Fortune J Egbulefu1, JaeWon Yang2, John C Segreti1, Scott M Sporer1, Antonia F Chen3, Matthew S Austin4, Craig J Della Valle1. 1. Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Rush University Medical Center, Chicago, IL, USA. 2. Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, University of Washington, Seattle, WA, USA. 3. Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Boston, MA, USA. 4. Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Rothman Orthopaedic Institute, Philadelphia, PA, USA.
Abstract
Background: Prior studies have shown that the majority of re-infections following two-stage revisions are due to organisms different from the initial organisms identified. It remains unknown whether these new organisms were susceptible to the antibiotics given (indicating the patient likely developed another infection following successful treatment) or not susceptible (indicating these organisms may have been initially present, but were not identified, and thus, inadequately treated). The purpose of this study was to determine if bacteria identified at time of re-infection following two-stage revisions were susceptible to the antibiotics administered during treatment of the index infection, in order to understand if these are new infections or from organisms that were present but not initially identified. Methods: Thirty failures (19 knees and 11 hips) following two-stage revisions from four institutions were identified. Cultures and antibiotic sensitivities were used to determine whether the re-infectious organisms were new and if they were susceptible to the antibiotics initially given. Results: Twenty-five (83.3%) re-infections were due to new organisms. Of these re-infections from new organisms, 16 (64.0%) were susceptible to the antibiotics previously administered, suggesting they were new infections rather than persistent infections from organisms that were not detected during initial treatment. No statistically significant differences in demographics or time to revision were observed when comparing by organism type (new vs. repeat) or by antibiotic susceptibility. Conclusions: Failures following two-stage revisions are frequently due to organisms different than those identified prior to two-stage revision and are likely new infections rather than persistent infections from undetected organisms.
Background: Prior studies have shown that the majority of re-infections following two-stage revisions are due to organisms different from the initial organisms identified. It remains unknown whether these new organisms were susceptible to the antibiotics given (indicating the patient likely developed another infection following successful treatment) or not susceptible (indicating these organisms may have been initially present, but were not identified, and thus, inadequately treated). The purpose of this study was to determine if bacteria identified at time of re-infection following two-stage revisions were susceptible to the antibiotics administered during treatment of the index infection, in order to understand if these are new infections or from organisms that were present but not initially identified. Methods: Thirty failures (19 knees and 11 hips) following two-stage revisions from four institutions were identified. Cultures and antibiotic sensitivities were used to determine whether the re-infectious organisms were new and if they were susceptible to the antibiotics initially given. Results: Twenty-five (83.3%) re-infections were due to new organisms. Of these re-infections from new organisms, 16 (64.0%) were susceptible to the antibiotics previously administered, suggesting they were new infections rather than persistent infections from organisms that were not detected during initial treatment. No statistically significant differences in demographics or time to revision were observed when comparing by organism type (new vs. repeat) or by antibiotic susceptibility. Conclusions: Failures following two-stage revisions are frequently due to organisms different than those identified prior to two-stage revision and are likely new infections rather than persistent infections from undetected organisms.
Authors: Benjamin Zmistowski; Matthew W Tetreault; Pouya Alijanipour; Antonia F Chen; Craig J Della Valle; Javad Parvizi Journal: J Arthroplasty Date: 2013-04-12 Impact factor: 4.757
Authors: Benjamin Zmistowski; Joseph A Karam; Joel B Durinka; David S Casper; Javad Parvizi Journal: J Bone Joint Surg Am Date: 2013-12-18 Impact factor: 5.284
Authors: Allison J Rao; Ian S MacLean; Amanda J Naylor; Grant E Garrigues; Nikhil N Verma; Gregory P Nicholson Journal: J Shoulder Elbow Surg Date: 2019-10-13 Impact factor: 3.019
Authors: Fay Leung; Corey J Richards; Donald S Garbuz; Bassam A Masri; Clive P Duncan Journal: Clin Orthop Relat Res Date: 2011-04 Impact factor: 4.176
Authors: Timothy S Brown; Stephen M Petis; Douglas R Osmon; Tad M Mabry; Daniel J Berry; Arlen D Hanssen; Matthew P Abdel Journal: J Arthroplasty Date: 2018-03-13 Impact factor: 4.757