Background and purpose — The long-term results of the 1-or 2-stage revision procedure and infection-free prosthesis survival in a tertiary referral center are unknown. In this retrospective observational study, the long-term results of infection control and infection-free prosthesis survival of the peri-prosthetic joint infection-related 1-and 2-stage revision procedure are evaluated. Furthermore, the merits of performing an antibiotic-free window in the 2-stage revision is evaluated. Patients and methods — All patients who received a 1-or 2-stage revision procedure of the hip or knee between 2010 and 2017 were included. Data was collected on patient and infection characteristics. The primary treatment aim was successful infection control without the use of antibiotic therapy afterwards. Infection-free survival analysis was performed using the Kaplan–Meier method with type of periprosthetic joint infection-related revision as covariate. Within the group of 2-stage revisions, use of an antibiotic-free window was selected as covariate. Results — 128 patients were treated for a periprosthetic joint infection-related revision procedure (81 hips and 47 knees). Successful infection control was achieved in 18 of 21 cases for the 1-stage and 89 out of 107 cases for the 2-stage revision procedure (83%) respectively after follow-up of more than 4 years. In addition, 2-stage revision procedure infection control was achieved in 52 of 60 cases with an anti-biotic-free interval and 37 of 45 cases without such interval (p = 0.6). The mean infection-free survival of the 1-stage revision was 90 months (95% CI 75–105) and 98 months (CI 90–106) for the 2-stage revision procedure. Interpretation — There seems to be no difference in infection control and infection-free survival between the 1-and 2-stage revision procedure. Second, an antibiotic-free window in the case of a 2-stage revision did not seem to influence treatment outcome. However, one must be cautious when interpreting these results due to confounding by indication and the small study population. Therefore, no definite conclusion can be drawn.@en

Implant infections caused by Staphylococcus aureus are difficult to treat due to biofilm formation, which complicates surgical and antibiotic treatment. We introduce an alternative approach using monoclonal antibodies (mAbs) targeting S. aureus and provide evidence of the specificity and biodistribution of S.-aureus-targeting antibodies in a mouse implant infection model. The monoclonal antibody 4497-IgG1 targeting wall teichoic acid in S. aureus was labeled with indium-111 using CHX-A”-DTPA as a chelator. Single Photon Emission Computed Tomography/computed tomographyscans were performed at 24, 72 and 120 h after administration of the 111In-4497 mAb in Balb/cAnNCrl mice with a subcutaneous implant that was pre-colonized with S. aureus biofilm. The biodistribution of this labelled antibody over various organs was visualized and quantified using SPECT/CT imaging, and was compared to the uptake at the target tissue with the implanted infection. Uptake of the 111In-4497 mAbs at the infected implant gradually increased from 8.34 %ID/cm3 at 24 h to 9.22 %ID/cm3 at 120 h. Uptake at the heart/blood pool decreased over time from 11.60 to 7.58 %ID/cm3, whereas the uptake in the other organs decreased from 7.26 to less than 4.66 %ID/cm3 at 120 h. The effective half-life of 111In-4497 mAbs was determined to be 59 h. In conclusion, 111In-4497 mAbs were found to specifically detect S. aureus and its biofilm with excellent and prolonged accumulation at the site of the colonized implant. Therefore, it has the potential to serve as a drug delivery system for the diagnostic and bactericidal treatment of biofilm.@en

Additively manufactured (AM) porous titanium implants may have an increased risk of implant-associated infection (IAI) due to their huge internal surfaces. However, the same surface, when biofunctionalized, can be used to prevent IAI. Here, we used a rat implant infection model to evaluate the biocompatibility and infection prevention performance of AM porous titanium against bioluminescent methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA). The specimens were biofunctionalized with Ag nanoparticles (NPs) using plasma electrolytic oxidation (PEO). Infection was initiated using either intramedullary injection in vivo or with in vitro inoculation of the implant prior to implantation. Nontreated (NT) implants were compared with PEO-treated implants with Ag NPs (PT-Ag), without Ag NPs (PT) and infection without an implant. After 7 days, the bacterial load and bone morphological changes were evaluated. When infection was initiated through in vivo injection, the presence of the implant did not enhance the infection, indicating that this technique may not assess the prevention but rather the treatment of IAIs. Following in vitro inoculation, the bacterial load on the implant and in the peri-implant bony tissue was reduced by over 90% for the PT-Ag implants compared to the PT and NT implants. All infected groups had enhanced osteomyelitis scores compared to the noninfected controls.@en

Introduction: Debridement, antibiotics and implant retention (DAIR) procedures are effective treatments for acute postoperative or acute hematogenous periprosthetic joint infections. However, literature reporting on the effectiveness of DAIR procedures performed after a one- or two-stage revision because of a prosthetic joint infection (PJI) (PJI-related revision arthroplasty) is scarce. The aim of this study is to retrospectively evaluate the infection control after 1 year of a DAIR procedure in the case of an early postoperative infection either after primary arthroplasty or after PJI-related revision arthroplasty. Materials and methods: All patients treated with a DAIR procedure within 3 months after onset of PJI between 2009 and 2017 were retrospectively included. Data were collected on patient and infection characteristics. All infections were confirmed by applying the Musculoskeletal Infection Society (MSIS) 2014 criteria. The primary outcome was successful control of infection at 1 year after a DAIR procedure, which was defined as the absence of clinical signs, such as pain, swelling, and erythema; radiological signs, such as protheses loosening; or laboratory signs, such as C-reactive protein (CRP) (<10) with no use of antibiotic therapy. Results: Sixty-seven patients were treated with a DAIR procedure (41 hips and 26 knees). Successful infection control rates of a DAIR procedure after primary arthroplasty (n=51) and after prior PJI-related revision arthroplasty (n=16) were 69 % and 56 %, respectively (p=0.38). The successful infection control rates of a DAIR procedure after an early acute infection (n=35) and after a hematogenous infection (n=16) following primary arthroplasty were both 69 % (p=1.00). Conclusion: In this limited study population, no statistically significant difference is found in infection control after 1 year between DAIR procedures after primary arthroplasty and PJI-related revision arthroplasty.@en

Introduction Implant infections caused by Staphylococcus aureus are responsible for high mortality and morbidity worldwide. Treatment of these infections can be difficult especially when bacterial biofilms are involved. In this study we investigate the potential of infrared photoimmunotherapy to eradicate staphylococcal infection in a mouse model. Methods A monoclonal antibody that targets Wall Teichoic Acid surface components of both S. aureus and its biofilm (4497-IgG1) was conjugated to a photosensitizer (IRDye700DX) and used as photoimmunotherapy in vitro and in vivo in mice with a subcutaneous implant pre-colonized with biofilm of Staphylococcus aureus. A dose of 400 μg and 200 μg of antibody-photosensitizer conjugate 4497-IgG–IRDye700DXwas administered intravenously to two groups of 5 mice. In addition, multiple control groups (vancomycin treated, unconjugated IRDye700DX and IRDye700DX conjugated to a non-specific antibody) were used to verify anti-microbial effects. Results In vitro results of 4497-IgG-IRDye700DX on pre-colonized (biofilm) implants showed significant (p<0.01) colony-forming units (CFU) reduction at a concentration of 5 μg of the antibody-photosensitizer conjugate. In vivo, treatment with 4497-IgG-IRDye700DX showed no significant CFU reduction at the implant infection. However, tissue around the implant did show a significant CFU reduction with 400 μg 4497-IgG-IRDye700DX compared to control groups (p = 0.037). Conclusion This study demonstrated the antimicrobial potential of photoimmunotherapy for selectively eliminating S. aureus in vivo. However, using a solid implant instead of a catheter could result in an increased bactericidal effect of 4497-IgG-IRDye700DX and administration locally around an implant (per operative) could become valuable applications in patients that are difficult to treat with conventional methods. We conclude that photoimmunotherapy could be a potential additional therapy in the treatment of implant related infections, but requires further improvement.@en