Dataset Information

Adjuvant antibiotic-loaded bone cement: Concerns with current use and research to make it work.

ABSTRACT: Antibiotic-loaded bone cement (ALBC) is broadly used to treat orthopaedic infections based on the rationale that high-dose local delivery is essential to eradicate biofilm-associated bacteria. However, ALBC formulations are empirically based on drug susceptibility from routine laboratory testing, which is known to have limited clinical relevance for biofilms. There are also dosing concerns with nonstandardized, surgeon-directed, hand-mixed formulations, which have unknown release kinetics. On the basis of our knowledge of in vivo biofilms, pathogen virulence, safety issues with nonstandardized ALBC formulations, and questions about the cost-effectiveness of ALBC, there is a need to evaluate the evidence for this clinical practice. To this end, thought leaders in the field of musculoskeletal infection (MSKI) met on 1 August 2019 to review and debate published and anecdotal information, which highlighted four major concerns about current ALBC use: (a) substantial lack of level 1 evidence to demonstrate efficacy; (b) ALBC formulations become subtherapeutic following early release, which risks induction of antibiotic resistance, and exacerbated infection from microbial colonization of the carrier; (c) the absence of standardized formulation protocols, and Food and Drug Administration-approved high-dose ALBC products to use following resection in MSKI treatment; and (d) absence of a validated assay to determine the minimum biofilm eradication concentration to predict ALBC efficacy against patient specific micro-organisms. Here, we describe these concerns in detail, and propose areas in need of research.

SUBMITTER: Schwarz EM

PROVIDER: S-EPMC7390691 | biostudies-literature | 2021 Feb

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Adjuvant antibiotic-loaded bone cement: Concerns with current use and research to make it work.

Schwarz Edward M EM McLaren Alex C AC Sculco Thomas P TP Brause Barry B Bostrom Mathias M Kates Stephen L SL Parvizi Javad J Alt Volker V Arnold William V WV Carli Alberto A Chen Antonia F AF Choe Hyonmin H Coraça-Huber Débora C DC Cross Michael M Ghert Michelle M Hickok Noreen N Jennings Jessica Amber JA Joshi Manjari M Metsemakers Willem-Jan WJ Ninomiya Mark M Nishitani Kohei K Oh Irvin I Padgett Douglas D Ricciardi Benjamin B Saeed Kordo K Sendi Parham P Springer Bryan B Stoodley Paul P Wenke Joseph C JC

Journal of orthopaedic research : official publication of the Orthopaedic Research Society 20200302 2

Antibiotic-loaded bone cement (ALBC) is broadly used to treat orthopaedic infections based on the rationale that high-dose local delivery is essential to eradicate biofilm-associated bacteria. However, ALBC formulations are empirically based on drug susceptibility from routine laboratory testing, which is known to have limited clinical relevance for biofilms. There are also dosing concerns with nonstandardized, surgeon-directed, hand-mixed formulations, which have unknown release kinetics. On th ...[more]

PMID: 31997412

Similar Datasets

Project description:Background and purposeThe purpose of this study was to investigate the effect of incorporating chitosan (Ch) and chitosan oligosaccharides (ChO) into the commercially premixed antibiotic-loaded bone cement (ALBC). We compare antibiotic release profiles, antibacterial activity, and mechanical properties among different ALBC formulations. The hypothesis was that increasing the amount of Ch and ChO in the cement mixture would increase the antibiotics released and bacterial control. ALBC mixed with Ch or ChO may create a greater effect due to its superior dissolving property.Materials and methodsThe bone cement samples used in this project were made from Copal® G+V composed of vancomycin and gentamicin. To prepare the Ch and the ChO mixed bone cement samples, different amounts of Ch and ChO were added to the polymethylmethacrylate matrix with three concentrations (1%, 5%, and 10%). Drug elution assay, antimicrobial assay, in vitro cytotoxicity, and mechanical properties were conducted.ResultsBone cement samples made from Copal® G+V alone or combined with Ch or ChO can release vancomycin and gentamicin into the phosphate-buffered saline. Mixing ChO into the bone cements can increase the amount of drug released more than Ch. ChO 10% gave the highest amount of antibiotics released. All samples showed good antibacterial properties with good biocompatibility in vitro. The microhardness values of the Ch and ChO groups increased significantly compared to the control group. In all groups tested, the microhardness of bone cements was reduced after the drug eluted out. However, this reduction of the Ch and ChO groups was in line with the control.InterpretationVarious attempts have been made to improve the ALBC efficacy. In our study, the best bone cement formulation was bone cement mixed with ChO (10%), which had the highest drug release profiles, was biocompatible, and contained antibacterial properties with acceptable mechanical properties. This phenomenon could result from the superior water solubility of the ChO. When ChO leaves the bone cement specimens, it generates pores that could act as a path that exposes the bone cement matrix to the surrounding medium, increasing antibiotic elution. From all above, ChO is a promising substance that could be added to ALBC in order to increase the drug elution rate. However, more in vitro and in vivo experiments are needed before being used in the clinic.

Project description:PurposeAntibiotic-loaded bone cement (ALBC) was usually used to prevent periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) in primary total knee arthroplasty (PTKA), but whether to use ALBC or plain bone cement in PTKA remains unclear. We aimed to compare the occurrence rate of PJI using two different cements, and to investigate the efficacy of different antibiotic types and doses administered in preventing surgical site infection (SSI) with ALBC.MethodsThe availability of ALBC for preventing PJI was evaluated by using a systematic review and meta-analysis referring to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines. Existing articles until December 2021 involving PTKA patients with both ALBC and plain bone cement cohorts were scanned by searching "total knee arthroplasty", "antibiotic-loaded cement", "antibiotic prophylaxis", "antibiotic-impregnated cement" and "antibiotic-laden cement" in the database of PubMed/MEDLINE, Embase, Web of Science and the Cochrane Library. Subgroup analysis included the effectiveness of different antibiotic types and doses in preventing SSI with ALBC. The modified Jadad scale was employed to score the qualities of included articles.ResultsEleven quantitative studies were enrolled, including 34,159 knees undergoing PTKA. The meta-analysis results demonstrated that the use of prophylactic ALBC could significantly reduce the prevalence of deep incisional SSI after PTKA, whereas there was no significant reduction in the rate of superficial incisional SSI. Moreover, gentamicin-loaded cement was effective in preventing deep incisional SSI, and the use of high-dose ALBC significantly reduced the rate of deep incisional SSI after PTKA. Besides, no significant adverse reactions and complications were stated during the use of ALBC in PTKA.ConclusionThe preventive application of ALBC during PTKA could reduce the rates of deep PJI. Furthermore, bone cement containing gentamicin and high-dose ALBC could even better prevent deep infection after PTKA. However, the existing related articles are mostly single-center and retrospective studies, and further high-quality ones are needed for confirmation.

Project description:IntroductionThe current evidence on the efficacy of antibiotic-loaded bone cement (ALBC) in reducing the risk of periprosthetic joint infections (PJI) after primary joint reconstruction is insufficient. In several European countries, the use of ALBC is routine practice unlike in the USA where ALBC use is not approved in low-risk patients. Therefore, we designed a double-blinded pragmatic multicentre register-based randomised controlled non-inferiority trial to investigate the effects of ALBC compared with plain bone cement in primary total knee arthroplasty (TKA).Methods and analysisA minimum of 9,172 patients undergoing full-cemented primary TKA will be recruited and equally randomised into the ALBC group and the plain bone cement group. This trial will be conducted in Norwegian hospitals that routinely perform cemented primary TKA. The primary outcome will be risk of revision surgery due to PJI at 1-year of follow-up. Secondary outcomes will be: risk of revision due to any reason including aseptic loosening at 1, 6, 10 and 20 years of follow-up; patient-related outcome measures like function, pain, satisfaction and health-related quality of life at 1, 6 and 10 years of follow-up; risk of changes in the microbial pattern and resistance profiles of organisms cultured in subsequent revisions at 1, 6, 10 and 20 years of follow-up; cost-effectiveness of routine ALBC versus plain bone cement use in primary TKA. We will use 1:1 randomisation with random permuted blocks and stratify by participating hospitals to randomise patients to receive ALBC or plain bone cement. Inclusion, randomisation and follow-up will be through the Norwegian Arthroplasty Register.Ethics and disseminationThe trial was approved by the Western Norway Regional Committees on Medical and Health Research Ethics (reference number: 2019/751/REK vest) on 21 June 2019. The findings of this trial will be disseminated through peer-reviewed publications and conference presentations.Trial registration numberNCT04135170.

Dataset Information

Adjuvant antibiotic-loaded bone cement: Concerns with current use and research to make it work.

Publications

Adjuvant antibiotic-loaded bone cement: Concerns with current use and research to make it work.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets