Purpose: Infection near metal implants is a problem that presents challenging treatment dilemmas for physicians. The aim of this study was to analyse the efficacy of two treatment protocols for acute fracture-related infections.
Methods: Seventy-one patients in two level-1 trauma centres in the Netherlands were retrospectively included in this study. These trauma centres had different standardised protocols for acute infection after osteosynthesis: 39 patients were selected from protocol A and 32 from protocol B. Both protocols involve immediate surgical debridement and soft tissue coverage, but differ in antibiotic approach: (A) immediate empirical combination antibiotic therapy with rifampicin, or (B) postponed (1-5 days) targeted antibiotic therapy. The primary outcome of these protocols was success, defined as a fracture healing in the absence of infection. The secondary outcome was antibiotic resistance patterns. Logistic regression was conducted on patients and treatment-related factors in association with primary success.
Results: Primary success was achieved in 72% of protocol A patients, in 47% of those in protocol B (P = 0.033), and with prolongation of treatment success was achieved in 90% and 78% of patients, respectively. Protocol A exhibited a better primary success rate (adjusted OR 3.45, CI 1.13-10.52) when adjusted for age and soft tissue injury. There was no significant difference in antibiotic resistance between the two protocols.
Conclusion: Both protocols yielded high overall success rates. Immediate empirical antibiotics can be used safely without additional bacterial resistance and may contribute to increased success rates.
Keywords: Antibiotics; FRI; Fracture; Infection; ORIF; Treatment.