Background In patients with diabetic foot osteomyelitis (DFO) who underwent surgical debridement, we investigated whether a short (3 weeks), compared with a long (6 weeks) duration of systemic antibiotic treatment is associated with non-inferior results for clinical remission and adverse events (AE). Methods In this prospective, randomized, non-inferiority, pilot trial, we randomized (allocation 1:1), patients with DFO after surgical debridement to either a 3-week or a 6-week course of antibiotic therapy. The minimal duration of follow-up after end of therapy was two months. We compared outcomes using Cox regression and non-inferiority analyses (25% margin, power 80%). Results Among 93 enrolled patients (18% females; median age 65 years), 44 were randomized to the 3-week arm and 49 to the 6-week arm. The median number of surgical debridement was 1 (range, 0-2 interventions). In the intention-to-treat (ITT) population, remission occurred in 37 (84%) of the patients in the 3-week arm compared to 36 (73%) in the 6-week arm (p=0.21). The number of AE was similar in the two study arms (17/44 vs. 16/49; p=0.51), as were the remission incidences in the per-protocol (PP) population (33/39 vs. 32/43; p=0.26). In multivariate analysis, treatment with the shorter antibiotic course was not significantly associated with remission (for the ITT population, hazard ratio 1.1, 95%CI 0.6-1.7; for the PP population hazard ratio 0.8, 95%CI 0.5-1.4). Conclusions In this randomized, controlled pilot trial, a post-debridement systemic antibiotic therapy course for DFO of 3-weeks gave similar (and statistically non-inferior) incidences of remission and AE to a course of 6 weeks.

Summary Objective The appropriate duration of antibiotic therapy for diabetic foot infections (DFI) after surgical amputations in toto is debated. There are discrepancies worldwide. Methods Using a clinical pathway for adult DFI patients (retrospective cohort analysis), we conducted a cluster‐controlled Cox regression analysis. Minimum follow‐up was 2 months. Results We followed 482 amputated DFI episodes for a median of 2.1 years after the index episode. The DFIs predominately affected the forefoot (n = 433; 90%). We diagnosed osteomyelitis in 239 cases (239/482; 50%). In total, 47 cases (10%) were complicated by bacteremia, 86 (18%) by abscesses and 139 (29%) presented with cellulitis. Surgical amputation involved the toes (n = 155), midfoot (280) and hindfoot (47). Overall, 178 cases (37%) required revascularization. After amputation, the median duration of antibiotic administration was 7 days (interquartile range, 1‐16 days). In 109 cases (25%), antibiotics were discontinued immediately after surgery. Overall, clinical failure occurred in 90 DFIs (17%), due to the same pathogens in only 38 cases. In multivariate analysis, neither duration of total postsurgical antibiotic administration (HR 1.0, 95% CI 0.99‐1.01) nor immediate postoperative discontinuation altered failure rate (HR 0.9, 0.5‐1.5). Conclusion According to our clinical pathway, we found no benefit in continuing postsurgical antibiotic administration in routine amputation for DFI. In the absence of residual infection (ie, resection at clear margins), antibiotics should be discontinued.

Background: The management of prosthetic joint infections (PJI) with debridement and retention of the implant (DAIR) has its rules. Some authors claim that lacking the exchange of mobile prosthetic parts is doomed to failure, while others regard it as optional. Methods: Single-center retrospective cohort in PJIs treated with DAIR. Results: We included 112 PJIs (69 total hip arthroplasties, 9 medullary hip prostheses, 41 total knee arthroplasties, and 1 total shoulder arthroplasty) in 112 patients (median age 75 years, 52 females (46%), 31 (28%) immune-suppressed) and performed a DAIR procedure in all cases—48 (43%) with exchange of mobile parts and 64 without. After a median follow-up of 3.3 years, 94 patients (84%) remained in remission. In multivariate Cox regression analysis, remission was unrelated to PJI localization, pathogens, number of surgical lavages, duration of total antibiotic treatment or intravenous therapy, choice of antibiotic agents, immune-suppression, or age. In contrast, the exchange of mobile parts was protective (hazard ratio 1.9; 95% confidence interval 1.2–2.9). Conclusions: In our retrospective single-center cohort, changing mobile parts of PJI during the DAIR approach almost doubled the probability for long-term remission.

No abstract

BackgroundProlonged hospital stay before surgery is a risk for colonization with antibiotic-resistant microorganisms and possible antibiotic-resistant surgical site infections (SSI), which lacks acknowledgement in international guidelines for perioperative antibiotic prophylaxis.MethodRetrospective cohort study focusing on prophylaxis-resistant SSI in adult orthopedic implant patients; with emphasis on length of hospital stay prior to the index surgery.ResultsWe enrolled 611 cases of SSI (median age, 65 years; 241 females and 161 immune-suppressed) in four large implant groups: arthroplasties (n = 309), plates (n = 127), spondylodeses (n = 31), and nails (n = 46). The causative pathogen was resistant to the perioperative antibiotic prophylaxis regimen in 307 cases (307/611; 50%), but the length of pre-surgical hospitalization did not influence the incidences of prophylaxis-resistant SSIs. These incidences were (107/211;51%) for the admission day, (170/345;49%) within 10 days of delay, (19/35;54%) between 10 and 20 days, and (11/20; 55%) beyond 20 days of hospital stay before surgery. The corresponding incidences of methicillin-resistant staphylococci were 13%, 14%, 17%, and 5%, respectively. In adjusted group comparisons, the length of prior hospital stay was equally unrelated to future prophylaxis-resistant SSI (odds ratio 1.0, 95% confidence interval 0.99–1.01).ConclusionsIn our retrospective cohort of orthopedic implant SSI, the length of pre-surgical hospital stay was unrelated to the incidence of prophylaxis-resistant pathogens.