Fracture-related infection (FRI) is a common and serious complication in trauma surgery. Accurately estimating the impact of this complication has been hampered by the lack of a clear definition. The absence of a working definition of FRI renders existing studies difficult to evaluate or compare. In order to address this issue, an expert group comprised of a number of scientific and medical organizations has been convened, with the support of the AO Foundation, in order to develop a consensus definition. The process that led to this proposed definition started with a systematic literature review, which revealed that the majority of randomized controlled trials in fracture care do not use a standardized definition of FRI. In response to this conclusion, an international survey on the need for and key components of a definition of FRI was distributed amongst all registered AOTrauma users. Approximately 90% of the more than 2000 surgeons who responded suggested that a definition of FRI is required. As a final step, a consensus meeting was held with an expert panel. The outcome of this process led to a consensus definition of FRI. Two levels of certainty around diagnostic features were defined. Criteria could be confirmatory (infection definitely present) or suggestive. Four confirmatory criteria were defined: Fistula, sinus or wound breakdown; Purulent drainage from the wound or presence of pus during surgery; Phenotypically indistinguishable pathogens identified by culture from at least two separate deep tissue/implant specimens; Presence of microorganisms in deep tissue taken during an operative intervention, as confirmed by histopathological examination. Furthermore, a list of suggestive criteria was defined. These require further investigations in order to look for confirmatory criteria. In the current paper, an overview is provided of the proposed definition and a rationale for each component and decision. The intention of establishing this definition of FRI was to offer clinicians the opportunity to standardize clinical reports and improve the quality of published literature. It is important to note that the proposed definition was not designed to guide treatment of FRI and should be validated by prospective data collection in the future.

One of the most challenging complications in trauma surgery is infection after fracture fixation (IAFF). IAFF may result in permanent functional loss or even amputation of the affected limb in patients who may otherwise be expected to achieve complete, uneventful healing. Over the past decades, the problem of implant related bone infections has garnered increasing attention both in the clinical as well as preclinical arenas; however this has primarily been focused upon prosthetic joint infection (PJI), rather than on IAFF. Although IAFF shares many similarities with PJI, there are numerous critical differences in many facets including prevention, diagnosis and treatment. Admittedly, extrapolating data from PJI research to IAFF has been of value to the trauma surgeon, but we should also be aware of the unique challenges posed by IAFF that may not be accounted for in the PJI literature. This review summarizes the clinical approaches towards the diagnosis and treatment of IAFF with an emphasis on the unique aspects of fracture care that distinguish IAFF from PJI. Finally, recent developments in anti-infective technologies that may be particularly suitable or applicable for trauma patients in the future will be briefly discussed.

Summary: Fracture-related infection (FRI) is a severe complication after bone injury and can pose a serious diagnostic challenge. Overall, there is a limited amount of scientific evidence regarding diagnostic criteria for FRI. For this reason, the AO Foundation and the European Bone and Joint Infection Society proposed a consensus definition for FRI to standardize the diagnostic criteria and improve the quality of patient care and applicability of future studies regarding this condition. The aim of this article was to summarize the available evidence and provide recommendations for the diagnosis of FRI. For this purpose, the FRI consensus definition will be discussed together with a proposal for an update based on the available evidence relating to the diagnostic value of clinical parameters, serum inflammatory markers, imaging modalities, tissue and sonication fluid sampling, molecular biology techniques, and histopathological examination. Second, recommendations on microbiology specimen sampling and laboratory operating procedures relevant to FRI will be provided. Level of Evidence: Diagnostic Level V. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

Fracture-related infection (FRI) remains a challenging complication that creates a heavy burden for orthopaedic trauma patients, their families and treating physicians, as well as for healthcare systems. Standardization of the diagnosis of FRI has been poor, which made the undertaking and comparison of studies difficult. Recently, a consensus definition based on diagnostic criteria for FRI was published. As a well-established diagnosis is the first step in the treatment process of FRI, such a definition should not only improve the quality of published reports but also daily clinical practice. The FRI consensus group recently developed guidelines to standardize treatment pathways and outcome measures. At the center of these recommendations was the implementation of a multidisciplinary team (MDT) approach. If such a team is not available, it is recommended to refer complex cases to specialized centers where a MDT is available and physicians are experienced with the treatment of FRI. This should lead to appropriate use of antimicrobials and standardization of surgical strategies. Furthermore, an MDT could play an important role in host optimization. Overall two main surgical concepts are considered, based on the fact that fracture fixation devices primarily target fracture consolidation and can be removed after healing, in contrast to periprosthetic joint infection were the implant is permanent. The first concept consists of implant retention and the second consists of implant removal (healed fracture) or implant exchange (unhealed fracture). In both cases, deep tissue sampling for microbiological examination is mandatory. Key aspects of the surgical management of FRI are a thorough debridement, irrigation with normal saline, fracture stability, dead space management and adequate soft tissue coverage. The use of local antimicrobials needs to be strongly considered. In case of FRI, empiric broad-spectrum antibiotic therapy should be started after tissue sampling. Thereafter, this needs to be adapted according to culture results as soon as possible. Finally, a minimum follow-up of 12 months after cessation of therapy is recommended. Standardized patient outcome measures purely focusing on FRI are currently not available but the patient-reported outcomes measurement information system (PROMIS) seems to be the preferred tool to assess the patients' short and long-term outcome. This review summarizes the current general principles which should be considered during the whole treatment process of patients with FRI based on recommendations from the FRI Consensus Group. Level of evidence: Level V.

Background: Both fracture-related infections (FRIs) and periprosthetic joint infections (PJIs) include orthopaedic implant-associated infections. However, key aspects of management differ due to the bone and soft tissue damage in FRIs and the option of removing the implant after fracture healing. In contrast to PJIs, research and guidelines for diagnosis and treatment in FRIs are scarce. Objectives: This narrative review aims to update clinical microbiologists, infectious disease specialists and surgeons on the management of FRIs. Sources: A computerized search of PubMed was performed to identify relevant studies. Search terms included 'Fracture' and 'Infection'. The reference lists of all retrieved articles were checked for additional relevant references. In addition, when scientific evidence was lacking, recommendations are based on expert opinion. Content: Pathogenesis, prevention, diagnosis and treatment of FRIs are presented. Whenever available, specific data of patients with FRI are discussed. Implications: Management of patients with FRI should take into account FRI-specific features. Treatment pathways should implement a multidisciplinary approach to achieve a good outcome. Recently, international consensus guidelines were developed to improve the quality of care for patients suffering from this severe complication, which are highlighted in this review.