Direkt zum Inhalt

Rupp, Markus ; Baertl, Susanne ; Walter, Nike ; Hitzenbichler, Florian ; Ehrenschwender, Martin ; Alt, Volker

Is There a Difference in Microbiological Epidemiology and Effective Empiric Antimicrobial Therapy Comparing Fracture-Related Infection and Periprosthetic Joint Infection? A Retrospective Comparative Study

Rupp, Markus , Baertl, Susanne, Walter, Nike , Hitzenbichler, Florian , Ehrenschwender, Martin und Alt, Volker (2021) Is There a Difference in Microbiological Epidemiology and Effective Empiric Antimicrobial Therapy Comparing Fracture-Related Infection and Periprosthetic Joint Infection? A Retrospective Comparative Study. Antibiotics 10 (8), S. 1-9.

Veröffentlichungsdatum dieses Volltextes: 11 Jan 2022 14:16
Artikel
DOI zum Zitieren dieses Dokuments: 10.5283/epub.51367


Zusammenfassung

This study aims to investigate (1) microbial patterns in fracture-related infections (FRIs) in comparison to microbiological patterns of periprosthetic joint infections (PJIs), (2) the identification of effective empiric antibiotic therapy for FRIs and PJIs and (3) analysis of difficult-to-treat (DTT) pathogens. Patients treated for FRIs or PJIs from 2017 to 2020 were evaluated for pathogens ...

This study aims to investigate (1) microbial patterns in fracture-related infections (FRIs) in comparison to microbiological patterns of periprosthetic joint infections (PJIs), (2) the identification of effective empiric antibiotic therapy for FRIs and PJIs and (3) analysis of difficult-to-treat (DTT) pathogens. Patients treated for FRIs or PJIs from 2017 to 2020 were evaluated for pathogens detected during treatment. Antibiotic susceptibility profiles were examined with respect to broadly used antibiotics and antibiotic combinations. Resistance rates to rifampicin or fluoroquinolone were determined. A total of 81 patients with PJI and 86 with FRI were included in the study. For FRIs Staphylococcus aureus was the most common infection-causing pathogen (37.4% vs. 27.9% for PJI). Overall, there was no statistical difference in pathogen distribution (p = 0.254). For FRIs, combinations of gentamicin + vancomycin (93.2%), co-amoxiclav + glycopeptide and meropenem + vancomycin (91.9% each) would have been effective for empiric therapy, similar to PJIs. Difficult to treat pathogens were more frequently detectable in PJIs (11.6% vs. 2.3%). Empiric therapy combinations such as gentamicin + vancomycin, co-amoxiclav + glycopeptide or meropenem + vancomycin, are effective antibiotic strategies for both FRI and PJI patients. More DTT pathogens were detectable in PJIs compared to FRIs.



Beteiligte Einrichtungen


Details

DokumentenartArtikel
Titel eines Journals oder einer ZeitschriftAntibiotics
Verlag:MDPI
Ort der Veröffentlichung:BASEL
Band:10
Nummer des Zeitschriftenheftes oder des Kapitels:8
Seitenbereich:S. 1-9
Datum27 Juli 2021
InstitutionenMedizin > Lehrstuhl für Unfallchirurgie
Medizin > Lehrstuhl für Innere Medizin I
Medizin > Lehrstuhl für Medizinische Mikrobiologie und Hygiene
Identifikationsnummer
WertTyp
10.3390/antibiotics10080921DOI
Stichwörter / KeywordsREVISION; HIP; empiric antimicrobial therapy; fracture-related infection; prosthetic joint infection; difficult to treat pathogens
Dewey-Dezimal-Klassifikation600 Technik, Medizin, angewandte Wissenschaften > 610 Medizin
StatusVeröffentlicht
BegutachtetJa, diese Version wurde begutachtet
An der Universität Regensburg entstandenJa
URN der UB Regensburgurn:nbn:de:bvb:355-epub-513673
Dokumenten-ID51367

Bibliographische Daten exportieren

Nur für Besitzer und Autoren: Kontrollseite des Eintrags

nach oben