Literature DB >> 31958506

Biofilm-active antibiotic treatment improves the outcome of knee periprosthetic joint infection: Results from a 6-year prospective cohort study.

Max Gellert1, Sebastian Hardt1, Karolin Köder1, Nora Renz1, Carsten Perka1, Andrej Trampuz2.   

Abstract

Biofilm-active antibiotics are suggested to improve the outcome in periprosthetic joint infection (PJI). However, the type, dose and duration of antibiotic treatment is rarely specified and their impact on outcomes is unknown. In this prospective cohort study, the infection and functional outcome were compared in 131 patients with knee PJI treated with or without biofilm-active antibiotics. The infection and functional outcome were evaluated by the Kaplan-Meier survival method to estimate the probability of infection-free survival; comparison between subgroups was performed by log-rank test. The influence of variables on the survival probability was analysed using univariate and multivariate Cox proportional-hazards regression models. Functional outcome was evaluated by pain intensity and the Knee injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (KOOS). Among the 131 patients, 55 (42%) were treated with biofilm-active antibiotics and 76 (58%) were treated with non-biofilm-active antibiotics. The median follow-up period was 3.7 years (range, 2.0-7.6 years), and the infection-free survival probability was 74% (95% CI 61-85%) after 1 year and 56% (95% CI 47-66%) after 2 years. Infection-free survival after 1 year was better for patients who received biofilm-active antibiotics compared with those who did not (83% vs. 70%; P = 0.040) and remained superior after 2 years (67% vs. 48%; P = 0.038). In addition, biofilm-active antibiotic treatment was associated with lower pain intensity (P = 0.006) and higher KOOS on all five subscales. In patients with knee PJI, biofilm-active antibiotic therapy was associated with better infection outcome, lower pain intensity and better joint function.
Copyright © 2020 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Antibiotic treatment; Biofilm; Knee prosthesis; Periprosthetic joint infection

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2020        PMID: 31958506     DOI: 10.1016/j.ijantimicag.2020.105904

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Int J Antimicrob Agents        ISSN: 0924-8579            Impact factor:   5.283


  5 in total

Review 1.  [Management of fracture-related infections].

Authors:  Jan-Dierk Clausen; Philipp Mommsen; Tarek Omar Pacha; Marcel Winkelmann; Christian Krettek; Mohamed Omar
Journal:  Unfallchirurg       Date:  2021-12-21       Impact factor: 1.000

2.  Invited reply to the letter to the editor by McNally et al., 2021.

Authors:  Christian Morgenstern; Nora Renz; Sabrina Cabric; Elena Maiolo; Carsten Perka; Andrej Trampuz
Journal:  BMC Musculoskelet Disord       Date:  2021-03-08       Impact factor: 2.362

3.  Outcome and Failure Analysis of 132 Episodes of Hematogenous Periprosthetic Joint Infections-A Cohort Study.

Authors:  Nora Renz; Andrej Trampuz; Carsten Perka; Anastasia Rakow
Journal:  Open Forum Infect Dis       Date:  2022-03-10       Impact factor: 3.835

4.  Preoperative synovial fluid culture poorly predicts the pathogen causing periprosthetic joint infection.

Authors:  Philipp Schulz; Constantin E Dlaska; Carsten Perka; Andrej Trampuz; Nora Renz
Journal:  Infection       Date:  2020-11-03       Impact factor: 3.553

5.  In vitro additive effects of dalbavancin and rifampicin against biofilm of Staphylococcus aureus.

Authors:  Benjamin Jacob; Oliwia Makarewicz; Anita Hartung; Steffen Brodt; Eric Roehner; Georg Matziolis
Journal:  Sci Rep       Date:  2021-12-06       Impact factor: 4.379

  5 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.