Subcutaneous suppressive antibiotic therapy for bone and joint infections: safety and outcome in a cohort of 10 patients.

BACKGROUND: Optimal treatment of prosthetic joint infection and chronic osteomyelitis consists of surgical removal of biofilm-embedded bacteria, followed by a 6-12 week course of antimicrobial therapy. However, when optimal surgery is not feasible, oral prolonged suppressive antibiotic therapy (PSAT) is recommended to prevent prosthesis loosening and/or relapse of infection. Since 2010, we have used infection salvage therapy using off-label subcutaneous (sc) injection of a ß-lactam as PSAT for patients in whom oral PSAT is not possible. METHODS: A single-centre prospective cohort study (2010-18) reporting treatment modalities, efficacy and safety in all patients receiving sc PSAT. NCT03403608. RESULTS: The 10 included patients (median age 79 years) had polymicrobial (n = 5) or MDR bacterial (n = 4) prosthetic joint infection (knee, n = 4; hip, n = 3) or chronic osteomyelitis (n = 3). After initial intensive therapy, seven patients received ertapenem, three patients received ceftriaxone and one patient received ceftazidime by sc injection (one patient received 8 days of ceftriaxone before receiving ertapenem). In one patient, sc PSAT failed with recurrent signs of infection under treatment. In three patients, sc PSAT had to be discontinued due to side effects; in only one of these was the sc route implicated (skin necrosis following direct sc injection and not gravity infusion). Median treatment duration was 433 days. In six patients, sc PSAT was successful with favourable outcome at the time of writing. Interestingly, three patients with MDR bacterial carriage at baseline lost this under PSAT during follow-up. CONCLUSIONS: As salvage therapy, sc PSAT delivered by gravity infusion is a safe and interesting alternative when an optimal surgical strategy is not feasible and no oral treatment is available.

Pressure ulcer-related pelvic osteomyelitis: evaluation of a two-stage surgical strategy (debridement, negative pressure therapy and flap coverage) with prolonged antimicrobial therapy.

BACKGROUND: A two-stage surgical strategy (debridement-negative pressure therapy (NPT) and flap coverage) with prolonged antimicrobial therapy is usually proposed in pressure ulcer-related pelvic osteomyelitis but has not been widely evaluated. METHODS: Adult patients with pressure ulcer-related pelvic osteomyelitis treated by a two-stage surgical strategy were included in a retrospective cohort study. Determinants of superinfection (i.e., additional microbiological findings at reconstruction) and treatment failure were assessed using binary logistic regression and Kaplan-Meier curve analysis. RESULTS: Sixty-four pressure ulcer-related pelvic osteomyelitis in 61 patients (age, 47 (IQR, 36-63)) were included. Osteomyelitis was mostly polymicrobial (73%), with a predominance of S. aureus (47%), Enterobacteriaceae spp. (44%) and anaerobes (44%). Flap coverage was performed after 7 (IQR, 5-10) weeks of NPT, with 43 (68%) positive bone samples among which 39 (91%) were superinfections, associated with a high ASA score (OR, 5.8; p = 0.022). An increased prevalence of coagulase negative staphylococci (p = 0.017) and Candida spp. (p = 0.003) was observed at time of flap coverage. An ESBL Enterobacteriaceae spp. was found in 5 (12%) patients, associated with fluoroquinolone consumption (OR, 32.4; p = 0.005). Treatment duration was as 20 (IQR, 14-27) weeks, including 11 (IQR, 8-15) after reconstruction. After a follow-up of 54 (IQR, 27-102) weeks, 15 (23%) failures were observed, associated with previous pressure ulcer (OR, 5.7; p = 0.025) and Actinomyces spp. infection (OR, 9.5; p = 0.027). CONCLUSIONS: Pressure ulcer-related pelvic osteomyelitis is a difficult-to-treat clinical condition, generating an important consumption of broad-spectrum antibiotics. The lack of correlation between outcome and the debridement-to-reconstruction interval argue for a short sequence to limit the total duration of treatment.

Pre-travel advice seeking from GPs by travellers with chronic illness seen at a travel clinic.

PURPOSE: Travellers are ageing and frequently report chronic illness. Pre-travel health advice is crucial, particularly in this subgroup, and general practitioners (GPs) are first in line for treatment adjustment before departure. Our aim is to evaluate pre-travel health advice seeking from GPs by travellers with chronic illness seen at a travel clinic. METHODS: A cross-sectional observational survey using a questionnaire was conducted between August 2013 and July 2014 in travellers attending the travel medicine clinic of a tertiary university hospital in France. RESULTS: During the study, 2019 travellers were included. Mean age was 39.4 years (±18.8). Three hundred and ninety-one (19.4%) travellers reported a history of a chronic illness. Arterial hypertension and diabetes mellitus were the most frequently reported illnesses, affecting, respectively, 168 (8.3%) travellers and 102 (5.1%). Hajj pilgrims were more likely to report a history of chronic illness than other travellers. Only 810 (40.1%) travellers sought pre-travel advice from their GP. Six hundred and fifty-two (40.1%) healthy travellers and 158 (40.5%) travellers reporting chronic illness sought pre-travel advice from their GP (P = 0.96). CONCLUSION: Travellers with a history of chronic illness do not seek pre-travel health advice from their GP more frequently than healthy travellers. Travel health specialists are generally not the best practitioners to manage the care of underlying medical conditions presenting risks during travel. However, GPs offer continuity and disease management expertise to improve the specificity of pre-travel planning. Thus, ongoing collaboration between the traveller, GP and travel health specialist is likely to yield the best outcomes.