Diabetic foot osteomyelitis (1)
-
Upload
bbrauer25 -
Category
Health & Medicine
-
view
175 -
download
3
Transcript of Diabetic foot osteomyelitis (1)
![Page 1: Diabetic foot osteomyelitis (1)](https://reader033.fdocuments.us/reader033/viewer/2022042614/559f38881a28ab302e8b460f/html5/thumbnails/1.jpg)
Diabetic Foot Osteomyelitis
![Page 2: Diabetic foot osteomyelitis (1)](https://reader033.fdocuments.us/reader033/viewer/2022042614/559f38881a28ab302e8b460f/html5/thumbnails/2.jpg)
Objectives
• Recognize patients at risk for diabetic foot infections
• Design a diagnostic work-up for diabetic foot osteomyelitis
• State the principles of management of diabetic foot infections
![Page 3: Diabetic foot osteomyelitis (1)](https://reader033.fdocuments.us/reader033/viewer/2022042614/559f38881a28ab302e8b460f/html5/thumbnails/3.jpg)
Challenging Infections of Skin, Soft Tissue and Bone
• Cellulitis-management in the community MRSA era
• Furuncles, carbuncles, skin abscesses
• Recurrent skin abscesses
• Diabetic foot osteomyelitis
![Page 4: Diabetic foot osteomyelitis (1)](https://reader033.fdocuments.us/reader033/viewer/2022042614/559f38881a28ab302e8b460f/html5/thumbnails/4.jpg)
Disclosure
• Very few antibiotics have FDA approval for osteomyelitis
• Newer antibiotics often gain approval for skin and soft tissue infections– Amoxicillin-clavulanate– Daptomycin– Linezolid
• Older antibiotics often lack an FDA indication for skin and soft tissue infection– Nafcillin– TMP-SMX
![Page 5: Diabetic foot osteomyelitis (1)](https://reader033.fdocuments.us/reader033/viewer/2022042614/559f38881a28ab302e8b460f/html5/thumbnails/5.jpg)
A previously healthy 40 y/o woman presents with uncomplicated lower extremity cellulitis. Which of the following options is the best treatment?
A. Co-trimoxazole
B. Amoxicillin-clavulanate
C. Linezolid
D. Doxycycline
E. A and B
![Page 6: Diabetic foot osteomyelitis (1)](https://reader033.fdocuments.us/reader033/viewer/2022042614/559f38881a28ab302e8b460f/html5/thumbnails/6.jpg)
Skin and Soft Tissue Infections
Purulent
• Furuncle
• Carbuncle
• Abscess
Nonpurulent• Cellulitis
• Erysipelas
• Necrotizing fasciitis
DL Stevens et al; www.idsociety.org
![Page 7: Diabetic foot osteomyelitis (1)](https://reader033.fdocuments.us/reader033/viewer/2022042614/559f38881a28ab302e8b460f/html5/thumbnails/7.jpg)
Purulent SSTIs• Furuncles-purulent infection of a hair follicle
extending through the dermis into the subcutaneous tissue
• Carbuncles-coalescent infection of multiple hair follicles, usually larger and deeper than furuncles
• Abscesses
![Page 8: Diabetic foot osteomyelitis (1)](https://reader033.fdocuments.us/reader033/viewer/2022042614/559f38881a28ab302e8b460f/html5/thumbnails/8.jpg)
Purulent SSTIsFuruncles, Carbuncles, Abscesses
• Skin flora-may be polymicrobial
• Staph aureus, recently USA 300 MRSA
![Page 9: Diabetic foot osteomyelitis (1)](https://reader033.fdocuments.us/reader033/viewer/2022042614/559f38881a28ab302e8b460f/html5/thumbnails/9.jpg)
Purulent SSTIsFuruncles, Carbuncles, Abscesses
• Incision and drainage is the cornerstone of management, and is more effective ultrasound guided needle aspiration in an RCT
• Packing may not be necessary for small, uncomplicated abscesses
GF O’Malley Acad Emerg Med 16:470, 2009RJ Gaspari; Ann Emerg Med, 57:483, 2011
![Page 10: Diabetic foot osteomyelitis (1)](https://reader033.fdocuments.us/reader033/viewer/2022042614/559f38881a28ab302e8b460f/html5/thumbnails/10.jpg)
Open I & D versus Needle Aspiration
• Primary endpoint = treatment failure
– Day 0 unable to fully aspirate pus
– Day 2 residual abscess by US, increased symptoms
– Day 7-antibiotics and/or continued symptoms or additional procedure
• Randomized by numbered packets-some packets disappeared!
• TMP-SMX DS 2 tabs bid recommended
RJ Gaspari; Ann Emerg Med, 57:483, 2011
![Page 11: Diabetic foot osteomyelitis (1)](https://reader033.fdocuments.us/reader033/viewer/2022042614/559f38881a28ab302e8b460f/html5/thumbnails/11.jpg)
Open I & D versus Needle Aspiration
RJ Gaspari; Ann Emerg Med, 57:483, 2011
101 patients enrolled
54 I & D 47 needle aspiration
43/54 (80%) success 12/47 (26%) success
![Page 12: Diabetic foot osteomyelitis (1)](https://reader033.fdocuments.us/reader033/viewer/2022042614/559f38881a28ab302e8b460f/html5/thumbnails/12.jpg)
Microbiology
Culture ResultIncision and Drainage (%)
Ultrasound Guided Needle Aspiration (%)
Total (%)
MRSA 18 (35) 15 (38) 33 (36)
MSSA 20 (39) 11 (28) 31 (34)
Group A strep 1 (2) 1 (3) 2 (2)
Other 3 (6) 6 (15) 9 (10)
No culture growth
4 (8) 2 (5) 6 (7)
Mixed growth 5 (10) 5 (13) 7 (11)
![Page 13: Diabetic foot osteomyelitis (1)](https://reader033.fdocuments.us/reader033/viewer/2022042614/559f38881a28ab302e8b460f/html5/thumbnails/13.jpg)
Open I & D versus Needle Aspiration
RJ Gaspari; Ann Emerg Med, 57:483, 2011
33 patients with MRSA enrolled
18 I & D 13 needle aspiration
11/18 (61%) success 1/13 (8%) success
![Page 14: Diabetic foot osteomyelitis (1)](https://reader033.fdocuments.us/reader033/viewer/2022042614/559f38881a28ab302e8b460f/html5/thumbnails/14.jpg)
Packing versus simple I & D
• Abscess < 5 cm on trunk or extremities
• > 18 y/o
![Page 15: Diabetic foot osteomyelitis (1)](https://reader033.fdocuments.us/reader033/viewer/2022042614/559f38881a28ab302e8b460f/html5/thumbnails/15.jpg)
Packing versus simple I & D
GF O’Malley Acad Emerg Med 16:470, 2009
48 patients enrolled
23 I & D + packing 25 simple I & D
4/23 repeat procedure at 48 hours
5/25 repeat procedure at 48 hours
![Page 16: Diabetic foot osteomyelitis (1)](https://reader033.fdocuments.us/reader033/viewer/2022042614/559f38881a28ab302e8b460f/html5/thumbnails/16.jpg)
Purulent SSTIsFuruncles, Carbuncles, Abscesses
• Antibiotics-necessary only in selected cases
– systemic signs (fever, tachycardia, tachypnea, leukocytosis)
– Immunocompromised
– Extremes of age
– Recurrent infections
– Failure after adequate I & D
![Page 17: Diabetic foot osteomyelitis (1)](https://reader033.fdocuments.us/reader033/viewer/2022042614/559f38881a28ab302e8b460f/html5/thumbnails/17.jpg)
TMP-SMX vs. placebo after I & D
• N=220
• Age > 16 y/o
• Intervention TMP-SMX DS 2 tabs BID
• Primary outcome: treatment failure at day 7
• Secondary outcome: relapse within 30 days
GR Schmitz; Ann Emerg Med, 56:283, 2010
![Page 18: Diabetic foot osteomyelitis (1)](https://reader033.fdocuments.us/reader033/viewer/2022042614/559f38881a28ab302e8b460f/html5/thumbnails/18.jpg)
Exclusions
• Immunocompromised
– Diabetes, HIV, malignancy
• Fever or signs of systemic illness
• Pregnant or breast-feeding
• Sulfa allergy
• Antibiotics in previous week
• Hospitalized in previous month
![Page 19: Diabetic foot osteomyelitis (1)](https://reader033.fdocuments.us/reader033/viewer/2022042614/559f38881a28ab302e8b460f/html5/thumbnails/19.jpg)
Bacteriology
Placebo (%) TMP-SMX (%)
MRSA 47 60
MSSA 22 15
Coag neg staph 10 10
Viridans strep 5 1
No growth 8 2
other 8 12
![Page 20: Diabetic foot osteomyelitis (1)](https://reader033.fdocuments.us/reader033/viewer/2022042614/559f38881a28ab302e8b460f/html5/thumbnails/20.jpg)
Antibiotics After I & D
0%
5%
10%
15%
20%
25%
30%
Failure Recurrence
TMP-SMX
Placebo
P=0.12
![Page 21: Diabetic foot osteomyelitis (1)](https://reader033.fdocuments.us/reader033/viewer/2022042614/559f38881a28ab302e8b460f/html5/thumbnails/21.jpg)
Management of Treatment Failures
Placebo N=27 TMP-SMX N=15
Admit-iv antibiotics 5 2
IV antibiotics in ED 3 1
Repeat I & D 3 2
Sent home w antibiotic 9 5
I & D plus home with antibiotics
7 5
![Page 22: Diabetic foot osteomyelitis (1)](https://reader033.fdocuments.us/reader033/viewer/2022042614/559f38881a28ab302e8b460f/html5/thumbnails/22.jpg)
RCT-Antibiotics vs. Placebo After I & D
• N = 161
• 3 months to 18 y/o
• Excluded patients with fever
• TMP-SMX 10-12 mg/kg/day TMP component
Duong; Ann Emerg Med, 55:410, 2010
![Page 23: Diabetic foot osteomyelitis (1)](https://reader033.fdocuments.us/reader033/viewer/2022042614/559f38881a28ab302e8b460f/html5/thumbnails/23.jpg)
Bacteriology
Culture Results Placebo (%)Trimethoprim-
Sulfamethoxazole (%)
Total (%)
CA-MRSA 61 (81) 58 (79) 129 (80)
MSSA 6 (8) 7 (10) 14 (9)
Proteus mirabilis 4 (5) 2 (3) 6 (4)
GAS 1 (1) 1 (1) 2 (1)
Other 1 (1) 3 (4) 4 (3)
No culture/growth 3 (4) 2 (3) 6 (3)
Duong; Ann Emerg Med, 55:410, 2010
![Page 24: Diabetic foot osteomyelitis (1)](https://reader033.fdocuments.us/reader033/viewer/2022042614/559f38881a28ab302e8b460f/html5/thumbnails/24.jpg)
RCT-Antibiotics vs. PlaceboNon-inferiority Trial, margin 7%
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
Failure Relapse-10 days Relapse-90 days
TMP-SMX
Placebo
95% CI ∞-6.7%
Duong; Ann Emerg Med, 55:410, 2010
![Page 25: Diabetic foot osteomyelitis (1)](https://reader033.fdocuments.us/reader033/viewer/2022042614/559f38881a28ab302e8b460f/html5/thumbnails/25.jpg)
Recurrent Skin Abscesses
• Evaluate site for local cause
– Inadequate drainage
– Hidradenitis
– Pilonidal cyst
– Foreign body
• R/O neutrophil disorder if onset in early childhood
• Consider decolonization therapy
![Page 26: Diabetic foot osteomyelitis (1)](https://reader033.fdocuments.us/reader033/viewer/2022042614/559f38881a28ab302e8b460f/html5/thumbnails/26.jpg)
Decolonization Therapy
• Nasal mupirocin BID x 5 days
• Daily bathing
– Chlorhexidine
– Dilute bleach 1/4 to 1/2 cup bleach in tub
• Daily disinfection of clothing, towels, sheets, combs, razors,environmental surfaces
• Consider treating family simultaneously
![Page 27: Diabetic foot osteomyelitis (1)](https://reader033.fdocuments.us/reader033/viewer/2022042614/559f38881a28ab302e8b460f/html5/thumbnails/27.jpg)
Purulent SSTIsWrap Up
• Incision and drainage
• Packing not be essential for small abscesses
• Antibiotics not necessary for most cases
• Recurrences-look for local cause, consider decolonization strategies
GF O’Malley Acad Emerg Med 16:470, 2009RJ Gaspari; Ann Emerg Med, 57:483, 2011
![Page 28: Diabetic foot osteomyelitis (1)](https://reader033.fdocuments.us/reader033/viewer/2022042614/559f38881a28ab302e8b460f/html5/thumbnails/28.jpg)
Figures 1A and 1B: Notice the integrity of the skin, the ill-described border of the lesion as well as the extension of erythema up medial aspect of the leg (figures courtesy of DermNetNZ.org).
![Page 29: Diabetic foot osteomyelitis (1)](https://reader033.fdocuments.us/reader033/viewer/2022042614/559f38881a28ab302e8b460f/html5/thumbnails/29.jpg)
Cellulitis
• Low burden of organisms
• Brisk inflammatory response
• Culture yield is low-not recommended for routine practice
• Punch biopsy cultures and serology confirm
– Group A strep
– Groups B, G, C, F strep
![Page 30: Diabetic foot osteomyelitis (1)](https://reader033.fdocuments.us/reader033/viewer/2022042614/559f38881a28ab302e8b460f/html5/thumbnails/30.jpg)
Cellulitis
• Select agent with good activity against streptococci
• If patient is improving at day 5, antimicrobial therapy may be discontinued
• Coverage for S. aureus, including MRSA, is recommended if there is– Penetrating trauma
– Purulent drainage
– Concurrent MRSA infection elsewhere
![Page 31: Diabetic foot osteomyelitis (1)](https://reader033.fdocuments.us/reader033/viewer/2022042614/559f38881a28ab302e8b460f/html5/thumbnails/31.jpg)
CellulitisAgents with good strep coverage
• Penicillin G 2-4 million units Q 4-6 h
• Clindamycin 600-900 mg Q 8 h
• Nafcillin 1-2 grams Q 4-6 h
• Cefazolin 1 gram Q 8 h
• Pen VK 250-500 mg po Q 6 h
• Cephalexin 500 mg po Q 6 h
• Doxycycline
• TMP-SMX
![Page 32: Diabetic foot osteomyelitis (1)](https://reader033.fdocuments.us/reader033/viewer/2022042614/559f38881a28ab302e8b460f/html5/thumbnails/32.jpg)
Duration of TherapyUncomplicated Cellulitis
121 subjects enrolled
87 eligible for randomization at day 5
43 received 5 more days of therapy 44 received 5 days of placebo
42/43 resolved at day 14 and relapse free at day 28
43/44 resolved at day 14 and relapse free at day 28
MJ Hepburn; Arch Intern Med, 164:1669, 2004
![Page 33: Diabetic foot osteomyelitis (1)](https://reader033.fdocuments.us/reader033/viewer/2022042614/559f38881a28ab302e8b460f/html5/thumbnails/33.jpg)
Recurrent cellulitis
• Annual recurrence rate 8%-20%
• Risk factors– Edema
– Obesity
– Eczema
– Venous insufficiency
– Tobacco use
– Malignancy
– Homelessness
– Toe web abnormalities, e.g. tinea pedis
![Page 34: Diabetic foot osteomyelitis (1)](https://reader033.fdocuments.us/reader033/viewer/2022042614/559f38881a28ab302e8b460f/html5/thumbnails/34.jpg)
Recurrent CellulitisAntimicrobial Prophylaxis
• 40 patients
• > 2 episodes in previous 3 years
• Venous insufficiency or lymphatic congestion
• Daily pen VK
• Decreased recurrences P< 0.06
AC Sjoblom; Infection 21:390, 1993
![Page 35: Diabetic foot osteomyelitis (1)](https://reader033.fdocuments.us/reader033/viewer/2022042614/559f38881a28ab302e8b460f/html5/thumbnails/35.jpg)
Recurrent CellulitisAntimicrobial Prophylaxis
36 subjects enrolled
18 received erythromycin 250 mg bid
18 received placebo
zero relapses over 18 months 9 relapses
M Kremer; J. Infection, 22:37-40, 1991
![Page 36: Diabetic foot osteomyelitis (1)](https://reader033.fdocuments.us/reader033/viewer/2022042614/559f38881a28ab302e8b460f/html5/thumbnails/36.jpg)
CellulitisWrap-Up
• Streptococci are the predominant pathogen• No need to cover MRSA unless
– Penetrating trauma– Purulent drainage– Concurrent MRSA infection elsewhere
• 5 days therapy is sufficient if symptoms improving on day 5
• Recurrence common– Address risk factors– Consider penicillin prophylaxis if recurrences are
frequent
![Page 37: Diabetic foot osteomyelitis (1)](https://reader033.fdocuments.us/reader033/viewer/2022042614/559f38881a28ab302e8b460f/html5/thumbnails/37.jpg)
Image 4. Diabetic Foot Ulcer (image courtesy antimicrobe.org)
![Page 38: Diabetic foot osteomyelitis (1)](https://reader033.fdocuments.us/reader033/viewer/2022042614/559f38881a28ab302e8b460f/html5/thumbnails/38.jpg)
Burden of Disease
• 21 million adults with diabetes in the U.S.
• 2-3% annual incidence of foot ulcer
• 15-30% of patients with foot ulcer require amputation
• 68,000 amputations
in 2009
http://www.cdc.gov/diabetes/statistics/prev/national/figadults.htm
![Page 39: Diabetic foot osteomyelitis (1)](https://reader033.fdocuments.us/reader033/viewer/2022042614/559f38881a28ab302e8b460f/html5/thumbnails/39.jpg)
Amputations per 1000 Diabetics Number of Persons with Diabetes
http://www.cdc.gov/diabetes/statistics/lea/fig3.htm http://www.cdc.gov/diabetes/statistics/prev/national/figadults.htm
![Page 40: Diabetic foot osteomyelitis (1)](https://reader033.fdocuments.us/reader033/viewer/2022042614/559f38881a28ab302e8b460f/html5/thumbnails/40.jpg)
Number of Nontraumatic Lower Extremity Amputations among
Diabetics
http://www.cdc.gov/diabetes/statistics/lea/fig1.htm
![Page 41: Diabetic foot osteomyelitis (1)](https://reader033.fdocuments.us/reader033/viewer/2022042614/559f38881a28ab302e8b460f/html5/thumbnails/41.jpg)
Diabetic Foot Osteomyelitis
• Risk of amputation in a patient with a diabetic foot ulcer rises 3 to 4-fold when osteomyelitis is present
Ramsey SD; Diabetes Care, 22:382, 1999
![Page 42: Diabetic foot osteomyelitis (1)](https://reader033.fdocuments.us/reader033/viewer/2022042614/559f38881a28ab302e8b460f/html5/thumbnails/42.jpg)
Outcomes of Infected Diabetic Foot Ulcer With or Without Osteomyelitis
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
Length of Stay (days) Time to Healing(weeks)
Amputation (%)
Soft Tissue
Bone
Mutluoglu W, et. al. Scandinavian Journal of Infectious Diseases, 45: 497–503; 2013
14% 60%
![Page 43: Diabetic foot osteomyelitis (1)](https://reader033.fdocuments.us/reader033/viewer/2022042614/559f38881a28ab302e8b460f/html5/thumbnails/43.jpg)
Prevalence of Osteomyelitis in Diabetic Foot Ulcers
Study N
DFUs
N OM Prevalence
OM
Comments
Aragon-Sanchez
2008(1)
498 292 37% Referral center
Ramsey 1999(2) 471 79 17% Single center HMO
Stockl 2004 (3) 2253 855 37.9%
1. Aragon-Sanchez FJ. Diabetologia. 51(11):1962-70, 2008. 2. Ramsey SD. Diabetes Care. 22(3):382-7, 1999. 3. Stockl K. Diabetes Care. 27(9):2129-34, 2004.
![Page 44: Diabetic foot osteomyelitis (1)](https://reader033.fdocuments.us/reader033/viewer/2022042614/559f38881a28ab302e8b460f/html5/thumbnails/44.jpg)
Image 4. Diabetic Foot Ulcer (image courtesy antimicrobe.org)
![Page 45: Diabetic foot osteomyelitis (1)](https://reader033.fdocuments.us/reader033/viewer/2022042614/559f38881a28ab302e8b460f/html5/thumbnails/45.jpg)
Diagnostic CriteriaDefinite: >90% specificity
• Bone sample with both:
– Positive culture
– Positive histology
• Purulence in bone at surgery
• Atraumatically detached bone fragment removed from ulcer
• Bone abscess on MRI
Berendt AR, et al. Diabetic foot osteomyelitis: a progress report on diagnosis and a systematic review of treatment. Diabetes/Metabolism Research Reviews 2008; 24:Suppl-61
![Page 46: Diabetic foot osteomyelitis (1)](https://reader033.fdocuments.us/reader033/viewer/2022042614/559f38881a28ab302e8b460f/html5/thumbnails/46.jpg)
Diagnostic CriteriaProbable: 50-90% specificity
• Visible cancellous bone in ulcer
• MRI shows bone edema
• Bone culture positive
• Bone histology positive
Berendt AR, et al. Diabetic foot osteomyelitis: a progress report on diagnosis and a systematic review of treatment. Diabetes/Metabolism Research Reviews 2008; 24:Suppl-61
![Page 47: Diabetic foot osteomyelitis (1)](https://reader033.fdocuments.us/reader033/viewer/2022042614/559f38881a28ab302e8b460f/html5/thumbnails/47.jpg)
Diagnostic Criteria-ProbableAny TWO of the following:
• Plain X-rays show cortical destruction • MRI shows bone edema or cloaca• Probe to bone positive• Visible cortical bone• ESR > 70 mm/hr with no other plausible explanation• Non-healing wound despite adequate offloading and perfusion for > 6 weeks • Ulcer of > 2 weeks duration with clinical evidence of infection
47
![Page 48: Diabetic foot osteomyelitis (1)](https://reader033.fdocuments.us/reader033/viewer/2022042614/559f38881a28ab302e8b460f/html5/thumbnails/48.jpg)
Approach to Patient
• History– Duration of ulcer
– Trauma-penetration through tennis shoe?
– Local care at home-Soaking?
• Exam– Rubor, dolor, calor
– Visible bone
– Probe to bone
– Perfusion
– Sensation
![Page 49: Diabetic foot osteomyelitis (1)](https://reader033.fdocuments.us/reader033/viewer/2022042614/559f38881a28ab302e8b460f/html5/thumbnails/49.jpg)
Approach to Patient
• Lab
– CBC
– ESR
– HbA1c
• Imaging
– Plain films
![Page 50: Diabetic foot osteomyelitis (1)](https://reader033.fdocuments.us/reader033/viewer/2022042614/559f38881a28ab302e8b460f/html5/thumbnails/50.jpg)
Approach to Patient
• Who should undergo an MRI?
– Ulcer present > 2 weeks PLUS signs of inflammation
– Ulcer not healed after 6 weeks, despite adequate perfusion and unloading
– Probe to bone positive
– Visible cortical bone
– ESR > 70
– Plain film with cortical destruction
![Page 51: Diabetic foot osteomyelitis (1)](https://reader033.fdocuments.us/reader033/viewer/2022042614/559f38881a28ab302e8b460f/html5/thumbnails/51.jpg)
Management
• Treat empirically with broad spectrum antibiotics if SIRS criteria present
• In the absence of SIRS
– Debride as needed
– Send bone for culture and histology
• Assess perfusion and re-perfuse if necessary
• Unload the ulcer
• Provide culture-directed antimicrobial therapy
![Page 52: Diabetic foot osteomyelitis (1)](https://reader033.fdocuments.us/reader033/viewer/2022042614/559f38881a28ab302e8b460f/html5/thumbnails/52.jpg)
Common Pathogens in DFO
• Staphylococcus aureus
• Streptococci– Group B strep
– Group A, G, C strep
• Enterobacteriaceae– E. coli
– Klebsiella
• Pseudomonas aeruginosa
• Anaerobes
52
![Page 53: Diabetic foot osteomyelitis (1)](https://reader033.fdocuments.us/reader033/viewer/2022042614/559f38881a28ab302e8b460f/html5/thumbnails/53.jpg)
Typical IV Empiric Regimen
• Vancomycin
– MRSA
– Streptococci
• Ertapenem
– Broad coverage of enterobacteriaceae, including ESBL organisms, as well as anaerobes
– Does not cover P. aeruginosa
53
![Page 54: Diabetic foot osteomyelitis (1)](https://reader033.fdocuments.us/reader033/viewer/2022042614/559f38881a28ab302e8b460f/html5/thumbnails/54.jpg)
When is therapy directed atP. aeruginosa indicated?
• Culture positive for P. aeruginosa
• High “cost of failure”
– Sepsis syndrome
• High risk that P. aeruginosa is infecting pathogen
– History of soaking the limb
– Previous history of P. aeruginosa infection at the site
![Page 55: Diabetic foot osteomyelitis (1)](https://reader033.fdocuments.us/reader033/viewer/2022042614/559f38881a28ab302e8b460f/html5/thumbnails/55.jpg)
Intravenous agents for P. aeruginosa
• Cefepime
• Ceftazidime
• Imipenem-cilastatin
• Meropenem
• Doripenem
• Aztreonam
![Page 56: Diabetic foot osteomyelitis (1)](https://reader033.fdocuments.us/reader033/viewer/2022042614/559f38881a28ab302e8b460f/html5/thumbnails/56.jpg)
Intravenous Agents for MRSA Osteomyelitis
Vancomycin
• FDA approved for MRSA infection
• Decades of clinical experience
• Less costly
• Requires serum level monitoring
• Nephrotoxic at higher levels
• 2.5 fold increased risk of failure compared to beta lactams
Daptomycin
• FDA approved for bacteremia and soft tissue infections
• Higher drug acquisition cost
• Once daily dosing
• No serum level monitoring
• Good bone penetration
• Good outcomes in uncontrolled case series
56
![Page 57: Diabetic foot osteomyelitis (1)](https://reader033.fdocuments.us/reader033/viewer/2022042614/559f38881a28ab302e8b460f/html5/thumbnails/57.jpg)
Cochrane ReviewOral versus IV Therapy for DFO
Oral IV RR
End of treatment remission
70/80 58/70 1.04 (0.92-1.18)
12 month remission 49/64 44/54 0.94 (0.78-1.13)
Mild adverse events 11/64 8/54 1.08 (0.49-2.42)
Severe adverse events
3/49 4/42 0.69 (0.19-2.57)
Conterno LO, The Cochrane Library, 2013, Issue 9
![Page 58: Diabetic foot osteomyelitis (1)](https://reader033.fdocuments.us/reader033/viewer/2022042614/559f38881a28ab302e8b460f/html5/thumbnails/58.jpg)
Oral Empiric Regimen
• TMP-SMX
– Active against 97.5% of S. aureus
• Moxifloxacin
– 400 mg po daily
Bacterium Bactrim Bactrim + FQ FQ
E. coli 72% 82% 75%
Klebsiellapneumonia
87% 90% 97%
Enterobacter 88% 93% 98%
Staph. aureus 97.5% 54%58
![Page 59: Diabetic foot osteomyelitis (1)](https://reader033.fdocuments.us/reader033/viewer/2022042614/559f38881a28ab302e8b460f/html5/thumbnails/59.jpg)
TMP-SMX Dosing
59
Author N Cases Dose Outcome
Saengnipanthkul(1) 66 Chronic OM 1 DS BID 45% cure
Sanchez(2) 25 S. aureus
Debrided
Rifampin added
7 mg/kg/day
9 months
100% cure
Nguyen(5) 28 Rifampin 10 mg/kg
bid added
8 mg/kg/day 78% cure
De Barros(3)
Portuguese
60 TMP 20 mg/kg/day 98%
Stein(4) 39 Orthopedic implants
8 subjects dropped
out
TMP 20 mg/kg/day 67%
(1) Saengnipanthkul S. Journal of the Medical Association of Thailand 1988; 71(4):186-191.(2) Sanchez C. Enfermedades Infecciosas y Microbiologia Clinica 1997; 15(1):10-13.(3) de Barros JW. Revista Da Sociedade Brasileira de Medicina Tropical 1992; 25(4):235-239.
(4) Stein A. Antimicrobial Agents & Chemotherapy 1998; 42(12):3086-3091.
![Page 60: Diabetic foot osteomyelitis (1)](https://reader033.fdocuments.us/reader033/viewer/2022042614/559f38881a28ab302e8b460f/html5/thumbnails/60.jpg)
Rifampin RCTsOsteomyelitis in Non-diabetics
Author Monotherapy Rifampin P
Norden, van der Auwera
12/21 (57%) 17/20 (85%) 0.05
Zimmerli 7/12 (58%) 12/12 (100%) <0.02
1. Norden CW, Southern Medical Journal; 79:947-51, 19862. Van der Auwera P, Antimicrobial Agents and Chemotherapy; 28:467-72, 19853. Zimmerilli W, JAMA; 279:1537-41, 1998
![Page 61: Diabetic foot osteomyelitis (1)](https://reader033.fdocuments.us/reader033/viewer/2022042614/559f38881a28ab302e8b460f/html5/thumbnails/61.jpg)
Rifampin in Diabetic Foot OsteomyelitisRetrospective Study
Monotherapy Rifampin Regimen
P(Fisher)
Success 15/27 (55%) 17/23 (74%) 0.24
Senneville E, Diabetes Care 31:637–642, 2008
![Page 62: Diabetic foot osteomyelitis (1)](https://reader033.fdocuments.us/reader033/viewer/2022042614/559f38881a28ab302e8b460f/html5/thumbnails/62.jpg)
Antimicrobial Therapy for DFOWrap-Up
• If systemic signs absent, delay therapy until bone sample obtained for culture
• IV therapy still considered standard by many
• Oral therapy may be considered for mild to moderate disease
• Rifampin looks like a promising adjunct, but limited data, and not FDA approved for OM
![Page 63: Diabetic foot osteomyelitis (1)](https://reader033.fdocuments.us/reader033/viewer/2022042614/559f38881a28ab302e8b460f/html5/thumbnails/63.jpg)
Extent of DebridementStudy N Design Duration therapy Remission
Bamberger
1987
51 > 10 weeks 53%
Nix
1987
24 Cipro + mtz 115 days 29%
Peterson
1989
29 Limited debridement
cipro
3 months 65%
Ha Van
1996
35 Limited debridement Mean 246 days 57%
Venkatesan
1997
22 Limited debridement Median 12 weeks 81%
Pittet
1999
50 Occasional debridement IV 24 days + > 6 weeks oral 70%
Eneroth
1999
112 I & D or bone resection IV 7 days + 17-18 weeks
oral
45%
Senneville
2001
17 Rifampin + ofloxacin IV 5.5 days
Oral 6 months
88%
Yadlipalli 58 “least resection possible” IV mean 40 days 79%
![Page 64: Diabetic foot osteomyelitis (1)](https://reader033.fdocuments.us/reader033/viewer/2022042614/559f38881a28ab302e8b460f/html5/thumbnails/64.jpg)
DebridementGoal of Initial Operation
• Removal of callus, fibrinous or other acellulardebris, and any areas of obvious/irreversible necrosis.
• Draining any abscess cavities / joint space infections that are present
64
Neal Barshes, MD
![Page 65: Diabetic foot osteomyelitis (1)](https://reader033.fdocuments.us/reader033/viewer/2022042614/559f38881a28ab302e8b460f/html5/thumbnails/65.jpg)
DebridementObjectives of First or Second Stage
• Resecting any remaining necrotic, non-viable or grossly-infected bone.
• Achieving soft tissue coverage over any remaining bone.
• Any further procedures needed to optimize subsequent foot function or surgical offloading (ex. Achilles tendon lengthening, completion transmetatarsal amputation)
65
Neal Barshes, MD
![Page 66: Diabetic foot osteomyelitis (1)](https://reader033.fdocuments.us/reader033/viewer/2022042614/559f38881a28ab302e8b460f/html5/thumbnails/66.jpg)
Standardization of Offloading
66Piaggesi A, Diabetes Care: 586, 2007