Suppressive Antibiotic Therapy Research Articles

Bacteriophage therapy as an innovative strategy for the treatment of Periprosthetic Joint Infection: a systematic review.

Periprosthetic Joint Infection (PJI) following hip and knee arthroplasty is a catastrophic complication in orthopaedic surgery. It has long been a key focus for orthopaedic surgeons in terms of prevention and management. With the increasing incidence of antibiotic resistance in recent years, finding more targeted treatment methods has become an increasingly urgent issue. Bacteriophage Therapy (BT) has emerged as a promising adjunctive treatment for bone and joint infections in recent years. It not only effectively kills bacteria but also demonstrates significant anti-biofilm activity, garnering substantial clinical interest due to its demonstrated efficacy and relatively low incidence of adverse effects. This review aims to systematically evaluate the efficacy and safety of bacteriophage therapy in treating PJI following hip and knee arthroplasty, providing additional reference for its future clinical application. Following predefined inclusion and exclusion criteria, our team conducted a systematic literature search across seven databases (PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, Cochrane Library, ClinicalTrials.gov, CNKI, and WanFang Database). The search was conducted up to May 2024 and included multiple clinical studies on the use of bacteriophage therapy for treating PJI after hip and knee arthroplasty to assess its efficacy and safety. This systematic review included 16 clinical studies after screening, consisting of 15 case reports and one prospective controlled clinical trial, involving a total of 42 patients with PJI treated with bacteriophage therapy. The average patient age was 62.86 years, and 43 joints were treated, with patients undergoing an average of 5.25 surgeries. The most common pathogen in these infections was Staphylococcus aureus, accounting for 18 cases. 33 patients received cocktail therapy, while nine were treated with a single bacteriophage preparation. Additionally, all patients underwent suppressive antibiotic therapy (SAT) postoperatively. All patients were followed up for an average of 13.55 months. There were two cases of recurrence, one of which resulted in amputation one year postoperatively. The remaining patients showed good recovery outcomes. Overall, the results from the included studies indicate that bacteriophage therapy effectively eradicates infectious strains in various cases of PJI, with minimal side effects, demonstrating promising clinical efficacy. In the treatment of PJI following hip and knee arthroplasty, bacteriophages, whether used alone or in combination as cocktail therapy, have shown therapeutic potential. However, thorough preoperative evaluation is essential, and appropriate bacteriophage types and treatment regimens must be selected based on bacteriological evidence. Future large-scale, randomized controlled, and prospective trials are necessary to validate the efficacy and safety of this therapy.

Prevalence and Impact of Unexpected Positive Intraoperative Cultures in Total Hip or Knee Revision Surgery

BackgroundOur aim was to evaluate the prevalence and impact of unexpected positive intraoperative cultures (UPICs) on the outcome of presumed aseptic total knee and hip revision surgery. MethodsData regarding patients who underwent elective total hip or knee revision surgery from January 2003 to July 2017 due to preoperatively presumed aseptic reasons was retrospectively reviewed. Partial revisions and patients who had follow-ups below 60 months were excluded from the study. In all surgeries, at least three intraoperative samples were taken for microbial culture. Failure was defined as the need for re-revision due to any cause at 5 years and/or the need for antibiotic suppressive therapy. Overall, 123 total hip and 431 total knee revisions were eligible for the study. All cases had at least a 5 year follow-up. ResultsThere were 420 cases (75.8%) that had all cultures negative, 108 (19.5%) had a single UPIC, and 26 (4.7%) had either ≥ 2 UPICs for the same microorganism or 1 UPIC for a virulent microorganism. This latter group was not associated with a significantly higher failure rate (2 of 26, 7.7%) compared to those in the aseptic group (54 of 528, 10.2%). Revisions performed within the first 24 months after primary implantation had a higher 5-year re-revision rate (19.3 versus 8.4%, P = 0.01), mainly attributable to aseptic causes. ConclusionTotal hip and knee revisions with UPICs were not significantly associated with a higher re-revision risk at 5 years. Those revisions performed within the first 24 months after primary arthroplasty had a higher rate of any-cause failure.

The use of long-term antibiotics for suppression of bacterial infections.

Suppressive antibiotic therapy is prescribed when a patient has an infection that is presumed to be incurable by a defined course of therapy or source control. The cohort receiving suppressive antibiotic therapy is typically highly comorbid and the infections often involve retained prosthetic material. In part due to a lack of clear guidelines regarding the use of suppressive antibiotics, and in part due to the complex nature of the infections in question, patients are often prescribed suppressive antibiotics for extremely long, if not indefinite, courses. The risks of prolonged antibiotic exposure in this context are not fully characterised, but they include adverse drug effects ranging from mild to severe, the development of antibiotic resistant organisms and perturbations of the gastrointestinal microbiome. In this narrative review we present the available evidence for the use of suppressive antibiotic therapy in four common indications, examine the gaps in the current literature and explore the known and potential risks of this therapy. We also make suggestions for improving the quality of evidence in future studies, particularly by highlighting the need for a standardised term to describe the use of long-courses of antibiotics to suppress hard-to-treat infections.

Dalbavancin as suppressive therapy for implant-related infections: a case series with therapeutic drug monitoring and review of the literature.

Implant-related infections may need suppressive antibiotic therapy (SAT). We describe a SAT strategy using dalbavancin with therapeutic drug monitoring (TDM). This is a retrospective bicentric study of patients with implant-related infection who received dalbavancin SAT between January 2021 and September 2023. Fifteen patients were included. Median number of injections was 4 (IQR: 2-7). Median time between two reinjections was 57days (IQR 28-82). Dalbavancin plasma concentrations were above 4mg/L for 97.9% of dosages (93/95) and above 8mg/L for 85% (81/95). These results support the use of dalbavancin SAT for implant-related infections.

Variation in North American Infectious Disease Specialists' Practice Regarding Oral and Suppressive Antibiotics for Adult Osteoarticular Infections: Results of an Emerging Infections Network (EIN) Survey.

Osteoarticular infections (OAIs) are commonly treated with prolonged intravenous (IV) antimicrobials. The Oral versus Intravenous Antibiotics for Bone and Joint Infection (OVIVA) trial demonstrated that oral (PO) antibiotics are noninferior to IV antibiotics in the treatment of OAIs. We surveyed infectious disease (ID) physicians about their use of PO antibiotics in the treatment of OAIs. An Emerging Infection Network survey with 9 questions regarding antibiotic prescribing for the treatment of OAIs was sent to 1475 North American ID physicians. The questions were mostly multiple choice and focused on the use of definitive oral antibiotic therapy (defined as oral switch within 2 weeks of starting antibiotics) and chronic suppressive antibiotic therapy (SAT). Of the 413 physicians who reported treating OAIs, 91% used oral antibiotics at least sometimes and 31% used them as definitive therapy, most often for diabetic foot osteomyelitis and native joint septic arthritis. The oral antibiotics most frequently used for OAIs included trimethoprim-sulfamethoxazole, doxycycline/minocycline, and linezolid for Staphylococcus aureus, amoxicillin/cefadroxil/cephalexin for streptococci, and fluoroquinolones for gram-negative organisms. The most common rationales for not transitioning to oral antibiotics included nonsusceptible pathogens, comorbidities preventing therapeutic drug levels, and concerns about adherence. SAT use was variable but employed by a majority in most cases of periprosthetic joint infection managed with debridement and implant retention. North American ID physicians utilize oral antibiotics and SAT for the management of OAIs, although significant practice variation exists. Respondents voiced a need for updated guidelines.

Role of Routine Suppressive Antibiotic Therapy After Debridement, Antibiotics, and Implant Retention for Acute Periprosthetic Joint Infections.

The first-line management strategy for acute periprosthetic joint infections (PJIs) is debridement, antibiotics, and implant retention (DAIR). Suppressive antibiotic therapy (SAT) after DAIR is proposed to improve outcomes, yet its efficacy remains under scrutiny. We conducted a multicenter retrospective study in patients with acute PJI of the hip or knee who were treated with DAIR in centers from Europe and the United States. We analyzed the effect of SAT using a Cox model landmarked at 12 weeks. The primary covariate of interest was SAT, which was analyzed as a time-varying covariate. Patients who experienced treatment failure or were lost to follow-up within 12 weeks were excluded from the analysis. The study included 510 patients with 66 treatment failures with a median follow-up of 801 days. We did not find a statistically significant association between SAT and treatment failure (hazard ratio, 1.37; 95% CI, .79-2.39; P = .27). Subgroup analyses for joint, country cohort, and type of infection (early or late acute) did not show benefit for SAT. Secondary analysis of country cohorts showed a trend toward benefit for the US cohort (hazard ratio, 0.36; 95% CI, .11-1.15; P = .09), which also had the highest risk of treatment failure. The utility of routine SAT as a strategy for enhancing DAIR's success in acute PJI remains uncertain. Our results suggest that SAT's benefits might be restricted to specific groups of patients, underscoring the need for randomized controlled trials. Identifying patients most likely to benefit from SAT should be a priority in future studies.

Static Versus Articulating Spacer: Does Infectious Pathogen Type Affect Treatment Success?

Treatment with a static or an articulating antibiotic-containing spacer is a common strategy for treating periprosthetic joint infection (PJI), yet many patients have persistent infections after spacer treatment. Although previous studies have compared the efficacy of a static and articulating spacer for treating PJI, few studies have assessed infection control from the time of spacer implantation, or they defined treatment failure as including reinfection, reoperation, or chronic suppressive therapy. Additionally, few studies have examined whether there is an interaction between spacer and pathogen type with respect to treatment success. (1) Is there a difference in failure-free survival (defined as no reoperation, reinfection, or suppressive antibiotic therapy) between static and articulating spacers after spacer implantation for PJI? (2) Did the relationship between spacer type and failure-free survival differ by pathogen type (staphylococcal versus nonstaphylococcal and difficult-to-treat [including methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus, methicillin-susceptible S. aureus, Corynebacterium, Mycobacterium, Enterococcus spp, and other gram-negative bacterium] versus not-difficult-to-treat organisms)? Between January 2014 and January 2022, a convenience sample of 277 patients was identified as having knee PJIs treated with an articulating (75% [208 of 277]) or static (25% [69 of 277]) antibiotic spacer and potentially eligible for this study. During that time, providers at our institution generally used spacers for later-presenting or chronic infections. Spacer choice was determined by surgeon preference, with static spacers used more often in instances of higher bone loss and poor soft tissue coverage. Thirty-one patients (8 static and 23 articulating spacers) were considered lost to follow-up or had incomplete datasets and were excluded from the analysis, resulting in a final analysis cohort of 246 patients: 25% (61 of 246) received a static spacer and 75% (185 of 246) received an articulating spacer. The mean ± standard deviation age of patients was 66 ± 9.9 years, BMI was 33.3 ± 6.9 kg/m2, and Elixhauser score was 18.1 ± 16.9. Demographic and clinical characteristics were similar between the two groups. Pathogen type was collected and categorized as staphylococcal versus nonstaphylococcal, and difficult-to-treat (including methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus, methicillin-susceptible S. aureus, Corynebacterium, Mycobacterium, Enterococcus spp, and other gram-negative bacterium) versus not-difficult-to-treat, as defined by an infectious disease physician. Other variables we collected included sex, age, American Society of Anesthesiologists classification, BMI, and Elixhauser score. The primary outcome of interest was failure-free survival, which was a composite time-to-event outcome, with failure defined as reoperation, reinfection, death owing to infection, or chronic antibiotic use at a minimum of 1 year after the completion of the patient's Stage 1 postoperative antibiotic course, whichever came first. Reinfection was determined by the treating physicians in accordance with the Musculoskeletal Infection Society guidelines and included an evaluation of infectious laboratory values, cultures, and clinical signs of infection. We compared static and articulating spacers using a Cox proportional hazards model, with spacer type as the primary predictor variable. We compared staphylococcal versus nonstaphylococcal and difficult-to-treat versus not-difficult-to-treat infections by running additional models with interaction terms between spacer type and pathogen type. No difference was observed in the cause-specific hazard ratio for static versus articulating (reference) spacers (HR 1.45 [95% confidence interval 0.94 to 2.22]; p = 0.09), after adjusting for covariates. Additionally, no difference in the association between spacer type and failure-free survival was found between pathogen types or treatment difficulty after evaluating interactions (staphylococcal HR 0.37 [95% CI 0.15 to 0.91], nonstaphylococcal HR 0.79 [95% CI 0.49 to 1.28]; p value for interaction = 0.14; difficult-to-treat HR 0.37 [95% CI 0.14 to 0.99], not-difficult-to-treat HR 0.75 [95% CI 0.47 to 1.20]; p value for interaction = 0.20). The lack of a difference in failure-free survival and insufficient evidence of a difference in the association between spacer type and treatment failure by pathogen type suggests that infectious organism may not be an important consideration in the decision about spacer treatment type. Further studies should aim to elucidate which patient factors are the most influential in surgeon decision-making when choosing a spacer type in patients with PJI of the knee.Level of Evidence Level III, therapeutic study.

Systemic Inflammation Response Index (SIRI) and Monocyte-to-Lymphocyte Ratio (MLR) Are Predictors of Good Outcomes in Surgical Treatment of Periprosthetic Joint Infections of Lower Limbs: A Single-Center Retrospective Analysis.

Periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) is a devastating complication that develops after total joint arthroplasty (TJA), whose incidence is expected to increase over the years. Traditionally, surgical treatment of PJI has been based on algorithms, where early infections are preferably treated with debridement, antibiotics, and implant retention (DAIR) and late infections with two-stage revision surgery. Two-stage revision is considered the "gold standard" for treatment of chronic prosthetic joint infection (PJI) as it enables local delivery of antibiotics, maintenance of limb-length and mobility, and easier reimplantation. Many studies have attempted to identify potential predicting factors for early diagnosis of PJI, but its management remains challenging. In this observational retrospective study, we investigated the potential role of inflammatory blood markers (neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio (NLR), monocyte-to-lymphocyte ratio (MLR), platelet-to-lymphocyte ratio (PLR), systemic inflammatory index (SII), systemic inflammatory response index (SIRI), and aggregate index of systemic inflammation (AISI)) as prognostic factors in two-stage exchange arthroplasty for PJI. A single-center retrospective analysis was conducted, collecting clinical data and laboratory parameters from patients submitted to prosthetic explantation (EP) for chronic PJI. Laboratory parameters (PCR, NLR, MLR, PLR, SIRI, SII, and AISI) were evaluated at the explantation time; at 4, 6, and 8 weeks after surgery; and at reimplantation time. The correlation between laboratory parameters and surgery success was evaluated and defined as infection absence/resolution at the last follow-up. A total of 57 patients with PJI were evaluated (62% males; average age 70 years, SD 12.14). Fifty-three patients with chronic PJI were included. Nine patients underwent DAIR revision surgery and chronic suppressive therapy; two patients died. Nineteen patients completed the two-stage revision process (prosthetic removal, spacer placement, and subsequent replanting). Among them, none showed signs of reinfection or persistence of infection at the last available follow-up. The other twenty-three patients did not replant due to persistent infection: among them, some (the most) underwent spacer retention; others (fewer in number) were submitted to resection arthroplasty and arthrodesis (Girdlestone technique) or chronic suppressive antibiotic therapy; the remaining were, over time, lost to follow-up. Of the patients who concluded the two-stage revision, the ones with high SIRI values (mean 3.08 SD 1.7 and p-value 0.04) and MLR values (mean 0.4 SD 0.2 and p-value 0.02) at the explantation time were associated with a higher probability of infection resolution. Moreover, higher variation in the SIRI and PCR, also defined, respectively, as delta-SIRI (mean -2.3 SD 1.8 and p-value 0.03) and delta-PCR (mean -46 SD 35.7 and p-value 0.03), were associated with favorable outcomes. The results of our study suggest that, in patients with PJI undergoing EP, the SIRI and MLR values and delta-SIRI and delta-PCR values could be predictive of a favorable outcome. The evaluation of these laboratory indices, especially their determination at 4 weeks after removal, could therefore help to determine which patients could be successfully replanted and to identify the best time to replant. More studies analyzing a wider cohort of patients with chronic PJI are needed to validate the promising results of this study.

Cardiac implantable electronic devices and bloodstream infections: management and outcomes.

Bloodstream infection (BSI) of any cause may lead to device infection in cardiac implantable electronic device (CIED) patients. Aiming for a better understanding of the diagnostic approach, treatment, and outcome, patients with an implantable cardioverter defibrillator (ICD) and cardiac resynchronization therapy and defibrillator (CRT-D) hospitalized with BSI were investigated. This is a single-centre, retrospective, cohort analysis including consecutive ICD/CRT-D patients implanted between 2012 and 2021. These patients were screened against a list of all hospitalized patients having positive blood cultures consistent with diagnosed infection in any department of a local public hospital. The total cohort consisted of 515 patients. Over a median follow-up of 59 months (interquartile range 31-87 months), there were 47 BSI episodes in 36 patients. The majority of patients with BSI (92%) was admitted to non-cardiology units, and in 25 episodes (53%), no cardiac imaging was performed. Nearly all patients (85%) were treated with short-term antibiotics, whereas chronic antibiotic suppression therapy (n = 4) and system extraction (n = 3) were less frequent. Patients with BSI had a nearly seven-fold higher rate (hazard ratio 6.7, 95% confidence interval 3.9-11.2; P < .001) of all-cause mortality. Diagnostic workup of defibrillator patients with BSI admitted to a non-cardiology unit is often insufficient to characterize lead-related endocarditis. The high mortality rate in these patients with BSI may relate to underdiagnosis and consequently late/absence of system removal. Efforts to increase an interdisciplinary approach and greater use of cardiac imaging are necessary for timely diagnosis and adequate treatment.

Enterococcal endocarditis management and relapses.

Enterococcus faecalis is the third micro-organism causing endocarditis and is associated with a significant relapse rate. The objective of this study was to describe the management of patients with Enterococcus faecalis endocarditis (EE) and its implication for relapses. We conducted a monocentric, retrospective analysis of all patients hospitalized for EE including endocarditis or infection of cardiac implantable electronic device defined by the modified ESC 2015 Duke criteria in a referral centre in Paris, France. Between October 2016, and September 2022, 54 patients with EE were included, mostly men (n = 40, 74%) with a median age of 75 [68-80] years. A high risk for infective endocarditis (IE) was found in 42 patients (78%), including 14 (26%) previous histories of IE, and 32 (59%) histories of valvular cardiac surgery. The aortic valve was the most frequently affected (n = 36, 67%). Combination therapy was mainly amoxicillin-ceftriaxone during all the curative antibiotic therapy duration (n = 31, 57%). Surgery was indicated for 40 patients (74%), but only 27 (50%) were operated on, mainly due to their frailty. Among the 17 deaths (32%), six (11%) happened during the first hospitalization for EE. A suppressive antibiotic treatment was initiated in 15 (29%) patients, mostly because of not performing surgery. During the 6-year study period an EE relapse occurred in three (6%) patients. EE is a worrying disease associated with a high risk of relapse and significant mortality. Suppressive antibiotic therapy could be a key treatment to limit the occurrence of relapses.

Atypical Mycobacterial Infections of the Spine: Evaluation and Management.

Atypical mycobacterial infections of the spine can be difficult to treat and represent a subset of the vertebral osteomyelitis and diskitis spectrum often requiring early and aggressive surgical intervention. The purpose of this review is to improve the understanding of and approach to disease management from the perspective of the spine surgeon. Debridement or excision of the affected levels may be necessary to decrease mycobacterial loads and restore biomechanics. A close relationship with the patient's internal medicine and infectious disease specialists should be maintained to ensure disease eradication or remission. Long-term suppressive antibiotic therapy may be required for infection control. Atypical mycobacterial spine infections are rare, complex, and difficult to eradicate. Our institution proposes a collaborative effort among the spine surgeon, infectious disease specialists, and internal medicine specialists to best approach the work-up, diagnosis, and treatment of these infections. [Orthopedics. 2024;47(2):e61-e66.].

2763. Evaluating the Safety and Effectiveness of Long-term Antibiotic Suppression in Patients with Left Ventricular Assist Devices

Abstract Background The utilization of left ventricular assist devices (LVADs) as a bridge to transplantation or destination therapy for non-transplant candidates continues to rise. Unfortunately, infection remains one of the most common complication and lack of definitive source control often leads to the decision to initiate long-term antibiotic suppression. The purpose of this retrospective cohort study is to evaluate the long-term safety and effectiveness of antibiotic suppression following an LVAD-related or LVAD-specific infection. Methods Adults who underwent LVAD placement between August 2018 and September 2022 at Prisma Health Midlands and received antibiotic suppression for an LVAD-related or LVAD-specific infection were evaluated. Safety was evaluated as a composite endpoint of treatment emergent adverse events, and discontinuation of or decrease in dose due to tolerability concerns. Effectiveness was evaluated as the proportion of patients without a suppression emergent infection (SEI) within six months of antibiotic suppression initiation. Patients experiencing a SEI (failure) were compared to those without an SEI (success) at six months. Secondary outcomes included the proportion of patients experiencing early SEI within 90 days of antibiotic suppression initiation and evaluation of factors associated with success of antibiotic suppression at six months. Results Fifty-one patients received antibiotic suppressive therapy following an LVAD-related or LVAD-specific index infection. Patients were followed for a minimum of 6 months and an average 2.8 years. Treatment emergent adverse events occurred in 4 (7.8%) patients, with 2 events leading to antibiotic discontinuation. SEI occurred in 9 (17.6%) of patients at 6 months with the most common organisms being P. aeruginosa, S. aureus, and S. epidermidis. Early SEI was observed in 4 (7.8%) patients. Overall, SEI occurred in 28 patients (55%) at a median 341 days (IQR 157-502). Documented resistance to suppressive antibiotic was observed in 13 (25.4%) patients. Index infections with a gram-negative organism was significantly more common in those experiencing SEI (80% vs. 47%, p=0.031). Conclusion Antibiotic suppression following LVAD-associated infections is well-tolerated and successful in 82% of patients at 6 months. Disclosures Julie Ann Justo, PharmD, MS, FIDSA, BCPS, Gilead Sciences: Advisor/Consultant|Shionogi: Advisor/Consultant|Vaxart: Stocks/Bonds

238. Comparison of Outcomes of Patients with Gram-Negative Bacterial Left Ventricular Assist Device-Related Infections on Chronic Suppressive Antibiotic Therapy versus Patients Monitored on No Antibiotic Therapy

Abstract Background Left ventricular assist devices (LVAD) are used for short- and long-term support in heart failure. LVAD-related infections may manifest as infections of the driveline or bacteremia and may result in morbidity and mortality. Treatment may involve surgical debridement and prolonged antimicrobial therapy. Given concern for recurrent infection due to retained hardware, suppressive antibiotics are commonly utilized after the index infection. However, minimal data is available to guide these decisions. Methods This was a single-center, retrospective cohort study at our institution from November 1, 2011 to September 1, 2021 comparing outcomes after index LVAD-related gram negative driveline infections or bacteremia who received suppressive antibiotic therapy versus those who did not. Patients on suppressive antibiotics for previous gram-positive infections were excluded. Fischer’s exact test was used to evaluate for statistically significant differences between the two groups. Results Of 460 patients who underwent LVAD placement, 32 patients met inclusion criteria. Demographic data and infection related outcomes are summarized in Tables 1 and 2. Number of infection recurrence (61.5% vs 57.9%) and LVAD-related infection re-admissions (69.2% vs 73.7%) were similar between the two groups. A higher proportion of patients started on chronic suppressive therapy during the index infection had surgical management (53.8% vs 36.8%) and bacteremia as their index infection (30.8% vs 18.8%). Subsequent cultures positive for multidrug resistant (MDR) organisms (15.4% vs 10.5%) and infection-related mortality (15.4% vs 0%) were also both observed to be higher in the group on chronic suppressive antibiotics. No statistically significant difference was observed in outcomes between the two groups (Table 2). Conclusion Following index gram-negative LVAD-related infections, patients transitioned to suppressive antibiotic therapy were observed to have similar outcomes compared to those monitored off chronic antibiotic therapy at our institution. Future studies with a larger sample size are necessary to determine if there is a statistically significant benefit to suppressive antibiotic therapy after gram-negative LVAD-related infections. Disclosures All Authors: No reported disclosures

Approaches to surgical treatment and antibacterial therapy in patients with chronic infection after war injuries

Fracture-related infection following orthopedic surgery, especially in cases of war-related trauma, represents a grave complication. The injuries sustained in war often entail severe damage to soft tissues, including significant impairment of vessels, nerves, tendons, muscles, and result in substantial bone defects. Complicating matters further, these infections often involve multidrug-resistant pathogens, making effective treatment a significant challenge. Optimal management of patients with combat-related trauma and signs of infection necessitates specialized care in dedicated centers. The approach to treatment should be guided by a well-defined algorithm that incorporates appropriate surgical interventions alongside systemic and localized antibiotic administration. In instances where chronic infection manifests after war-related injuries and specific causative agents are not definitively identified, initiating empiric therapy is advisable. A combination of meropenem, colistin, and vancomycin can be a suitable choice for initial treatment. Subsequently, once the causative microbes are identified, targeted treatment can be prescribed based on the susceptibility patterns. This article delves into the primary pathogens commonly found in war-related wounds and provides effective antibiotic regimens based on the specific microorganisms. One promising approach for managing severe war injuries is suppressive antibiotic therapy, which enhances the prospects of successful treatment. The comprehensive strategy outlinedhere aims to mitigate the serious risks posed by fracture-related infections in the context of war-induced trauma, ultimately improving patient outcomes and prognosis.

Should We Use Rifampicin in Periprosthetic Joint Infections Caused by Staphylococci When the Implant Has Been Exchanged? A Multicenter Observational Cohort Study.

Previous studies demonstrated the efficacy of a rifampicin-based regimen in the treatment of acute staphylococcal periprosthetic joint infections (PJIs) treated with surgical debridement. However, evidence is lacking to support the use of rifampicin in cases where the implant is exchanged during revision. We included all consecutive cases of staphylococcal PJIs treated from January 2013 to December 2018 with revision surgery in this international, retrospective, multicenter observational cohort study. PJI was defined according to the European Bone and Joint Infection Society diagnostic criteria. A relapse or reinfection during follow-up, the need for antibiotic suppressive therapy, the need for implant removal, and PJI-related death were defined as clinical failure. Cases without reimplantation or with follow-up <12 months were excluded. A total of 375 cases were included in the final analysis, including 124 1-stage exchanges (33.1%) and 251 2-stage exchanges (66.9%). Of those, 101 cases failed (26.9%). There was no statistically significant difference in failure of patients receiving rifampicin (22.5%, 42/187) and those not receiving rifampicin (31.4%, 59/188; P = .051). A subanalysis of chronic PJIs treated by 2-stage exchange arthroplasty demonstrated a lower failure rate in cases treated with rifampicin (15%) compared with the no-rifampicin group (35.5%; P = .005). In this subgroup, the use of rifampicin and an antibiotic holiday of >2 weeks were independent predictors of clinical success (odds ratio [OR], 0.36; 95% CI, 0.15-0.88; and OR, 0.19; 95% CI, 0.04-0.90; respectively). Combination treatment with rifampicin increases treatment success in patients with chronic staphylococcal PJI treated with 2-stage exchange arthroplasty.

Suppressive Antibiotic Therapy After Debridement, Antibiotics, and Implant Retention is Well-Tolerated Without Inducing Resistance: A Multicenter Study

BackgroundSuppressive antibiotic therapy (SAT) after total joint arthroplasty (TJA) debridement, antibiotics, and implant retention (DAIR) maximizes reoperation-free survival. We evaluated SAT after DAIR of acutely infected primary TJA regarding: 1) adverse drug reaction (ADR)/intolerance; 2) reoperation for infection; and 3) antibiotic resistance. MethodsPatients who underwent total knee arthroplasty (TKA) or total hip arthroplasty (THA) DAIR for acute periprosthetic joint infection at two academic medical centers from 2015 to 2020 were identified (n = 115). Data were collected on patient demographics, infecting organisms, antibiotics, ADR/intolerances, reoperations, and antibiotic resistances. Median SAT duration was 11 months. Stepwise multivariate logistic regressions were used to identify covariates significantly associated with outcomes of interest. ResultsThere were 11.1 and 16.3% of TKA and THA DAIR patients, respectively, who had ADR/intolerance to SAT. Patients prescribed trimethoprim/sulfamethoxazole (P = .0014) or combination antibiotic therapy (P = .0169) after TKA DAIR had increased risk of ADR/intolerance. There was no difference in reoperation-free survival between TKA (83.3%) and THA (65.1%) DAIR (P = .5900) at mean 2.8-year follow-up. Risk of reoperation for infection was higher among TKA Staphylococcus aureus infections (P = .0004) and lower with increased SAT duration (P < .0450). The optimal duration of SAT was nearly 2 years. No cases of antibiotic resistance developed due to SAT. ConclusionsConsider SAT after TJA DAIR due to improved reoperation-free survival and favorable safety profile. Prolonged SAT did not induce antibiotic resistance. Use trimethoprim/sulfamethoxazole with caution because of the increased likelihood of ADR/intolerance. Level of EvidenceTherapeutic Level III.

Dalbavancin as suppressive antibiotic therapy in patients with prosthetic infections: efficacy and safety.

Suppressive antibiotic therapy (SAT) is a strategy to alleviate symptoms and/or to reduce the progression of an infection when other treatment options cannot be used. Dalbavancin, due to its prolonged half-life, enables (bi) weekly dosing. Here, we report our multicenter real-life clinical experience with dalbavancin used as SAT in patients with prosthetic joint or vascular infections. Medical records of all adult patients with documented vascular or orthopedic chronic prosthetic infections, who received dalbavancin as SAT between 2016 and 2018 from four Spanish hospitals were reviewed for inclusion. Descriptive analysis of demographic characteristics, Charlson Comorbidity index, Barthel index, isolated pathogens and indication, concomitant antibiotic use, adverse events, and clinical outcome of SAT were performed. Eight patients were eligible for inclusion, where six patients had prosthetic vascular infections (aortic valve) and two patients had knee prosthetic joint infections. The most common pathogens were methicillin-susceptible Staphylococcus aureus and Enterococcus faecium. All patients had a history of prior antibiotic treatment for the prosthetic infection [median duration of antibiotic days 125days (IQR, 28-203days)]. The median number of dalbavancin doses was 29 (IQR, 9-61) and concomitant antibiotic use (n = 5, 62.5%). Clinical success was reported in 75% (n = 6) of patients. Adverse events were reported in two patients (mild renal and hepatic impairment). The median estimated cost savings due to the avoided hospital days was €60185 (IQR, 19,916-94984) per patient. Despite the limitations of our study, this preliminary data provides valuable insight to support further evaluation of dalbavancin for SAT in patients with prosthetic infections in the outpatient setting when alternative treatments are not feasible.

Reevaluación del diagnóstico y el tratamiento de las infecciones de dispositivos de electroestimulación cardiaca mediante [18F]FDG-PET/TC

Introduction and objectivesThe role of [18F]FDG-PET/CT in cardiac implantable electronic device (CIED) infections requires better evaluation, especially in the diagnosis of systemic infections. We aimed to determine the following: a) the diagnostic accuracy of [18F]FDG-PET/CT in each CIED topographical region, b) the added value of [18F]FDG-PET/CT over transesophageal echocardiography (TEE) in diagnosing systemic infections, c) spleen and bone marrow uptake in differentiating isolated local infections from systemic infections, and d) the potential application of [18F]FDG-PET/CT in follow-up. MethodsRetrospective single-center study including 54 cases and 54 controls from 2014 to 2021. The Primary endpoint was the diagnostic yield of [18F]FDG-PET/CT in each topographical CIED region. Secondary analyses described the performance of [18F]FDG-PET/CT compared with that of TEE in systemic infections, bone marrow and spleen uptake in systemic and isolated local infections, and the potential application of [18F]FDG-PET/CT in guiding cessation of chronic antibiotic suppression when completed device removal is not performed. ResultsWe analyzed 13 (24%) isolated local infections and 41 (76%) systemic infections. Overall, the specificity of [18F]FDG-PET/CT was 100% and sensitivity 85% (79% pocket, 57% subcutaneous lead, 22% endovascular lead, 10% intracardiac lead). When combined with TEE, [18F]FDG-PET/CT increased definite diagnosis o fsystemic infections from 34% to 56% (P=.04). Systemic infections with bacteremia showed higher spleen (P=.05) and bone marrow metabolism (P=.04) than local infections. Thirteen patients without complete device removal underwent a follow-up [18F]FDG-PET/CT, with no relapses after discontinuation of chronic antibiotic suppression in 6 cases with negative follow-up [18F]FDG-PET/CT. ConclusionsThe sensitivity of [18F]FDG-PET/CT for evaluating CIED infections was high in local infections but much lower in systemic infections. However, accuracy increased when [18F]FDG-PET/CT was combined with TEE in endovascular lead bacteremic infection. Spleen and bone marrow hypermetabolism could differentiate bacteremic systemic infection from local infection. Although further prospective studies are needed, follow-up [18F]FDG-PET/CT could play a potential role in the management of chronic antibiotic suppression therapy when complete device removal is unachievable.

Irrigation and Debridement With Chronic Antibiotic Suppression for the Management of Acutely Infected Aseptic Revision Total Joint Arthroplasties

BackgroundMost data on irrigation and debridement with component retention (IDCR) as a treatment for acute periprosthetic joint infections (PJIs) focuses on primary total joint arthroplasties (TJAs). However, the incidence of PJI is greater after revisions. We investigated the outcomes of IDCR with suppressive antibiotic therapy (SAT) following aseptic revision TJAs. MethodsThrough our total joint registry, we identified 45 aseptic revision TJAs (33 hips, 12 knees) performed from 2000 to 2017 that were treated with IDCR for acute PJI. Acute hematogenous PJI was present in 56%. Sixty-four percent of PJIs involved Staphylococcus. All patients were treated with 4 to 6 weeks of intravenous antibiotics with the intention to treat with SAT (89% received SAT). The mean age was 71 years (range, 41 to 90), with 49% being women and a mean body mass index of 30 (range, 16 to 60). The mean follow-up was 7 years (range, 2 to 15). ResultsThe 5-year survivorships free from re-revision for infection and reoperation for infection were 80% and 70%, respectively. Of the 13 reoperations for infection, 46% involved the same species as the initial PJI. The 5-year survivorships free from any revision and any reoperation were 72% and 65%, respectively. The 5-year survivorship free from death was 65%. ConclusionAt 5 years following IDCR, 80% of implants were free from re-revision for infection. As the penalty for implant removal is often high in revision TJAs, IDCR with SAT is a viable option for acute infection after revision TJAs in select patients. Level of EvidenceIV.

P.139 Cerebral toxoplasmosis in an HIV-negative patient

Background: Toxoplasma gondii is a protozoan parasite with the ability to infect any nucleated cell in humans. Most immunocompetent infected individuals are asymptomatic. Latent toxoplasma can become reactivated in immunocompromised individuals though this is exceptionally rare in HIV-negative individuals. Methods: We present the case of a 47-year-old male with chronic immunosuppression secondary to marginal zone lymphoma and steroid therapy. Results: The patient presented to hospital with a 1-week history of word-finding difficulties, intermittent right facial numbness and leg weakness, and tonic-clonic seizures. CT head showed a left temporal heterogenous mass measuring 2.8 × 2.8 × 3.5 cm. Biopsy of the lesion showed Multiple tachyzoites and rare bradyzoites with strong positivity for the toxoplasma specific immunostain. The patient was treated with trimethoprim/sulfamethoxazole which resulted in complete neurologic recovery. Conclusions: Our literature review included 32 cases of cerebral toxoplasmosis in HIV-negative patients with an overall mortality rate of 48%. Cerebral toxoplasmosis has a predilection for immunosuppressed patients with an underlying hematologic malignancy (74%, n= 23). Successful treatment requires early recognition of the disease and prompt treatment with sulfamethoxazole and trimethoprim, pyrimethamine, or sulfadiazine. Patients who recover from acute toxoplasmosis should remain on lifelong suppressive antibiotic therapy to prevent relapse.