Similar Efficacy and Lower Cost Associated With Ceftazidime Compared to Tobramycin Coupled With Vancomycin in Antibiotic Spacers in the Treatment of Periprosthetic Joint Infection.

BACKGROUND: Vancomycin and tobramycin have traditionally been used in antibiotic spacers. In 2020, our institution replaced tobramycin with ceftazidime. We hypothesized that the use of ceftazidime/vancomycin (CV) in antibiotic spacers would not lead to an increase in treatment failure compared to tobramycin/vancomycin (TV). METHODS: From 2014 to 2022, we identified 243 patients who underwent a stage I revision for periprosthetic joint infection. The primary outcome was a recurrent infection requiring antibiotic spacer exchange. We were adequately powered to detect a 10% difference in recurrent infection. Patients who had a prior failed stage I or two-stage revision for infection, acute kidney injury prior to surgery, or end-stage renal disease were excluded. Given no other changes to our spacer constructs, we estimated cost differences attributable to the antibiotic change. Chi-square and t-tests were used to compare the two groups. Multivariable logistic regressions were utilized for the outcomes. RESULTS: The combination of TV was used in 127 patients; CV was used in 116 patients. Within one year of stage I, 9.8% of the TV group had a recurrence of infection versus 7.8% of the CV group (P = .60). By final follow-up, results were similar (12.6 versus 8.6%, respectively, P = .32). Adjusting for potential risk factors did not alter the results. Cost savings for ceftazidime versus tobramycin are estimated to be $68,550 per one hundred patients treated. CONCLUSIONS: Replacing tobramycin with ceftazidime in antibiotic spacers yielded similar periprosthetic joint infection eradication success at a lower cost. While larger studies are warranted to confirm these efficacy and cost-saving results, our data justifies the continued investigation and use of ceftazidime as an alternative to tobramycin in antibiotic spacers.

Extrapulmonary, Chronic Septic Arthritis From Mycobacterium tuberculosis in the Ankle and Subtalar Joints.

In the United States, rates of Mycobacterium tuberculosis infection have been declining for decades. Osteoarticular tuberculosis of the ankle is rarely observed. We present the case of a 65-year-old man who immigrated to the United States from India 24 years before the onset of symptoms. The patient initially reported atraumatic swelling and pain of the left ankle and foot and was treated for venous insufficiency. Later, the patient was referred to a nonsurgical orthopaedic clinic for additional workup and was found to have elevated inflammatory markers. MRI showed septic arthritis and osteomyelitis of the talus, distal tibia, and calcaneus. Joint aspiration revealed elevated white blood cell counts with predominately PMNs. The patient was then referred to an orthopaedic foot and ankle surgeon and underwent extensive irrigation and débridement. The patient was discharged on empiric antibiotics. Culture results from the original joint aspirate returned 14 days after surgery as positive for acid-fast bacillus, later identified as M tuberculosis by sequencing. Empiric antibiotics were discontinued, and the patient was started on appropriate antituberculotic therapy. This case report illustrates the challenge in the diagnosis of skeletal tuberculosis and the importance of including this condition on the differential for patients with atypical foot and ankle presentations.

Bacillus coagulans-associated severe necrotizing scleral infection.

Purpose: We describe a case of severe scleritis possibly caused by Bacillus coagulans. Observations: Conventional laboratory evaluation was inconclusive. The associated organism was identified with metagenomic RNA deep sequencing (MDS). The infection resolved with trimethoprim-sulfamethoxazole treatment. Conclusions: This case demonstrates the utility of unbiased, high-throughput sequencing for infectious scleritis.

"Once more, with feeling": no difference in outcomes between patients discharged on oral versus intravenous antibiotics for orthopedic infections in a propensity score matched cohort at a US medical center.

Objective: To compare outcomes between patients discharged on intravenous (IV) versus oral (PO) antibiotics for the treatment of orthopedic infections, after creation of an IV-to-PO guideline, at a single academic medical center in the United States. Methods: This was a retrospective, propensity score matched, cohort study of adult patients hospitalized for orthopedic infections from September 30, 2020, to April 30, 2022. Patients discharged on PO antibiotics were matched to patients discharged on IV antibiotics. The primary outcome was one-year treatment failure following discharge. Secondary outcomes were incidence of 60-day treatment failure, adverse drug events (ADE), readmissions, infectious disease clinic "no-show" rates, and emergency department (ED) encounters. Results: Ninety PO-treated patients were matched to 90 IV-treated patients. Baseline characteristics were similar in the two groups after matching. There was no significant difference in the proportions of patients on PO versus IV antibiotics experiencing treatment failure at one year (26% vs 31%, P = .47). There were no significant differences for any secondary outcomes: treatment failure within 60 days (13% vs 14%, P = 1.00), ADE (13% vs 11%, P = .82), unplanned readmission (17% vs 21%, P = .57), or ED encounters (9% vs 18%, P = .54). Survival analyses identified no significant differences in time-to-event between PO and IV treatment for any of the outcomes assessed. Conclusions: There were no appreciable differences in outcomes between patients discharged on PO compared to IV regimens. Antimicrobial stewardship interventions to increase prescribing of PO antibiotics for the treatment of orthopedic infections should be encouraged.

Multisite Study of the Management of Musculoskeletal Infection After Trauma: The MMUSKIT Study.

Background: The optimal duration and choice of antibiotic for fracture-related infection (FRI) is not well defined. This study aimed to determine whether antibiotic duration (≤6 vs >6 weeks) is associated with infection- and surgery-free survival. The secondary aim was to ascertain risk factors associated with surgery- and infection-free survival. Methods: We performed a multicenter retrospective study of patients diagnosed with FRI between 2013 and 2022. The association between antibiotic duration and surgery- and infection-free survival was assessed by Cox proportional hazard models. Models were weighted by the inverse of the propensity score, calculated with a priori variables of hardware removal; infection due to Staphylococcus aureus, Staphylococcus lugdunensis, Pseudomonas or Candida species; and flap coverage. Multivariable Cox proportional hazard models were run with additional covariates including initial pathogen, need for flap, and hardware removal. Results: Of 96 patients, 54 (56.3%) received ≤6 weeks of antibiotics and 42 (43.7%) received >6 weeks. There was no association between longer antibiotic duration and surgery-free survival (hazard ratio [HR], 0.95; 95% CI, .65-1.38; P = .78) or infection-free survival (HR, 0.77; 95% CI, .30-1.96; P = .58). Negative culture was associated with increased hazard of reoperation or death (HR, 3.52; 95% CI, 1.99-6.20; P < .001) and reinfection or death (HR, 3.71; 95% CI, 1.24-11.09; P < .001). Need for flap coverage had an increased hazard of reoperation or death (HR, 3.24; 95% CI, 1.61-6.54; P = .001). Conclusions: The ideal duration of antibiotics to treat FRI is unclear. In this multicenter study, there was no association between antibiotic treatment duration and surgery- or infection-free survival.