Four versus six weeks of antibiotic therapy for osteoarticular infections after implant removal: a randomized trial.

BACKGROUND: The optimal duration of antibiotic therapy for treating orthopaedic implant infections after surgical drainage and complete implant removal is unknown. METHODS: This was a single-centre, unblinded, prospective trial randomizing (1:1) eligible patients to either 4 or 6 weeks of systemic, pathogen-targeted antibiotic therapy. Clinical trial registration number: ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT0362209). RESULTS: We analysed 123 eligible patients (62 in the 4 week antibiotic arm and 61 in the 6 week arm) in the ITT analysis. The patients' median age was 64 years, 75 (61%) were men and 38 (31%) were immunocompromised. The most common types of infection treated included: two-stage exchange procedure for prosthetic joint infection (n = 38); orthopaedic plate infection (44) and infected nail implants (11). The median duration of post-explant intravenous antibiotic therapy was 4 days. Overall, 120 episodes (98%) were cured microbiologically and 116 (94%) clinically after a median follow-up period of 2.2 years. During follow-up, four patients had a clinical recurrence with a pathogen other than the initial causative agent. We noted recurrence of clinical infection in four patients in the 4 week arm and three patients in the 6 week arm (4/62 versus 3/61; χ2 test; P = 0.74); in all cases, this occurred at around 2 months following the end of antibiotic treatment. CONCLUSIONS: We found no statistically significant difference in the rates of clinical or microbiological remission between patients randomized to only 4 compared with 6 weeks of systemic antibiotic therapy after removal of an infected osteoarticular implant.

Remission after treatment of osteoarticular infections due to Pseudomonas aeruginosa versus Staphylococcus aureus: a case-controlled study.

PURPOSE: Osteoarticular infections due to methicillin-susceptible Staphylococcus aureus (MSSA) or its methicillin-resistant variant (MRSA) are feared due to treatment failures. According to clinical experience, Pseudomonas aeruginosa may reveal less long-term remission than S. aureus. METHODS: A case-controlled study comparing outcomes of osteoarticular infections due to P. aeruginosa vs S. aureus was performed at Geneva University Hospitals. RESULTS: A total of 111 S. aureus (including 37 MRSA) and 20 P. aeruginosa osteoarticular infections were analysed in 131 patients: arthroplasties (n = 38), fracture fixation devices (n = 56), native joint arthritis (n = 7) and osteomyelitis without implant (n = 30). The median active follow-up time was 4 years. The patients underwent a median number of two surgical interventions for P. aeruginosa infections compared to two for S. aureus (two for MRSA), while the median duration of antibiotic treatment was 87 days for P. aeruginosa and 46 days for S. aureus infections (58 days for MRSA) (all p > 0.05). Overall, Pseudomonas-infected patients tended towards a lower remission rate than those infected with S. aureus (12/20 vs 88/111; p = 0.06). This was similar when P. aeruginosa was compared with MRSA alone (12/20 vs 30/37; p = 0.08). In multivariate logistic regression analyses adjusting for case mix, odds ratios (OR) for remission were as follows: P. aeruginosa vs S. aureus [OR 0.4, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.1-1.2], number of surgical interventions (OR 0.6, 95% CI 0.5-1.0) and duration of antibiotic treatment (OR 1.0, 95% CI 1.0-1.0). CONCLUSIONS: Despite a similar number of surgical interventions and longer antibiotic treatment, osteoarticular infections due to P. aeruginosa tended towards a lower remission rate than infections due to S. aureus in general or MRSA in particular.