Efficacy and tolerance of rifampicin–linezolid compared with rifampicin–cotrimoxazole combinations in prolonged oral therapy for bone and joint infections

Tedizolid for osteoarticular infections: Evaluation of the published evidence

INTRODUCTION

Tedizolid phosphate, an oxazolidinone antibiotic, has been approved for the treatment of acute bacterial skin and skin structure infections (ABSSSIs). However, its off-label use has been reported in various infections, including osteoarticular infections.

METHODS

A systematic review of data from PubMed, Scopus, and Web of Science was conducted to evaluate the antimicrobial activity, safety, and effectiveness of tedizolid in patients with bone and joint infections, including prosthetic joint infections, osteomyelitis, and septic arthritis. The review encompassed clinical trials, prospective and retrospective studies, and case reports.

RESULTS

A total of 6 in vitro antimicrobial and 15 clinical studies were included in the review. Tedizolid demonstrated high antimicrobial activity across all in vitro studies. In 106 patients from the included clinical studies, tedizolid showed high effectiveness, with therapy success ranging from 76.5 % to 100 % in 4 cohort studies. Additionally, favorable outcomes were reported in 7 of 9 case reports. Tedizolid exhibited a favorable safety profile, with 11 of 15 clinical studies reporting no adverse events in 37 patients. Adverse events leading to therapy discontinuation were observed in 9 out of 124 patients included in the remaining studies.

CONCLUSION

The current appraisal suggests that tedizolid is a promising antibiotic for the treatment of bone and joint infections. Nonetheless, its use should be reserved for multi-drug resistant infections when other approved therapeutic options are limited. Further clinical studies are warranted to substantiate the effectiveness and safety of tedizolid in this patient population.

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.

Efficacy and safety of co-trimoxazole in device-related bone and joint infections: a CRIOGO multicentre case-control study

OBJECTIVES

Co-trimoxazole could be an alternative antibiotic to treat device-related bone and joint infection (BJI) but there are few published data about its efficacy and safety in this complex scenario to treat infection. The objective was to compare the outcome of patients with device-related BJI treated with an antibiotic regimen including co-trimoxazole versus a regimen without co-trimoxazole.

METHODS

This multicentre case-control study included consecutive adult patients diagnosed with device-related BJI. Each patient receiving co-trimoxazole was included in the co-trimoxazole group and was matched with two control patients, with stratification on microbial aetiology and age. The primary outcome was composite and defined by death or treatment failure during the follow-up.

RESULTS

In this study, 150 patients were included, 50 in the co-trimoxazole group and 100 in the control group. The rate of reaching the primary endpoint was 18% in the co-trimoxazole group (9/50 cases) versus 21% in the control group (21/100) (P = 0.66). Co-trimoxazole use was not associated with an unfavourable outcome in the multivariate analysis (adjusted OR 0.8, 95% CI 0.31-2.06, P = 0.64). Although no significant difference was observed in premature discontinuation of treatment due to an adverse event between both groups (14 versus 12%, P = 0.73), treatment-related adverse events were significantly more frequently reported in patients of the co-trimoxazole group than the control group [34% (17/50) versus 18% (18/100), P = 0.03].

CONCLUSIONS

Co-trimoxazole appears to be an effective alternative for the treatment of BJI, even when it occurs on a device, but the safety profile requires close monitoring of adverse effects.

Uncommon Septic Arthritis of the Hip Joint in an Immunocompetent Adult Patient Due to Bacillus pumilus and Paenibacillus barengoltzii Managed with Long-Term Treatment with Linezolid: A Case Report and Short Literature Review

The Bacillus and Paenibacillus genera are diverse soil-related bacterial pathogens. In this case report, we describe, to our knowledge, the first report of septic arthritis in a native hip joint in an immunocompetent adult patient caused by Bacillus pumilus and Paenibacillus barengoltzii. We describe the case of a 39-year-old Caucasian male patient who sought medical advice for chronic pain on the mobilization of the right hip, decreased range of motion, and physical asthenia. The patient underwent a surgical intervention (core decompression) for a right osteonecrosis of the femoral head, with a slightly favorable postoperative evolution after surgery for one month. Surgical treatment was planned on the basis of clinical and paraclinical investigations and the joint damage. The hip was explored using an anterior approach under spinal anesthesia and standard antibiotic prophylaxis. After resection of the femoral head, meticulous debridement of all inflammatory tissues was performed, and a preformed temporary spacer was inserted into the femoral canal. Bacteriological laboratory studies identified Bacillus pumilus and Paenibacillus barengoltzii via matrix-assisted laser desorption-ionization time-of-flight mass spectrometry analysis. The patient initially received nine days of empirical therapy with intravenous antibiotics (linezolid and meropenem). After the bacterial strains were identified, the patient received organism-specific antibiotic therapy with the same antibiotics and dose for eight days until discharge. After discharge, the patient was referred to another hospital, where he continued treatment with linezolid for seven weeks and, after that, four weeks of oral therapy with cotrimoxazole and rifampicin. During this period, no severe or potentially life-threatening adverse events were recorded during long-term treatment with linezolid or with the two oral antibiotics. In conclusion, our findings suggest that long-term treatment with linezolid may be a viable option for the management of bone and joint infections caused by Bacillus pumilus and Paenibacillus barengoltzii.

Two-Stage Revision Arthroplasty for Resistant Gram-Positive Periprosthetic Joint Infections Using an Oral Linezolid-Based Antibiotic Regime

BACKGROUND

Increasing antibiotic resistance has been reported as an issue in the systemic treatment of periprosthetic joint infection (PJI). Linezolid offers the advantages of high oral bioavailability and little resistance; however, efficacy in the treatment of PJI varies considerably, and studies reporting consistent surgical treatment are scarce.

METHODS

This is a retrospective, single-center analysis of two-stage revisions performed between 2008 and 2017. We identified 111 patients who met the inclusion criteria. Oral linezolid was given for 28 days following 14 days of intravenous tailored antibiotics in resistant gram-positive PJI. A total of 64% of the patients had methicillin-resistant coagulase-negative staphylococci. The median follow-up was 43 (interquartile range (IQR) 30-57) months.

RESULTS

22% (24/111) of the patients underwent surgery for subsequent infection. The 5-year infection-free survival probability was 77% (95% confidence interval (CI) 69-85). A total of 5% of the patients (6/111) had the same organism at the time of reinfection. The patients with infections caused by other organisms than Coagulase-negative staphylococci tended to have a worse reinfection-free survivorship at five years (70% vs. 81%, p = 0.09). Furthermore, the patients with obesity tended to have reduced reinfection-free survivorship at five years (69% vs. 84%, p = 0.08). Overall, 5% (6/111) of the patients had blood count abnormalities with no treatment discontinuations.

CONCLUSION

Two-stage revision arthroplasty with systemic oral linezolid treatment for resistant gram-positive PJI results in an infection control of 77% at the mid-term.

Pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic considerations for optimizing antimicrobial therapy used to treat bone and joint infections: an evidence-based algorithmic approach

INTRODUCTION

Bone and joint infections (BJIs) are a major health concern causing remarkable morbidity and mortality. However, which antimicrobial treatment could be the best according to specific clinical scenarios and/or to the pharmacokinetic/pharmacodynamic (PK/PD) features remains an unmet clinical need. This multidisciplinary opinion article aims to develop evidence-based algorithms for empirical and targeted antibiotic therapy of patients affected by BJIs.

AREAS COVERED

A multidisciplinary team of four experts had several rounds of assessment for developing algorithms devoted to empirical and targeted antimicrobial therapy of BJIs. A literature search was performed on PubMed-MEDLINE (until April 2023) to provide evidence for supporting therapeutic choices. Four different clinical scenarios were structured according to specific infection types (i.e. vertebral osteomyelitis, prosthetic joint infections, infected non-unions and other chronic osteomyelitis, and infectious arthritis), need or not of surgical intervention or revision, isolation or not of clinically relevant bacterial pathogens from blood and/or tissue cultures, and PK/PD features of antibiotics.

EXPERT OPINION

The proposed therapeutic algorithms were based on a multifaceted approach considering the peculiar features of each antibiotic (spectrum of activity, PK/PD properties, bone penetration rate, and anti-biofilm activity), and could be hopefully helpful in improving clinical outcome of BJIs.

Efficacy and Safety of Different Antibiotic Therapies for Bone and Joint Infections: A Network Meta-analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials

BACKGROUND

Although an increasing number of antibiotics are being used to treat bone and joint infections, their specific efficacy remains controversial. Thus, we aimed to systematically compare the efficacy and safety of antibiotic therapies for orthopedic infections.

METHODS

PubMed, Embase, The Cochrane Library, and Web of Science databases were searched from inception to April 2022. Two authors independently and rigorously conducted the screening, data extraction, and quality assessment of the relevant studies. All the extracted data were evaluated using traditional metaanalysis and network meta-analysis by STATA SE 16.0.

RESULTS

A total of eleven randomized controlled trials (RCTs) involving 1,063 patients were included for data analysis. The analysis results from the NMA indicated that in terms of the clinical effectiveness rate, linezolid (OR: 1.75, 95% CI: 1.01 to 3.02) showed significant efficacy compared to ampicillin/sulbactam. With regard to the microbiological eradication rate, linezolid showed significant efficacy compared to cephalosporins (OR: 8.13, 95% CI: 1.16 to 57.09) and quinolones (OR: 3.51, 95% CI: 1.18 to 10.49). Similar findings were obtained for subgroup populations with diabetic foot infections (DFI). However, linezolid was significantly related to higher adverse events than ampicillin/sulbactam (OR: 3.25, 95% CI: 1.68 to 6.30) and cephalosporins (OR: 18.29, 95% CI: 1.59 to 209.76).

CONCLUSION

Linezolid appeared to be the most promising treatment regimen for staphylococcal bone and joint infections. However, due to the overall limited evidence, the research results need further high-quality RCTs for confirmation.

The Use of Rifampin in Total Joint Arthroplasty: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Comparative Studies

BACKGROUND

Periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) is a devastating complication of total joint arthroplasty (TJA). Rifampin is an antibiotic with the ability to penetrate bacterial biofilms, and thus has been considered as a potentially important adjunct in the prevention and treatment of PJI. The aim of this systematic review is to evaluate and summarize the use of rifampin in TJA, particularly in the context of PJI.

METHODS

A literature search of all relevant electronic databases was performed. All comparative studies assessing the use of rifampin in the context of TJA were included. Descriptive data are reported, and a meta-analysis was performed using all studies which compared the addition of rifampin to standard care in treating PJI.

RESULTS

A total of 33 studies met inclusion criteria. A meta-analysis of 22 studies comparing the addition of rifampin to standard care for treating PJI found a significant reduction in failure rates (26.0% vs 35.9%; odds ratio 0.61, 95% confidence interval 0.43-0.86). The protective effect of rifampin was maintained in studies which included exchange arthroplasty as a treatment strategy, but not in studies only using an implant retention strategy. Among studies reporting adverse events of rifampin, there was a 20.5% adverse event rate.

CONCLUSION

Overall, rifampin appears to confer a protective effect against treatment failure following PJI. This treatment effect is particularly pronounced in the context of exchange arthroplasty. Further high-level evidence is needed to clarify the exact indications and doses of rifampin which can most effectively act as an adjunct in the treatment of PJI.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level III, Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Level I-III Studies.

Orthopaedic Implant-Associated Staphylococcal Infections: A Critical Reappraisal of Unmet Clinical Needs Associated with the Implementation of the Best Antibiotic Choice

Infections associated with orthopaedic implants represent a major health concern characterized by a remarkable incidence of morbidity and mortality. The wide variety of clinical scenarios encountered in the heterogeneous world of infections associated with orthopaedic implants makes the implementation of an optimal and standardized antimicrobial treatment challenging. Antibiotic bone penetration, anti-biofilm activity, long-term safety, and drug choice/dosage regimens favouring outpatient management (i.e., long-acting or oral agents) play a major role in regards to the chronic evolution of these infections. The aim of this multidisciplinary opinion article is to summarize evidence supporting the use of the different anti-staphylococcal agents in terms of microbiological and pharmacological optimization according to bone penetration, anti-biofilm activity, long-term safety, and feasibility for outpatient regimens, and to provide a useful guide for clinicians in the management of patients affected by staphylococcal infections associated with orthopaedic implants Novel long-acting lipoglycopeptides, and particularly dalbavancin, alone or in combination with rifampicin, could represent the best antibiotic choice according to real-world evidence and pharmacokinetic/pharmacodynamic properties. The implementation of a multidisciplinary taskforce and close cooperation between microbiologists and clinicians is crucial for providing the best care in this scenario.

Animal experimental investigation on the efficacy of antibiotic therapy with linezolid, vancomycin, cotrimoxazole, and rifampin in treatment of periprosthetic knee joint infections by MRSA

Aims

Periprosthetic joint infections (PJIs) are rare, but represent a great burden for the patient. In addition, the incidence of methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) is increasing. The aim of this rat experiment was therefore to compare the antibiotics commonly used in the treatment of PJIs caused by MRSA.

Methods

For this purpose, sterilized steel implants were implanted into the femur of 77 rats. The metal devices were inoculated with suspensions of two different MRSA strains. The animals were divided into groups and treated with vancomycin, linezolid, cotrimoxazole, or rifampin as monotherapy, or with combination of antibiotics over a period of 14 days. After a two-day antibiotic-free interval, the implant was explanted, and bone, muscle, and periarticular tissue were microbiologically analyzed.

Results

Vancomycin and linezolid were able to significantly (p < 0.05) reduce the MRSA bacterial count at implants. No significant effect was found at the bone. Rifampin was the only monotherapy that significantly reduced the bacterial count on implant and bone. The combination with vancomycin or linezolid showed significant efficacy. Treatment with cotrimoxazole alone did not achieve a significant bacterial count reduction. The combination of linezolid plus rifampin was significantly more effective on implant and bone than the control group in both trials.

Conclusion

Although rifampicin is effective as a monotherapy, it should not be used because of the high rate of resistance development. Our animal experiments showed the great importance of combination antibiotic therapies. In the future, investigations with higher case numbers, varied bacterial concentrations, and changes in individual drug dosages will be necessary to be able to draw an exact comparison, possibly within a clinical trial.

Cite this article: Bone Joint Res 2022;11(3):143–151.

Dynamic PET-facilitated modeling and high-dose rifampin regimens for Staphylococcus aureus orthopedic implant-associated infections

Staphylococcus aureus is a major human pathogen causing serious implant–associated infections. Combination treatment with rifampin (10 to 15 mg/kg per day), which has dose-dependent activity, is recommended to treat S. aureus orthopedic implant–associated infections. Rifampin, however, has limited bone penetration. Here, dynamic 11C-rifampin positron emission tomography (PET) performed in prospectively enrolled patients with confirmed S. aureus bone infection (n = 3) or without orthopedic infection (n = 12) demonstrated bone/plasma area under the concentration-time curve ratio of 0.14 (interquartile range, 0.09 to 0.19), exposures lower than previously thought. PET-based pharmacokinetic modeling predicted rifampin concentration-time profiles in bone and facilitated studies in a mouse model of S. aureus orthopedic implant infection. Administration of high-dose rifampin (human equipotent to 35 mg/kg per day) substantially increased bone concentrations (2 mg/liter versus <0.2 mg/liter with standard dosing) in mice and achieved higher bacterial killing and biofilm disruption. Treatment for 4 weeks with high-dose rifampin and vancomycin was noninferior to the recommended 6-week treatment of standard-dose rifampin with vancomycin in mice (risk difference, −6.7% favoring high-dose rifampin regimen). High-dose rifampin treatment ameliorated antimicrobial resistance (0% versus 38%; P = 0.04) and mitigated adverse bone remodeling (P < 0.01). Last, whole-genome sequencing demonstrated that administration of high-dose rifampin in mice reduced selection of bacterial mutations conferring rifampin resistance (rpoB) and mutations in genes potentially linked to persistence. These data suggest that administration of high-dose rifampin is necessary to achieve optimal bone concentrations, which could shorten and improve treatments for S. aureus orthopedic implant infections.

New-Generation Antibiotics for Treatment of Gram-Positive Infections: A Review with Focus on Endocarditis and Osteomyelitis

Infective endocarditis, osteomyelitis, and osteosynthesis-associated infections are mostly caused by Gram-positive bacteria. They are often difficult to treat and are associated with a poor prognosis. In the past 20 years, nine antibiotic drugs with predominant activity against Gram-positive bacteria have been introduced and approved by the Food and Drug Administration or the European Medicines Agency: ceftaroline, daptomycin, telavancin, dalbavancin, oritavancin, linezolid, tedizolid, delafloxacin, and omadacycline. This narrative review aims to provide an overview on these antibiotics with a special focus on their use in infective endocarditis, osteomyelitis, and osteosynthesis-associated infections. Although some of these approved antibiotics are promising, they should not be used as first- or second-line therapy, awaiting more clinical data.

Clindamycin combination treatment for the treatment of bone and joint infections caused by clindamycin-susceptible, erythromycin-resistant Staphylococcus spp

The objective of this study was to evaluate the clinical outcomes and safety of clindamycin combination antibiotherapy for the treatment of erythromycin-resistant, lincosamide-susceptible bone and joint infections caused by Staphylococcus spp. Between January 2010 and September 2018, 46 patients with Staphylococcus spp. erythromycin-resistant, lincosamide-susceptible bone and joint infections were treated with clindamycin combination antibiotherapy for 6 to 12 weeks. The type of infection was prosthetic in 20 cases (43.5%), osteosynthetic device in 15 cases (32.6%), chronic osteomyelitis in 7 cases (15.2%), and arthritis in 4 cases (8.7%). The cure rate was 67.4% by intention to treat and 84.6% per protocol, with a median follow-up of 398 days (range 86-843). Only 2 relapses (5.1%) were observed in patients with chronic osteomyelitis; an acquired resistance to lincosamides developed in 1 case. Clindamycin combination therapy appears to be effective for the treatment of bone and joint infection caused by erythromycin-resistant, lincosamide-susceptible Staphylococcus spp.

Clinical use of linezolid in periprosthetic joint infections - a systematic review

Introduction: The most common causative organism in periprosthetic joint infections (PJIs) is Gram-positive bacteria that are increasingly drug resistant. In these cases the use of linezolid may be warranted. However, there are conflicting reports regarding its role in antibiotic treatment of PJIs. The aim of this review is to gather and analyze clinical results and treatment details on linezolid in patients with PJIs. Methods: In August 2019, a comprehensive literature search using MEDLINE (Pubmed and Ovid) and Cochrane Library was performed. A total of 504 records were screened, and a total of 16 studies including 372 patients treated with linezolid for a PJI were included in this review based on the PRISMA criteria and after quality analysis using the MINOR score and Newcastle–Ottawa scale, as well as assessing level of evidence. Pooling analysis as well as descriptive analysis was performed. Results: Based on the results from the studies included, infection control was achieved in 80 % (range 30 %–100 %) of patients after a mean follow-up period of 25 (range 2–66) months. The mean duration of treatment was 58 d intravenous and orally at a median dose of 600 mg bis in die (b.i.d.) (range 400–900 b.i.d.). A combination therapy with rifampicin was used in 53 % of patients. MRSA (methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus) infections were present in 29 % and resistant CoNS (coagulase-negative Staphylococcus) in 46 %. Adverse effects occurred in 33 % of cases, mostly anemia, thrombocytopenia and gastrointestinal complaints leading to treatment discontinuation in 9 %. However, great heterogeneity was found with respect to surgical treatment, diagnosis of infection and indication for linezolid. Discussion: Linezolid is an appropriate option for treatment of resistant Gram-positive organisms in PJIs. Most commonly 600 mg b.i.d. is used, and a combination with rifampicin appears feasible although one must consider individual increases in doses in these cases. However, adverse effects are common and there are limited data for long-term use and optimal antibiotic combinations or individual doses.

Role of linezolid combination therapy for serious infections: review of the current evidence

As long-standing clinical problems, a series of complicated infections are more difficult to treat due to the development of antibiotic resistance, especially caused by methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA), vancomycin-resistant Enterococcus faecium (VRE), and multidrug-resistant Mycobacterium tuberculosis (M. tuberculosis). Moreover, the treatment options available to against these infections are also becoming increasingly limited. Linezolid is the first synthetic oxazolidinone antibiotic with a unique mechanism of action, and its efficacy against Gram-positive bacteria has been clearly demonstrated. However, the limitations of linezolid alone for the treatment of these complicated infections have been reported in the recent years. Combination therapy may be a good approach to enhance efficacy and prevent the development of resistance. In this review, the results of multiple linezolid combination therapies from in vitro, animal studies, and clinical cases for the treatment of MRSA, VRE, and multidrug-resistant M. tuberculosis strains will be discussed, and thus provide more relevant information for clinician in clinical practice.

Efficacy of cotrimoxazole (Sulfamethoxazole-Trimethoprim) as a salvage therapy for the treatment of bone and joint infections (BJIs)

INTRODUCTION

Cotrimoxazole (Sulfamethoxazole-Trimethoprim, SXT) has interesting characteristics for the treatment of bone and joint infection (BJI): a broad spectrum of activity with adequate bone diffusion and oral and intravenous formulations. However, its efficacy and safety in BJIs are poorly documented and its use remains limited.

METHODS

We conducted a retrospective study in 2 reference centers for BJIs from 2013 to 2018 among patients treated with SXT for a BJI. Data were collected from patient's medical charts. Outcomes and adverse events were evaluated at day (D)7, D45 and D90.

RESULTS

We analyzed 51 patients with a mean age of 60 ± 20 (SD) years of which 76% presented with an orthopedic device infection (ODI). Gram-negative bacilli (GNB) were involved in 47% of BJIs (n = 24). Moreover, they were often polymicrobial infections (41%). Doses of SXT ranged from 800/160mg bid (61%; n = 31) to 800/160mg tid (39%; n = 20). Median SXT treatment duration was 45 days (IQR 40-45). SXT was part of a dual therapy in 84% of patients (n = 43), associated mainly with fluoroquinolones (n = 17) or rifampicin (n = 14). Outcome was favorable at D7 in 98% (n = 50), at D45 in 88.2% (n = 45) and at D90 in 78.4% (n = 40). The second agent combined with SXT was not an independent factor of favorable outcome (p = 0.97). Adverse events were reported in 8% (n = 4) of patients, with a median of 21 days (IQR 20-30) from SXT initiation and led to discontinuation (n = 3).

CONCLUSION

SXT appears to be effective for treatment of BJIs as a salvage therapy, even in GNB or polymicrobial infection, including ODI. Further data are needed to confirm SXT efficacy as an alternative oral regimen in BJIs.

Oral versus intravenous antibiotics for bone and joint infections: the OVIVA non-inferiority RCT

BACKGROUND

Management of bone and joint infection commonly includes 4-6 weeks of intravenous (IV) antibiotics, but there is little evidence to suggest that oral (PO) therapy results in worse outcomes.

OBJECTIVE

To determine whether or not PO antibiotics are non-inferior to IV antibiotics in treating bone and joint infection.

DESIGN

Parallel-group, randomised (1 : 1), open-label, non-inferiority trial. The non-inferiority margin was 7.5%.

SETTING

Twenty-six NHS hospitals.

PARTICIPANTS

Adults with a clinical diagnosis of bone, joint or orthopaedic metalware-associated infection who would ordinarily receive at least 6 weeks of antibiotics, and who had received ≤ 7 days of IV therapy from definitive surgery (or start of planned curative treatment in patients managed non-operatively).

INTERVENTIONS

Participants were centrally computer-randomised to PO or IV antibiotics to complete the first 6 weeks of therapy. Follow-on PO therapy was permitted in either arm.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE

The primary outcome was the proportion of participants experiencing treatment failure within 1 year. An associated cost-effectiveness evaluation assessed health resource use and quality-of-life data.

RESULTS

Out of 1054 participants (527 in each arm), end-point data were available for 1015 (96.30%) participants. Treatment failure was identified in 141 out of 1015 (13.89%) participants: 74 out of 506 (14.62%) and 67 out of 509 (13.16%) of those participants randomised to IV and PO therapy, respectively. In the intention-to-treat analysis, using multiple imputation to include all participants, the imputed risk difference between PO and IV therapy for definitive treatment failure was -1.38% (90% confidence interval -4.94% to 2.19%), thus meeting the non-inferiority criterion. A complete-case analysis, a per-protocol analysis and sensitivity analyses for missing data each confirmed this result. With the exception of IV catheter complications [49/523 (9.37%) in the IV arm vs. 5/523 (0.96%) in the PO arm)], there was no significant difference between the two arms in the incidence of serious adverse events. PO therapy was highly cost-effective, yielding a saving of £2740 per patient without any significant difference in quality-adjusted life-years between the two arms of the trial.

LIMITATIONS

The OVIVA (Oral Versus IntraVenous Antibiotics) trial was an open-label trial, but bias was limited by assessing all potential end points by a blinded adjudication committee. The population was heterogenous, which facilitated generalisability but limited the statistical power of subgroup analyses. Participants were only followed up for 1 year so differences in late recurrence cannot be excluded.

CONCLUSIONS

PO antibiotic therapy is non-inferior to IV therapy when used during the first 6 weeks in the treatment for bone and joint infection, as assessed by definitive treatment failure within 1 year of randomisation. These findings challenge the current standard of care and provide an opportunity to realise significant benefits for patients, antimicrobial stewardship and the health economy.

FUTURE WORK

Further work is required to define the optimal total duration of therapy for bone and joint infection in the context of specific surgical interventions. Currently, wide variation in clinical practice suggests significant redundancy that likely contributes to the excess and unnecessary use of antibiotics.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN91566927.

FUNDING

This project was funded by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Health Technology Assessment programme and will be published in full in Health Technology Assessment; Vol. 23, No. 38. See the NIHR Journals Library website for further project information.

What Is the Evidence for Co-trimoxazole, Clindamycin, Doxycycline, and Minocycline in the Treatment of Methicillin-Resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) Pneumonia?

Objective: To review the evidence for trimethoprim-sulfamethoxazole (TMP-SMX), clindamycin, doxycycline, and minocycline in the treatment of methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) pneumonia. Data Source: MEDLINE, PubMed, EMBASE, Google, Google Scholar, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials from 1946 to May 20, 2019. The search was performed with the keywords methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus, MRSA, Staphylococcus aureus, pneumonia, trimethoprim, sulfamethoxazole drug combination, trimethoprim, sulfamethoxazole, TMP-SMX, co-trimoxazole, clindamycin, doxycycline, and minocycline. Data Extraction: Studies reporting the use of the above antibiotics for MRSA pneumonia treatment with clinical outcomes were included. Search parameters were limited to English language and human studies only. Data Synthesis: The search yielded 16 relevant articles: 6 TMP-SMX, 8 clindamycin, zero doxycycline, and 2 minocycline. For TMP-SMX, prospective randomized trials showed variable results; however, these studies were not specifically designed to assess MRSA pneumonia treatment. Retrospective studies with clindamycin suggested that it could be used as monotherapy or in combination with other anti-MRSA antibiotics. There was no evidence for doxycycline use, but 2 small retrospective reviews appeared to support minocycline as a treatment option. Relevance to Patient Care and Clinical Practice: These antibiotics are often used in clinical practice as potential treatment options for MRSA pneumonia. This article reviews the evidence for the clinical efficacy and safety of these agents. Conclusions: There are limited data to support use of TMP-SMX, clindamycin, doxycycline, or minocycline in MRSA pneumonia treatment. Randomized controlled trials are required to determine the effectiveness of these antibiotics. Clinicians should base their decision to use these agents on a case-by-case basis depending on clinical status and susceptibility results.

Treatment of bone and joint infections caused by Enterobacter cloacae with a fluoroquinolone-cotrimoxazole combination

Although the frequency of bone and joint infections caused by Enterobacter spp. is increasing, studies regarding the optimal antibiotic therapy are scarce. The objective of this retrospective study was to assess the clinical outcomes and safety of a fluoroquinolone-cotrimoxazole combination for the treatment of bone and joint infections caused by Enterobacter cloacae. Between 2010 and 2017, 30 patients with bone and joint infections caused by E. cloacae were treated with a fluoroquinolone-cotrimoxazole combination for 8-12 weeks. There were 26 cases (87%) of infection of an internal fixation device, two cases (6.6%) of pseudarthrosis with chronic osteomyelitis, and two cases (6.6%) of infection of knee and ankle prosthetic devices. The cure rate of the fluoroquinolone-cotrimoxazole combination was 80% by intention-to-treat analysis, with a mean follow-up of 29.3 ± 19.1 months. The fluoroquinolone-cotrimoxazole combination for 8-12 weeks is effective for the treatment of bone and joint infections caused by E. cloacae.

The History of Antibiotic Treatment of Osteomyelitis

Antibiotic treatment of osteomyelitis has evolved substantially over the past 80 years. Traditional teachings (eg, that antimicrobials must be given parenterally, selected based upon ratios of achieved bone vs serum drug levels, and continued for 4–6 weeks) are supported by limited data. New studies are challenging this dogma, however. In this review, we seek to contextualize the discussion by providing a narrative, chronologic review of osteomyelitis treatment spanning the pre-antibiotic era through the present day and by describing the quality of evidence supporting each component of traditional osteomyelitis therapy.

Antibiotic penetration into bone and joints: An updated review

Treatment of bone and joint infections can be challenging as antibiotics should penetrate through the rigid bone structure and into the synovial space. Several pharmacokinetic studies measured the extent of penetration of different antibiotics into bone and joint tissues. This review discusses the results of these studies and compares them with minimum inhibitory concentrations (MIC) of common pathogens implicated in bone and joint infections in order to determine which antibiotics may have a greater potential in the treatment of such infections. Clinical outcomes were also evaluated as data were available. More than 30 antibiotics were evaluated. Overall, most antibiotics, including amoxicillin, piperacillin/tazobactam, cloxacillin, cephalosporins, carbapenems, aztreonam, aminoglycosides, fluoroquinolones, doxycycline, vancomycin, linezolid, daptomycin, clindamycin, trimethoprim/sulfamethoxazole, fosfomycin, rifampin, dalbavancin, and oritavancin, showed good penetration into bone and joint tissues reaching concentrations exceeding the MIC₉₀ and/or MIC breakpoints of common bone and joint infections pathogens. Few exceptions include penicillin and metronidazole which showed a lower than optimum penetration into bones, and the latter as well as flucloxacillin had poor profiles in terms of joint space penetration. Of note, studies on joint space penetration were fewer than studies on bone tissue penetration. Although clinical studies in osteomyelitis and septic arthritis are not available for all of the evaluated antibiotics, these pharmacokinetic results indicate that agents with good penetration profiles would have a potential utilization in such infections.

Current health and economic burden of chronic diabetic osteomyelitis

INTRODUCTION

Diabetic foot ulcer (DFU) prevalence is as high as 25% and 40-80% of DFUs become infected (DFI). About 20% of infected ulcers will spread to bone causing diabetic foot osteomyelitis (DFO). DFU costs Medicare $9-13 billion/year. The most expensive costs associated with DFU are inpatient costs and hospital admissions. DFO costs are driven mostly by surgical procedures. DFU patients have a 3-year cumulative mortality rate of 28% and rates approaching 50% in amputated patients.

AREAS COVERED

This review will summarize the current health and economic burden of DFO covering management, epidemiology, and copious costs associated with DFO. The review began by searching PubMed and Cochrane databases for various terms including, 'diabetic osteomyelitis costs,' 'diabetic foot infection,' and 'diabetes and antibiotics.' Additionally, references from retrieved publications were reviewed. The global burden of DFU calls for investigating new therapeutic options.

EXPERT OPINION

For DFI, anti-biofilm agents have had success because they directly deliver antimicrobials to the infection site. For DFO, intraosseous (I/O) antibiotic therapy similarly bypasses the issue of vascular disease, will likely have improved therapeutic efficacy, and reduced costs for DFO patients. I/O antibiotic therapy has had clinical success in one case report already, and may significantly improve the lives of those afflicted with DFO.

Evaluation of linezolid or trimethoprim/sulfamethoxazole in combination with rifampicin as alternative oral treatments based on an in vitro pharmacodynamic model of staphylococcal biofilm

Combinations of linezolid (LZD) or trimethoprim/sulfamethoxazole (SXT) plus rifampicin (RIF) are alternative oral treatments for staphylococcal prosthetic joint infections (PJIs) when fluoroquinolones are not possible to use, but there is limited evidence regarding their activity. This study evaluated the efficacy of LZD and SXT, alone and in combination with RIF, against Staphylococcus aureus in an in vitro pharmacokinetic/pharmacodynamic biofilm model. Using the CDC Biofilm Reactor^® system, simulated regimens of LZD (600 mg every 12 h), SXT (160/800 mg every 8 h) and levofloxacin (LVX) (750 mg/day), alone and in combination with RIF (600 mg/day), were evaluated against one methicillin-susceptible S. aureus (MSSA) and one methicillin-resistant S. aureus (MRSA) strain. Antibiotic efficacy was evaluated by the decrease in planktonic bacterial counts from medium and biofilm-embedded bacteria from coupons over 56 h. Resistant strains were screened. In both strains, SXT alone was ineffective and LZD presented low activity, but no resistance emerged. Combinations with RIF significantly increased the antibiofilm efficacy against MSSA (Δlog CFU/mL 56h-0h: SXT + RIF, -2.9 and LZD + RIF, -3.1), but RIF-resistant strains appeared with SXT + RIF. Against MRSA, LZD + RIF (-3.1) protected against the emergence of resistance and was more effective than SXT + RIF (-0.6; P <0.05), in which RIF-resistant strains were again detected. LVX + RIF confirmed its high efficacy against biofilm-embedded bacteria, this being the most effective therapy (-5.1 against MSSA). The emergence of RIF-resistant strains with SXT + RIF poses serious concerns for its use in clinical practice. Interestingly, LZD + RIF appears to be an appropriate alternative for PJI caused by LVX-resistant S. aureus.

Drawbacks of the use of cotrimoxazole in foreign-body infections

INTRODUCTION

The anti-staphylococcal efficacy of cotrimoxazole in the setting of difficult-to-treat infections seems to be compromised by large amounts of pus and devitalized tissue, and, therefore, high levels of thymidine. Our objective was to evaluate the activity of cotrimoxazole against a staphylococcal foreign-body infection experimental model, which also yields significant quantities of thymidine.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

We used a rat tissue-cage model of infection (with high inherent thymidine levels) caused by a strain of methicillin-susceptible Staphylococcus aureus (MSSA; ATCC 29213). MIC values were determined (microdilution method) and compared in the presence or absence of tissue-cage fluid samples.

RESULTS

The inefficacy of cotrimoxazole was found to be similar to that of the control group. The MIC of cotrimoxazole was 4-8 fold higher in the presence of rat tissue-cage fluid.

CONCLUSIONS

The inefficacy of cotrimoxazole in our foreign-body infection model by MSSA, and the probable negative impact of the presence of thymidine on its efficacy, challenge the use of this drug in acute phases of foreign-body infections. It should be reserved as an alternative treatment when the infection is more controlled.

Old antimicrobials and Gram-positive cocci through the example of infective endocarditis and bone and joint infections

The management of some serious infections such as infective endocarditis (IE) and bone and joint infections (BJIs) caused by Gram-positive cocci (GPC) is complex and requires great responsiveness and effective antimicrobials with high bioavailability in heart valves or bone tissues. Treatment of these infections requires the use of a higher dosage that may result in increased toxicity or the use of new promising antimicrobials to control the infection. However, use of these new antimicrobials could still bring about new toxicity and resistance. Another approach may be the 'comeback' of old antimicrobials, which is evaluated in this review in the treatment of IE and BJIs caused by GPC.

Drug treatments for prosthetic joint infections in the era of multidrug resistance

INTRODUCTION

Despite many advances, the management of prosthetic joint infection is still a complex issue. Moreover, in recent years the problem of antimicrobial resistance has emerged as an important challenge.

AREAS COVERED

We analysed recent advances in different aspects of prosthetic joint infections. The importance of biofilms needs to be considered for antibiotic selection because, when embedded in these structures, bacteria acquire resistant behaviour. Moreover, the presence of resistance mechanisms in some species of organisms increases the difficulty of management. In this sense, the growing importance of methicillin-resistant staphylococci, multidrug-resistant Enterobacteriaceae or Pseudomonas aeruginosa is of increasing concern. Together with these organisms, others with constitutive resistance against most antibiotics (like Enterococcus sp., mycobacteria or fungi) represent a similar problem for selection of therapy. Research into new materials that can be used as drug carriers opens a new field for management of these infections and will likely come to the front line in the coming years.

EXPERT OPINION

Individualised therapies should carefully consider the aetiology, pathogenesis and antimicrobial susceptibility. Satisfactory clinical outcome could be further fostered by enhancing the multidisciplinary approach, with better collaboration in the antibiotic selection and the surgical management.

Orthopaedic device-related infection: current and future interventions for improved prevention and treatment

Orthopaedic and trauma device-related infection (ODRI) remains one of the major complications in modern trauma and orthopaedic surgery.Despite best practice in medical and surgical management, neither prophylaxis nor treatment of ODRI is effective in all cases, leading to infections that negatively impact clinical outcome and significantly increase healthcare expenditure.The following review summarises the microbiological profile of modern ODRI, the impact antibiotic resistance has on treatment outcomes, and some of the principles and weaknesses of the current systemic and local antibiotic delivery strategies.The emerging novel strategies aimed at preventing or treating ODRI will be reviewed. Particular attention will be paid to the potential for clinical impact in the coming decades, when such interventions are likely to be critically important.The review focuses on this problem from an interdisciplinary perspective, including basic science innovations and best practice in infectious disease. Cite this article: Moriarty TF, Kuehl R, Coenye T, et al. Orthopaedic device related infection: current and future interventions for improved prevention and treatment. EFORT Open Rev 2016;1:89-99. DOI: 10.1302/2058-5241.1.000037.

TREATMENT OF INFECTION AFTER TOTAL KNEE ARTHROPLASTY

OBJECTIVES

To identify and compare the rate of success of therapeutic modalities applied in surgeries for the treatment of infections associated with total knee arthroplasty (TKA), and to evaluate the functional outcome and pain in different therapeutic modalities by means of quality of life scores.

METHODS

We evaluated all patients who developed periprosthetic infection after TKA for primary or secondary osteoarthritis, in the period from January 1(st), 2008 to December 31(st), 2010.

RESULTS

In the study period, 29 patients with TKA had infection, and 12 of these underwent debridement and retention of the prosthesis (D+R), seven received two-stage and six one-stage exchange arthroplasties, and four patients were treated with suppressive antibiotic therapy because they could not undergo another surgical procedure.

CONCLUSION

The D+R, one-stage revision and two-stage revision success rates were 75%, 83.3%, and 100%, respectively. The best results of quality of life (QoL) and function occur in patients undergoing D+R. In contrast, the worst QoL and functional results were obtained in patients treated with two-stage revision arthroplasty. Level of Evidence II, Prognostic Studies - Investigating the Effect of a Patient Characteristic on the Outcome of Disease.

Clinical experience with linezolid for the treatment of orthopaedic implant infections

Gram-positive cocci are commonly isolated in orthopaedic implant infections and their resistance to β-lactams and fluoroquinolones is increasing. The high oral bioavailability of linezolid makes it an attractive oral alternative to glycopeptides and its use has increased in the last decade. To evaluate experience with linezolid in orthopaedic implant infections a systematic review of the literature available in English was undertaken. Only those articles describing series of ≥10 patients with acute or chronic orthopaedic implant infections treated with linezolid and with a clear definition of diagnosis and outcome were selected. A total of 293 patients (79.9% had prosthetic joint infections) were analysed in the 10 articles included. The overall remission rate with at least 3 months of follow-up was 79.9%, depending on whether the implant was removed or not (94% versus 69.9%). The addition of rifampicin was described in only two articles and no significant difference was observed. Adverse events were frequent during prolonged administration of linezolid (34.3%), requiring treatment discontinuation in 12.8%. The most common event was anaemia (13.4%) followed by gastrointestinal symptoms (11.1%). In conclusion, linezolid seems a good oral treatment alternative for orthopaedic implant infections due to Gram-positive cocci resistant to β-lactams and fluoroquinolones. However, close monitoring of adverse events is required.

The use of bone cement for the localized, controlled release of the antibiotics vancomycin, linezolid, or fusidic acid: effect of additives on drug release rates and mechanical strength

Bone cement containing antibiotics is commonly used to treat orthopedic related infections. However, effective treatment (especially of resistant bacteria, methacillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA)) is compromised by very low levels of drug release so that typically less than 10% of loaded drug is released over a 6-week period. The objective of this study was to investigate the effect of incorporation of water soluble excipients (polyethylene glycol, sodium chloride, or dextran) into antibiotic-loaded cement on mechanical strength and drug release properties. Poly(methyl methylacrylate) cement implants containing various amounts of drug (vancomycin, linezolid or fusidic acid (all MRSA active)) and excipients were cast in the form of beads or films and characterized using differential scanning calorimetry. Mechanical strength as assessed by Young's modulus was determined by thermo-mechanical analysis. Drug release was measured by incubation in phosphate buffered saline with analysis by HPLC methods. The inclusion of sodium chloride up to 20% w/w caused only minor reductions in Young's modulus. Vancomycin and linezolid released very slowly from unmodified bone cement beads (less than 3% released by 4 weeks) whereas fusidic acid released more quickly (approximately 8% released by 4 weeks). The inclusion of sodium chloride or dextran in bone cement resulted in major increases in the release rate of vancomycin, linezolid and fusidic acid. These studies support the inclusion of sodium chloride and dextran in bone cement to increase the release rate of vancomycin, linezolid, or fusidic acid without compromising the mechanical strength of the composite material.

A new strategy to fight antimicrobial resistance: the revival of old antibiotics

The increasing prevalence of hospital and community-acquired infections caused by multidrug-resistant (MDR) bacterial pathogens is limiting the options for effective antibiotic therapy. Moreover, this alarming spread of antimicrobial resistance has not been paralleled by the development of novel antimicrobials. Resistance to the scarce new antibiotics is also emerging. In this context, the rational use of older antibiotics could represent an alternative to the treatment of MDR bacterial pathogens. It would help to optimize the armamentarium of antibiotics in the way to preserve new antibiotics and avoid the prescription of molecules known to favor the spread of resistance (i.e., quinolones). Furthermore, in a global economical perspective, this could represent a useful public health orientation knowing that several of these cheapest “forgotten” antibiotics are not available in many countries. We will review here the successful treatment of MDR bacterial infections with the use of old antibiotics and discuss their place in current practice.

A Retrospective Review of the Clinical Experience of Linezolid with or Without Rifampicin in Prosthetic Joint Infections Treated with Debridement and Implant Retention

Introduction

Debridement and prosthesis retention, combined with a prolonged antibiotic regimen including rifampicin, is an accepted therapeutic approach when the duration of symptoms is less than 4 weeks and there are no radiological signs of loosening. The outcome of patients managed with this strategy has been previously assessed in several articles with success rates of 60–90%. This study aims to review the clinical experience with linezolid in 3 different hospitals from Spain and France in patients with prosthetic joint infection (PJI) managed with debridement, retention of the implant and treated with linezolid with or without rifampicin.

Methods

Patients with an acute PJI who underwent open debridement with implant retention treated with linezolid for more than 7 days in 3 hospitals from Barcelona, Tours and Lille between 2005 and 2011 were retrospectively reviewed. Relevant information about demographics, co-morbidity, type of implant, surgical treatment, microorganism isolated, antimicrobial therapy, adverse events (AEs) and outcomes were recorded from patients.

Results

A total of 39 patients were retrospectively reviewed. The mean age (SD) was 70.5 (8.8) years and 9 patients had diabetes mellitus (23%). There were 25 (64%) knee prostheses, 13 (33%) hips and 1 shoulder (3%). The median interquartile range (IQR) days from arthroplasty to infection diagnosis was 17 (19–48) and 33 (85%) cases were diagnosed within the first 60 days. The median (IQR) duration of antibiotic treatment was 70.5 (34–96) days and the median (IQR) number of days on linezolid treatment was 44.5 (30–81). AEs were observed in 15 patients (38%), with gastrointestinal complaints in 8 cases and anemia in 5 being the most frequent. After a median (IQR) follow-up of 2.5 (1.8–3.6) years, there were 11 failures (28%) (8 relapses and 3 new infections). The failure rate was higher in the rifampicin group (36% vs. 18%) mainly due to a higher relapse rate (27% vs. 12%) although differences were not statistically significant.

Conclusion

Management of acute PJIs with debridement and retention of the implant linezolid, with or without rifampicin, is associated with a high remission rate and it is an alternative treatment for infections due to fluoroquinolone and/or rifampicin-resistant staphylococci.

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (doi:10.1007/s40121-014-0032-z) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Factors predictive of treatment failure in staphylococcal prosthetic vascular graft infections: a prospective observational cohort study: impact of rifampin

BACKGROUND

There exists considerable debate concerning management of prosthetic vascular graft infection (PVGI), especially in terms of antimicrobial treatment. This report studies factors associated with treatment failure in a cohort of patients with staphylococcal PVGI, along with the impact of rifampin (RIF).

METHODS

All data on patients with PVGI between 2006 and 2010 were reviewed. Cure was defined as the absence of evidence of infection during the entire post-treatment follow-up for a minimum of one year. Failure was defined as any other outcome.

RESULTS

84 patients (72 M/12 F, median age 64.5 ± 11 y) with diabetes mellitus (n = 25), obesity (n = 48), coronary artery disease (n = 48), renal failure (n = 24) or COPD (n = 22) were treated for PVGI (median follow-up was 470 ± 469 d). PVGI was primarily intracavitary (n = 47). Staphylococcus aureus (n = 65; including 17 methicillin-resistant S. aureus) and coagulase-negative Staphylocococcus (n = 22) were identified. Surgical treatment was performed in 71 patients. In univariate analysis, significant risk factors associated with failure were renal failure (p = 0.04), aortic aneurysm (p = 0.03), fever (p = 0.009), aneurysm disruption (p = 0.02), septic shock in the peri-operative period (p = 0.005) and antibiotic treatment containing RIF (p = 0.03). In multivariate analysis, 2 variables were independently associated with failure:septic shock [OR 4.98: CI 95% 1.45-16.99; p=0.01] and antibiotic containing rifampin [OR: 0.32: CI95% 0.10-0.96; p=0.04].

CONCLUSION

Results of the present study suggest that fever, septic shock and non-use of antibiotic treatment containing RIF are associated with poor outcome.

Prosthetic joint infection

Prosthetic joint infection (PJI) is a tremendous burden for individual patients as well as the global health care industry. While a small minority of joint arthroplasties will become infected, appropriate recognition and management are critical to preserve or restore adequate function and prevent excess morbidity. In this review, we describe the reported risk factors for and clinical manifestations of PJI. We discuss the pathogenesis of PJI and the numerous microorganisms that can cause this devastating infection. The recently proposed consensus definitions of PJI and approaches to accurate diagnosis are reviewed in detail. An overview of the treatment and prevention of this challenging condition is provided.

Treatment of infections due to resistant Staphylococcus aureus

This chapter reviews data on the treatment of infections caused by drug-resistant Staphylococcus aureus, particularly methicillin-resistant S. aureus (MRSA). This review covers findings reported in the English language medical literature up to January of 2013. Despite the emergence of resistant and multidrug-resistant S. aureus, we have seven effective drugs in clinical use for which little resistance has been observed: vancomycin, quinupristin-dalfopristin, linezolid, tigecycline, telavancin, ceftaroline, and daptomycin. However, vancomycin is less effective for infections with MRSA isolates that have a higher MIC within the susceptible range. Linezolid is probably the drug of choice for the treatment of complicated MRSA skin and soft tissue infections (SSTIs); whether it is drug of choice in pneumonia remains debatable. Daptomycin has shown to be non-inferior to either vancomycin or β-lactams in the treatment of staphylococcal SSTIs, bacteremia, and right-sided endocarditis. Tigecycline was also non-inferior to comparator drugs in the treatment of SSTIs, but there is controversy about whether it is less effective than other therapeutic options in the treatment of more serious infections. Telavancin has been shown to be non-inferior to vancomycin in the treatment of SSTIs and pneumonia, but has greater nephrotoxicity. Ceftaroline is a broad-spectrum cephalosporin with activity against MRSA; it is non-inferior to vancomycin in the treatment of SSTIs. Clindamycin, trimethoprim-sulfamethoxazole, doxycycline, rifampin, moxifloxacin, and minocycline are oral anti-staphylococcal agents that may have utility in the treatment of SSTIs and osteomyelitis, but the clinical data for their efficacy is limited. There are also several drugs with broad-spectrum activity against Gm-positive organisms that have reached the phase II and III stages of clinical testing that will hopefully be approved for clinical use in the upcoming years: oritavancin, dalbavancin, omadacycline, tedizolid, delafloxacin, and JNJ-Q2. Thus, there are currently many effective drugs to treat resistant S. aureus infections and many promising agents in the pipeline. Nevertheless, S. aureus remains a formidable adversary, and despite our deep bullpen of potential therapies, there are still frequent treatment failures and unfortunate clinical outcomes. The following discussion summarizes the clinical challenges presented by MRSA, the clinical experience with our current anti-MRSA antibiotics, and the gaps in our knowledge on how to use these agents to most effectively combat MRSA infections.

Antibiotics for treating chronic osteomyelitis in adults

BACKGROUND

Chronic osteomyelitis is generally treated with antibiotics and surgical debridement but can persist intermittently for years with frequent therapeutic failure or relapse. Despite advances in both antibiotic and surgical treatment, the long-term recurrence rate remains around 20%. This is an update of a Cochrane review first published in 2009.

OBJECTIVES

To determine the effects of different systemic antibiotic treatment regimens for treating chronic osteomyelitis in adults.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Bone, Joint and Muscle Trauma Group Specialised Register (October 2012), the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (The Cochrane Library 2012, Issue 9), MEDLINE (January 1948 to September Week 4 2012), EMBASE (January 1980 to 2012 Week 40), LILACS (October 2012), the WHO International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (June 2012) and reference lists of relevant articles.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) or quasi-RCTs addressing the effects of different antibiotic treatments given after surgical debridement for chronic osteomyelitis in adults.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently screened papers for inclusion, extracted data and appraised risk of bias in the included trials. Where appropriate, we pooled data using the fixed-effect model.

MAIN RESULTS

We included eight small trials involving a total of 282 participants with chronic osteomyelitis. Data were available from 248 participants. Most participants were male with post-traumatic osteomyelitis, usually affecting the tibia and femur, where recorded. The antibiotic regimens, duration of treatment and follow-up varied between trials. All trials mentioned surgical debridement before starting on antibiotic therapy as part of treatment, but it was unclear in four trials whether all participants underwent surgical debridement.We found that study quality and reporting were often inadequate. In particular, we judged almost all trials to be at moderate to high risk of bias due to failure to conceal allocation and inadequate follow-up.Four trials compared oral versus parenteral route for administration of antibiotics. There was no statistically significant difference between the two groups in the remission at the end of treatment (70/80 versus 58/70; risk ratio (RR) 1.04, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.92 to 1.18; four trials, 150 participants). There was no statistically significant difference between the two groups in the remission rate 12 or more months after treatment (49/64 versus 44/54; RR 0.94, 95% CI 0.78 to 1.13; three trials, 118 participants). There was also no significant difference between the two groups in the occurrence of mild adverse events (11/64 versus 8/54; RR 1.08, 95% CI 0.49 to 2.42; three trials, 118 participants) or moderate and severe adverse events (3/49 versus 4/42; RR 0.69, 95% CI 0.19 to 2.57; three trials, 91 participants). Superinfection occurred in participants of both groups (5/66 in the oral group versus 4/58 in the parenteral group; RR 1.08, 95% CI 0.33 to 3.60; three trials, 124 participants).Single trials with few participants found no statistical significant differences for remission or adverse events for the following four comparisons: oral only versus parenteral plus oral administration; parenteral plus oral versus parenteral only administration; two different parenteral antibiotic regimens; and two different oral antibiotic regimens. No trials compared different durations of antibiotic treatment for chronic osteomyelitis, or adjusted the remission rate for bacteria species or severity of disease.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Limited and low quality evidence suggests that the route of antibiotic administration (oral versus parenteral) does not affect the rate of disease remission if the bacteria are susceptible to the antibiotic used. However, this and the lack of statistically significant differences in adverse effects need confirmation. No or insufficient evidence exists for other aspects of antibiotic therapy for chronic osteomyelitis.The majority of the included trials were conducted over 20 years ago and currently we are faced with a far higher prevalence of bacteria that are resistant to many of the available antibiotics used for healthcare. This continuously evolving bacterial resistance represents another challenge in the choice of antibiotics for treating chronic osteomyelitis.

The safety and efficacy of high-dose daptomycin combined with rifampicin for the treatment of Gram-positive osteoarticular infections

PURPOSE

Treatment of Gram-positive osteoarticular infections requires an adequate surgical approach combined with intensive antimicrobial therapy. The aim of this study was to evaluate the safety and efficacy of a combined regimen of high-dose daptomycin and rifampicin, in patients with various types of Gram-positive osteoarticular infections.

METHODS

This single centre, non-comparative, prospective study evaluated the safety and efficacy of a combined regimen of intravenous daptomycin (8 mg/kg/day) and oral rifampicin (600 mg/day) in patients with Gram-positive osteoarticular infections, with a minimal follow-up of one year. Creatine phosphokinase, transaminases, bilirubinaemia, and serum creatinine, were measured at baseline and regular intervals.

RESULTS

The median daily doses of daptomycin and rifampicin, administered for a median duration of 21 (range, 10-122) days to 16 patients (median age, 63.5 years; 11 males, five females) presenting with staphylococcal (n = 15) or streptococcal (n = 1) osteoarticular infections, were 8.15 (range, 6.6-8.9) mg/kg/day and 600 (range, 600-900) mg/day, respectively. The combined regimen of daptomycin and rifampicin was well tolerated by all except one patient, without requiring treatment adjustment or discontinuation. One patient developed allergic responses probably due to rifampicin after 42 days. Fifteen (94 %) patients showed favourable clinical and microbiological outcomes.

CONCLUSIONS

The combined regimen of high-dose daptomycin and rifampicin was well tolerated and may provide a useful alternative to standard glycopeptide therapy for Gram-positive osteoarticular infections.

Optimizing combination rifampin therapy for staphylococcal osteoarticular infections

Staphylococcus spp. causes more than half of all osteoarticular infections of native structures or implanted material. The ability of Staphylococcus spp. to persist within infected bone tissue and to produce a bacterial biofilm, most notably in infections of implanted material, can lead to treatment failures and microbiological relapses. Rifampin is a cornerstone of the treatment of staphylococcal osteoarticular infections, particularly those of implanted material. Rifampin is a bactericidal antibiotic that diffuses very well within bone tissue and bacterial biofilms. The mechanism of action is inhibition of bacterial DNA transcription to mRNA independently from bacterial division, which results in activity against even dormant Staphylococcus spp. organisms. However, the high risk of emergence of rifampin-resistant mutants requires the concomitant administration of another antibiotic. Several antibiotics are recommended in the French guidelines issued by the French-Speaking Society for Infectious Diseases (Société de Pathologie Infectieuse de Langue Française [SPILF]). Here, we discuss the results from in vitro, animal, and clinical studies that explain the advantages and drawbacks of each antibiotic used with rifampin to treat osteoarticular infections due to Staphylococcus spp.

Systemic antibiotic therapy for chronic osteomyelitis in adults

The standard recommendation for treating chronic osteomyelitis is 6 weeks of parenteral antibiotic therapy. However, oral antibiotics are available that achieve adequate levels in bone, and there are now more published studies of oral than parenteral antibiotic therapy for patients with chronic osteomyelitis. Oral and parenteral therapies achieve similar cure rates; however, oral therapy avoids risks associated with intravenous catheters and is generally less expensive, making it a reasonable choice for osteomyelitis caused by susceptible organisms. Addition of adjunctive rifampin to other antibiotics may improve cure rates. The optimal duration of therapy for chronic osteomyelitis remains uncertain. There is no evidence that antibiotic therapy for >4-6 weeks improves outcomes compared with shorter regimens. In view of concerns about encouraging antibiotic resistance to unnecessarily prolonged treatment, defining the optimal route and duration of antibiotic therapy and the role of surgical debridement in treating chronic osteomyelitis are important, unmet needs.

Trimethoprim-sulfamethoxazole therapy for children with acute osteomyelitis

BACKGROUND

The emergence of community-acquired methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (CA-MRSA) has complicated the conventional management of osteomyelitis. While oral clindamycin is commonly used to treat acute CA-MRSA osteomyelitis, the emergence of inducible clindamycin resistance among CA-MRSA isolates has made alternative therapy necessary. The excellent oral bioavailability, susceptibility profile, favorable palatability, and low cost of trimethoprim-sulfamethoxazole (TMP-SMX) make this drug an attractive option for treating osteomyelitis, yet its clinical efficacy for osteomyelitis has not been established.

METHODS

Between October 1998 and September 2009, 20 children who received a TMP-SMX-containing regimen for acute osteomyelitis at All Children's Hospital were identified from hospital records, and their cases reviewed for clinical outcome and drug safety.

RESULTS

Patients ranged in age from 9 months to 17 years. Twelve (60%) of the patients were male. Causative pathogens were found in 8 (40%) cases of which 5 were CA-MRSA and 3 were methicillin-susceptible Staphylococcus aureus. Eleven patients (55%) received TMP-SMX as their primary therapy. The median dose of TMP-SMX was 16.4 mg/kg/d. During TMP-SMX therapy, 8 patients (40%) experienced adverse events; all were considered mild. Duration of total therapy was 26 to 59 days, with a median of 40 days. All 20 patients were considered cured of their infection at the end of therapy.

CONCLUSION

Orally administered TMP-SMX appears to be a useful and well-tolerated therapy for treatment of acute osteomyelitis in children. Further prospective comparative studies will be needed to confirm this observation.