» Articles » PMID: 33717908

No Differences in Short-term Outcomes Between Patients with Anaerobic and Aerobic Culture Positive Prosthetic Joint Infection

Overview
Specialty Orthopedics
Date 2021 Mar 15
PMID 33717908
Citations 1
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

Background: Prosthetic joint infection (PJI) is a devastation complication of total joint arthroplasty that can result in poor patient outcomes. Anaerobic organisms make up a small proportion of PJI cases and are much less studied. Studies comparing patient outcomes in anaerobic PJI to outcomes in aerobic PJI are sparse. The purpose of this study was to compare the clinical presentation, duration of antibiotics, type of treatment provided, and final outcome between PJI patients with anaerobic infection and those with aerobic infection.

Methods: This was a retrospective study of 26 patients who underwent treatment for PJI at a tertiary referral center. Eight patients with anaerobic PJI were compared to 18 patients with aerobic PJI in terms of clinical presentation, laboratory values, treatment duration, and functional outcome. Statistical analysis was performed on continuous variables of interest.

Results: The results of our study showed that there are no differences in short term clinical outcomes between PJI patients with cultures positive for anaerobic vs aerobic organisms (38.9% vs 50% successfully treated). Inflammatory markers were higher in the aerobic group and patients in the anaerobic group tended to have fewer medical comorbidities.

Conclusion: PJI caused by anaerobic organisms results in poor patient outcomes similar to infection caused by aerobic organisms. There are some differences in clinical presentation between the two groups that can be explained by the fact that anaerobic organisms are of low virulence and result in indolent infections causing longstanding symptoms.

Citing Articles

Outcome measures in total hip arthroplasty: have our metrics changed over 15 years?.

Lan R, Bell J, Samuel L, Kamath A Arch Orthop Trauma Surg. 2021; 142(8):1753-1762.

PMID: 33570664 DOI: 10.1007/s00402-021-03809-z.

References
1.
Zmistowski B, Karam J, Durinka J, Casper D, Parvizi J . Periprosthetic joint infection increases the risk of one-year mortality. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2013; 95(24):2177-84. DOI: 10.2106/JBJS.L.00789. View

2.
Marculescu C, Berbari E, Cockerill 3rd F, Osmon D . Unusual aerobic and anaerobic bacteria associated with prosthetic joint infections. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2006; 451:55-63. DOI: 10.1097/01.blo.0000229317.43631.81. View

3.
Zimmerli W, Trampuz A, Ochsner P . Prosthetic-joint infections. N Engl J Med. 2004; 351(16):1645-54. DOI: 10.1056/NEJMra040181. View

4.
Lidgren L, Knutson K, Stefansdottir A . Infection and arthritis. Infection of prosthetic joints. Best Pract Res Clin Rheumatol. 2003; 17(2):209-18. DOI: 10.1016/s1521-6942(03)00002-0. View

5.
Parvizi J, Tan T, Goswami K, Higuera C, Della Valle C, Chen A . The 2018 Definition of Periprosthetic Hip and Knee Infection: An Evidence-Based and Validated Criteria. J Arthroplasty. 2018; 33(5):1309-1314.e2. DOI: 10.1016/j.arth.2018.02.078. View