hip periprosthetic infection.
BACKGROUND: Periprosthetic hip infection treatment remains a significant challenge for orthopedics. Some studies have suggested that methicillin resistance and gram-negative organism type are associated with increased treatment failure. The aim of this research is to determine if specific organisms were associated with poor outcomes in treatment for hip periprosthetic infection. METHODS: Records were reviewed of all patients between 2005 and 2015 who underwent treatment for infected partial or total hip arthroplasty. Characteristics of each patient's treatment course were determined including baseline characteristics, infecting organism(s), infection status at final follow-up, surgeries for infection, and time in hospital. Baseline characteristics and organisms that were associated with clinical outcomes in univariate analysis were incorporated into multivariable outcomes models. RESULTS: When compared with patients infected with other organism(s), patients infected with the following organisms had significantly decreased infection-free rates: Pseudomonas, methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA), and Proteus. Infection with certain organisms was associated with 1.13-2.58 additional surgeries: methicillin-sensitive S aureus, coagulase-negative Staphylococcus, MRSA, Pseudomonas, Peptostreptococcus, Klebsiella, Candida, diphtheroids, Propionibacterium acnes, and Proteus species. Specific organisms were associated with 8.56-24.54 additional days in hospital for infection: methicillin-sensitive S aureus, coagulase-negative Staphylococcus, Proteus, MRSA, Enterococcus, Pseudomonas, Klebsiella, beta-hemolytic Streptococcus, and diphtheroids. Higher comorbidity score was also associated with greater length of hospitalization. CONCLUSION: MRSA, Pseudomonas, and Proteus were associated with all 3 outcomes of lower infection-free rate, more surgery, and more time in hospital in treatment for hip periprosthetic infection. Organism-specific outcome information may help individualize patient-physician discussions about the expected course of treatment for hip periprosthetic infection.
Authors: Erik von Elm; Douglas G Altman; Matthias Egger; Stuart J Pocock; Peter C Gøtzsche; Jan P Vandenbroucke Journal: Int J Surg Date: 2014-07-18 Impact factor: 6.071
Authors: Hude Quan; Vijaya Sundararajan; Patricia Halfon; Andrew Fong; Bernard Burnand; Jean-Christophe Luthi; L Duncan Saunders; Cynthia A Beck; Thomas E Feasby; William A Ghali Journal: Med Care Date: 2005-11 Impact factor: 2.983
Authors: Pier Francesco Indelli; F Iannotti; A Ferretti; R Valtanen; P Prati; D Pérez Prieto; N P Kort; B Violante; N R Tandogan; A Schiavone Panni; G Pipino; M T Hirschmann Journal: Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc Date: 2021-09-13 Impact factor: 4.342
Authors: John M Thompson; Robert J Miller; Alyssa G Ashbaugh; Carly A Dillen; Julie E Pickett; Yu Wang; Roger V Ortines; Robert S Sterling; Kevin P Francis; Nicholas M Bernthal; Taylor S Cohen; Christine Tkaczyk; Li Yu; C Kendall Stover; Antonio DiGiandomenico; Bret R Sellman; Daniel Lj Thorek; Lloyd S Miller Journal: JCI Insight Date: 2018-09-06
Authors: Abigail A Weaver; Nur A Hasan; Mark Klaassen; Hiren Karathia; Rita R Colwell; Joshua D Shrout Journal: J Med Microbiol Date: 2019-10 Impact factor: 3.196
Authors: Christopher E Kandel; Richard Jenkinson; Nick Daneman; David Backstein; Bettina E Hansen; Matthew P Muller; Kevin C Katz; Jessica Widdifield; Earl Bogoch; Sarah Ward; Abhilash Sajja; Felipe Garcia Jeldes; Allison McGeer Journal: Open Forum Infect Dis Date: 2019-10-21 Impact factor: 3.835