Management of vertebral osteomyelitis over an eight-year period: The UDIPROVE (UDIne PROtocol on VErtebral osteomyelitis).

OBJECTIVES: Vertebral osteomyelitis (VO) is a compelling clinical entity for clinicians because of its insidious and indolent course, which makes diagnosis difficult. METHODS: All patients with a suspected diagnosis of VO were analyzed over an 8-year period (January 2009 to January 2017). The UDIPROVE protocol (UDIne PROtocol on VErtebral osteomyelitis) was applied in all cases. The primary endpoint was the performance of the UDIPROVE protocol to obtain the causal bacteria of infection. RESULTS: During the study period, 133 episodes of confirmed VO were observed. The etiology of infection was obtained in 73.6% of cases: 70.5% were gram-positive, 16.3% were gram-negative, and 13.2% were mycobacteria. 18F-Fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography/computed tomography (FDG-PET/CT) showed that for tubercular VO, the median standard uptake value (SUV) was higher when compared with VO caused by other bacteria. Clinical cure at the end of therapy was reported in 85.7% of patients. Previous antimicrobial therapy and a delay of more than 5 days in performing biopsy were associated with an undiagnosed etiology of VO. Targeted antibacterial therapy and follow-up with FDG-PET/CT were associated with clinical cure at the end of therapy, while the involvement of more than two vertebrae and inadequate drainage were associated with failure. CONCLUSIONS: Rigorous application of the UDIPROVE protocol allowed the causative pathogens of VO to be obtained - at about twice the rate reported in the literature. The use of FDG-PET/CT for the follow-up of infection was more reliable when compared to magnetic resonance imaging (MRI).

Prosthetic joint infections: clinical management, diagnosis, and treatment.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: Prosthetic joint infections (PJIs) represent one of the most disastrous complications in prosthetic surgery, requiring long hospitalization, prolonged antimicrobial treatment and repeated surgical interventions. No gold standard test to formulate diagnosis exist. A combination of high index of suspicion, physical examination, microbiological and biohumoral investigations is required. Therapeutical approach should be based on a multidisciplinary team. In our center, a two-stage approach is preferred. As regards the choice of the empirical antibiotic backbone, individual risk factors for multiple-drug resistant (MDR) pathogens should be considered. Several studies enhance the possibility to shorten the length of antibiotic couses. RECENT FINDINGS: Some interesting improvements have been made in the setting of PJIs management. As regards diagnosis, novel biomarkers and nuclear imaging are acquiring more importance. Molecular biology techniques also offer the possibility to formulate rapid microbiological identification. The pattern of PJIs is evolving towards higher rates of MDR causes. During the last decade, a number of new antibiotic molecules with activity against MDRs have been approved. Some of them are also available either in oral formulation or as long-acting compounds, offering the opportunity for early patient's discharge, with expected healthcare costs saving. SUMMARY: Management of PJIs still represents a major threat for clinicians. Improvements in surgical techniques and antibiotic pipeline promise to revolutionize the approach in next years. Despite data from our experience confirm the efficacy of shorter antibiotic courses and the value of new molecules, randomized clinical trials are lacking. More data are needed in order to modify the routine clinical practice.

Current antibiotic management of prosthetic joint infections in Italy: the 'Udine strategy'.

The rate of prosthetic joint infections followed and cured at our institution is constantly increasing, in line with epidemiological data from the recent literature. This is probably related to the greater number of knee and hip prostheses implanted every year. For intermediate and late infections, only the two-stage approach is applied, as this demonstrates the best outcome in our experience. Particular attention is paid to microbiological isolation of the pathogen: multiple samples of tissue are collected during the interventions, and kept in culture for a longer period of time than usual. Sonication of prosthetic devices is used to enhance the sensitivity and specificity of the microbiological cultures. Histological examination influences surgical choices either towards implantation of a new prosthesis or replacement of the spacer. An empirical antibiotic backbone of a glycopeptide/lipopeptide and rifampicin is chosen, due to the leading role of Gram-positive bacteria in this setting and the high incidence of methicillin resistance in our centre (>30%), followed by an antibiotic regimen containing linezolid. If specific risk factors are present, an anti-Gram-negative drug is added to the regimen. Duration of therapy depends upon the approach that is chosen, usually being 6 weeks when the prosthesis is removed. Despite at the moment being limited by its small sample size, data from our experience confirms that our empirical approach may represent a valid choice during the early phase of treatment, by keeping linezolid for a step-down therapy of shorter duration (4 weeks).