4.6 Article

Epidemiology and Antibiotic Resistance of Late Prosthetic Knee and Hip Infections

期刊

JOURNAL OF ARTHROPLASTY
卷 32, 期 8, 页码 2496-2500

出版社

CHURCHILL LIVINGSTONE INC MEDICAL PUBLISHERS
DOI: 10.1016/j.arth.2017.03.005

关键词

infections; prostheses; epidemiology; hip; knee

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Background: Prosthetic joint infections (PJI) are still a major complication of hip and knee arthroplasties. Identification of the causative pathogens and knowledge of their antibiotic susceptibilities are essential for the management of these infections. The main purpose of the study was to identify and compare the causative bacteria of prosthetic knee and hip joint infections in a reference Italian orthopedic center and to characterize antibiotic resistance profiles of bacteria involved. Methods: Data from 429 patients with diagnosis of PJI were collected from January 2013 to June 2015: 229 presented a hip and 200 a knee prosthesis infection. Prostheses and periprosthetic tissues were treated with dithiothreitol before plating onto different media and broths. Identification and antimicrobial susceptibility testing were carried out by VITEK2 Compact (bioMerieux). Results: There was not a substantial difference in the etiology of hip and knee PJI: staphylococci were the most frequently isolated bacteria in both groups, followed by Enterobacteriaceae and Propionibacterium acnes. Staphylococci showed a high rate of methicillin resistance (144 of 341) and a worrying frequency of isolates were resistant to teicoplanin (9%). Only 8.3% of Enterobacteriaceae produced extendedspectrum beta-lactamases, whereas the rate of carbapenemase-producing bacteria was not significant. Conclusion: We observed similar etiology of hip and knee PJIs. Nevertheless, bacteria isolated from knee showed higher resistance rates to glycopeptides and fluoroquinolones when compared with those isolated from the hip. The reason for this difference remains to be elucidated in future studies. (C) 2017 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据