Wouthuyzen-Bakker Marjan, Benito Natividad, Soriano Alex
Department of Medical Microbiology and Infection Prevention, University of Groningen, University Medical Center Groningen, Groningen, the Netherlands
Infectious Diseases Unit, Department of Internal Medicine, Hospital de la Santa Creu i Sant Pau, Institut d'Investigació Biomèdica Sant Pau, Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona, Barcelona, Spain.
J Clin Microbiol. 2017 Sep;55(9):2765-2774. doi: 10.1128/JCM.00640-17. Epub 2017 Jun 28.
Obtaining reliable cultures during revision arthroplasty is important to adequately diagnose and treat a prosthetic joint infection (PJI). The influence of antimicrobial prophylaxis on culture results remains unclear. Since withholding prophylaxis increases the risk for surgical site infections, clarification on this topic is critical. A systematic review was performed with the following research question: in patients who undergo revision surgery of a prosthetic joint, does preoperative antimicrobial prophylaxis affect the culture yield of intraoperative samples in comparison with nonpreoperative antimicrobial prophylaxis? Seven articles were included in the final analysis. In most studies, standard diagnostic culture techniques were used. In patients with a PJI, pooled analysis showed a culture yield of 88% (145/165) in the prophylaxis group versus 95% (344/362) in the nonprophylaxis group ( = 0.004). Subanalysis of patients with chronic PJIs showed positive cultures in 88% (78/89) versus 91% (52/57), respectively ( = 0.59). In patients with a suspected chronic infection, a maximum difference of 4% in culture yield between the prophylaxis and nonprophylaxis groups was observed. With the use of standard culture techniques, antimicrobial prophylaxis seems to affect cultures in a minority of patients. Along with the known risk of surgical site infections due to inadequate timing of antimicrobial prophylaxis, we discourage the postponement of prophylaxis until tissue samples are obtained in revision surgery. Future studies are necessary to conclude whether the small percentage of false-negative cultures after prophylaxis can be further reduced with the use of more-sensitive culture techniques, like sonication.
在翻修关节成形术中获取可靠的培养物对于充分诊断和治疗人工关节感染(PJI)至关重要。抗菌预防对培养结果的影响尚不清楚。由于停用预防措施会增加手术部位感染的风险,因此对该主题的阐明至关重要。进行了一项系统评价,研究问题如下:在接受人工关节翻修手术的患者中,与未进行术前抗菌预防相比,术前抗菌预防是否会影响术中样本的培养阳性率?最终分析纳入了7篇文章。在大多数研究中,使用了标准的诊断培养技术。在PJI患者中,汇总分析显示预防组的培养阳性率为88%(145/165),而未预防组为95%(344/362)(P = 0.004)。对慢性PJI患者的亚分析显示,培养阳性率分别为88%(78/89)和91%(52/57)(P = 0.59)。在疑似慢性感染的患者中,预防组和未预防组的培养阳性率最大差异为4%。使用标准培养技术时,抗菌预防似乎仅在少数患者中影响培养结果。鉴于抗菌预防时机不当会导致手术部位感染这一已知风险,我们不鼓励在翻修手术中推迟预防措施直至获取组织样本。未来有必要进行研究,以确定使用更敏感的培养技术(如超声处理)是否可以进一步降低预防后假阴性培养的小比例。