• J M Barbero, E Montero, A Vallés, M A Plasencia, J Romanyk, and J Gómez.
• José Mª Barbero Allende, Hospital Príncipe de Asturias. Alcalá de Henares (España). Servicio de Medicina Interna. c/ Fray Luis de León 5A, 3ºC, 28012, Madrid, Spain. j_m_barbero@yahoo.es.
• Rev Esp Quimioter. 2016 Oct 1; 29 (5): 273-7.

ObjectiveMost publications about prosthetic joint infections (PJI) are referred to elective prosthesis and they exclude arthroplasties due to hip fracture.MethodsWe conducted a descriptive study about prosthetic joint infections after joint fracture in Alcalá de Henares Hospital (Madrid) between 2009 and 2014 and we compared with elective prosthetic infections in the same period.ResultsThere were 30 PJI after hip fracture and 14 elective PJI. The incidence of infection was 4.7% in arthroplasties due to hip fracture from 1.3% in elective prosthesis (RR 3.8, p=0.005). The PJI after fracture affected older patients (82.5 years vs 71.5, p=0.006), with greater comorbidity (5.4 vs 3.6, p=0.003), higher anesthetic risk (ASA>2 70% vs 21.4%, p=0.004) and higher incidence of dementia (50% vs 0%, p=0.02). Staphylococcus aureus was the most common causative agent in both groups, but there was higher incidence of Gram negative-cases in PJI after fracture group (43.3% vs 21.4%, p no significance) and cefazolin-resistance (63.3% vs 28.6%, p=0.03). In logistic regression analysis the treatment had less chance of success in PJI after fracture than elective PJI (33.3% vs 78.6%, OR 0.09, p=0.06).ConclusionsThe PJI after fracture are more frequent than elective PJI, affect older patients, with poor general condition, are produced by more resistant bacteria and have worst evolution than EPJI.

34 keywords...

hide…