Continuous local antibiotic perfusion for orthopaedic infections: A systematic review and pooled individual participant data analysis of observational reports.

IF 1.6 4区 医学 Journal of Orthopaedic Surgery Pub Date : 2026-01-01 Epub Date: 2026-04-15 DOI:10.1177/10225536261441913
Patrick Ze-En Ng, Norio Yamamoto, Mari Yamamoto, Ke Wei Hiew, Wei Ching Cheong, Jia Shen Goh, Akihiro Saitsu, Glenn Xin-Zhang Lee, Naoya Inagaki
{"title":"Continuous local antibiotic perfusion for orthopaedic infections: A systematic review and pooled individual participant data analysis of observational reports.","authors":"Patrick Ze-En Ng, Norio Yamamoto, Mari Yamamoto, Ke Wei Hiew, Wei Ching Cheong, Jia Shen Goh, Akihiro Saitsu, Glenn Xin-Zhang Lee, Naoya Inagaki","doi":"10.1177/10225536261441913","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>BackgroundOrthopaedic infections are difficult to eradicate because biofilm and poor local vascularity limit antibiotic exposure. Continuous local antibiotic perfusion (CLAP) delivers sustained, titratable antibiotics directly into infected compartments. We used harmonised individual participant data (IPD) to quantify early effectiveness, longer-term control, safety, and patient-level modifiers.MethodsWe performed an IPD review of observational reports using CLAP as primary or adjunctive therapy (January-May 2025). The primary outcome was 30-days early response (C-reactive protein ≤3 mg/L or earliest sustained clinical/wound improvement). Secondary outcomes were durable infection control at ≥6 and ≥12 months using evaluable denominators with best-worst bounds, infection-free days) and safety. One-stage analyses used mixed-effects logistic regression; Restricted Mean Survival Time (RMST) was preferred when proportional hazards were violated. Multiple imputation supported inferences.ResultsEighty-one studies (<i>n</i> = 256) were included; 164 patients had observed time-to-response. Fifty-nine percent achieved a 30-days response; median time-to-response was 26 days. Implant involvement was associated with lower odds of 30-days response; trajectories were slower with implants and higher organism burden (polymicrobial ≥3), while osteomyelitis responded faster than fracture-related infection. RMST (30) showed delays with implants (+4.43 days) and polymicrobial infection (+6.74 days), and faster response for osteomyelitis versus fracture-related infection (-9.06 days). Durable control among evaluable patients was 88.4% at ≥6 months and 90.2% at ≥12 months, with best-worst bounds of 89.2-82.2% and 90.9-83.5%, respectively. Infection-free-day RMST supported substantial time free of recurrent infection within the first year. Adverse events were uncommon; renal events were generally reversible.ConclusionsCLAP achieved encouraging early response and high durability among evaluable patients, with slower trajectories when implants were retained or pathogen burden was high and faster responses in osteomyelitis. Safety appeared acceptable with monitoring. Prospective comparative studies using standardised endpoints, with RMST for non-proportional hazards, are warranted.</p>","PeriodicalId":16608,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Orthopaedic Surgery","volume":"34 1","pages":"10225536261441913"},"PeriodicalIF":1.6000,"publicationDate":"2026-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Orthopaedic Surgery","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/10225536261441913","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2026/4/15 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

BackgroundOrthopaedic infections are difficult to eradicate because biofilm and poor local vascularity limit antibiotic exposure. Continuous local antibiotic perfusion (CLAP) delivers sustained, titratable antibiotics directly into infected compartments. We used harmonised individual participant data (IPD) to quantify early effectiveness, longer-term control, safety, and patient-level modifiers.MethodsWe performed an IPD review of observational reports using CLAP as primary or adjunctive therapy (January-May 2025). The primary outcome was 30-days early response (C-reactive protein ≤3 mg/L or earliest sustained clinical/wound improvement). Secondary outcomes were durable infection control at ≥6 and ≥12 months using evaluable denominators with best-worst bounds, infection-free days) and safety. One-stage analyses used mixed-effects logistic regression; Restricted Mean Survival Time (RMST) was preferred when proportional hazards were violated. Multiple imputation supported inferences.ResultsEighty-one studies (n = 256) were included; 164 patients had observed time-to-response. Fifty-nine percent achieved a 30-days response; median time-to-response was 26 days. Implant involvement was associated with lower odds of 30-days response; trajectories were slower with implants and higher organism burden (polymicrobial ≥3), while osteomyelitis responded faster than fracture-related infection. RMST (30) showed delays with implants (+4.43 days) and polymicrobial infection (+6.74 days), and faster response for osteomyelitis versus fracture-related infection (-9.06 days). Durable control among evaluable patients was 88.4% at ≥6 months and 90.2% at ≥12 months, with best-worst bounds of 89.2-82.2% and 90.9-83.5%, respectively. Infection-free-day RMST supported substantial time free of recurrent infection within the first year. Adverse events were uncommon; renal events were generally reversible.ConclusionsCLAP achieved encouraging early response and high durability among evaluable patients, with slower trajectories when implants were retained or pathogen burden was high and faster responses in osteomyelitis. Safety appeared acceptable with monitoring. Prospective comparative studies using standardised endpoints, with RMST for non-proportional hazards, are 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
骨科感染的持续局部抗生素灌注:观察性报告的系统回顾和汇总个体参与者数据分析。
骨科感染很难根除,因为生物膜和不良的局部血管限制了抗生素的暴露。持续局部抗生素灌注(CLAP)提供持续的,可滴定的抗生素直接进入感染室。我们使用统一的个体参与者数据(IPD)来量化早期有效性、长期控制、安全性和患者水平的调节剂。方法:我们对使用CLAP作为主要或辅助治疗的观察性报告(2025年1月至5月)进行了IPD回顾。主要终点是30天早期反应(c反应蛋白≤3mg /L或最早的持续临床/伤口改善)。次要结果是≥6个月和≥12个月的持久感染控制(使用可评估的分母,最佳最差界限,无感染天数)和安全性。单阶段分析采用混合效应logistic回归;当违反比例风险时,首选限制平均生存时间(RMST)。多重输入支持推理。结果共纳入81项研究(n = 256);164例患者观察到反应时间。59%的人在30天内做出反应;中位反应时间为26天。植入物受损伤与较低的30天反应几率相关;植入物和较高的微生物负担(多微生物≥3)的轨迹较慢,而骨髓炎的反应比骨折相关感染快。RMST(30)显示植入物延迟(+4.43天)和多微生物感染延迟(+6.74天),骨髓炎比骨折相关感染反应更快(-9.06天)。≥6个月时可评估患者的持久控制率为88.4%,≥12个月时为90.2%,最佳-最差界限分别为89.2-82.2%和90.9-83.5%。无感染日RMST支持在第一年内无复发感染的大量时间。不良事件不常见;肾脏事件通常是可逆的。结论:在可评估的患者中,sclap获得了令人鼓舞的早期反应和高持久性,当植入物保留或病原体负担高时,其轨迹较慢,而骨髓炎患者的反应较快。有了监控,安全性似乎是可以接受的。使用标准化终点的前瞻性比较研究是有必要的,非比例风险采用RMST。
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
自引率
0.00%
发文量
91
期刊介绍: Journal of Orthopaedic Surgery is an open access peer-reviewed journal publishing original reviews and research articles on all aspects of orthopaedic surgery. It is the official journal of the Asia Pacific Orthopaedic Association. The journal welcomes and will publish materials of a diverse nature, from basic science research to clinical trials and surgical techniques. The journal encourages contributions from all parts of the world, but special emphasis is given to research of particular relevance to the Asia Pacific region.
期刊最新文献
Repair of the medial meniscus posterior root tear using an all-inside meniscal repair device is not necessary during open-wedge high tibial osteotomy. Comparative outcomes of single condylar replacement and total knee arthroplasty in elderly patients with knee osteoarthritis: A controlled clinical study. Optimizing multimodal diagnostic strategies for periprosthetic joint infection: Current advances and integration. Effect of epidural patient-controlled analgesia on pain relief after lumbar spinal surgeries-a case-control study. Performance and reliability of state-of-the-art LLMs in complex hand surgery scenarios: A prospective cross-sectional, double-blinded study.
×
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学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
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