No abstract

A key factor in the successful management of periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) besides the surgical regime is a consistent antimicrobial therapy. Recently, oral versus intravenous (IV) antibiotics for bone and joint infection trial demonstrated the noninferiority of oral antimicrobial therapy compared to IV, implying that an early transition to oral administration is reasonable. It is likely that the international consensus meeting of musculoskeletal Infections and the European Bone and Joint Infection Society will consider these findings. However, rising levels of antimicrobial resistance are challenging and recommendations for dealing with multidrug‐resistant (MDR) pathogens resistant to oral antibiotics are lacking. This study focuses on establishing guidance towards their management in PJI. From December 2015 to June 2019, patients with MDR pathogens were included in a single‐center prospective cohort study and treated with self‐administered outpatient parenteral antimicrobial therapy (S‐OPAT) based on a two‐stage revision strategy. Demographics, pathogens, antimicrobial agents, and outcomes were recorded. A total of 1738 outpatient days in 26 patients were analyzed. The incidence of pathogens resistant to oral antibiotics in PJI was 4%, most frequently encountered were staphylococcus epidermidis. The Kaplan–Meier‐estimated infection‐free survival after 3 years was 90% (95% confidence interval, 84.6%–95.5%). We recorded adverse events in 6 of 54 (11%) S‐OPAT episodes (3.45/1000 S‐OPAT days). (i) S‐OPAT in two‐stage revision arthroplasty to counter increasing numbers of MDR pathogens resistant to oral agents can achieve a high infection eradication rate and (ii) should therefore be taken into account at the next society's consensus treatment updates.

Introduction Salvage of joint destruction of the tibiotalar and subtalar joint with necrosis or infection of the talus in compromised hosts is a challenging problem. In these cases, tibiocalcaneal arthrodesis using the Ilizarov external fixator represents a possible alternative to amputation. This retrospective study presents the results and complications of this salvage procedure. Materials and methods Between 2005 and 2015, 19 patients were treated with tibiocalcaneal arthrodesis using the Ilizarov external fixator. Ten patients received tibiocalcaneal arthrodesis due to an acute or chronic infection with joint destruction. The other nine patients presented posttraumatic necrosis of the talus or Charcot arthropathy. In addition to demographic data, the time spent in the fixator, the major and minor complications and the endpoint of the consolidation were evaluated retrospectively. Furthermore, clinical outcomes were measured using the modified American Orthopedic Foot and Ankle Society (AOFAS) score. Results The average time spent in the fixator was 22 (range 14–34) weeks. The average follow-up in 17 patients was 116 (range 4–542) weeks. Two patients were lost to follow-up. Complete osseous consolidation was achieved in 14 out of 19 patients. One patient presented partial consolidation, and in four patients, pseudarthrosis could be detected. The mean modified AOFAS score at the final follow-up was 53 out of 86 possible points. Conclusion Tibiocalcaneal arthrodesis using the Ilizarov fixator is a possible salvage procedure even in compromised hosts. However, the healing rates are below the rates reported in the literature for tibiotalar arthrodesis in comparable clinical situations.