Treatment Failures in Diabetic Foot Osteomyelitis Associated with Concomitant Charcot Arthropathy: The Role of Underlying Arteriopathy

Nicotine promotes Staphylococcus aureus-induced osteomyelitis by activating the Nrf2/Slc7a11 signaling axis

Although smoking is a significant risk factor for osteomyelitis, there is limited experimental evidence that nicotine, a key tobacco constituent, is associated with this condition, leaving its mechanistic implications uncharacterized. This study revealed that nicotine promotes Staphylococcus aureus-induced osteomyelitis by increasing Nrf2 and Slc7a11 expression in vivo and in vitro. Inhibition of Slc7a11 using Erastin augmented bacterial phagocytosis/killing capabilities and fortified antimicrobial responses in an osteomyelitis model. Moreover, untargeted metabolomic analysis demonstrated that Erastin mitigated the effects of nicotine on S. aureus-induced osteomyelitis by altering glutamate/glutathione metabolism. These findings suggest that nicotine aggravates S. aureus-induced osteomyelitis by activating the Nrf2/Slc7a11 signaling pathway and that Slc7a11 inhibition can counteract the detrimental health effects of nicotine.

Brazilian Society of Angiology and Vascular Surgery 2023 guidelines on the diabetic foot

The diabetic foot interacts with anatomical, vascular, and neurological factors that challenge clinical practice. This study aimed to compile the primary scientific evidence based on a review of the main guidelines, in addition to articles published on the Embase, Lilacs, and PubMed platforms. The European Society of Cardiology system was used to develop recommendation classes and levels of evidence. The themes were divided into six chapters (Chapter 1 - Prevention of foot ulcers in people with diabetes; Chapter 2 - Pressure relief from foot ulcers in people with diabetes; Chapter 3 -Classifications of diabetic foot ulcers; Chapter 4 - Foot and peripheral artery disease; Chapter 5 - Infection and the diabetic foot; Chapter 6 - Charcot's neuroarthropathy). This version of the Diabetic Foot Guidelines presents essential recommendations for the prevention, diagnosis, treatment, and follow-up of patients with diabetic foot, offering an objective guide for medical practice.

The Differentiation Between Infection and Acute Charcot

The differentiation between acute Charcot neuroarthropathy and infection in the foot and ankle should be supported by multiple criteria. A detailed history and physical examination should always be completed. Plain radiographs should be performed, though advanced imaging, currently MRI, is more helpful in diagnosis. Scintigraphy and PET may become the standard imaging modalities once they are more clinically available due to their reported increased accuracy. Laboratory analysis can also act as a helpful diagnostic tool. Histopathology with culturing should be performed if osteomyelitis is suspected. The prompt diagnosis and initiation of treatment is vital to reducing patient morbidity and mortality.

Investigation and management of diabetic foot osteomyelitis: An update for the foot and ankle orthopaedic surgeon

Diabetic foot osteomyelitis (DFO) poses a significant challenge in the management of diabetic patients, often leading to severe complications and increased morbidity. Effective management of DFO requires a multidisciplinary approach, involving endocrinologists, infectious disease specialists, vascular surgeons, orthopaedic surgeons, and wound care experts. Early diagnosis is paramount, facilitated by advanced imaging techniques such as magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) and bone scintigraphy. Once diagnosed, the treatment strategy hinges on a combination of medical and surgical interventions. Antibiotic therapy, guided by culture results, plays a central role in managing DFO. Tailored regimens targeting the specific pathogens involved are administered, often for prolonged durations. Surgical intervention becomes necessary when conservative measures fall short. Surgical approaches range from minimally invasive procedures, like percutaneous drainage, to more extensive interventions like debridement and bone resection. Prevention of DFO recurrence is equally vital, emphasising glycemic control, meticulous foot care, patient education, monitoring of at-risk signs, revascularization and early intervention when indicated. The management of diabetic foot osteomyelitis mandates a comprehensive strategy that addresses both the infectious and surgical aspects of the condition. A collaborative, interdisciplinary approach ensures timely diagnosis, tailored treatment, and holistic care. Further research into novel therapeutic modalities and long-term outcomes remains essential in refining the management of this complex and debilitating complication of diabetes.

Comparative Efficacy of Conservative Surgery vs Minor Amputation for Diabetic Foot Osteomyelitis

BACKGROUND

There is uncertainty regarding the optimal surgical intervention for diabetic foot osteomyelitis (DFO). Conservative surgery-amputation-free resection of infected bone and soft tissues-is gaining traction as an alternative to minor amputation. Our primary objective was to explore the comparative effectiveness of conservative surgery and minor amputations in clinical failure risk 1 year after index intervention. We also aimed to explore microbiological recurrence at 1 year, and revision surgery risk over a 10-year study period.

METHODS

Retrospective, single-center chart review of DFO patients undergoing either conservative surgery or minor amputation. We used multivariable Cox regression and Kaplan-Meier estimates to explore the effect of surgical intervention on clinical failure (recurrent diabetic foot infection at surgical site within 1 year after index operation), microbiological recurrence at 1 year, and revision surgery risk over a 10-year follow-up period.

RESULTS

651 patients were included (conservative surgery, n = 121; minor amputation, n = 530). Clinical failure occurred in 34 (28%) patients in the conservative surgery group, and in 111 (21%) of the minor amputation group at 1 year (P = .09). After controlling for potential confounders, we found no association between conservative surgery and clinical failure at 1 year (adjusted hazard ratio [HR] 1.3, 95% CI 0.8-2.1). We found no between-group differences in microbiological recurrence at 1 year (conservative surgery: 8 [6.6%]; minor amputation: 33 [6.2%]; P = .25; adjusted HR 1.1, 95% CI 0.5-2.6). Over the 10-year period, the conservative group underwent significantly more revision surgeries (conservative surgery: 85 [70.2%]; minor amputation: 252 [47.5%]; P < .01; adjusted HR 1.3, 95% CI 0.9-1.8).

CONCLUSION

We found that with comorbidity-based patient selection, conservative surgery in the treatment of DFO was associated with the same rates of clinical failure and microbiological recurrence at 1 year, but with significantly more revision surgeries during follow-up, compared with minor amputations.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level III, retrospective comparative effectiveness study.

No Difference in Risk of Amputation or Frequency of Surgical Interventions Between Patients With Diabetic and Nondiabetic Charcot Arthropathy

BACKGROUND

The cause of Charcot neuro-osteoarthropathy (CN) is diabetes in approximately 75% of patients. Most reports on the clinical course and complications of CN focus on diabetic CN, and reports on nondiabetic CN are scarce. No study, to our knowledge, has compared the clinical course of patients initially treated nonoperatively for diabetic and nondiabetic CN.

QUESTIONS/PURPOSES

Among patients with CN, are there differences between patients with diabetes and those without in terms of (1) the frequency of major amputation as ascertained by a competing risks survivorship estimator; (2) the frequency of surgery as ascertained by a competing risks survivorship estimator; (3) frequency of reactivation, as above; or (4) other complications (contralateral CN development or ulcers)?

METHODS

Between January 1, 2006, and December 31, 2018, we treated 199 patients for diabetic CN. Eleven percent (22 of 199) were lost before the minimum study follow-up of 2 years or had incomplete datasets and could not be analyzed, and another 9% (18 of 199) were excluded for other prespecified reasons, leaving 80% (159 of 199) for analysis in this retrospective study at a mean follow-up duration since diagnosis of 6 ± 4 years. During that period, we also treated 78 patients for nondiabetic Charcot arthropathy. Eighteen percent (14 of 78) were lost before the minimum study follow-up and another 5% (four of 78 patients) were excluded for other prespecified reasons, leaving 77% (60 of 78) of patients for analysis here at a mean of 5 ± 3 years. Patients with diabetic CN were younger (59 ± 11 years versus 68 ± 11 years; p < 0.01), more likely to smoke cigarettes (37% [59 of 159] versus 20% [12 of 60]; p = 0.02), and had longer follow-up (6 ± 4 years versus 5 ± 3 years; p = 0.02) than those with nondiabetic CN. Gender, BMI, overall renal failure, dialysis, and presence of peripheral arterial disease did not differ between the groups. Age difference and length of follow-up were not considered disqualifying problems because of the later onset of idiopathic neuropathy and longer available patient follow-up in patients with diabetes, because our program adheres to the follow-up recommendations suggested by the International Working Group on the Diabetic Foot. Treatment was the same in both groups and included serial total-contact casting and restricted weightbearing until CN had resolved. Then, patients subsequently transitioned to orthopaedic footwear. CN reactivation was defined as clinical signs of the recurrence of CN activity and confirmation on MRI. Group-specific risks of the frequencies of major amputation, surgery, and CN reactivation were calculated, accounting for competing events. Group comparisons and confounder analyses were conducted on these data with a Cox regression analysis. Other complications (contralateral CN development and ulcers) are described descriptively to avoid pooling of complications with varying severity, which could be misleading.

RESULTS

The risk of major amputation (defined as an above-ankle amputation), estimated using a competing risks survivorship estimator, was not different between the diabetic CN group and nondiabetic CN group at 10 years (8.8% [95% confidence interval 4.2% to 15%] versus 6.9% [95% CI 0.9% to 22%]; p = 0.4) after controlling for potentially confounding variables such as smoking and peripheral artery disease. The risk of any surgery was no different between the groups as estimated by the survivorship function at 10 years (53% [95% CI 42% to 63%] versus 58% [95% CI 23% to 82%]; p = 0.3), with smoking (hazard ratio 2.4 [95% CI 1.6 to 3.6]) and peripheral artery disease (HR 2.2 [95% CI 1.4 to 3.4]) being associated with diabetic CN. Likewise, there was no between-group difference in CN reactivation at 10 years (16% [95% CI 9% to 23%] versus 11% [95% CI 4.5% to 22%]; p = 0.7) after controlling for potentially confounding variables such as smoking and peripheral artery disease. Contralateral CN occurred in 17% (27 of 159) of patients in the diabetic group and in 10% (six of 60) of those in the nondiabetic group. Ulcers occurred in 74% (117 of 159) of patients in the diabetic group and in 65% (39 of 60) of those in the nondiabetic group.

CONCLUSION

Irrespective of whether the etiology of CN is diabetic or nondiabetic, our results suggest that orthopaedic surgeons should use similar nonsurgical treatments, with total-contact casting until CN activity has resolved, and then proceed with orthopaedic footwear. A high frequency of foot ulcers must be anticipated and addressed as part of the treatment approach.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level III, prognostic study.

Timing of Revascularization and Parenteral Antibiotic Treatment Associated with Therapeutic Failures in Ischemic Diabetic Foot Infections

For ischemic diabetic foot infections (DFIs), revascularization ideally occurs before surgery, while a parenteral antibiotic treatment could be more efficacious than oral agents. In our tertiary center, we investigated the effects of the sequence between revascularization and surgery (emphasizing the perioperative period of 2 weeks before and after surgery), and the influence of administering parenteral antibiotic therapy on the outcomes of DFIs. Among 838 ischemic DFIs with moderate-to-severe symptomatic peripheral arterial disease, we revascularized 608 (72%; 562 angioplasties, 62 vascular surgeries) and surgically debrided all. The median length of postsurgical antibiotic therapy was 21 days (given parenterally for the initial 7 days). The median time delay between revascularization and debridement surgery was 7 days. During the long-term follow-up, treatment failed and required reoperation in 182 DFI episodes (30%). By multivariate Cox regression analyses, neither a delay between surgery and angioplasty (hazard ratio 1.0, 95% confidence interval 1.0–1.0), nor the postsurgical sequence of angioplasty (HR 0.9, 95% CI 0.5–1.8), nor long-duration parenteral antibiotic therapy (HR 1.0, 95% CI 0.9–1.1) prevented failures. Our results might indicate the feasibility of a more practical approach to ischemic DFIs in terms of timing of vascularization and more oral antibiotic use.

Nonoperative Treatment of Charcot Neuro-osteoarthropathy

Conservative treatment of Charcot neuro-osteoarthropathy (CN) aims to retain a stable, plantigrade, and ulcer-free foot, or to prevent progression of an already existing deformity. CN is treated with offloading in a total contact cast as long as CN activity is present. Transition to inactive CN is monitored by the resolution of clinical activity signs and by resolution of bony edema in MRI. Fitting of orthopedic depth insoles, orthopedic shoes, or ankle-foot orthosis should follow immediately after offloading has ended to prevent CN reactivation or ulcer development.

Short and oral antimicrobial therapy for diabetic foot infection: a narrative review of current knowledge

Diabetic foot infection is a frequent complication in long-standing diabetes mellitus. For antimicrobial therapy of this infection, both the optimal duration and the route of administration are often based more on expert opinion than on published evidence. We reviewed the scientific literature, specifically seeking prospective trials, and aimed at addressing two clinical issues: (1) shortening the currently recommended antibiotic duration and (2) using oral (rather than parenteral) therapy, especially after the patient has undergone debridement and revascularization. We also reviewed some older key articles that are critical to our understanding of the treatment of these infections, particularly with respect to diabetic foot osteomyelitis. Our conclusion is that the maximum duration of antibiotic therapy for osteomyelitis should be no more than to 4-6 weeks and might even be shorter in selected cases. In the future, in addition to conducting randomized trials and propagating national and international guidance, we should also explore innovative strategies, such as intraosseous antibiotic agents and bacteriophages.