Добавил:
kiopkiopkiop18@yandex.ru t.me/Prokururor I Вовсе не секретарь, но почту проверяю Опубликованный материал нарушает ваши авторские права? Сообщите нам.
Вуз: Предмет: Файл:

Ординатура / Хирургия / Библиотека им академика М.И. Перельмана / Книга_764_Библиотеки_им_академика_М_И_Перельмана

.pdf
Скачиваний:
0
Добавлен:
30.08.2026
Размер:
47 Мб
Скачать
Osteomyelitis
https://t.me/medicina_free
GiovanniVicenti, GuglielmoOttaviani, andBiagioMoretti
36
36.1 Introduction
Osteomyelitis is characterized as bone inamma­tion brought on by an infectious agent [1].
Understanding the etiology of the disease, the common and uncommon etiological agents, the principles of anti-infective therapy, and when and how to perform surgical debridement and recon­structive techniques are all necessary for the suc­cessful management of osteomyelitis.
It is difcult to determine the pathophysiol­ogy, imaging, and classication of osteomyelitis because it depends on the patient’s age (child vs. adult), the duration and intensity of the infection (acute vs. chronic), the route of spread (hema­togenous vs. contiguous focus), the patient’s immune and vascular status, as well as the affected area.
36.2 Classication
Osteomyelitis has historically been categorized using the Waldvogel classication, which was introduced in 1970 [2]. The source of the infec-
G. Vicenti · G. Ottaviani (*) · B. Moretti U.O.C Ortopedia e traumatologia, Policlinico di Bari, Università degli studi di Bari “Aldo Moro”, Bari, Italy e-mail: biagio.moretti@uniba.it
tion (hematogenous or contiguous), the existence of generalized vascular disease, and the length of the infection were all included in this descriptive classication system (acute, sub-acute, and chronic).
The 1977 publication of Ger’s classication recognized the role of the soft tissue situation in the surgical decision-making process. This clas­sication categorizes soft tissue conditions as simple sinus, chronic supercial ulcer, multiple sinuses, multiple skin-lined sinuses, or multiple sinuses.
Through the publication of a classication system that emphasized a more comprehensive approach to the patient and acknowledged the signicance of immune competency and the physiological ability of the host to effect healing, Cierny and Mader revolutionized our understand­ing of osteomyelitis in 1984 [3]. This system included categorization based on the disease’s anatomical characteristics and the physiological state of the host (Fig.36.1).
The Cierny and Mader classication however failed to provide specic, objective criteria according to which the C-host, whom they deemed unsuitable for surgery, should be dened. McPherson etal. attempted to address the short­comings of the Cierny and Mader host classica­tion system by modifying it to include specic objective criteria [4].
But several and more articulated classica­tions have been developed.
© The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2023 M. Maruccia et al. (eds.), Pearls and Pitfalls in Skin Ulcer Management,
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-45453-0_36
405
406
a
https://t.me/medicina_free
Fig. 36.1 Cierny– Mader Classication: (a) medullary osteomyelitis (early hematogenous); (b) supercial osteomyelitis (early contiguous); (c) localized osteomyelitis; and (d) diffuse osteomyelitis
b
G. Vicenti et al.
c
d
abc
36 Osteomyelitis
https://t.me/medicina_free
407
36.3 Pathogenesis
Invasion of the bone by pathogens leads to an acute reaction by the body and inammatory fac­tors. Microscopic examination of the bone dem­onstrates the presence of areas of suppurative inammation in which bacteria and inammatory cells are deposited. The inammation causes pro­gressive destruction of the bone matrix and sub­sequent occlusion of blood vessels. As a result, areas of ischemia are created that contribute to tissue necrosis. Ischemia also makes it impossi­ble for other inammatory cells and antibiotics to reach the site of infection. A hypervascularized rim forms around these areas, which increases the activity of osteoclasts and osteoblasts result­ing in localized osteoporosis and apposition of new exuberant osseous tissue [5].
36.4 Anatomo-Pathological Lesions
Four anatomopathological lesions typical of osteomyelitis are recognized in this process and deserve to be described (Fig.36.2).
Brodie’s abscess represents a purulent intraos­seous collection, often surrounded by a hypervas­cular orb [6]. It is considered a typical lesion of acute osteomyelitis even though it manifests over a period ranging from 1week to 1year and often
the typical symptoms are not associated. By MRI, a uid lesion, frequently metaphyseal, sur­rounded by a vascularized orb can be visualized.
Sequestrum, on the other hand, represents the typical lesion of chronic osteomyelitis [1]. It is an area of devascularized bone surrounded by an area of necrosis. As explained earlier this makes treatment with antibiotics ineffective, as they cannot reach the site of infection. It can be found on plain radiographs and, even better, on CT.
Involucrum is the sclerotic area surrounding the sequestrum [7].
Cloaca, on the other hand, is the break in the sequestrum that allows communication with the periosteum and in some cases with the outside, taking the name stula.
36.5 Pathogens
Osteomyelitis are frequently polymicrobial infections, especially when caused by contigu­ity with an ulcer. Hematogenous osteomyelitis, on the other hand, is usually caused by a single pathogenic organism. The most frequently iso­lated pathogen is Staphylococcus aureus. This is probably due to its numerous virulence factors. Adhesins allow colonization of implanted tis­sues and materials. The pathogen has the ability to evade host defenses and invade cells. It can also remain viable within host cells, which
Fig. 36.2 Anatomopathological lesions: (a) acute hematogenous osteomielitys (1. nidus); (b) subacute osteomielytis (2. Brodie’s abscess); and (c) chronic osteomyelitis (3. sinus; 4. sequestrum; 5. stula)
408
https://t.me/medicina_free
G. Vicenti et al.
would explain the high rate of recurrence of infections [8].
Staphylococcus aureus, along with other bacterial species, is capable of producing bio­film, a highly structured community of sessile bacteria surrounded by a polymeric extracel­lular matrix. This structure, which is difficult for antibiotics to penetrate, surrounds colonies of bacteria that are metabolically inactive and therefore less sensitive to their effect [9]. Although some antibiotics have a greater effect against biofilm, the best therapy is sur­gical debridement.
36.6 Diagnosis
The diagnosis of osteomyelitis is using a multi­disciplinary approach involving laboratory medi­cine, imaging, and pathology.
Symptomatology is highly variable and nonspecific. Acute osteomyelitis may be char­acterized by more obvious symptoms such as fever, pain, and swelling. Chronic forms, on the other hand, have more subtle symptom­atology; fever may not be present, bone pain, local swelling, and, in some cases, fistulae are manifest. Confirmation of osteomyelitis requires several diagnostic procedures as described below.
36.6.1 Microbiology
andHistopathology
In any type of osteomyelitis, the identication of the pathogen is crucial. This can be done by sev­eral tools. Blood cultures are diagnostic only in hematogenous osteomyelitis. The use of local swabs is now considered obsolete, collecting samples from the surface of an ulcer or even from the depth of the ulcer often results in contamina­tion by nonpathogenic microorganisms that have colonized the site. The suggestion is to take ve biopsy samples of the deep perilesional tissue, around the implant or debridement site [10]. All samples should be analyzed for Gram + and Gram .
36.6.2 Laboratory Studies
The use of laboratory tests can be helpful in the diagnosis and follow-up of osteomyelitis. Erythrocyte sedimentation rate (ESR) is fre­quently high but its changes are too slow to allow adequate follow-up. In contrast, the concentra­tion of C-reactive protein (CRP) is highly sensi­tive and its kinetics allow the evaluation of the effectiveness of therapy. In fact, it increases as early as the rst hours following the acute phase and decreases in about a week after the start of effective treatment. The use of these parameters in combination makes it possible to exponen­tially increase the sensitivity and specicity of the tests, moreover with the addition of local sampling the sensitivity reaches 100% [11]. The white blood cell count (WBC) may also be nor­mal in chronic osteomyelitis [12]. However, all of these values, despite being particularly sensi­tive, are highly nonspecic and, by themselves, do not allow for a denite diagnosis.
36.6.3 Imaging Procedures
All imaging procedures can be used to complete the diagnosis of osteomyelitis.
Plain radiography is the basis of diagnosis and follow-up (Fig.36.3). It allows visualization of local swelling that occurs as early as 2–3days; after about 10–12 days, on the other hand, the presence of a bone defect can be assessed.
Sonography is a useful tool for the evaluation of osteomyelitis in the acute phase. It allows excellent visualization of soft tissues, and because of its low invasiveness it can be used for the diagnosis of pediatric osteomyelitis [13].
CT allows detailed visualization of bone structures and surrounding soft tissues, conse­quently it is a valuable tool for the study of chronic osteomyelitis. However, it often suffers from artifacts caused by the simultaneous pres­ence of metal implants [14] (Fig.36.4).MRI, on the other hand, is ideal for the study of the early stages of the disease and allows an even more accurate study of the soft tissues. The presence of bone edema is a typical sign of osteomyelitis, but
36 Osteomyelitis
https://t.me/medicina_free
Fig. 36.3 Plain radiography of chronic osteomyelitis showing diffuse osteolysis, periosteal reaction, and soft tissues involvement
409
Fig. 36.4 CT-scan of chronic osteomyelitis showing diffuse osteolysis, osteoporosis, sequestrum, and air bubbles inside soft tissue
on the other hand, it does not allow for adequate follow-up as it may persist for months after the resolution of the disease [15]. Bone scintigraphy can be used with different types of radiopharma-
ceuticals. Leukocytes labeled with indium-111 or technetium-99m can be used for early diagnosis of acute osteomyelitis with high specicity and high sensitivity.
410
abc
https://t.me/medicina_free
G. Vicenti et al.
Positron emission tomography (PET) labeled with uorine-18-uoro-D-deoxyglucose (FDG) is a highly sensitive and specic test that com­bined with CT allows accurate visualization of lesions [16].
36.7 Treatment
The goal of treatment is always the denitive eradication of the pathogen, however the options available are different if the osteomyelitis is acute or chronic.
36.7.1 Acute Osteomyelitis
The rst line of treatment for acute osteomyelitis (Fig. 36.5) is always antibiotic therapy [17]. As mentioned earlier, successful therapy depends on correct diagnosis and, most importantly, isolation of the pathogen. To avoid the emergence of resistance, a consultation with an infectiologist is always rec­ommended and usually the combination of two antibiotics is chosen. The parameters to be evalu­ated in the choice of antibiotics are bone-wide dis­tribution, adverse effects, cost, and duration.
36.7.2 Chronic Osteomyelitis
Regarding chronic osteomyelitis, it is now known that antibiotic therapy alone cannot completely eradicate the infection. Surgery has therefore become the cornerstone of treatment. Fundamental turns out to be the study of the patient and classication of the disease. The clas­sication most commonly used nowadays is the Cierny–Mader classication, which in addition to local conditions, allows us to divide the host into three classes: host-A healthy patients with low perioperative risk; host-B patients with local or systemic immunologic changes; and host-C patients in whom treatment may be more danger­ous than the disease. After accurately studying the location of the disease and the patient’s comorbidities, one should try to correct the immunological status of the patient: nutritional status should be optimized, and metabolic altera­tions and anemia should be corrected. To allow proper wound healing after surgical resection, one must ascertain the patient’s vascular status (by pulsoximetry, Doppler, or CT angiography) and correct it when possible.Salvage surgery involves an extensive debridement of bone and soft tissue, and resection surgery tries to maintain
Fig. 36.5 Clinical progression of acute osteomyelitis: (a) 1day; (b) 3days; and (c) 4days
36 Osteomyelitis
https://t.me/medicina_free
411
bone stability. Resection of the osteomyelitis focus should be radical and include healthy mar­gins (“tumor-like resection”), it is always better to remove a few more segments than less [18]. However, the extent of resection may cause insta­bility of the treated skeletal segment, leading to an advancement in the Cierny–Mader classica­tion from stage III to IV, in which case additional therapies are necessary. The various options allow the bone defect to be lled acutely or by multi-step treatments. In acute, it is possible to ll the defect by the placement of an autologous graft, this can be taken from numerous anatomi­cal sites and may or may not be associated with vascularized pedicles and soft tissue aps. If, however, a high risk of acute recurrence remains, it is possible to reclaim the osteomyelitis focus by placing a cement spacer to ll the defect, as described by Masquelet [19]. The technique describes the use of a simple poly-methyl­methacrylate (PMMA) spacer; however, it can be fortied with antibiotics to increase its eradicat­ing power and decrease the rate of recurrence. Retention of the PMMA spacer within the defect for at least 4–6 weeks causes a “foreign body reaction” that leads to the formation of a highly vascularized “pseudomembrane.” The second step involves the incision of the “pseudomem­brane,” the removal of the PMMA spacer, and placement of bone grafts in what is called a “bio­logical chamber.” A 2016 meta-analysis by an Italian group of 17 papers (between 2000 and
2016) analyzed variables from 427 patients. An
89.7% union rate was reported with 91.1% eradi­cation of infection in bone defects between 0.6 and 26cm [20]. Another technique, described by Ilizarov [21] in the 1970s, allows for the simulta­neous treatment of bone and soft tissue defects and is called distractional osteogenesis. Through the use of a circular external xation system, devised by the author himself, it is possible to resect large bone segments while still maintain­ing limb stability and still allowing load bearing.
Then an osteotomy is made at the metaphyseal site, and again thanks to Ilizarov’s “apparatus,” it is possible to ll the defect by progressive dis­traction of the bony callus, creating a “regener­ate” following the principles of distraction osteogenesis. The most recent meta-analyses report a cure rate of 97.26%, with unsatisfactory results in less than 10% of cases [22]. The refrac­ture rate reported in the literature is less than 5%, but increases as bone decit increases [23].
36.7.3 Foot Infections
Diabetes frequently results in foot infections. About 20% of diabetic foot infections are com­plicated by the involvement of the underlying bone, which typically results from contiguous spreading from overlaying soft-tissue infection. This signicantly raises the risk of lower extremity amputation. Deep wounds, peripheral neuropathy, Charcot’s arthropathy, vascular insufciency, poor glycemic control, and immu­nological dysfunction are among the risk factors for diabetic foot osteomyelitis (Fig.36.6). The choice of treatment is inuenced by the pres­ence of an associated vascular disorder and the presence of adjacent ulcers. Antibiotic treatment following debridement has demonstrated good outcomes in patients with good tissue oxygen­ation [24]. Pressure-off-loading surgical tech­niques such as hammertoe correction or Achilles tendon lengthening can help prevent ulcers and decrease their recurrence. If the extent of osteo­myelitis requires larger resections, minor ampu­tations (digit, trans metatarsal, and Chopart joint) may be opted for to continue to allow loading on the residual limb. Amputations below the knee or thigh may be considered in severe cases complicated by severe vascular insuf­ciency. Of great importance is the correct stag­ing of the host (A, B, or C) and proper patient information.
412
https://t.me/medicina_free
Fig. 36.6 Clinical and radiographic assessment of chronic osteomyelitis of the foot
G. Vicenti et al.
36.8 Conclusions
Osteomyelitis is a common clinical problem with an increased incidence correlated mainly with diabetes-related foot infections. Successful treatment depends on accurate diagnosis, cor­rect staging of the disease and the host, and col­laboration of multiple specialists. Antibiotic therapy is rst line in the treatment of acute osteomyelitis, while it is adjuvant in the treat­ment of chronic disease in which surgery is still the gold standard.
References
1. Lew DP, Waldvogel FA.Osteomyelitis. N Engl J Med. 1997;336(14):999–1007. https://doi.org/10.1056/
NEJM199704033361406.
2. Waldvogel FA, Medoff G, Swartz MN.Osteomyelitis: a review of clinical features, therapeutic con­siderations and unusual aspects. N Engl J Med. 1970;282(4):198–206. https://doi.org/10.1056/
NEJM197001222820406.
3. Cierny G, Mader JT. Adult chronic osteomyeli­tis. Orthopedics. 1984;7(10):1557–64. https://doi.
org/10.3928/0147- 7447- 19841001- 07.
4. McPherson EJ, Woodson C, Holtom P, Roidis N, Shufelt C, Patzakis M.Periprosthetic total hip infec-
tion: outcomes using a staging system. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2002;403:8–15.
5. Klosterhalfen B, Peters KM, Tons C, Hauptmann S, Klein CL, Kirkpatrick CJ. Local and sys­temic inammatory mediator release in patients with acute and chronic posttraumatic osteomy­elitis. J Trauma. 1996;40(3):372–8. https://doi.
org/10.1097/00005373- 199603000- 00008.
6. Brodie B. Pathological and surgical observations on the diseases of the joints. Washington: D.Green;
1834.
7. Jennin F, Bousson V, Parlier C, Jomaah N, Khanine V, Laredo J-D.Bony sequestrum: a radiologic review. Skelet Radiol. 2011;40(8):963–75. https://doi.
org/10.1007/s00256- 010- 0975- 4.
8. Baumert N, von Eiff C, Schaaff F, Peters G, Proctor RA, Sahl H-G.Physiology and antibiotic susceptibil­ity of Staphylococcus aureus small colony variants. Microb Drug Resist. 2002;8(4):253–60. https://doi.
org/10.1089/10766290260469507.
9. Costerton JW, Lewandowski Z, Caldwell DE, Korber DR, Lappin-Scott HM.Microbial biolms. Annu Rev Microbiol. 1995;49:711–45. https://doi.org/10.1146/
annurev.mi.49.100195.003431.
10. Jacobson IV, Sieling WL. Microbiology of second­ary osteomyelitis. Value of bone biopsy. S Afr Med J. 1987;72(7):476–7.
11. Fleischer AE, Didyk AA, Woods JB, Burns SE, Wrobel JS, Armstrong DG. Combined clinical and laboratory testing improves diagnostic accuracy for osteomyelitis in the diabetic foot. J Foot Ankle Surg. 2009;48(1):39–46. https://doi.org/10.1053/j.
jfas.2008.09.003.
36 Osteomyelitis
https://t.me/medicina_free
413
12. Ertugrul BM, Savk O, Ozturk B, Cobanoglu M, Oncu S, Sakarya S. The diagnosis of diabetic foot osteomyelitis: examination ndings and labora­tory values. Med Sci Monit Int Med J Exp Clin Res. 2009;15(6):CR307–12.
13. Shahid M, Holton C, O’Riordan S, Kraft JK.Sonography of musculoskeletal infection in chil­dren. Ultrasound. 2020;28(2):103–17. https://doi.org/
10.1177/1742271X20901736.
14. Fayad LM, Carrino JA, Fishman EK.Musculoskeletal infection: role of CT in the emergency department. Radiographics. 2007;27(6):1723–36. https://doi.
org/10.1148/rg.276075033.
15. Xu Z, Koo A, Shah A.The utility of MRI for the diag­nosis of osteomyelitis in the pressure ulcer patient. J Plast Reconstr Aesthetic Surg. 2017;70(2):289–91.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bjps.2016.11.009.
16. Casali M, Lauri C, Altini C, etal. State of the art of (18)F-FDG PET/CT application in inammation and infection: a guide for image acquisition and inter­pretation. Clin Transl imaging. 2021;9(4):299–339.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s40336- 021- 00445- w.
17. Senneville E, Lombart A, Beltrand E, et al. Outcome of diabetic foot osteomyelitis treated nonsurgically: a retrospective cohort study. Diabetes Care. 2008;31(4):637–42. https://doi.
org/10.2337/dc07- 1744.
18. Simpson AH, Deakin M, Latham JM, Chronic osteomyelitis. The effect of the extent of surgi­cal resection on infection-free survival. J Bone
Joint Surg Br. 2001;83(3):403–7. https://doi.
org/10.1302/0301- 620x.83b3.10727.
19. Masquelet AC, Fitoussi F, Begue T, Muller G.Reconstruction des os longs par membrane induite et autogreffe spongieuse. Ann Chir Plast Esthet. 2000;45(3):346–53.
20. Morelli I, Drago L, George DA, Gallazzi E, Scarponi S, Romanò CL. Masquelet technique: myth or reality? A systematic review and meta-analysis. Injury. 2016;47:S68–76. https://doi.org/10.1016/
S0020- 1383(16)30842- 7.
21. Ilizarov GA. Basic principles of transosseous com­pression and distraction osteosynthesis. Ortop Travmatol Protez. 1971;32:7.
22. Yin P, Ji Q, Li T, et al. A systematic review and meta-analysis of Ilizarov methods in the treatment of infected nonunion of tibia and femur. PLoS One. 2015;10(11):1–12. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.
pone.0141973.
23. Papakostidis C, Bhandari M, Giannoudis PV. Distraction osteogenesis in the treatment of long bone defects of the lower limbs. Effectiveness, complications and clinical results; a siste­matic review and meta-analysis. J Bone Jt Surg. 2013;95(B(12)):1673–80.
24. Pittet D, Wyssa B, Herter-Clavel C, Kursteiner K, Vaucher J, Lew PD. Outcome of diabetic foot infections treated conservatively: a retrospective cohort study with long-term follow-up. Arch Intern Med. 1999;159(8):851–6. https://doi.org/10.1001/
archinte.159.8.851.
Part VII
https://t.me/medicina_free
Plastic Surgery: When and How