Acute haematogenous prosthetic joint infection: prospective evaluation of medical and surgical management

The optimum treatment for prosthetic joint infections has not been clearly defined. We report our experience of the management of acute haematogenous prosthetic joint infection (AHPJI) in patients during a 3-year prospective study in nine Spanish hospitals. Fifty patients, of whom 30 (60%) were female, with a median age of 76 years, were diagnosed with AHPJI. The median infection-free period following joint replacement was 4.9 years. Symptoms were acute in all cases. A distant previous infection and/or bacteraemia were identified in 48%. The aetiology was as follows: Staphylococcus aureus, 19; Streptococcus spp., 14; Gram-negative bacilli, 12; anaerobes, two; and mixed infections, three. Thirty-four (68%) patients were treated with a conservative surgical approach (CSA) with implant retention, and 16 had prosthesis removal. At 2-year follow-up, 24 (48%) were cured, seven (14%) had relapsed, seven (14%) had died, five (10%) had persistent infection, five had re-infection, and two had an unknown evolution. Overall, the treatment failure rates were 57.8% in staphylococcal infections and 14.3% in streptococcal infections. There were no failures in patients with Gram-negative bacillary. By multivariate analysis, CSA was the only factor independently associated with treatment failure (OR 11.6; 95% CI 1.29-104.8). We were unable to identify any factors predicting treatment failure in CSA patients, although a Gram-negative bacillary aetiology was a protective factor. These data suggest that although conservative surgery was the only factor independently associated with treatment failure, it could be the first therapeutic choice for the management of Gram-negative bacillary and streptococcal AHPJI, and for some cases with acute S. aureus infections.

Drug assessment by a Pharmacy and Therapeutics committee: from drug selection criteria to use in clinical practice.

BACKGROUND In Spain, hospital medicines are assessed and selected by local Pharmacy and Therapeutics committees (PTCs). Of all the drugs assessed, cancer drugs are particularly important because of their budgetary impact and the sometimes arguable added value with respect to existing alternatives. This study analyzed the PTC drug selection process and the main objective was to evaluate the degree of compliance of prescriptions for oncology drugs with their criteria for use. METHODS This was a retrospective observational study (May 2007 to April 2010) of PTC-assessed drugs. The variables measured to describe the committee's activity were number of drugs assessed per year and number of drugs included in any of these settings: without restrictions, with criteria for use, and not included in formulary. These drugs were also analyzed by therapeutic group. To assess the degree of compliance of prescriptions, a score was calculated to determine whether prescriptions for bevacizumab, cetuximab, trastuzumab, and bortezomib were issued in accordance with PTC drug use criteria. RESULTS The PTC received requests for inclusion of 40 drugs, of which 32 were included in the hospital formulary (80.0%). Criteria for use were established for 28 (87.5%) of the drugs included. In total, 293 patients were treated with the four cancer drugs in eight different therapeutic indications. The average prescription compliance scores were as follows: bevacizumab, 83% for metastatic colorectal cancer, 100% for metastatic breast cancer, and 82.3% for non-small-cell lung cancer; cetuximab, 62.0% for colorectal cancer and 50% for head and neck cancer; trastuzumab, 95.1% for early breast cancer and 82.4% for metastatic breast cancer; and bortezomib, 63.7% for multiple myeloma. CONCLUSION The degree of compliance with criteria for use of cancer drugs was reasonably high. PTC functions need to be changed so that they can carry out more innovative tasks, such as monitoring conditions for drug use.