Implant materials and prosthetic joint infection: the battle with the biofilm

Donald J Davidson, David Spratt, Alexander D Liddle, Donald J Davidson, David Spratt, Alexander D Liddle

Abstract

Prosthetic joint infection (PJI) is associated with poor clinical outcomes and is expensive to treat.Although uncommon overall (affecting between 0.5% and 2.2% of cases), PJI is one of the most commonly encountered complications of joint replacement and its incidence is increasing, putting a significant burden on healthcare systems.Once established, PJI is extremely difficult to eradicate as bacteria exist in biofilms which protect them from antibiotics and the host immune response.Improved understanding of the microbial pathology in PJI has generated potential new treatment strategies for prevention and eradication of biofilm associated infection including modification of implant surfaces to prevent adhesion of bacteria.Much research is currently ongoing looking at different implant surface coatings and modifications, and although most of this work has not translated into clinical medicine there has been some early clinical success. Cite this article: EFORT Open Rev 2019;4:633-639. DOI: 10.1302/2058-5241.4.180095.

Keywords: biofilm; implant; material; microbiology; prosthetic joint infection; surface coating.

Conflict of interest statement

ICMJE Conflict of interest statement: DJD reports grants from Royal College of Surgeons Research Fellowship and grants from ORUK during the conduct of the study. ADL reports two unrestricted charitable grants from Orthopaedic Research UK, Royal College of Surgeons; expenses for travel to educational meetings for Stryker, Zimmer, Biomet, de Puy and Implantcast. DS reports no conflict of interest relevant to this work.

© 2019 The author(s).

References

    1. Tsang STJ, Gwynne PJ, Gallagher MP, Simpson AHRW. The biofilm eradication activity of acetic acid in the management of periprosthetic joint infection. Bone Joint Res 2018;7:517–523.
    1. Parvizi J, Fassihi SC, Enayatollahi MA. Diagnosis of periprosthetic joint infection following hip and knee arthroplasty. Orthop Clin North Am 2016;47:505–515.
    1. Yoon B-H, Ha Y-C, Lee Y-K, Koo K-H. Postoperative deep infection after cemented versus cementless total hip arthroplasty: a meta-analysis. J Arthroplasty 2015;30:1823–1827.
    1. Jafari SM, Coyle C, Mortazavi SMJ, Sharkey PF, Parvizi J. Revision hip arthroplasty: infection is the most common cause of failure. Clin Orthop Relat Res 2010;468:2046–2051.
    1. Lenguerrand E, Whitehouse MR, Beswick AD, Toms AD, Porter ML, Blom AW; National Joint Registry for England, Wales, Northern Ireland and the Isle of Man. Description of the rates, trends and surgical burden associated with revision for prosthetic joint infection following primary and revision knee replacements in England and Wales: an analysis of the National Joint Registry for England, Wales, Northern Ireland and the Isle of Man. BMJ Open 2017;7:e014056.
    1. National Joint Registry for England, Wales, Northern Ireland and the Isle of Man. Annual report. (date last accessed 18 October 2019).
    1. Kurtz S, Ong K, Lau E, Mowat F, Halpern M. Projections of primary and revision hip and knee arthroplasty in the United States from 2005 to 2030. J Bone Joint Surg Am 2007;89:780–785.
    1. Gundtoft PH, Overgaard S, Schønheyder HC, Møller JK, Kjærsgaard-Andersen P, Pedersen AB. The ‘true’ incidence of surgically treated deep prosthetic joint infection after 32,896 primary total hip arthroplasties: a prospective cohort study. Acta Orthop 2015;86:326–334.
    1. Leonard HA, Liddle AD, Burke O, Murray DW, Pandit H. Single- or two-stage revision for infected total hip arthroplasty? A systematic review of the literature. Clin Orthop Relat Res 2014;472:1036–1042.
    1. Luu A, Syed F, Raman G, et al. Two-stage arthroplasty for prosthetic joint infection: a systematic review of acute kidney injury, systemic toxicity and infection control. J Arthroplasty 2013;28:1490–1498.
    1. Zmistowski B, Restrepo C, Hess J, Adibi D, Cangoz S, Parvizi J. Unplanned readmission after total joint arthroplasty: rates, reasons, and risk factors. J Bone Joint Surg Am 2013;95:1869–1876.
    1. Kallala RF, Vanhegan IS, Ibrahim MS, Sarmah S, Haddad FS. Financial analysis of revision knee surgery based on NHS tariffs and hospital costs: does it pay to provide a revision service? Bone Joint J 2015;97-B:197–201.
    1. Vanhegan IS, Malik AK, Jayakumar P, Ul Islam S, Haddad FS. A financial analysis of revision hip arthroplasty: the economic burden in relation to the national tariff. J Bone Joint Surg Br 2012;94:619-623.
    1. Briggs T. A national review of adult elective orthopaedic services in England: Getting it right first time. (date last accessed 18 October 2019).
    1. Parvizi J, Zmistowski B, Berbari EF, et al. New definition for periprosthetic joint infection: from the Workgroup of the Musculoskeletal Infection Society. Clin Orthop Relat Res 2011;469:2992–2994.
    1. Lenguerrand E, Whitehouse MR, Beswick AD, et al. Risk factors associated with revision for prosthetic joint infection after hip replacement: a prospective observational cohort study. Lancet Infect Dis 2018;18:1004–1014.
    1. Kunutsor SK, Whitehouse MR, Blom AW, Beswick AD, INFORM Team. Patient-related risk factors for periprosthetic joint infection after total joint arthroplasty: a systematic review and meta-analysis. PLoS One 2016;11:e0150866.
    1. Arciola CR, Campoccia D, Montanaro L. Implant infections: adhesion, biofilm formation and immune evasion. Nat Rev Microbiol 2018;16:397–409.
    1. Tande AJ, Patel R. Prosthetic joint infection. Clin Microbiol Rev 2014;27:302–345.
    1. Zimmerli W. Clinical presentation and treatment of orthopaedic implant-associated infection. J Intern Med 2014;276:111–119.
    1. Osmon DR, Berbari EF, Berendt ARet al.; Infectious Diseases Society of America. Diagnosis and management of prosthetic joint infection: clinical practice guidelines by the Infectious Diseases Society of America. Clin Infect Dis 2013;56:e1–e25.
    1. McConoughey SJ, Howlin R, Granger JF, et al. Biofilms in periprosthetic orthopedic infections. Future Microbiol 2014;9:987–1007.
    1. Stoodley P, Conti SF, DeMeo PJ, et al. Characterization of a mixed MRSA/MRSE biofilm in an explanted total ankle arthroplasty. FEMS Immunol Med Microbiol 2011;62:66–74.
    1. Stoodley P, Nistico L, Johnson S, et al. Direct demonstration of viable Staphylococcus aureus biofilms in an infected total joint arthroplasty: a case report. J Bone Joint Surg Am 2008;90:1751–1758.
    1. Sendi P, Rohrbach M, Graber P, Frei R, Ochsner PE, Zimmerli W. Staphylococcus aureus small colony variants in prosthetic joint infection. Clin Infect Dis 2006;43:961–967.
    1. Gbejuade HO, Lovering AM, Webb JC. The role of microbial biofilms in prosthetic joint infections. Acta Orthop 2015;86:147–158.
    1. Flemming HC, Wingender J, Szewzyk U, Steinberg P, Rice SA, Kjelleberg S. Biofilms: an emergent form of bacterial life. Nat Rev Microbiol 2016;14:563–575.
    1. Wood TK, Knabel SJ, Kwan BW. Bacterial persister cell formation and dormancy. Appl Environ Microbiol 2013;79:7116–7121.
    1. Olson ME, Ceri H, Morck DW, Buret AG, Read RR. Biofilm bacteria: formation and comparative susceptibility to antibiotics. Can J Vet Res 2002;66:86–92.
    1. Leid JG, Shirtliff ME, Costerton JW, Stoodley P. Human leukocytes adhere to, penetrate, and respond to Staphylococcus aureus biofilms. Infect Immun 2002;70:6339–6345.
    1. Cerca N, Jefferson KK, Oliveira R, Pier GB, Azeredo J. Comparative antibody-mediated phagocytosis of Staphylococcus epidermidis cells grown in a biofilm or in the planktonic state. Infect Immun 2006;74:4849–4855.
    1. Zimmerli W, Waldvogel FA, Vaudaux P, Nydegger UE. Pathogenesis of foreign body infection: description and characteristics of an animal model. J Infect Dis 1982;146:487–497.
    1. Hall-Stoodley L, Hu FZ, Gieseke A, et al. Direct detection of bacterial biofilms on the middle-ear mucosa of children with chronic otitis media. JAMA 2006;296:202–211.
    1. Romanò CL, Scarponi S, Gallazzi E, Romanò D, Drago L. Antibacterial coating of implants in orthopaedics and trauma: a classification proposal in an evolving panorama. J Orthop Surg Res 2015;10:157.
    1. Gallo J, Holinka M, Moucha CS. Antibacterial surface treatment for orthopaedic implants. Int J Mol Sci 2014;15:13849–13880.
    1. Rochford ET, Richards RG, Moriarty TF. Influence of material on the development of device-associated infections. Clin Microbiol Infect 2012;18:1162–1167.
    1. Koseki H, Yonekura A, Shida T, et al. Early staphylococcal biofilm formation on solid orthopaedic implant materials: in vitro study. PLoS One 2014;9:e107588.
    1. Campoccia D, Montanaro L, Arciola CR. A review of the biomaterials technologies for infection-resistant surfaces. Biomaterials 2013;34:8533–8554.
    1. Laverty G, Gorman SP, Gilmore BF. Biomolecular mechanisms of staphylococcal biofilm formation. Future Microbiol 2013;8:509–524.
    1. Roberts AE, Kragh KN, Bjarnsholt T, Diggle SP. The limitations of in vitro experimentation in understanding biofilms and chronic infection. J Mol Biol 2015;427:3646–3661.
    1. Nana A, Nelson SB, McLaren A, Chen AF. What’s new in musculoskeletal infection: update on biofilms. J Bone Joint Surg Am 2016;98:1226–1234.
    1. Sorrentino R, Cochis A, Azzimonti B, et al. Reduced bacterial adhesion on ceramics used for arthroplasty applications. J Eur Ceram Soc 2018;38:963–970.
    1. Hexter AT, Hislop SM, Blunn GW, Liddle AD. The effect of bearing surface on risk of periprosthetic joint infection in total hip arthroplasty: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Bone Joint J 2018;100-B:134–142.
    1. Lass R, Giurea A, Kubista B, et al. Bacterial adherence to different components of total hip prosthesis in patients with prosthetic joint infection. Int Orthop 2014;38:1597–1602.
    1. Pitto RP, Sedel L. Periprosthetic joint infection in hip arthroplasty: is there an association between infection and bearing surface type? Clin Orthop Relat Res 2016;474:2213–2218.
    1. Gallardo-Moreno AM, Pacha-Olivenza MA, Saldaña L, et al. In vitro biocompatibility and bacterial adhesion of physico-chemically modified Ti6Al4V surface by means of UV irradiation. Acta Biomater 2009;5:181–192.
    1. Zhu H, Guo Z, Liu W. Adhesion behaviors on superhydrophobic surfaces. Chem Commun (Camb) 2014;50:3900–3913.
    1. An YH, Bradley J, Powers DL, Friedman RJ. The prevention of prosthetic infection using a cross-linked albumin coating in a rabbit model. J Bone Joint Surg Br 1997;79:816–819.
    1. Cao Y, Su B, Chinnaraj S, et al. Nanostructured titanium surfaces exhibit recalcitrance towards Staphylococcus epidermidis biofilm formation. Sci Rep 2018;8:1071.
    1. Bhadra CM, Truong VK, Pham VT, et al. Antibacterial titanium nano-patterned arrays inspired by dragonfly wings. Sci Rep 2015;5:16817.
    1. Tang P, Zhang W, Wang Y, et al. Effect of superhydrophobic surface of titanium on staphylococcus aureus adhesion. J Nanomater 2011;1–8.
    1. Valdez-Salas B, Beltrán-Partida E, Castillo-Uribe S, et al. In vitro assessment of early bacterial activity on micro/nanostructured Ti6Al4V surfaces. Molecules 2017;22:E832.
    1. Singh AV, Vyas V, Patil R, et al. Quantitative characterization of the influence of the nanoscale morphology of nanostructured surfaces on bacterial adhesion and biofilm formation. PLoS One 2011;6:e25029.
    1. McConda DB, Karnes JM, Hamza T, Lindsey BA. A novel co-culture model of murine K12 osteosarcoma cells and S. aureus on common orthopedic implant materials: ‘the race to the surface’ studied in vitro. Biofouling 2016;32:627–634.
    1. Hardes J, von Eiff C, Streitbuerger A, et al. Reduction of periprosthetic infection with silver-coated megaprostheses in patients with bone sarcoma. J Surg Oncol 2010;101:389–395.
    1. Wafa H, Grimer RJ, Reddy K, et al. Retrospective evaluation of the incidence of early periprosthetic infection with silver-treated endoprostheses in high-risk patients: case-control study. Bone Joint J 2015;97-B:252–257.
    1. Holinka J, Pilz M, Kubista B, Presterl E, Windhager R. Effects of selenium coating of orthopaedic implant surfaces on bacterial adherence and osteoblastic cell growth. Bone Joint J 2013;95-B:678–682.
    1. Shirai T, Tsuchiya H, Nishida H, et al. Antimicrobial megaprostheses supported with iodine. J Biomater Appl 2014;29:617–623.
    1. Fuchs T, Stange R, Schmidmaier G, Raschke MJ. The use of gentamicin-coated nails in the tibia: preliminary results of a prospective study. Arch Orthop Trauma Surg 2011;131:1419–1425.
    1. Buchholz HW, Engelbrecht H. Depot effects of various antibiotics mixed with Palacos resins. Chirurgia (Bucur) 1970;41:511–515.
    1. Engesaeter LB, Lie SA, Espehaug B, Furnes O, Vollset SE, Havelin LI. Antibiotic prophylaxis in total hip arthroplasty: effects of antibiotic prophylaxis systemically and in bone cement on the revision rate of 22,170 primary hip replacements followed 0–14 years in the Norwegian Arthroplasty Register. Acta Orthop Scand 2003;74:644–651.
    1. Pitarresi G, Palumbo FS, Calascibetta F, Fiorica C, Di Stefano M, Giammona G. Medicated hydrogels of hyaluronic acid derivatives for use in orthopedic field. Int J Pharm 2013;449:84–94.
    1. Malizos K, Blauth M, Danita A, et al. Fast-resorbable antibiotic-loaded hydrogel coating to reduce post-surgical infection after internal osteosynthesis: a multicenter randomized controlled trial. J Orthop Traumatol 2017;18:159–169.
    1. Zagra L, Gallazzi E, Romanò D, Scarponi S, Romanò C. Two-stage cementless hip revision for peri-prosthetic infection with an antibacterial hydrogel coating: results of a comparative series. Int Orthop 2019;43:111–115.

Source: PubMed

Sponsoren und Mitarbeiter

Krankheiten

Drogeninterventionen

3
Abonnieren