Antibiotic Prophylaxis During Dental Procedures in Patients with Prosthetic Joints

Late prosthetic knee joint infection with Staphylococcus xylosus

Prosthethic Joint Infection (PJI) is a severe complication following joint replacement. Late PJI can occur years after implantation by hematogenous seeding of a microbial agent. Staphylococcus xylosus is a coagulase-negative commensal of the human skin and rarely associated with opportunistic human infections. We report the rare case of a 70-year old Patient suffering from knee pain 18 years after primary Total Knee Arthroplasty. Microbiological sampling detected S. xylosus as causative agent. The patient was successfully treated with a two-stage implant exchange and antibiotic therapy using co-amoxicillin and rifampicin/cotrimoxazol. This case illustrates the ability of S. xylosus to cause late PJI and the importance of not letting coagulase-negative Staphylococci be routinely categorized as contaminants of microbiological samples.

Prosthetic Joint Infection After Dental Work: Is the Correct Prophylaxis Being Prescribed? A Systematic Review

Background

Prosthetic joint infection (PJI) of total hip (THA) or total knee arthroplasty (TKA) after dental procedures is uncommon, and antibiotic prophylaxis remains controversial. For high-risk patients, the American Academy of Orthopedic Surgeons recommends amoxicillin prophylaxis. However, no systematic review of the literature of PJIs associated with dental procedures explores if amoxicillin is suitable for the reported organisms.

Methods

A librarian-assisted search of the major databases (PubMed, Medline, Embase, Scopus) identified 954 articles. Only case reports, case series, and reviews with patient level data were included. After exclusions, 79 articles were fully reviewed.

Results

Forty-four PJIs after dental procedures were identified, 22 in primary THA, 20 in primary TKA, one in revision THA, and one in a hip resurfacing procedure. Antibiotic prophylaxis was documented for 5 patients. The dental procedure was invasive in 35 (79.5%). Comorbidities were present in 17 patients (38.7%). The organisms reported were Streptococcus spp. in 44%, other aerobic gram-positives in 27%, anaerobic gram-positives in 18%, and gram-negative organisms in 11%. An estimated 46% of organisms may be resistant to amoxicillin. The outcomes of treatment were reported for 35 patients (79.5%). Twenty-seven patients (61.4%) had no clinical signs of PJI at the final follow-up visit.

Conclusions

Lower extremity PJI associated with dental procedures is often caused by organisms unlikely to be prevented with amoxicillin. Additional studies are warranted to determine the choice and efficacy of antibiotic prophylaxis to prevent dental-associated PJI in the highest risk patients. Insufficient data exist to recommend the optimal treatment for patients with PJI in THA and TKA associated with dental procedures.

Is dental prophylaxis required following spinal fusion?-a systematic review and call for evidence

BACKGROUND

Controversy exists regarding the need for antimicrobial prophylaxis prior to dental procedures following spinal fusion. In this review, we attempt to synthesize a comprehensive summary of the published literature to provide recommendations on the use of antimicrobial prophylaxis before dental procedures in patients with a history of spinal fusion.

METHODS

We searched PubMed, Web of Science, Cochrane Library, and EMBASE databases from inception to February 2018. Eligible studies included patients with a history of spinal fusion treated with or without antimicrobial prophylaxis in preparation for dental procedures. Two reviewers independently assessed the eligibility of potential studies and extracted data. Outcomes of interest were the indications and efficacy of antimicrobial prophylaxis to protect against infection of spinal prostheses with dental origin.

RESULTS

A total of 1,909 articles were initially screened. After inclusion and exclusion criteria were applied, one study was found specifically relating to dental prophylaxis and spine surgery. The survey, as well as objective studies and professional organization guidelines on dental prophylaxis in patients with total hip and knee replacements, were reviewed to add context to the controversy.

CONCLUSIONS

There is a significant paucity of literature regarding dental prophylaxis in spine surgery patients. Although there has been a recent movement away from recommending antimicrobial prophylaxis before dental work in patients with other forms of orthopaedic prostheses, the gap in the literature addressing spine patients represents an important question that requires more targeted and specific research.

Is there a Role for Antibiotic Prophylaxis Prior to Dental Procedures in Patients with Total Joint Arthroplasty? A Systematic Review of the Literature

Background: The indication of prophylactic antibiotics prior to dental procedures for non-infected causes in order to reduce the risk of haematogenous periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) remains as controversial. We performed a systematic review of the literature assessing the relationship between PJI and invasive dental procedures and whether there is evidence to support the use of antibiotic prophylaxis. Methods: This review was conducted in accordance with the 2009 Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis (PRISMA) statement. MEDLINE, EMBASE and the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews were searched for studies focusing on dental procedures after TJA, reporting on PJI as an outcome. The methodological quality was assessed with the Newcastle-Ottawa quality assessment scale for case-control and cohort studies and by the tool proposed by Murad et al. for observational studies. Results: Our systematic literature review yielded 90 individual studies, of which 9 met the inclusion criteria. The overall infection rate ranged from 0.26% to 2.12%. Of these, cases associated with a dental procedure ranged from 0% to 15.9%. Five of the studies described cases in which antibiotic prophylaxis was administered; however, no clear algorithm regarding type and dosage of antibiotic was mentioned. When assessing the methodological quality of the evidence, all studies had an overall low to moderate quality. Conclusion: The current systematic review, mostly composed of low-quality studies, suggests that there is no direct evidence to indicate prophylactic antibiotics prior to dental procedures in patients with TJA. In line with the current guidelines, no prophylaxis should be used on interventions for non-infected causes, except for occasional unusual situations, which can then be judged individually.

Is Antibiotic Prophylaxis Necessary Before Dental Procedures in Patients Post Total Ankle Arthroplasty?

BACKGROUND:

The need for dental antibiotic prophylaxis after orthopedic surgery remains unclear. Current recommendations are based on patients with total hip and total knee arthroplasties. We investigated available evidence regarding the need for dental antibiotic prophylaxis in patients post foot and ankle surgery, specifically total ankle arthroplasty. Additionally, we examined the microbiology behind the risk of transient bacteremia from dental procedures and whether this leads to an increased risk for postoperative infection in foot and ankle surgery.

METHODS:

We performed a MEDLINE literature review of English articles between 1980 and 2018 on patients with prosthetic joints undergoing dental work, and studies evaluating hematogenous prosthetic joint infection (PJI) and dental antibiotic prophylaxis. We additionally included articles on PJI post total ankle arthroplasty, as well as committee guidelines.

RESULTS:

There is no literature at present that evaluates transient bacteremia with dental procedures in patients following foot and ankle surgery. The data on this topic are isolated to PJI rates in the context of hip and total knee arthroplasty. This is of particular interest as rates of total ankle arthroplasty PJI have been reported to be 2- to 4-fold higher than in hip and total knee arthroplasty.

CONCLUSION:

The concern for postoperative infection due to transient bacteremia without dental antibiotic prophylaxis can be extrapolated to patients undergoing foot and ankle surgeries. Some data suggest that oral cavity bacteria can seed a prosthetic joint, though no clear relationship has been demonstrated. Similar risk factors have been identified between hip and knee PJI and total ankle arthroplasty. In light of the absence of scrutiny of and guidelines on this topic in foot and ankle surgery, it may be advisable to apply similar principles to decision-making in patients after foot and ankle surgery.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE:

Level III, systematic review.

Incidence and risk factors for dental pathology in patients planned for elective total hip or knee arthroplasty

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

To prevent severe prosthetic joint infections, a dental examination is usually recommended prior to arthroplasty, even sometimes regarded resource- and time-consuming. The aim of this study was to determine whether a risk factor-based algorithm could be created to send only selected patients for dental clearance.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A prospective study of 952 patients scheduled for elective arthroplasty was performed. Patients filled out a questionnaire regarding potential risk factors for dental infections, and dentists documented patients' oral health and interventions performed (data available for 731 patients).

RESULTS

Of the patients, 215 (29.4%) failed dental clearance; a total of 432 teeth were extracted, 32 patients (4.4%) required root canal treatment, and 37 patients (5.1%) had severe periodontitis. Independent risk factors for failure were history of root canal treatment (odds ratio: 2.282, 95% confidence interval: 1.346-3.869, p = 0.020), use of tobacco products (odds ratio: 1.704, 95% confidence interval: 1.033-2.810, p = 0.037), dental visit indicated by oral symptoms within 3 months (odds ratio: 1.828, 95% confidence interval: 1.183-2.827, p = 0.007), or visit to a dentist within 6 months (odds ratio: 1.538, 95% confidence interval: 1.063-2.224, p = 0.022). Regular dental examination was a preventive factor (odds ratio: 0.519, 95% confidence interval: 0.349-0.773, p = 0.001). However, based on the examined risk factors, no sufficiently large group of patients at lesser risk for dental infections could be identified.

CONCLUSION

Because of the high need for dental care revealed by our unselected patient population, the inspection and treatment of dental pathology of all patients are important interventions prior to elective arthroplasty.

Origin and characteristics of haematogenous periprosthetic joint infection

OBJECTIVES

Recognition of infectious origin of haematogenous periprosthetic joint infections (PJI) is crucial. We investigated the primary focus and characteristics of haematogenous PJI.

METHODS

Consecutive patients who presented with haematogenous PJI between 01/2010 and 01/2018 were retrospectively analysed. Haematogenous PJI was defined by diagnosis of infection ≥1 month after surgery, acute manifestation after a pain-free period and positive blood or prosthetic-site culture and/or evidence of distant infectious focus consistent with the pathogen. Fisher's exact, Student's t and Mann-Whitney U tests were used, as appropriate.

RESULTS

A total of 106 episodes of PJI were included, involving 59 knee, 45 hip, one shoulder and one elbow prostheses. The median time from last surgery until haematogenous PJI was 47 months (range, 1-417 months). The pathogen was identified in 105 episodes (99%), including Staphylococcus aureus (n = 43), streptococci (n = 32), enterococci (n = 13), Gram-negative bacteria (n = 9) and coagulase-negative staphylococci (n = 8). Gram-negative bacteria were significantly more often found in hip joints than in knee joints. Blood cultures grew the pathogen in 43 of 70 episodes (61%). The primary infectious focus was identified in 72 episodes (68%) and included infections of intravascular devices or heart valves (22 episodes), skin and soft tissue (16 episodes), the oral cavity (12 episodes), urogenital (12 episodes) or gastrointestinal tract (seven episodes) and other sites (three episodes).

CONCLUSIONS

In acute PJI manifesting after a pain-free period, the haematogenous infection route should be considered and the primary infectious focus should be actively searched for. The cardiovascular system, skin and soft tissue, oral cavity, urogenital and gastrointestinal tracts were common origins of haematogenous PJI.

Erysipelas or cellulitis with a prosthetic joint in situ

We describe a case of a 60-year old male who developed an acute prosthetic joint infection (PJI) of the knee, secondary to erysipelas of the lower leg due to beta-hemolytic Group G streptococci. As it is unknown how often this phenomenon occurs in patients with prosthetic implants and which patients are most prone to develop this complication, we analyzed: i) the incidence of the development of a PJI in these patients and ii) the clinical characteristics of streptococcal PJI during an episode of erysipelas/cellulitis. Based on a retrospective analysis of patients with a prosthetic implant in situ presenting at the emergency department with erysipelas/cellulitis, 1 out of 10 patients developed a PJI. An additional analysis within a multicenter cohort on streptococcal PJI demonstrated in 22 patients that a secondary PJI due to erysipelas/cellulitis mostly develops in young implants (<5 years old). In 20 cases (91%), the skin infection was in the same limb as the joint prosthesis suggesting contiguous spread of bacteria. These data emphasizes the importance of preventive measures to reduce the occurrence of skin infections in patients with prosthetic implants, and if an erysipelas or cellulitis does occur, to monitor patients carefully.

Antibiotic prophylaxis is not indicated prior to dental procedures for prevention of periprosthetic joint infections

Background and purpose - To minimize the risk of hematogenous periprosthetic joint infection (HPJI), international and Dutch guidelines recommended antibiotic prophylaxis prior to dental procedures. Unclear definitions and contradictory recommendations in these guidelines have led to unnecessary antibiotic prescriptions. To formulate new guidelines, a joint committee of the Dutch Orthopaedic and Dental Societies conducted a systematic literature review to answer the following question: can antibiotic prophylaxis be recommended for patients (with joint prostheses) undergoing dental procedures in order to prevent dental HPJI? Methods - The Medline, Embase, and Cochrane databases were searched for randomized controlled trials (RCTs), reviews, and observational studies up to July 2015. Studies were included if they involved patients with joint implants undergoing dental procedures, and either considered HPJI as an outcome measure or described a correlation between HPJI and prophylactic antibiotics. A guideline was formulated using the GRADE method and AGREE II guidelines. Results - 9 studies were included in this systematic review. All were rated "very low quality of evidence". Additional literature was therefore consulted to address clinical questions that provide further insight into pathophysiology and risk factors. The 9 studies did not provide evidence that use of antibiotic prophylaxis reduces the incidence of dental HPJI, and the additional literature supported the conclusion that antibiotic prophylaxis should be discouraged in dental procedures. Interpretation - Prophylactic antibiotics in order to prevent dental HPJI should not be prescribed to patients with a normal or an impaired immune system function. Patients are recommended to maintain good oral hygiene and visit the dentist regularly.