RESUMO
BACKGROUND: Cutibacterium acnes is the bacterium most commonly responsible for shoulder periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) and is often cultured from samples obtained at the time of revision for failed shoulder arthroplasty. We sought to determine whether these bacteria originate from the patient or from exogenous sources. We also sought to identify which C. acnes genetic traits were associated with the development of shoulder PJI. METHODS: We performed bacterial whole-genome sequencing of C. acnes from a single-institution repository of cultures obtained before or during primary and revision shoulder arthroplasty and correlated the molecular epidemiology and genetic content of strains with clinical features of infection. RESULTS: A total of 341 isolates collected over a 4-year period from 88 patients were sequenced. C. acnes cultured from surgical specimens demonstrated significant similarity to the strains colonizing the skin of the same patient (P < .001). Infrequently, there was evidence of strains shared across unrelated patients, suggesting that exogenous sources of C. acnes culture-positivity were uncommon. Phylotypes IB and II were modestly associated with clinical features of PJI, but all phylotypes appeared inherently capable of causing disease. Chronic shoulder PJI was associated with the absence of common C. acnes genes involved in bacterial quorum-sensing (luxS, tqsA). CONCLUSION: C. acnes strains cultured from deep intraoperative sources during revision shoulder arthroplasty demonstrate strong genetic similarity to the strains colonizing a patient's skin. Some phylotypes of C. acnes commonly colonizing human skin are modestly more virulent than others, but all phylotypes have a capacity for PJI. C. acnes cultured from cases of PJI commonly demonstrated genetic hallmarks associated with adaptation from acute to chronic phases of infection. This is the strongest evidence to date supporting the role of the patient's own, cutaneous C. acnes strains in the pathogenesis of shoulder arthroplasty infection. Our findings support the importance of further research focused on perioperative decolonization and management of endogenous bacteria that are likely to be introduced into the arthroplasty wound at the time of skin incision.
RESUMO
BACKGROUND: Deep tissue culture specimens obtained at the time of revision shoulder arthroplasty are commonly positive for Cutibacterium. Clinical interpretation of positive cultures can be difficult. This was a multi-institutional study evaluating the accuracy of cultures for Cutibacterium using positive control (PC) and negative control (NC) samples. The relationship between time to culture positivity and strength of culture positivity was also studied. METHODS: Eleven different institutions were each sent 12 blinded samples (10 PC and 2 NC samples). The 10 PC samples included 2 sets of 5 different dilutions of a Cutibacterium isolate from a failed total shoulder arthroplasty with a probable periprosthetic infection. At each institution, the samples were handled as if they were received from the operating room. Specimen growth, time to culture positivity, and strength of culture positivity (based on semiquantitative assessment) were reported. RESULTS: A total of 110 PC samples and 22 NC samples were tested. One hundred percent of specimens at the 4 highest dilutions were positive for Cutibacterium. At the lowest dilution, 91% of samples showed positive findings. Cutibacterium grew in 14% of NC samples. Cutibacterium grew in PC samples at an average of 4.0 ± 1.3 days, and all of these samples showed growth within 7 days. The time to positivity was significantly shorter (P < .001) and the strength of positivity was significantly higher (P < .001) in true-positive cultures compared with false-positive cultures. CONCLUSIONS: This multi-institutional study suggests that different institutions may report highly consistent rates of culture positivity for revision shoulder arthroplasty samples with higher bacterial loads. In contrast, with lower bacterial loads, the results are somewhat less consistent. Clinicians should consider using a shorter time to positivity and a higher strength of positivity as adjuncts in determining whether a tissue culture sample is a true positive.