TY - JOUR
T1 - Significant Difference in Antimicrobial Resistance of Coagulase Negative Periprosthetic Joint Infection in Septic Revision Total Knee Arthroplasty Between Two Major Orthopedic Centers
AU - Stevoska, Stella
AU - Himmelbauer, Felix
AU - Stiftinger, Julian
AU - Stadler, Christian
AU - Gotterbarm, Tobias
AU - Heyse, Thomas Jan
AU - Klasan, Antonio
PY - 2022/2
Y1 - 2022/2
N2 - Background: Antimicrobial resistance is recognized as a major public health threat. It occurs naturally; however, an excessive antibiotic use and misuse of antibiotics accelerate the process. Periprosthetic joint infections (PJI) are becoming harder to treat as the efficacy of antibiotics is becoming lower. The aim of this study was to compare the resistance of coagulase-negative staphylococci (CNS) to antibiotics identified after revision TKAs for PJI between two major orthopedic centers.
Methods: A review of all revision TKAs, undertaken between 2006 and 2018 in two orthopedic centers, was performed, including all those meeting the consensus criteria for PJI, in which CNS were identified. There were no major differences in surgical approach and tissue sampling between both centers. Thirteen commonly used antibiotics were tested at both centers.
Results: The 132 strains were analyzed for their resistance to 13 different antibiotics. Staphylococcus epidermidis was identified in 70.5% cultures, followed by Staphylococcus capitis in 8.3% cultures. The comparison of antibiotic resistance between two centers was statistically significant to penicillin (P = .001), oxacillin (P = .011), cefuroxime (P = .044), levofloxacin (P = .006), moxifloxacin (P = .008), tetracycline (P < .001), rifampicin (P < .001) and vancomycin (P < .001). The difference of resistance of CNS was not statistically significant to fosfomycin, clindamycin, teicoplanin, erythromycin and ampicillin.
Conclusions: The resistance of CNS to antibiotics differs significantly between two major orthopedic centers that are geographically fairly close. Monitoring of bacteriological analyses in each referral center should be continuously performed. Close monitoring is needed for more efficient antibiotic treatment of and prophylaxis against PJI.
AB - Background: Antimicrobial resistance is recognized as a major public health threat. It occurs naturally; however, an excessive antibiotic use and misuse of antibiotics accelerate the process. Periprosthetic joint infections (PJI) are becoming harder to treat as the efficacy of antibiotics is becoming lower. The aim of this study was to compare the resistance of coagulase-negative staphylococci (CNS) to antibiotics identified after revision TKAs for PJI between two major orthopedic centers.
Methods: A review of all revision TKAs, undertaken between 2006 and 2018 in two orthopedic centers, was performed, including all those meeting the consensus criteria for PJI, in which CNS were identified. There were no major differences in surgical approach and tissue sampling between both centers. Thirteen commonly used antibiotics were tested at both centers.
Results: The 132 strains were analyzed for their resistance to 13 different antibiotics. Staphylococcus epidermidis was identified in 70.5% cultures, followed by Staphylococcus capitis in 8.3% cultures. The comparison of antibiotic resistance between two centers was statistically significant to penicillin (P = .001), oxacillin (P = .011), cefuroxime (P = .044), levofloxacin (P = .006), moxifloxacin (P = .008), tetracycline (P < .001), rifampicin (P < .001) and vancomycin (P < .001). The difference of resistance of CNS was not statistically significant to fosfomycin, clindamycin, teicoplanin, erythromycin and ampicillin.
Conclusions: The resistance of CNS to antibiotics differs significantly between two major orthopedic centers that are geographically fairly close. Monitoring of bacteriological analyses in each referral center should be continuously performed. Close monitoring is needed for more efficient antibiotic treatment of and prophylaxis against PJI.
U2 - 10.1016/j.arth.2021.11.017
DO - 10.1016/j.arth.2021.11.017
M3 - Article
SN - 1532-8406
JO - The Journal of Arthroplasty
JF - The Journal of Arthroplasty
ER -