The Fate of Antibiotic Impregnated Cement Space in Treatment for Forefoot Osteomyelitis

Revisiting Antibiotic-Impregnated Cement Spacer for Diabetic Osteomyelitis of the Foot

INTRODUCTION

Despite the rising global awareness and improvement of socioeconomic and living standards, the prevalence of diabetic osteomyelitis (DOM) and its complications has been increasing rapidly. This study aims to investigate the long-term prognosis of DOM of the foot treated using antibiotic-impregnated cement spacer (ACS) and the contributing risk factors for reoperation.

METHODS AND MATERIALS

We retrospectively reviewed the data of 55 diabetic patients with Meggitt-Wagner Grade IIB wounds diagnosed with osteomyelitis of the foot, treated in our institution with excessive debridement, excision of the infected tissue, and implantation of antibiotic-impregnated cement spacer fixed with a Kirschner wire. Descriptive statistics, including patient demographics, were analyzed. Statistical analysis was performed using point-biserial correlation and a Chi-square test with Cramer's V effect-size estimation to determine the relationship between reoperation and various parameters.

RESULTS

55 patients (36 (65.45%) males and 19 (34.55%) females) with a median age of 64 (39-84) years were thoroughly analyzed throughout a median follow-up of 884 days (2-4671 days). Of the entire cohort, 29 (52.72%) patients achieved primary successful infection eradication without any further intervention, and 8 (14.54%) patients were successfully treated using a secondary procedure. More than half of the reoperated patients underwent the secondary intervention within less than a month after the primary ACS. When assessing correlation, age (r = 0.28, p = 0.04), gender (r = 0.31, p = 0.02), Staphylococcus aureus (r = -0.10, p = 0.04), and the use of gentamicin-only antibiotic cement spacer (r = 0.34, p = 0.01) demonstrated statistically significant correlation to reoperation. 89.18% of the patients who achieved infection eradication did not undergo cement removal.

CONCLUSIONS

ACS has shown excellent results in eradicating bone infection with up to 7.23 years of follow-up, acting as a structural stabilizer, preventing soft tissue contractures, and delivering highly concentrated local antibiotic treatment both to soft tissue and bone. Regardless, specific factors should be thoroughly evaluated prior to surgery, as advancing age, gender, and the use of gentamicin-only antibiotics appear to be positively associated with a higher likelihood of reoperation. Conversely, infections caused by cultured Staphylococcus aureus seem to be inversely related to reoperation.

Debridement-Reconstruction-Docking Management System Versus Ilizarov Technique for Lower-Extremity Osteomyelitis

BACKGROUND

Osteomyelitis causes marked disability and is one of the most challenging diseases for orthopaedists to treat because of the considerable rate of infection recurrence. In this study, we proposed and assessed the debridement-reconstruction-docking (DRD) system for the treatment of lower-extremity osteomyelitis. This procedure comprises 3 surgical stages and 2 preoperative assessments; namely, pre-debridement assessment, debridement, pre-reconstruction assessment, reconstruction, and docking-site management. We evaluated the use of the DRD system compared with the Ilizarov technique, which is defined as a 1-stage debridement, osteotomy, and bone transport.

METHODS

This retrospective cohort included 289 patients who underwent either DRD or the Ilizarov technique for the treatment of lower-extremity osteomyelitis at a single institution between January 2013 and February 2021 and who met the eligibility criteria. The primary outcome was the rate of infection recurrence. Secondary outcomes included the external fixator index (EFI), refracture rate, and the Paley classification for osseous and functional results. An inverse-probability-weighted regression adjustment model was utilized to estimate the effect of the DRD system and Ilizarov technique on the treatment of lower-extremity osteomyelitis.

RESULTS

A total of 131 and 158 patients underwent DRD or the Ilizarov technique, respectively. The inverse-probability-weighted regression adjustment model suggested that DRD was associated with a significant reduction in infection recurrence (risk ratio [RR], 0.26; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.13 to 0.50; p < 0.001) and EFI (-6.9 days/cm, 95% CI; -8.3 to -5.5; p < 0.001). Patients in the DRD group had better Paley functional results than those in the Ilizarov group (ridit score, 0.55 versus 0.45; p < 0.001). There was no significant difference between the 2 groups in the rate of refracture (RR, 0.87; 95% CI, 0.42 to 1.79; p = 0.71) and Paley osseous results (ridit score, 0.51 versus 0.49; p = 0.39).

CONCLUSIONS

In this balanced retrospective cohort of patients with lower-extremity osteomyelitis, the use of the DRD system was associated with a reduced rate of infection recurrence, a lower EFI, and better Paley functional results compared with the use of the Ilizarov technique.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Therapeutic Level III . See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

State-of-the-art update for diagnosing diabetic foot osteomyelitis: a narrative review

Recently, the International Working Group on the Diabetic Foot and the Infectious Diseases Society of America divided diabetic foot disease into diabetic foot infection (DFI) and diabetic foot osteomyelitis (DFO). DFI is usually diagnosed clinically, while numerous methods exist to diagnose DFO. In this narrative review, the authors aim to summarize the updated data on the diagnosis of DFO. An extensive literature search using "diabetic foot [MeSH]" and "osteomyelitis [MeSH]" or "diagnosis" was performed using PubMed and Google Scholar in July 2023. The possibility of DFO is based on inflammatory clinical signs, including the probe-to-bone (PTB) test. Elevated inflammatory biochemical markers, especially erythrocyte sedimentation rate, are beneficial. Distinguishing abnormal findings of plain radiographs is also a first-line approach. Moreover, sophisticated modalities, including magnetic resonance imaging and nuclear medicine imaging, are helpful if doubt remains after a first-line diagnosis. Transcutaneous bone biopsy, which does not pass through the wound, is necessary to avoid contaminating the sample. This review focuses on the current diagnostic techniques for DFOs with an emphasis on the updates. To obtain the correct therapeutic results, selecting a proper option is necessary. Based on these numerous diagnosis modalities and indications, the proper choice of diagnostic tool can have favorable treatment outcomes.

Correction: Woo et al. The Fate of Antibiotic Impregnated Cement Space in Treatment for Forefoot Osteomyelitis. J. Clin. Med. 2022, 11, 1976

In the published publication [...].