PDF herunterladen
CC BY-NC-ND 4.0 · Rev Bras Ortop (Sao Paulo) 2023; 58(03): 443-448
DOI: 10.1055/s-0042-1758368
Artigo Original
Joelho

Perfil microbiológico das infecções periprotéticas do joelho em um hospital do Sistema Único de Saúde especializado em cirurgias ortopédicas de alta complexidade[*]

Artikel in mehreren Sprachen: português | English
Alan de Paula Mozella 
1   Centro de Cirurgia do Joelho, Instituto Nacional de Traumatologia e Ortopedia (INTO), Rio de Janeiro, RJ, Brasil
,
Thales Nunes de Assunção 
1   Centro de Cirurgia do Joelho, Instituto Nacional de Traumatologia e Ortopedia (INTO), Rio de Janeiro, RJ, Brasil
,
Hugo Alexandre de Araújo Barros Cobra 
1   Centro de Cirurgia do Joelho, Instituto Nacional de Traumatologia e Ortopedia (INTO), Rio de Janeiro, RJ, Brasil
,
Sandra Tie Nishibe Minamoto 
1   Centro de Cirurgia do Joelho, Instituto Nacional de Traumatologia e Ortopedia (INTO), Rio de Janeiro, RJ, Brasil
,
Rodrigo Salim 
2   Departamento de Ortopedia e Anestesiologia, Faculdade de Medicina de Ribeirão Preto, Universidade de São Paulo (USP-RP), São Paulo, SP, Brasil
,
Ana Carolina Leal 
3   Divisão de Ensino e Pesquisa, Instituto Nacional de Traumatologia e Ortopedia (INTO), Rio de Janeiro, RJ, Brasil
› Institutsangaben Suporte Financeiro Não houve apoio financeiro de fontes públicas, comerciais ou sem fins lucrativos.
› Weitere Informationen
Auch verfügbar auf
   Lizenzen und Reprints

Resumo

Objetivo Identificar o perfil microbiológico das infecções periprotéticas do joelho tratadas em um hospital terciário brasileiro.

Métodos Todos os pacientes submetidos à cirurgia de revisão de artroplastia total do joelho (RATJ), no período compreendido entre novembro de 2019 e dezembro de 2021, e que tiveram o diagnóstico de infecção periprotética confirmado de acordo com critérios do International Consensus Meeting (ICM) 2018, foram incluídos no estudo.

Resultados Sessenta e dois pacientes foram diagnosticados com infecção periprotética (IAP) pelos critérios do International Consensus Meeting 2018. Culturas monomicrobianas foram identificadas em 79% e polimicrobianas em 21% dos casos. A bactéria mais frequentemente identificada nas culturas microbiológicas de tecidos e líquido sinovial foi o Staphylococcus aureus, presente em 26% dos pacientes com infecção periprotética. Infecções periprotéticas com culturas negativas ocorreram em 23% dos pacientes.

Conclusão Nossos resultados evidenciam: i) alta prevalência de bactérias do gênero Staphylococcus como causadores da IAP do joelho; ii) a alta incidência de infecções polimicrobianas nas infecções precoces e iii) IAP com culturas negativas ocorre em, aproximadamente, um quarto dos pacientes.

Palavras-chave

artroplastia do joelho - complicações pós-operatórias - injeções intra-articulares - infecções relacionadas à prótese

* Trabalho desenvolvido no Instituto Nacional de Traumatologia e Ortopedia (INTO), Rio de Janeiro, Brasil.




Publikationsverlauf

Eingereicht: 18. April 2022

Angenommen: 12. September 2022

Artikel online veröffentlicht:
29. Juni 2023

© 2023. Sociedade Brasileira de Ortopedia e Traumatologia. This is an open access article published by Thieme under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonDerivative-NonCommercial License, permitting copying and reproduction so long as the original work is given appropriate credit. Contents may not be used for commercial purposes, or adapted, remixed, transformed or built upon. (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/)

Thieme Revinter Publicações Ltda.
Rua do Matoso 170, Rio de Janeiro, RJ, CEP 20270-135, Brazil

 

  • Referências

  • 1 Delanois RE, Mistry JB, Gwam CU, Mohamed NS, Choksi US, Mont MA. Current Epidemiology of Revision Total Knee Arthroplasty in the United States. J Arthroplasty 2017; 32 (09) 2663-2668
    Google Scholar
  • 2 Evangelopoulos DS, Ahmad SS, Krismer AM. et al. Periprosthetic Infection: Major Cause of Early Failure of Primary and Revision Total Knee Arthroplasty. J Knee Surg 2019; 32 (10) 941-946
    Google Scholar
  • 3 Meyer JA, Zhu M, Cavadino A, Coleman B, Munro JT, Young SW. Infection and periprosthetic fracture are the leading causes of failure after aseptic revision total knee arthroplasty. Arch Orthop Trauma Surg 2021; 141 (08) 1373-1383
    Google Scholar
  • 4 McNally M, Sousa R, Wouthuyzen-Bakker M. et al. The EBJIS definition of periprosthetic joint infection. Bone Joint J 2021; 103-B (01) 18-25
    Google Scholar
  • 5 Parvizi J, Tan TL, Goswami K. et al. The 2018 Definition of Periprosthetic Hip and Knee Infection: An Evidence-Based and Validated Criteria. J Arthroplasty 2018; 33 (05) 1309-1314 .e2
    Google Scholar
  • 6 Schwarz EM, Parvizi J, Gehrke T. et al. 2018 International Consensus Meeting on Musculoskeletal Infection: Research Priorities from the General Assembly Questions. J Orthop Res 2019; 37 (05) 997-1006
    Google Scholar
  • 7 Zimmerli W, Trampuz A, Ochsner PE. Prosthetic-joint infections. N Engl J Med 2004; 351 (16) 1645-1654
    Google Scholar
  • 8 Morawietz L, Tiddens O, Mueller M. et al. Twenty-three neutrophil granulocytes in 10 high-power fields is the best histopathological threshold to differentiate between aseptic and septic endoprosthesis loosening. Histopathology 2009; 54 (07) 847-853
    Google Scholar
  • 9 Kalbian I, Park JW, Goswami K, Lee YK, Parvizi J, Koo KH. Culture-negative periprosthetic joint infection: prevalence, aetiology, evaluation, recommendations, and treatment. Int Orthop 2020; 44 (07) 1255-1261
    Google Scholar
  • 10 Tan TL, Kheir MM, Shohat N. et al. Culture-Negative Periprosthetic Joint Infection: An Update on What to Expect. JBJS Open Access 2018; 3 (03) e0060
    Google Scholar
  • 11 Palan J, Nolan C, Sarantos K, Westerman R, King R, Foguet P. Culture-negative periprosthetic joint infections. EFORT Open Rev 2019; 4 (10) 585-594
    Google Scholar
  • 12 Tarabichi M, Shohat N, Goswami K. et al. Diagnosis of Periprosthetic Joint Infection: The Potential of Next-Generation Sequencing. J Bone Joint Surg Am 2018; 100 (02) 147-154
    Google Scholar
  • 13 Drago L, Clerici P, Morelli I. et al. The World Association against Infection in Orthopaedics and Trauma (WAIOT) procedures for Microbiological Sampling and Processing for Periprosthetic Joint Infections (PJIs) and other Implant-Related Infections. J Clin Med 2019; 8 (07) E933
    Google Scholar
  • 14 Bémer P, Léger J, Tandé D. et al; Centre de Référence des Infections Ostéo-articulaires du Grand Ouest (CRIOGO) Study Team. How Many Samples and How Many Culture Media To Diagnose a Prosthetic Joint Infection: a Clinical and Microbiological Prospective Multicenter Study. J Clin Microbiol 2016; 54 (02) 385-391
    Google Scholar
  • 15 Tande AJ, Patel R. Prosthetic joint infection. Clin Microbiol Rev 2014; 27 (02) 302-345
    Google Scholar
  • 16 Peel TN, Cheng AC, Buising KL, Choong PFM. Microbiological aetiology, epidemiology, and clinical profile of prosthetic joint infections: are current antibiotic prophylaxis guidelines effective?. Antimicrob Agents Chemother 2012; 56 (05) 2386-2391
    Google Scholar
  • 17 Cobo J, Miguel LG, Euba G. et al. Early prosthetic joint infection: outcomes with debridement and implant retention followed by antibiotic therapy. Clin Microbiol Infect 2011; 17 (11) 1632-1637
    Google Scholar
  • 18 Rieber H, Frontzek A, Heinrich S. et al. Microbiological diagnosis of polymicrobial periprosthetic joint infection revealed superiority of investigated tissue samples compared to sonicate fluid generated from the implant surface. Int J Infect Dis 2021; 106: 302-307
    Google Scholar
  • 19 Tsai Y, Chang CH, Lin YC, Lee SH, Hsieh PH, Chang Y. Different microbiological profiles between hip and knee prosthetic joint infections. J Orthop Surg (Hong Kong) 2019; 27 (02) 2309499019847768
    Google Scholar
  • 20 Li C, Renz N, Trampuz A, Ojeda-Thies C. Twenty common errors in the diagnosis and treatment of periprosthetic joint infection. [published correction appears in Int Orthop 2019 Dec 10] Int Orthop 2020; 44 (01) 3-14
    Google Scholar