Aims With the ageing population, fragility fractures have become one of the most common conditions. The objective of this study was to investigate whether microbiological outcomes and fracture-healing in osteoporotic bone is worse than normal bone with fracture-related infection (FRI). Methods A total of 120 six-month-old Sprague-Dawley (SD) rats were randomized to six groups: Sham, sham + infection (Sham-Inf), sham with infection + antibiotics (Sham-Inf-A), ovariectomized (OVX), OVX + infection (OVX-Inf), and OVX + infection + antibiotics (OVX-Inf-A). Open femoral diaphysis fractures with Kirschner wire fixation were performed. Staphylococcus aureus at 4 × 104 colony-forming units (CFU)/ml was inoculated. Rats were euthanized at four and eight weeks post-surgery. Radiography, micro-CT, haematoxylin-eosin, mechanical testing, immunohistochemistry (IHC), gram staining, agar plating, crystal violet staining, and scanning electron microscopy were performed. Results Agar plating analysis revealed a higher bacterial load in bone (p = 0.002), and gram staining showed higher cortical bone colonization (p = 0.039) in OVX-Inf compared to Sham-Inf. OVX-Inf showed significantly increased callus area (p = 0.013), but decreased high-density bone volume (p = 0.023) compared to Sham-Inf. IHC staining showed a significantly increased expression of TNF-α in OVX-Inf compared to OVX (p = 0.049). Significantly reduced bacterial load on bone (p = 0.001), enhanced ultimate load (p = 0.001), and energy to failure were observed in Sham-Inf-A compared to Sham-Inf (p = 0.028), but not in OVX-Inf-A compared to OVX-Inf. Conclusion In osteoporotic bone with FRI, infection was more severe with more bone lysis and higher bacterial load, and fracture-healing was further delayed. Systemic antibiotics significantly reduced bacterial load and enhanced callus quality and strength in normal bone with FRI, but not in osteoporotic bone. Cite this article: Bone Joint Res 2022;11(2):49–60.
Aims Biofilm-related infection is a major complication that occurs in orthopaedic surgery. Various treatments are available but efficacy to eradicate infections varies significantly. A systematic review was performed to evaluate therapeutic interventions combating biofilm-related infections on in vivo animal models. Methods Literature research was performed on PubMed and Embase databases. Keywords used for search criteria were “bone AND biofilm”. Information on the species of the animal model, bacterial strain, evaluation of biofilm and bone infection, complications, key findings on observations, prevention, and treatment of biofilm were extracted. Results A total of 43 studies were included. Animal models used included fracture-related infections (ten studies), periprosthetic joint infections (five studies), spinal infections (three studies), other implant-associated infections, and osteomyelitis. The most common bacteria were Staphylococcus species. Biofilm was most often observed with scanning electron microscopy. The natural history of biofilm revealed that the process of bacteria attachment, proliferation, maturation, and dispersal would take 14 days. For systemic mono-antibiotic therapy, only two of six studies using vancomycin reported significant biofilm reduction, and none reported eradication. Ten studies showed that combined systemic and topical antibiotics are needed to achieve higher biofilm reduction or eradication, and the effect is decreased with delayed treatment. Overall, 13 studies showed promising therapeutic potential with surface coating and antibiotic loading techniques. Conclusion Combined topical and systemic application of antimicrobial agents effectively reduces biofilm at early stages. Future studies with sustained release of antimicrobial and biofilm-dispersing agents tailored to specific pathogens are warranted to achieve biofilm eradication. Cite this article: Bone Joint Res 2022;11(10):670–684.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
customersupport@researchsolutions.com
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
Copyright © 2025 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.