It is important to know the spectrum of the microbial aetiology of prosthetic joint infections (PJIs) to guide empiric treatment and establish antimicrobial prophylaxis in joint replacements. There are no available data based on large contemporary patient cohorts. We sought to characterize the causative pathogens of PJIs and to evaluate trends in the microbial aetiology. We hypothesized that the frequency of antimicrobial-resistant organisms in PJIs has increased in the recent years. We performed a cohort study in 19 hospitals in Spain, from 2003 to 2012. For each 2-year period (2003-2004 to 2011-2012), the incidence of microorganisms causing PJIs and multidrug-resistant bacteria was assessed. Temporal trends over the study period were evaluated. We included 2524 consecutive adult patients with a diagnosis of PJI. A microbiological diagnosis was obtained for 2288 cases (90.6%). Staphylococci were the most common cause of infection (1492, 65.2%). However, a statistically significant rising linear trend was observed for the proportion of infections caused by Gram-negative bacilli, mainly due to the increase in the last 2-year period (25% in 2003-2004, 33.3% in 2011-2012; p 0.024 for trend). No particular species contributed disproportionally to this overall increase. The percentage of multidrug-resistant bacteria PJIs increased from 9.3% in 2003-2004 to 15.8% in 2011-2012 (p 0.008), mainly because of the significant rise in multidrug-resistant Gram-negative bacilli (from 5.3% in 2003-2004 to 8.2% in 2011-2012; p 0.032). The observed trends have important implications for the management of PJIs and prophylaxis in joint replacements.

Prosthetic valve endocarditis is a serious condition with high mortality. Patients with perivalvular abscess had a worse prognosis, and combined surgical and medical treatment could be the preferred approach to improve outcome.

BackgroundThe most common cause of implant failure is aseptic loosening (AL), followed by prosthetic joint infection (PJI). This study evaluates the incidence of PJI among patients operated with suspected AL and whether the diagnosis of PJI was predictive of subsequent implant failure including re-infection, at 2 years of follow up.MethodsPatients undergoing revision hip or knee arthroplasty due to presumed AL from February 2009 to September 2011 were prospectively evaluated. A sonication fluid of prosthesis and tissue samples for microbiology and histopathology at the time of the surgery were collected. Implant failure include recurrent or persistent infection, reoperation for any reason or need for chronic antibiotic suppression.ResultsOf 198 patients with pre-and intraoperative diagnosis of AL, 24 (12.1 %) had postoperative diagnosis of PJI. After a follow up of 31 months (IQR: 21 to 38 months), 9 (37.5 %) of 24 patients in the PJI group had implant failure compared to only 1 (1.1 %) in the 198 of AL group (p < 0.0001). Sensitivity of sonicate fluid culture (>20 CFU) and peri-prosthetic tissue culture were 87.5 % vs 66.7 %, respectively. Specificities were 100 % for both techniques (95 % CI, 97.9–100 %). A greater number of patients with PJI (79.1 %) had previous partial arthroplasty revisions than those patients in the AL group (56.9 %) (p = 0.04). In addition, 5 (55.5 %) patients with PJI and implant failure had more revision arthroplasties during the first year after the last implant placement than those patients with PJI without implant failure (1 patient; 6.7 %) (RR 3.8; 95 % CI 1.4-10.1; p = 0.015). On the other hand, 6 (25 %) patients finally diagnosed of PJI were initially diagnosed of AL in the first year after primary arthroplasty, whereas it was only 16 (9.2 %) patients in the group of true AL (RR 2.7; 95 % CI 1.2–6.1; p = 0.03).ConclusionsMore than one tenth of patients with suspected AL are misdiagnosed PJI. Positive histology and positive peri-implant tissue and sonicate fluid cultures are highly predictive of implant failure in patients with PJI. Patients with greater number of partial hip revisions for a presumed AL had more risk of PJI. Early loosening is more often caused by hidden PJI than late loosening.

A study of melanocytic naevi was carried out in southern Spain to examine the relationship between numbers of naevi at different body sites as predictors of whole-body naevus count and to determine whether the naevus count on the arms is valid for identifying the risk factors for total naevi. Subjects were the control group from a case-control study on risk factors for cutaneous melanoma. They were selected from visitors to the University of Granada Hospital (southern Spain) between 1989 and 1993. Of 200 people invited to participate, 146 accepted (73%). Data were collected by personal interview, and melanocytic naevi were counted over the entire body surface by clinical skin examination performed by one dermatologist. Partial correlation coefficients (R) estimated by multiple linear regression were calculated. Comparisons between whole-body naevi and naevi on the arms, and their relationship with risk factors, were assessed by analysis of variance and covariance. Arms in men (adjusted R = 0.88) and thighs in women (adjusted R = 0.82) were the best predictors of total naevi after adjusting for age and sun exposure. Age, occupational and leisure sun exposure, and sunburns showed significant correlations with the total number of naevi. Similar results were found for the naevus count on the arms. In conclusion, the prediction of whole-body numbers of naevi by a naevus count on specific sites differs between men and women: arms in men and thighs in women are the best predictors. Nevertheless, naevus counts on the arms allowed us to study the risk factors for total naevi as well as whole-body naevus count: age and occupational sun exposure were the strongest determinants.