Wouthuyzen-Bakker, Marjan

Abstract Spinal implant infections are a serious complications of instrumented spinal fusion surgeries, carrying high morbidity and complex management challenges. Early postoperative infections may manifest with wound-healing issues, back pain, and fevers. Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) is the preferred imaging modality, but can be limited by metal artifacts. For cases with stable implants, surgical debridement with implant retention combined with at least 12 weeks of antibiotics is currently considered appropriate treatment. Staphylococcal infections are ideally treated with biofilm-active antibiotics. Suppressive antibiotic therapy can be considered when surgical debridement has been delayed or is incomplete, and for those who are poor surgical candidates for another surgery. Chronic infections may present insidiously with implant failure or pseudarthrosis; implant removal or revision is generally pursued. As current guidance is heavily based on the periprosthetic joint infection literature and low-level studies on spinal implant infections, further research on optimizing diagnostic and treatment approaches is needed.

Abstract Background The first-line management strategy for acute periprosthetic joint infections (PJIs) is debridement, antibiotics, and implant retention (DAIR). Suppressive antibiotic therapy (SAT) after DAIR is proposed to improve outcomes, yet its efficacy remains under scrutiny. Methods We conducted a multicenter retrospective study in patients with acute PJI of the hip or knee who were treated with DAIR in centers from Europe and the United States. We analyzed the effect of SAT using a Cox model landmarked at 12 weeks. The primary covariate of interest was SAT, which was analyzed as a time-varying covariate. Patients who experienced treatment failure or were lost to follow-up within 12 weeks were excluded from the analysis. Results The study included 510 patients with 66 treatment failures with a median follow-up of 801 days. We did not find a statistically significant association between SAT and treatment failure (hazard ratio, 1.37; 95% CI, .79–2.39; P = .27). Subgroup analyses for joint, country cohort, and type of infection (early or late acute) did not show benefit for SAT. Secondary analysis of country cohorts showed a trend toward benefit for the US cohort (hazard ratio, 0.36; 95% CI, .11–1.15; P = .09), which also had the highest risk of treatment failure. Conclusions The utility of routine SAT as a strategy for enhancing DAIR's success in acute PJI remains uncertain. Our results suggest that SAT's benefits might be restricted to specific groups of patients, underscoring the need for randomized controlled trials. Identifying patients most likely to benefit from SAT should be a priority in future studies.

Abstract Background Cutibacterium species are common pathogens in periprosthetic joint infections (PJI). These infections are often treated with β-lactams or clindamycin as monotherapy, or in combination with rifampin. Clinical evidence supporting the value of adding rifampin for treatment of Cutibacterium PJI is lacking. Methods In this multicenter retrospective study, we evaluated patients with Cutibacterium PJI and a minimal follow-up of 12 months. The primary endpoint was clinical success, defined by the absence of infection relapse or new infection. We used Fisher’s exact tests and Cox proportional hazards models to analyze the effect of rifampin and other factors on clinical success after PJI. Results We included 187 patients (72.2% male, median age 67 years) with a median follow-up of 36 months. The surgical intervention was a 2-stage exchange in 95 (50.8%), 1-stage exchange in 51 (27.3%), debridement and implant retention (DAIR) in 34 (18.2%), and explantation without reimplantation in 7 (3.7%) patients. Rifampin was included in the antibiotic regimen in 81 (43.3%) cases. Infection relapse occurred in 28 (15.0%), and new infection in 13 (7.0%) cases. In the time-to-event analysis, DAIR (adjusted hazard ratio [HR] = 2.15, P = .03) and antibiotic treatment over 6 weeks (adjusted HR = 0.29, P = .0002) significantly influenced treatment failure. We observed a tentative evidence for a beneficial effect of adding rifampin to the antibiotic treatment—though not statistically significant for treatment failure (adjusted HR = 0.5, P = .07) and not for relapses (adjusted HR = 0.5, P = .10). Conclusions We conclude that a rifampin combination is not markedly superior in Cutibacterium PJI, but a dedicated prospective multicenter study is needed.