Antibiotic Eluting Bone Void Filler Versus Systemic Antibiotics For Pedal Osteomyelitis.

IF 1.3 4区 医学 Q2 Medicine Journal of Foot & Ankle Surgery Pub Date : 2024-08-23 DOI:10.1053/j.jfas.2024.08.010
Vandana Venkateswaran, Madhu Tiruveedhula, Justin Edwards, Shiva Dindyal, Michael Mulcahy, Ankur Thapar
{"title":"Antibiotic Eluting Bone Void Filler Versus Systemic Antibiotics For Pedal Osteomyelitis.","authors":"Vandana Venkateswaran, Madhu Tiruveedhula, Justin Edwards, Shiva Dindyal, Michael Mulcahy, Ankur Thapar","doi":"10.1053/j.jfas.2024.08.010","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Osteomyelitis complicates 20% of patients with infected diabetic foot ulcers. In this study, 2 strategies for treating pedal osteomyelitis were compared in a pilot study. This was a retrospective, non-randomized, single center 2 arm cohort study, conducted between 2020 and 2022 involving 53 patients at a tertiary limb salvage unit. All patients were managed with debridement and proximal bone biopsy. Group A was treated with systemic antibiotics for up to 6 weeks. Group B had vancomycin or gentamycin eluting bone void filler implanted into the diseased bone medullary cavity(s) and 1 week of oral antibiotics. Patients were followed independently for the primary endpoint of osteomyelitis treatment failure and secondary endpoints of amputation free survival, wound healing, minor amputation, and treatment-limiting side-effects. Survival analysis demonstrated no significant difference in treatment failure (p = .35) or amputation free survival (p = .46). Limb salvage rates were 88% in Group A and 89% in Group B. Wounds healed in 85% in Group A and 89% in Group B. Minor amputations occurred in 21% in Group A and 11% in Group B. Treatment limiting side effects occurred in 6% in Group A and were absent in Group B. In conclusion, the use of antibiotic eluting bone void filler appeared safe without extended systemic antibiotics in this study. Group B had fewer intravenous lines, requirement for home nursing, and treatment limiting side effects. A larger randomized controlled trial examining longer term clinical and radiological efficacy, treatment costs and side effects is warranted.</p>","PeriodicalId":50191,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Foot & Ankle Surgery","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.3000,"publicationDate":"2024-08-23","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Foot & Ankle Surgery","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1053/j.jfas.2024.08.010","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"Medicine","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Osteomyelitis complicates 20% of patients with infected diabetic foot ulcers. In this study, 2 strategies for treating pedal osteomyelitis were compared in a pilot study. This was a retrospective, non-randomized, single center 2 arm cohort study, conducted between 2020 and 2022 involving 53 patients at a tertiary limb salvage unit. All patients were managed with debridement and proximal bone biopsy. Group A was treated with systemic antibiotics for up to 6 weeks. Group B had vancomycin or gentamycin eluting bone void filler implanted into the diseased bone medullary cavity(s) and 1 week of oral antibiotics. Patients were followed independently for the primary endpoint of osteomyelitis treatment failure and secondary endpoints of amputation free survival, wound healing, minor amputation, and treatment-limiting side-effects. Survival analysis demonstrated no significant difference in treatment failure (p = .35) or amputation free survival (p = .46). Limb salvage rates were 88% in Group A and 89% in Group B. Wounds healed in 85% in Group A and 89% in Group B. Minor amputations occurred in 21% in Group A and 11% in Group B. Treatment limiting side effects occurred in 6% in Group A and were absent in Group B. In conclusion, the use of antibiotic eluting bone void filler appeared safe without extended systemic antibiotics in this study. Group B had fewer intravenous lines, requirement for home nursing, and treatment limiting side effects. A larger randomized controlled trial examining longer term clinical and radiological efficacy, treatment costs and side effects is warranted.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
抗生素洗脱骨腔填充剂与全身抗生素治疗腓骨骨髓炎的对比
20% 的糖尿病足溃疡患者会并发骨髓炎。本研究在一项试点研究中比较了治疗足骨髓炎的两种策略。这是一项回顾性、非随机、单中心双臂队列研究,于 2020-2022 年间进行,涉及一家三级肢体救治单位的 53 名患者。所有患者都接受了清创术和近端骨活检。A 组接受长达 6 周的全身抗生素治疗。B 组在病变骨髓腔内植入万古霉素或庆大霉素洗脱骨空洞填充物,并口服抗生素 1 周。对患者进行独立随访,主要终点是骨髓炎治疗失败,次要终点是无截肢生存期、伤口愈合、轻微截肢和治疗限制性副作用。生存分析表明,治疗失败率(P=0.35)和无截肢生存率(P=0.46)无显著差异。肢体挽救率 A 组为 88%,B 组为 89%;伤口愈合率 A 组为 85%,B 组为 89%;轻微截肢发生率 A 组为 21%,B 组为 11%;治疗限制性副作用发生率 A 组为 6%,B 组为零。B 组的静脉注射管路、家庭护理要求和治疗副作用较少。有必要进行更大规模的随机对照试验,对长期临床和放射学疗效、治疗成本和副作用进行研究。临床证据水平:这是一项回顾性队列研究,因此临床证据级别为 2。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Journal of Foot & Ankle Surgery
Journal of Foot & Ankle Surgery ORTHOPEDICS-SURGERY
CiteScore
2.30
自引率
7.70%
发文量
234
审稿时长
29.8 weeks
期刊介绍: The Journal of Foot & Ankle Surgery is the leading source for original, clinically-focused articles on the surgical and medical management of the foot and ankle. Each bi-monthly, peer-reviewed issue addresses relevant topics to the profession, such as: adult reconstruction of the forefoot; adult reconstruction of the hindfoot and ankle; diabetes; medicine/rheumatology; pediatrics; research; sports medicine; trauma; and tumors.
期刊最新文献
Outcomes of naviculocuneiform arthrodesis with and without adjunct arthrodesis. Concomitant osteochondral lesion of the talus in ankle instability: Utilizing clinical presentation to guide imaging decision. Diabetic Foot Infection Severity as a Predictor of Re-ulceration Following Partial Forefoot Amputation. Predictive factors to return to sport after surgical management of ankle fractures. Reply to: EVALUATION OF THE HEALING STATUS OF LATERAL ANKLE LIGAMENTS SIX WEEKS AFTER AN ACUTE ANKLE SPRAIN.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1