Efficacy of Antibiotic Suppressive Therapy in Patients with a Prosthetic Joint Infection (2024)

Abstract

Introduction: For chronic prosthetic joint infections (PJI), complete removal of the infected prosthesis is necessary in order to cure the infection. Unfortunately, a subgroup of patients is not able to undergo a revision surgery due to high surgical risk. Alternatively, these patients can be treated with antibiotic suppressive therapy (AST) to suppress the infection. Aim: To evaluate the efficacy and tolerability of AST. Methods: We retrospectively collected data (period 2009-2015) from patients with a PJI (of hip, knee or shoulder) who were treated with AST at the University Medical Center Groningen, the Netherlands. AST was defined as antibiotic treatment for PJI that was started after the usual 3 months of antibiotic treatment. The time of follow-up was defined from the time point AST was started. Treatment was considered as failed, when the patient still experienced joint pain, when surgical intervention (debridement, removal, arthrodesis or amputation) was needed to control the infection and/or when death occurred due to the infection. Results: We included 21 patients with a median age of 67 years (range 21 - 88) and with a median follow-up of 21 months (range 3 - 81). Coagulase negative staphylococci (CNS) (n=6), S. aureus (n=6) and polymicrobial flora (n=4) were the most frequently found causative pathogens. Most patients with CNS and S. aureus were treated with minocycline (67%) and clindamycin (83%) as AST, respectively. Overall, treatment was successful in 67% of patients. Failure was due to persistent joint pain (n=1), surgical intervention because of an uncontrolled infection (n=3), and death due the infection (n=3). We observed a treatment success of 90% in patients with a 'standard' prosthesis (n=11), compared to only 50% in patients with a tumor-prosthesis (n=10). Also, treatment was successful in 83% of patients with a CNS as causative microorganism for the infection, compared to 50% in patients with a S. aureus. Patients who failed on AST had a higher ESR in comparison to patients with a successful treatment (mean 73 ± 25SD versus 32 ± 19SD mm/hour (p = 0.007), respectively. 43% of patients experienced side effects and led to a switch of antibiotic treatment or a dose adjustment in almost all of these patients. Conclusions: Removal of the implant remains first choice in patients with chronic PJI. However, AST is a reasonable alternative treatment option in a subgroup of patients with a PJI who are no candidate for revision surgery, in particular in patients with a 'standard' prosthesis and/or CNS as the causative micro-organism.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)77-83
Number of pages7
JournalJournal of bone and joint infection
Volume2
Issue number2
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 2017

Keywords

  • Journal Article

Access to Document

  • Efficacy of Antibiotic Suppressive Therapy in Patients with a Prosthetic Joint InfectionFinal publisher's version, 497 KBLicence: CC BY-NC

Handle.net

    Cite this

    • APA
    • Author
    • BIBTEX
    • Harvard
    • Standard
    • RIS
    • Vancouver

    Wouthuyzen-Bakker, M., Nijman, J. M., Kampinga, G. A., van Assen, S. (2017). Efficacy of Antibiotic Suppressive Therapy in Patients with a Prosthetic Joint Infection. Journal of bone and joint infection, 2(2), 77-83. https://doi.org/10.7150/jbji.17353

    Wouthuyzen-Bakker, Marjan ; Nijman, Jasperina M ; Kampinga, Greetje A et al. / Efficacy of Antibiotic Suppressive Therapy in Patients with a Prosthetic Joint Infection. In: Journal of bone and joint infection. 2017 ; Vol. 2, No. 2. pp. 77-83.

    @article{068d16bb536d47c5a5546510362946b0,

    title = "Efficacy of Antibiotic Suppressive Therapy in Patients with a Prosthetic Joint Infection",

    abstract = "Introduction: For chronic prosthetic joint infections (PJI), complete removal of the infected prosthesis is necessary in order to cure the infection. Unfortunately, a subgroup of patients is not able to undergo a revision surgery due to high surgical risk. Alternatively, these patients can be treated with antibiotic suppressive therapy (AST) to suppress the infection. Aim: To evaluate the efficacy and tolerability of AST. Methods: We retrospectively collected data (period 2009-2015) from patients with a PJI (of hip, knee or shoulder) who were treated with AST at the University Medical Center Groningen, the Netherlands. AST was defined as antibiotic treatment for PJI that was started after the usual 3 months of antibiotic treatment. The time of follow-up was defined from the time point AST was started. Treatment was considered as failed, when the patient still experienced joint pain, when surgical intervention (debridement, removal, arthrodesis or amputation) was needed to control the infection and/or when death occurred due to the infection. Results: We included 21 patients with a median age of 67 years (range 21 - 88) and with a median follow-up of 21 months (range 3 - 81). Coagulase negative staphylococci (CNS) (n=6), S. aureus (n=6) and polymicrobial flora (n=4) were the most frequently found causative pathogens. Most patients with CNS and S. aureus were treated with minocycline (67%) and clindamycin (83%) as AST, respectively. Overall, treatment was successful in 67% of patients. Failure was due to persistent joint pain (n=1), surgical intervention because of an uncontrolled infection (n=3), and death due the infection (n=3). We observed a treatment success of 90% in patients with a 'standard' prosthesis (n=11), compared to only 50% in patients with a tumor-prosthesis (n=10). Also, treatment was successful in 83% of patients with a CNS as causative microorganism for the infection, compared to 50% in patients with a S. aureus. Patients who failed on AST had a higher ESR in comparison to patients with a successful treatment (mean 73 ± 25SD versus 32 ± 19SD mm/hour (p = 0.007), respectively. 43% of patients experienced side effects and led to a switch of antibiotic treatment or a dose adjustment in almost all of these patients. Conclusions: Removal of the implant remains first choice in patients with chronic PJI. However, AST is a reasonable alternative treatment option in a subgroup of patients with a PJI who are no candidate for revision surgery, in particular in patients with a 'standard' prosthesis and/or CNS as the causative micro-organism.",

    keywords = "Journal Article",

    author = "Marjan Wouthuyzen-Bakker and Nijman, {Jasperina M} and Kampinga, {Greetje A} and {van Assen}, Sander and Jutte, {Paul C}",

    year = "2017",

    doi = "10.7150/jbji.17353",

    language = "English",

    volume = "2",

    pages = "77--83",

    journal = "Journal of bone and joint infection",

    issn = "2206-3552",

    publisher = "Copernicus Publications",

    number = "2",

    }

    Wouthuyzen-Bakker, M, Nijman, JM, Kampinga, GA, van Assen, S 2017, 'Efficacy of Antibiotic Suppressive Therapy in Patients with a Prosthetic Joint Infection', Journal of bone and joint infection, vol. 2, no. 2, pp. 77-83. https://doi.org/10.7150/jbji.17353

    Efficacy of Antibiotic Suppressive Therapy in Patients with a Prosthetic Joint Infection. / Wouthuyzen-Bakker, Marjan; Nijman, Jasperina M; Kampinga, Greetje A et al.
    In: Journal of bone and joint infection, Vol. 2, No. 2, 2017, p. 77-83.

    Research output: Contribution to journalArticleAcademicpeer-review

    TY - JOUR

    T1 - Efficacy of Antibiotic Suppressive Therapy in Patients with a Prosthetic Joint Infection

    AU - Wouthuyzen-Bakker, Marjan

    AU - Nijman, Jasperina M

    AU - Kampinga, Greetje A

    AU - van Assen, Sander

    AU - Jutte, Paul C

    PY - 2017

    Y1 - 2017

    N2 - Introduction: For chronic prosthetic joint infections (PJI), complete removal of the infected prosthesis is necessary in order to cure the infection. Unfortunately, a subgroup of patients is not able to undergo a revision surgery due to high surgical risk. Alternatively, these patients can be treated with antibiotic suppressive therapy (AST) to suppress the infection. Aim: To evaluate the efficacy and tolerability of AST. Methods: We retrospectively collected data (period 2009-2015) from patients with a PJI (of hip, knee or shoulder) who were treated with AST at the University Medical Center Groningen, the Netherlands. AST was defined as antibiotic treatment for PJI that was started after the usual 3 months of antibiotic treatment. The time of follow-up was defined from the time point AST was started. Treatment was considered as failed, when the patient still experienced joint pain, when surgical intervention (debridement, removal, arthrodesis or amputation) was needed to control the infection and/or when death occurred due to the infection. Results: We included 21 patients with a median age of 67 years (range 21 - 88) and with a median follow-up of 21 months (range 3 - 81). Coagulase negative staphylococci (CNS) (n=6), S. aureus (n=6) and polymicrobial flora (n=4) were the most frequently found causative pathogens. Most patients with CNS and S. aureus were treated with minocycline (67%) and clindamycin (83%) as AST, respectively. Overall, treatment was successful in 67% of patients. Failure was due to persistent joint pain (n=1), surgical intervention because of an uncontrolled infection (n=3), and death due the infection (n=3). We observed a treatment success of 90% in patients with a 'standard' prosthesis (n=11), compared to only 50% in patients with a tumor-prosthesis (n=10). Also, treatment was successful in 83% of patients with a CNS as causative microorganism for the infection, compared to 50% in patients with a S. aureus. Patients who failed on AST had a higher ESR in comparison to patients with a successful treatment (mean 73 ± 25SD versus 32 ± 19SD mm/hour (p = 0.007), respectively. 43% of patients experienced side effects and led to a switch of antibiotic treatment or a dose adjustment in almost all of these patients. Conclusions: Removal of the implant remains first choice in patients with chronic PJI. However, AST is a reasonable alternative treatment option in a subgroup of patients with a PJI who are no candidate for revision surgery, in particular in patients with a 'standard' prosthesis and/or CNS as the causative micro-organism.

    AB - Introduction: For chronic prosthetic joint infections (PJI), complete removal of the infected prosthesis is necessary in order to cure the infection. Unfortunately, a subgroup of patients is not able to undergo a revision surgery due to high surgical risk. Alternatively, these patients can be treated with antibiotic suppressive therapy (AST) to suppress the infection. Aim: To evaluate the efficacy and tolerability of AST. Methods: We retrospectively collected data (period 2009-2015) from patients with a PJI (of hip, knee or shoulder) who were treated with AST at the University Medical Center Groningen, the Netherlands. AST was defined as antibiotic treatment for PJI that was started after the usual 3 months of antibiotic treatment. The time of follow-up was defined from the time point AST was started. Treatment was considered as failed, when the patient still experienced joint pain, when surgical intervention (debridement, removal, arthrodesis or amputation) was needed to control the infection and/or when death occurred due to the infection. Results: We included 21 patients with a median age of 67 years (range 21 - 88) and with a median follow-up of 21 months (range 3 - 81). Coagulase negative staphylococci (CNS) (n=6), S. aureus (n=6) and polymicrobial flora (n=4) were the most frequently found causative pathogens. Most patients with CNS and S. aureus were treated with minocycline (67%) and clindamycin (83%) as AST, respectively. Overall, treatment was successful in 67% of patients. Failure was due to persistent joint pain (n=1), surgical intervention because of an uncontrolled infection (n=3), and death due the infection (n=3). We observed a treatment success of 90% in patients with a 'standard' prosthesis (n=11), compared to only 50% in patients with a tumor-prosthesis (n=10). Also, treatment was successful in 83% of patients with a CNS as causative microorganism for the infection, compared to 50% in patients with a S. aureus. Patients who failed on AST had a higher ESR in comparison to patients with a successful treatment (mean 73 ± 25SD versus 32 ± 19SD mm/hour (p = 0.007), respectively. 43% of patients experienced side effects and led to a switch of antibiotic treatment or a dose adjustment in almost all of these patients. Conclusions: Removal of the implant remains first choice in patients with chronic PJI. However, AST is a reasonable alternative treatment option in a subgroup of patients with a PJI who are no candidate for revision surgery, in particular in patients with a 'standard' prosthesis and/or CNS as the causative micro-organism.

    KW - Journal Article

    U2 - 10.7150/jbji.17353

    DO - 10.7150/jbji.17353

    M3 - Article

    C2 - 28529867

    SN - 2206-3552

    VL - 2

    SP - 77

    EP - 83

    JO - Journal of bone and joint infection

    JF - Journal of bone and joint infection

    IS - 2

    ER -

    Wouthuyzen-Bakker M, Nijman JM, Kampinga GA, van Assen S, Jutte PC. Efficacy of Antibiotic Suppressive Therapy in Patients with a Prosthetic Joint Infection. Journal of bone and joint infection. 2017;2(2):77-83. doi: 10.7150/jbji.17353

    Efficacy of Antibiotic Suppressive Therapy in Patients with a Prosthetic Joint Infection (2024)
    Top Articles
    Latest Posts
    Article information

    Author: Jonah Leffler

    Last Updated:

    Views: 6068

    Rating: 4.4 / 5 (45 voted)

    Reviews: 92% of readers found this page helpful

    Author information

    Name: Jonah Leffler

    Birthday: 1997-10-27

    Address: 8987 Kieth Ports, Luettgenland, CT 54657-9808

    Phone: +2611128251586

    Job: Mining Supervisor

    Hobby: Worldbuilding, Electronics, Amateur radio, Skiing, Cycling, Jogging, Taxidermy

    Introduction: My name is Jonah Leffler, I am a determined, faithful, outstanding, inexpensive, cheerful, determined, smiling person who loves writing and wants to share my knowledge and understanding with you.