Moderate to Severe Soft Tissue Diabetic Foot Infections: A Randomized, Controlled, Pilot Trial of Post-debridement Antibiotic Treatment for 10 versus 20 days

Functional and molecular insights in topical wound healing by ascorbic acid

The skin acts as a vital barrier against external threats and regulates moisture levels. The skin's repair and rejuvenation encompass complex molecular and cellular mechanisms, constituting an essential yet intricate process to preserve skin integrity following trauma or surgical intervention. Acute wound repair unfolds through different interrelated stages, whereas chronic wounds pose significant healthcare challenges, often linked to conditions like diabetes and vascular diseases. Understanding of wound physiology is crucial for developing effective treatments. Chronic wounds require more comprehensive treatments, including surgical debridement, glycemic control, and antibiotic therapy. Ascorbic acid (AA) emerges as a promising wound-healing agent because it facilitates collagen synthesis, enhances antioxidant defense, promotes re-epithelialization and angiogenesis, regulates pH, and exhibits antimicrobial properties. Research outcomes on applying AA-based formulations on wound environment demonstrated its potential to accelerate wound closure and tissue regeneration, offering hope for improved wound management and reduced healthcare burdens associated with chronic wounds. The application of AA, which often utilizes innovative delivery methods and synergistic combinations with other actives, shows promise in preclinical studies for superior efficacy, biocompatibility, and controlled release profiles. Overall, AA-based therapies represent a significant avenue for advancing wound care and addressing the challenges of chronic wounds in healthcare systems.

Optimizing Antibiotic Therapy in Musculoskeletal Infections

Research into the optimal antibiotic management of musculoskeletal infections has advanced tremendously over the past quarter century, including over a dozen randomized controlled trials and numerous observational studies. This review examines the rationale for and evidence base supporting modern approaches to antibiotic decision making and stewardship in orthopedic infections. Specific practice advances discussed include the increased and earlier use of oral antibiotics, other principles of antibiotic selection (eg, the notion of "bone penetration" and novel local antimicrobial strategies), individualizing durations of therapy, and increasingly selective approaches to empiric antipseudomonal therapy, suppressive antibiotic therapy, and periprocedural antimicrobial prophylaxis following arthroplasty.

Diabetic Foot Infections

Diabetes is a growing public health concern, with diabetic foot infections (DFI) being one of the leading causes of lower extremity limb amputation in the United States. Accurate diagnosis of DFI requires a combination of clinical, laboratory, and radiologic tests to determine the extent and depth of infection, including the presence of osteomyelitis. Treatment often includes a combination of antibiotics and surgical debridement. Addressing comorbidities such as peripheral vascular disease, glycemic control, and offloading pressure from ulcers and bony prominences is paramount to achieving a successful outcome, and patients should ideally be managed by dedicated interdisciplinary teams.

Determining the optimal antibiotic duration for skin and soft tissue infections

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Optimal duration of therapy in SSTIs - a heterogeneous group of infections - remains unknown. The advances in knowledge of antibiotic duration of treatment in selected SSTIs that can impact clinical practice and published in the last 18 months are reviewed.

RECENT FINDINGS

Recent evidence indicates that few patients receive guideline concordant empiric antibiotics and appropriate duration in the United States, although this likely can be extrapolated to other countries. One of the most commonly identified opportunities to improve antibiotic stewardship is duration of therapy more than 10 days. The long-standing debate regarding the significance of abscess size and its impact on clinical response to antibiotics, following proper drainage, is increasingly shifting towards the conclusion that abscess size is not directly associated with cure.In obese patients with SSTI, there is no benefit to longer antibiotic durations for SSTIs in patients with obesity, and it appears that longer antibiotic duration of therapy was associated with increased treatment failure. In diabetic foot infections (DFO), two randomized studies suggest that in the presence of osteomyelitis, the total duration of antibiotic therapy for patients treated nonsurgically does not need to be more than 6 weeks. In a prospective, randomized, noninferiority, pilot trial, patients with DFO who underwent surgical debridement and received either a 3-week or 6-week course of antibiotic therapy had similar outcomes and antibiotic-related adverse events. In patients with necrotizing soft tissue infections, successive observational studies clearly suggest that short duration of antibiotic treatment after NSTI source control is as well tolerated and effective as a longer course. It appears that 48 h would be enough. The possibility of fixed versus individualized approaches to therapy for common bacterial infections, including SSTIs merits to be considered seriously. Fully individualized therapy may be an ideal approach to maximize the benefits and minimize the harms of antimicrobials. Much more work is needed before this strategy becomes feasible.

SUMMARY

There is increasing evidence that shorter duration of treatment is better in different types of SSTIs. Paradoxically, evaluation of real-life clinical practice indicates that long treatments continue to be commonly given to this population.

Novel monomers recipe derived from Shengji-Huayu formula targeting PI3K/Akt signaling pathway for diabetic wound healing based on accurate network pharmacology

ETHNOPHARMACOLOGICAL RELEVANCE

Shengji-Huayu (SJHY) formula has been used clinically for diabetic ulcer (DU) treatment. The transcriptional profiles analysis revealed the PI3K/Akt signaling pathway plays a critical role for diabetic wound healing. However, the effects and underlying mechanisms of SJHY are often challenging in diabetic wound treatment.

AIM OF THE STUDY

To explore the novel monomers recipe and mechanism of SJHY treated diabetic wound via the in vivo and in vitro experiments.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

The diabetic wound mice model was established to evaluate the therapeutic efficacy of SJHY treated diabetic ulcer. The transcriptional profile was implemented to identify the differentially expressed genes (DEGs) of SJHY treated diabetic wound mice. The constructed PPI network and KEGG-target network were used to identify the core pathway and related targets. The HPLC-MS method was used to identify the ingredients of SJHY formula. The molecular docking and in vitro experiment was used to screen which monomers regulated core pathway in diabetic wound. Finally, a novel monomers recipe was performed for diabetic wound healing.

RESULTS

The in vivo experiment demonstrated SJHY formula significantly promoted diabetic wound healing. Transcriptomic and network analysis revealed the existence of PI3K/Akt signaling pathway was high correlated with SJHY treated diabetic wound. The HPLC-MS and molecular docking revealed that Calycosin (Cal) and Dehydromiltirone (DHT) were strongly targeting Itga6 and Thbs1. The mRNA and protein levels suggested that Itga6 and Thbs1 acted as important upstream regulators of PI3K/Akt signaling pathway in diabetic wound, and the in vitro experiments revealed Cal, DHT and their recipe were significantly increased the levels of Itga6, Thbs1, PI3K and Akt in MGO induced HaCaT cells.

CONCLUSIONS

SJHY formula has therapeutic efficiency for diabetic wound healing, and Cal and DHT may be a part of the important monomers that alleviate inflammation via activating the PI3K/Akt signaling pathway by regulated Itga6 and Thbs1. Our study demonstrated Cal and DHT formed a novel monomers recipe, which may be one of the critical strategies of SJHY formula promote diabetic wound healing.

A research-based, current approach to diabetes-related acute foot infections and chronic osteomyelitis

INTRODUCTION

Diabetic foot infections (DFIs) and diabetic foot osteomyelitis (DFO) are common and serious complications in patients with diabetes, often leading to severe morbidity (including amputation) and even mortality. Professional footcare, prompt diagnosis and appropriate treatment are crucial to preventing limb loss and improving outcomes in infections.

AREAS COVERED

This narrative review addresses the management of all DFIs, including the approach to clinical evaluation, appropriate diagnostic methods, and optimal therapeutic strategies. We specifically address key areas in antibiotic therapy, and surgical interventions and techniques. Based on our literature review and extensive, multidisciplinary experience, we developed a novel treatment flowchart specifically for the management of DFO.

EXPERT OPINION

Managing DFIs, including DFO, requires a multidisciplinary approach tailored to each patient's clinical presentation. While antibiotics, surgery, and wound care each play a crucial role, the decision-making process should always consider the infection's severity and chronicity. Our proposed flowchart for DFO management emphasizes the importance of logically-sequenced, easy to apply and tailored interventions to prevent unnecessary amputations and improve outcomes. Further research is needed to further refine this flowchart in clinical practice and demonstrate its effectiveness.

Clinical guideline highlights for the hospitalist: Diagnosis and treatment of diabetes-related foot infections

GUIDELINE TITLE

IWGDF/IDSA Guidelines on the Diagnosis and Treatment of Diabetes-related Foot Infections RELEASE DATE: October 2, 2023 PRIOR VERSION: March 16, 2020 DEVELOPER: IWGDF Editorial Board FUNDING SOURCE: International Working Group on the Diabetic Foot (IWGDF), Infectious Diseases Society of America (IDSA) TARGET POPULATION: Adults with suspected or confirmed diabetes-related foot infections.

What is the agreement between principles and practice of antibiotic stewardship in the management of diabetic foot infection: an in-hospital quality control study

Introduction: Standardization of diagnostic and treatment concepts in diabetes-related foot infection (DFI) is challenging. In 2019, specific recommendations regarding diagnostic principles and antibiotic therapy (ABT) for DFI, including the one for osteomyelitis (DFO), were introduced in our institution. In this study, we assessed the adherence to these in-house guidelines 2 years after their implementation. Methods: Adult patients with DFI with and without DFO who underwent surgical intervention between 2019 and 2021 were included. Patients' charts were retrospectively reviewed. Accordance to recommendations regarding biopsy sampling, labeling, requesting microbiological and histopathological examinations, and treatment duration were assessed. Results: A total of 80 patients with 117 hospital episodes and 163 surgical interventions were included; 84.6 % required an amputation. Patients with HbA1c levels of < 6.5  % more often required a revision during the same hospitalization than those with HbA1c levels of ≥ 6.5  % (29.4 % vs. 12.1 %, respectively, p = 0.023 ). Specimens were obtained in 71.8 % of operations and sent for histological examination in 63.2 %. The mean duration of ABT was 9 (interquartile range (IQR) 5-15) d in macroscopically surgically cured episodes and 40.5 (IQR 15-42) d in cases with resection margins in non-healthy bone ( p < 0.0001 ). Treatment duration results were similar when using histological results: 13 (IQR 8-42) d for healthy bone vs. 29 (IQR 13-42) d for resection margins consistent with osteomyelitis ( p = 0.026 ). Conclusion: The adherence to recommendations in terms of biopsy sampling was good, moderate for histopathological analysis and poor for labeling the anatomic location. Adherence to recommendations for ABT duration was good, but further shortening of treatment duration for surgically cured cases is necessary.

Current challenges in acute bacterial skin infection management

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

There are aspects of skin and soft tissue infections (SSTIs) that remain unresolved, such as current numbers, classification criteria, how best to define severity and predict the outcome, what diagnostic tests to perform, what new treatment options are available, or what the duration of antibiotic treatment should be. We have reviewed the literature over the last 18 months to clarify these issues and provide our opinion.

RECENT FINDINGS

SSTIs are common and among the top 10 most frequent infections worldwide. They represent a burden on the healthcare system and have a major impact on the quality of life of patients. Regarding classification, the Infectious Diseases Society of America (IDSA) provides a practical guide that distinguishes between uncomplicated and complicated infections, acute and chronic wound infections, and necrotising and nonnecrotizing infections based on skin extension and tissue necrosis. With new microbiological and imaging diagnostic techniques, SSTIs can now be better diagnosed. New PCR techniques are available, and mass spectrometry can be applied to samples collected in liquid transport media. Moreover, new treatment methods such as photodynamic therapy, reactive oxygen, and phages are emerging. SSTI patients can be treated with shorter antibiotic courses if they receive an active drug with good tissue penetration. Antibiotic treatment in necrotizing infections can be shortened to 48 h after the last debridement.

SUMMARY

SSTIs remain a challenge regarding rapid and accurate diagnosis and clinical management.

IWGDF/IDSA guidelines on the diagnosis and treatment of diabetes-related foot infections (IWGDF/IDSA 2023)

The International Working Group on the Diabetic Foot (IWGDF) has published evidence-based guidelines on the management and prevention of diabetes-related foot diseases since 1999. The present guideline is an update of the 2019 IWGDF guideline on the diagnosis and management of foot infections in persons with diabetes mellitus. The Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) framework was used for the development of this guideline. This was structured around identifying clinically relevant questions in the P(A)ICO format, determining patient-important outcomes, systematically reviewing the evidence, assessing the certainty of the evidence, and finally moving from evidence to the recommendation. This guideline was developed for healthcare professionals involved in diabetes-related foot care to inform clinical care around patient-important outcomes. Two systematic reviews from 2019 were updated to inform this guideline, and a total of 149 studies (62 new) meeting inclusion criteria were identified from the updated search and incorporated in this guideline. Updated recommendations are derived from these systematic reviews, and best practice statements made where evidence was not available. Evidence was weighed in light of benefits and harms to arrive at a recommendation. The certainty of the evidence for some recommendations was modified in this update with a more refined application of the GRADE framework centred around patient important outcomes. This is highlighted in the rationale section of this update. A note is also made where the newly identified evidence did not alter the strength or certainty of evidence for previous recommendations. The recommendations presented here continue to cover various aspects of diagnosing soft tissue and bone infections, including the classification scheme for diagnosing infection and its severity. Guidance on how to collect microbiological samples, and how to process them to identify causative pathogens, is also outlined. Finally, we present the approach to treating foot infections in persons with diabetes, including selecting appropriate empiric and definitive antimicrobial therapy for soft tissue and bone infections; when and how to approach surgical treatment; and which adjunctive treatments may or may not affect the infectious outcomes of diabetes-related foot problems. We believe that following these recommendations will help healthcare professionals provide better care for persons with diabetes and foot infections, prevent the number of foot and limb amputations, and reduce the patient and healthcare burden of diabetes-related foot disease.

Interventions in the management of diabetes-related foot infections: A systematic review

The optimal approaches to managing diabetic foot infections remain a challenge for clinicians. Despite an exponential rise in publications investigating different treatment strategies, the various agents studied generally produce comparable results, and high-quality data are scarce. In this systematic review, we searched the medical literature using the PubMed and Embase databases for published studies on the treatment of diabetic foot infections from 30 June 2018 to 30 June 2022. We combined this search with our previous literature search of a systematic review performed in 2020, in which the infection committee of the International Working Group on the Diabetic Foot searched the literature until June 2018. We defined the context of the literature by formulating clinical questions of interest, then developing structured clinical questions (Patients-Intervention-Control-Outcomes) to address these. We only included data from controlled studies of an intervention to prevent or cure a diabetic foot infection. Two independent reviewers selected articles for inclusion and then assessed their relevant outcomes and methodological quality. Our literature search identified a total of 5,418 articles, of which we selected 32 for full-text review. Overall, the newly available studies we identified since 2018 do not significantly modify the body of the 2020 statements for the interventions in the management of diabetes-related foot infections. The recent data confirm that outcomes in patients treated with the different antibiotic regimens for both skin and soft tissue infection and osteomyelitis of the diabetes-related foot are broadly equivalent across studies, with a few exceptions (tigecycline not non-inferior to ertapenem [±vancomycin]). The newly available data suggest that antibiotic therapy following surgical debridement for moderate or severe infections could be reduced to 10 days and to 3 weeks for osteomyelitis following surgical debridement of bone. Similar outcomes were reported in studies comparing primarily surgical and predominantly antibiotic treatment strategies in selected patients with diabetic foot osteomyelitis. There is insufficient high-quality evidence to assess the effect of various recent adjunctive therapies, such as cold plasma for infected foot ulcers and bioactive glass for osteomyelitis. Our updated systematic review confirms a trend to a better quality of the most recent trials and the need for further well-designed trials to produce higher quality evidence to underpin our recommendations.

Clinical practice recommendations for infectious disease management of diabetic foot infection (DFI) - 2023 SPILF

In march 2020, the International Working Group on the Diabetic Foot (IWGDF) published an update of the 2015 guidelines on the diagnosis and management of diabetic foot infection (DFI). While we (the French ID society, SPILF) endorsed some of these recommendations, we wanted to update our own 2006 guidelines and specifically provide informative elements on modalities of microbiological diagnosis and antibiotic treatment (especially first- and second-line regiments, oral switch and duration). The recommendations put forward in the present guidelines are addressed to healthcare professionals managing patients with DFI and more specifically focused on infectious disease management of this type of infection, which clearly needs a multidisciplinary approach. Staging of the severity of the infection is mandatory using the classification drawn up by the IWGDF. Microbiological samples should be taken only in the event of clinical signs suggesting infection in accordance with a strict preliminarily established protocol. Empirical antibiotic therapy should be chosen according to the IWGDF grade of infection and duration of the wound, but must always cover methicillin-sensitive Staphylococcus aureus. Early reevaluation of the patient is a fundamental step, and duration of antibiotic therapy can be shortened in many situations. When osteomyelitis is suspected, standard foot radiograph is the first-line imagery examination and a bone biopsy should be performed for microbiological documentation. Histological analysis of the bone sample is no longer recommended. High dosages of antibiotics are recommended in cases of confirmed osteomyelitis.

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.

Initial antibiotic therapy for postoperative moderate or severe diabetic foot infections: Broad versus narrow spectrum, empirical versus targeted

AIM

To retrospectively evaluate clinical and microbiological outcomes after combined surgical and medical therapy for diabetic foot infections (DFIs), stratifying between the empirical versus the targeted nature, and between an empirical broad versus a narrow-spectrum, antibiotic therapy.

METHODS

We retrospectively assessed the rate of ultimate therapeutic failures for each of three types of initial postoperative antibiotic therapy: adequate empirical therapy; culture-guided therapy; and empirical inadequate therapy with a switch to targeted treatment based on available microbiological results.

RESULTS

We included data from 332 patients who underwent 716 DFI episodes of surgical debridement, including partial amputations. Clinical failure occurred in 40 of 194 (20.6%) episodes where adequate empirical therapy was given, in 77 of 291 (26.5%) episodes using culture-guided (and correct) therapy from the start, and in 73 of 231 (31.6%) episodes with switching from empirical inadequate therapy to culture-targeted therapy. Equally, a broad-spectrum antibiotic choice could not alter this failure risk. Group comparisons, Kaplan-Meier curves and Cox regression analyses failed to show either statistical superiority or inferiority of any of the initial antibiotic strategies.

CONCLUSIONS

In this study, the microbiological adequacy of the initial antibiotic regimen after (surgical) debridement for DFI did not alter therapeutic outcomes. We recommend that clinicians follow the stewardship approach of avoiding antibiotic de-escalation and start with a narrow-spectrum regimen based on the local epidemiology.

IWGDF/IDSA Guidelines on the Diagnosis and Treatment of Diabetes-related Foot Infections (IWGDF/IDSA 2023)

The International Working Group on the Diabetic Foot (IWGDF) has published evidence-based guidelines on the management and prevention of diabetes-related foot diseases since 1999. The present guideline is an update of the 2019 IWGDF guideline on the diagnosis and management of foot infections in persons with diabetes mellitus. The Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) framework was used for the development of this guideline. This was structured around identifying clinically relevant questions in the P(A)ICO format, determining patient-important outcomes, systematically reviewing the evidence, assessing the certainty of the evidence, and finally moving from evidence to the recommendation. This guideline was developed for healthcare professionals involved in diabetes-related foot care to inform clinical care around patient-important outcomes. Two systematic reviews from 2019 were updated to inform this guideline, and a total of 149 studies (62 new) meeting inclusion criteria were identified from the updated search and incorporated in this guideline. Updated recommendations are derived from these systematic reviews, and best practice statements made where evidence was not available. Evidence was weighed in light of benefits and harms to arrive at a recommendation. The certainty of the evidence for some recommendations was modified in this update with a more refined application of the GRADE framework centred around patient important outcomes. This is highlighted in the rationale section of this update. A note is also made where the newly identified evidence did not alter the strength or certainty of evidence for previous recommendations. The recommendations presented here continue to cover various aspects of diagnosing soft tissue and bone infections, including the classification scheme for diagnosing infection and its severity. Guidance on how to collect microbiological samples, and how to process them to identify causative pathogens, is also outlined. Finally, we present the approach to treating foot infections in persons with diabetes, including selecting appropriate empiric and definitive antimicrobial therapy for soft tissue and bone infections; when and how to approach surgical treatment; and which adjunctive treatments may or may not affect the infectious outcomes of diabetes-related foot problems. We believe that following these recommendations will help healthcare professionals provide better care for persons with diabetes and foot infections, prevent the number of foot and limb amputations, and reduce the patient and healthcare burden of diabetes-related foot disease.

The Epidemiology of Antibiotic-Related Adverse Events in the Treatment of Diabetic Foot Infections: A Narrative Review of the Literature

The use of antibiotics for the treatment of diabetic foot infections (DFIs) over an extended period of time has been shown to be associated with adverse events (AEs), whereas interactions with concomitant patient medications must also be considered. The objective of this narrative review was to summarize the most frequent and most severe AEs reported in prospective trials and observational studies at the global level in DFI. Gastrointestinal intolerances were the most frequent AEs, from 5% to 22% among all therapies; this was more common when prolonged antibiotic administration was combined with oral beta-lactam or clindamycin or a higher dose of tetracyclines. The proportion of symptomatic colitis due to Clostridium difficile was variable depending on the antibiotic used (0.5% to 8%). Noteworthy serious AEs included hepatotoxicity due to beta-lactams (5% to 17%) or quinolones (3%); cytopenia's related to linezolid (5%) and beta-lactams (6%); nausea under rifampicin, and renal failure under cotrimoxazole. Skin rash was found to rarely occur and was commonly associated with the use of penicillins or cotrimoxazole. AEs from prolonged antibiotic use in patients with DFI are costly in terms of longer hospitalization or additional monitoring care and can trigger additional investigations. The best way to prevent AEs is to keep the duration of antibiotic treatment short and with the lowest dose clinically necessary.

Study protocol: short against long antibiotic therapy for infected orthopedic sites - the randomized-controlled SALATIO trials

BACKGROUND

Few studies address the appropriate duration of post-surgical antibiotic therapy for orthopedic infections; with or without infected residual implants. We perform two similar randomized-clinical trials (RCT) to reduce the antibiotic use and associated adverse events.

METHODS

Two unblinded RCTs in adult patients (non-inferiority with a margin of 10%, a power of 80%) with the primary outcomes "remission" and "microbiologically-identical recurrences" after a combined surgical and antibiotic therapy. The main secondary outcome is antibiotic-related adverse events. The RCTs allocate the participants between 3 vs. 6 weeks of post-surgical systemic antibiotic therapy for implant-free infections and between 6 vs. 12 weeks for residual implant-related infections. We need a total of 280 episodes (randomization schemes 1:1) with a minimal follow-up of 12 months. We perform two interim analyses starting approximately after 1 and 2 years. The study approximatively lasts 3 years.

DISCUSSION

Both parallel RCTs will enable to prescribe less antibiotics for future orthopedic infections in adult patients.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrial.gov NCT05499481. Registered on 12 August 2022.

PROTOCOL VERSION

2 (19 May 2022).

Influence of Skin Commensals on Therapeutic Outcomes of Surgically Debrided Diabetic Foot Infections-A Large Retrospective Comparative Study

In diabetic foot infections (DFI), the clinical virulence of skin commensals are generally presumed to be low. In this single-center study, we divided the wound isolates into two groups: skin commensals (coagulase-negative staphylococci, micrococci, corynebacteria, cutibacteria) and pathogenic pathogens, and followed the patients for ≥ 6 months. In this retrospective study among 1018 DFI episodes (392 [39%] with osteomyelitis), we identified skin commensals as the sole culture isolates (without accompanying pathogenic pathogens) in 54 cases (5%). After treatment (antibiotic therapy [median of 20 days], hyperbaric oxygen in 98 cases [10%]), 251 episodes (25%) were clinical failures. Group comparisons between those growing only skin commensals and controls found no difference in clinical failure (17% vs. 24 %, p = 0.23) or microbiological recurrence (11% vs. 17 %, p = 0.23). The skin commensals were mostly treated with non-beta-lactam oral antibiotics. In multivariate logistic regression analysis, the isolation of only skin commensals was not associated with failure (odds ratio 0.4, 95% confidence interval 0.1-3.8). Clinicians might wish to consider these isolates as potential pathogens when selecting a targeted antibiotic regimen, which may also be based on oral non-beta-lactam antibiotic agents effective against the corresponding skin pathogens.

Short-course antibiotics for common infections: what do we know and where do we go from here?

BACKGROUND

Over the past 25 years, researchers have performed >120 randomized controlled trials (RCTs) illustrating short courses to be non-inferior to long courses of antibiotics for common bacterial infections.

OBJECTIVE

We sought to determine whether clinical data from RCTs affirm the mantra of 'shorter is better' for antibiotic durations in 7 common infections: pneumonia, urinary tract infection, intra-abdominal infection, bacteraemia, skin and soft tissue infection, bone and joint infections, pharyngitis and sinusitis.

SOURCES

Published RCTs comparing short- versus long-course antibiotic durations were identified through searches of PubMed and clinical guideline documents.

CONTENT

Short-course antibiotic durations consistently result in similar treatment success rates as longer antibiotic courses among patients with community-acquired pneumonia, complicated urinary tract infections in women, gram-negative bacteraemia, and skin and soft tissue infections when the diagnosis is confirmed, appropriate antimicrobials are used, and patients show clinical signs of improvement. For patients with osteomyelitis, 6 weeks of antibiotics is adequate for the treatment of osteomyelitis in the absence of implanted foreign bodies and surgical debridement. Whether durations can be further shortened with debridement is unclear, although small studies are promising.

IMPLICATIONS

With few exceptions, short courses were non-inferior to long courses; future research should focus on appropriately defining the patient population, ensuring the correct choice and dose of antimicrobials and developing meaningful outcomes relevant for frontline clinicians.

Local Antibiotics in the Treatment of Diabetic Foot Infections: A Narrative Review

Along with the increasing global burden of diabetes, diabetic foot infections (DFI) and diabetic foot osteomyelitis (DFO) remain major challenges for patients and society. Despite progress in the development of prominent international guidelines, the optimal medical treatment for DFI and DFO remains unclear as to whether local antibiotics, that is, topical agents and local delivery systems, should be used alone or concomitant to conventional systemic antibiotics. To better inform clinicians in this evolving field, we performed a narrative review and summarized key relevant observational studies and clinical trials of non-prophylactic local antibiotics for the treatment of DFI and DFO, both alone and in combination with systemic antibiotics. We searched PubMed for studies published between January 2000 and October 2022, identified 388 potentially eligible records, and included 19 studies. Our findings highlight that evidence for adding local antibiotic delivery systems to standard DFO treatment remains limited. Furthermore, we found that so far, local antibiotic interventions have mainly targeted forefoot DFO, although there is marked variation in the design of the included studies. Suggestive evidence emerging from observational studies underscores that the addition of local agents to conventional systemic antibiotics might help to shorten the clinical healing time and overall recovery rates in infected diabetic foot ulcers, although the effectiveness of local antibiotics as a standalone approach remains overlooked. In conclusion, despite the heterogeneous body of evidence, the possibility that the addition of local antibiotics to conventional systemic treatment may improve outcomes in DFI and DFO cannot be ruled out. Antibiotic stewardship principles call for further research to elucidate the potential benefits of local antibiotics alone and in combination with conventional systemic antibiotics for the treatment of DFI and DFO.

Surgery without postoperative antibiotic treatment in diabetic foot osteomyelitis is not associated with recurrence or limb loss

Not using antibiotics after surgical treatment of diabetic foot osteomyelitis was not associated with failure of the surgery, recurrences, or limb loss. Antibiotics were given in doubtful complicated cases such as severe infections, cases with necrosis, foul-smelling lesions and patients requiring revascularization.

Microbiology of Diabetic Foot Infections in a Tertiary Care Hospital in São Paulo, Brazil

Diabetic foot infections (DFIs) are one of the causes of hospitalization in diabetic patients and, when this occurs, empirical antibiotic therapy is necessary. We have conducted a retrospective study of patients with DFI that required hospitalization to evaluate microbiologic profile and the susceptibility pattern of these infections. We evaluated 320 patients, of which 223 (69.7%) were male with a media age of 71 years with 276 isolates. Gram-positive bacteria were responsible for 188 (68.1%) of the isolates, while Gram-negative bacilli were responsible for 88 (31.9%). E. faecalis was the most prevalent pathogen, followed by S. aureus and coagulase negative Staphylococci. Among Gram-negative pathogens, P. aeruginosa was the most prevalent agent. Regarding the susceptibility profile, we found ampicillin-sensitive enterococci in 89% of the cases, oxacillin-sensitive S. aureus in 47%, but in coagulase-negative staphylococci, oxacillin was sensible only in 20%. The susceptibility profile of Gram-negatives was very good with 76% susceptibility of P. aeruginosa to ceftazidime and meropenem. The other prevalent Enterobacterales had great susceptibility to ceftazidime, piperacillin-tazobactam and 100% susceptibility to meropenem, with the exception of K. pneumoniae, which had 75% susceptibility to meropenem. Knowledge of microbiological profile and susceptibility patterns of patients with DFIs is useful to guide empirical therapy.