Comparative Study of Linezolid and Vancomycin Regimens in One-Stage Surgery for Treating Limb Traumatic Osteomyelitis Caused by Methicillin-Resistant Staphylococcus aureus

Bactericidal versus bacteriostatic antibacterials: clinical significance, differences and synergistic potential in clinical practice

Antibacterial activity can be classified as either bactericidal or bacteriostatic, using methods such as the MBC/MIC ratio and time-kill curves. However, such categorization has proven challenging in clinical practice, as these definitions only apply under specific laboratory conditions, which may differ from clinical settings. Several factors, such as the specific bacteria or infectious medium, can affect the action of antibiotics, with many antibacterials exerting both activities. These definitions have also led to the belief that bactericidal antibacterials are superior to bacteriostatic, especially in more severe cases, such as endocarditis, neutropenia and bacteraemia. Additionally, current dogma dictates against the combination of bactericidal and bacteriostatic antibacterials in clinical practice, due to potential antagonism. This review aimed to assess the differences in antibacterial activity of bactericidal and bacteriostatic antibacterials based on in vitro and in vivo studies and examine their antagonistic or synergistic effects. Our findings show that specific bacteriostatic agents, such as linezolid and tigecycline, are clinically non-inferior to bactericidals in multiple infections, including pneumonia, intra-abdominal infections, and skin and soft tissue infections. Studies also support using several bacteriostatic agents as salvage therapies in severe infections, such as neutropenic fever and endocarditis. Additionally, not all combinations of bacteriostatic and bactericidal agents appear to be antagonistic, with many combinations, such as linezolid and rifampicin, already being used. The findings should be interpreted with caution, as most evidence is from observational studies and there is a need for randomized controlled trials to assess their effectiveness and combinations, especially within the context of rising antimicrobial resistance.

Evaluating the efficacy of combined flap coverage, antibiotic-loaded bone cement and negative pressure irrigation in traumatic osteomyelitis management

Traumatic osteomyelitis with accompanying soft tissue defects presents a significant therapeutic challenge. This prospective, randomised controlled trial aims to evaluate the efficacy of antibiotic-impregnated bone cement, flap coverage and negative pressure sealed irrigation in the management of traumatic osteomyelitis complicated by soft tissue defects. A total of 46 patients with clinically diagnosed traumatic osteomyelitis and soft tissue defects were randomised into a control group (n = 23) and an observation group (n = 23). The control group underwent standard flap coverage and negative-pressure lavage, while the observation group received an additional treatment with antibiotic-loaded bone cement. Efficacy was measured based on clinical criteria, surgical metrics and morphometric assessment of bone and soft tissue defects. Statistical analyses were performed using SPSS version 27.0. The observation group, treated with an integrated approach of flap coverage, negative pressure wound therapy (NPWT) and antibiotic-impregnated bone cement, demonstrated significantly higher overall treatment efficacy (91.3%) compared to the control group, which received only flap coverage and NPWT (65.2%) (p < 0.01). This enhanced efficacy was evidenced through various outcomes: the observation group experienced reduced surgical times, shorter hospital stays, fewer dressing changes and accelerated wound healing, all statistically significant (p < 0.001). Additionally, a quantitative analysis at 6-month post-treatment revealed that the observation group showed more substantial reductions in both bone and soft tissue defect sizes compared to the control group (p < 0.001). The multi-modal treatment strategy, combining skin flap coverage, antibiotic bone cement and negative-pressure irrigation, showed marked efficacy in treating traumatic osteomyelitis and associated soft tissue defects. This approach accelerated postoperative recovery and lowered costs.