RESUMEN

A classification of osteomyelitis must reflect the complexity of the disease and, moreover, provide conclusions for the treatment. The classification is based on the following eight parameters: source of infection (OM [osteomyelitis]/OT [post-traumatic OM]), anatomic region, stability of affected bone (continuity of bone), foreign material (internal fixation, prosthesis), range of infection (involved structures), activity of infection (acute, chronic, quiescent), causative microbes (unspecific and specific bacteria, fungi) and comorbidity (immunosuppressive diseases, general and local). In the long version of the classification, which was designed for scientific studies, the parameters are named by capital letters and specified by Arabic numbers, e.g., an acute, haematogenous osteomyelitis of a femur in an adolescent with diabetes mellitus, caused by Staphylococcus aureus, multi-sensible is coded as: OM2 Lo33 S1a M1 In1d Aa1 Ba2a K2a. The letters and numbers can be found in clearly arranged tables or calculated by a freely available grouper on the internet (www.osteomyelitis.exquit.net). An equally composed compact version of the classification for clinical use includes all eight parameters, but without further specification. The above-mentioned example in the compact version is: OM 3 S a Ba2 K2. The short version of the classification uses only the first six parameters and excludes causative microbes and comorbidity. The above mentioned example in the short version is: OM 3 S a. The long version of the classification describes an osteomyelitis in every detail. The complexity of the patient's disease is clearly reproducible and can be used for scientific comparisons. The for clinical use suggested compact and short versions of the classification include all important characteristics of an osteomyelitis, can be composed quickly and distinctly with the help of tables and provide conclusions for the individual treatment. The freely available grouper (www.osteomyelitis.exquit.net) creates all three versions of the classification in one step.

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

AIM: The disease "osteomyelitis" is characterised by different symptoms and parameters. Decisive roles in the development of the disease are played by the causative bacteria, the route of infection and the individual defense mechanisms of the host. The diagnosis is based on different symptoms and findings from the clinical history, clinical symptoms, laboratory results, diagnostic imaging, microbiological and histopathological analyses. While different osteomyelitis classifications have been published, there is to the best of our knowledge no score that gives information how sure the diagnosis "osteomyelitis" is in general. METHOD: For any scientific study of a disease a valid definition is essential. We have developed a special osteomyelitis diagnosis score for the reliable classification of clinical, laboratory and technical findings. The score is based on five diagnostic procedures: 1) clinical history and risk factors, 2) clinical examination and laboratory results, 3) diagnostic imaging (ultrasound, radiology, CT, MRI, nuclear medicine and hybrid methods), 4) microbiology, and 5) histopathology. RESULTS: Each diagnostic procedure is related to many individual findings, which are weighted by a score system, in order to achieve a relevant value for each assessment. If the sum of the five diagnostic criteria is 18 or more points, the diagnosis of osteomyelitis can be viewed as "safe" (diagnosis class A). Between 8-17 points the diagnosis is "probable" (diagnosis class B). Less than 8 points means that the diagnosis is "possible, but unlikely" (class C diagnosis). Since each parameter can score six points at a maximum, a reliable diagnosis can only be achieved if at least 3 parameters are scored with 6 points. CONCLUSION: The osteomyelitis diagnosis score should help to avoid the false description of a clinical presentation as "osteomyelitis". A safe diagnosis is essential for the aetiology, treatment and outcome studies of osteomyelitis.

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

Septic diseases of the bone and the immediate surrounding soft tissue, i.e., osteitis, belong to the most alarming findings in recent traumatology and orthopedic surgery. The paramount goal of this therapy is to preserve the stable weight-bearing bones while maintaining a correct axis and proper working muscles and joints, in order to avoid permanent disability in the patient. "State-of-the-art" therapy of osteitis/osteomyelitis therapy has two priorities: eradication of the infection and reconstruction of bone and soft tissue. Surgical treatment of the affected bone segments and soft tissue, followed by reconstructive methods, continues to be the main basic therapy. It is often extremely difficult to decide whether the affected bone segment has to be resected, or whether bone continuity can be preserved. The following paper provides strategies and guidance to help guide decisions in this complex and challenging area.

RESUMEN

A chronic empyema of the ankle joint often develops after an open fracture or surgery. In the case of the destruction of the joint due to an infection, an arthrodesis should be performed. Normally we use an external fixator with two bone-nails placed into the calcaneus and two into the tibia. The arthrodesis is distracted and Septopal is permanently implemented. At 4-6 weeks after surgery the Septopal is removed, with distraction being reduced and a cancellous bone-graft taken from the dorsal iliac crest is performed to fill the bony defect. After bone healing, the external fixator is removed and the patient mobilized in a brace. Initially, weight-bearing is limited to 10 kg but is increased gradually to full weight. The brace is used for 6-9 months; later the patient is mobilized in orthopaedic shoes. In difficult cases, also in combination with a malposition which has to be corrected or a lengthening of the lower limb, we use the Ilizarov fixator. From 1993 to 2003 we performed arthrodeses of the ankle joint due to infectious destruction in 107 cases. In 82.2%, the empyema was caused by a fracture of the ankle joint and the following treatment. In 58% of the patients, we saw associated diseases such as obesity, alcohol abuse, diabetes and malposition of the foot. In 55% we found Staphylococcus aureus. In 86%, we used the external AO-fixator, in 14% the Ilizarov fixator. The patient retained the fixator for an average of 128 days. In our study, 92.1% of the 101 patients who had completed therapy showed a good stability an average of 4.5 years after the arthrodesis. In 5% we found partial stability, while three patients had to be amputated. In 57 patients (56.4), an arthrosis of the tarsal bones was found, and 38 patients (54.3%) of the 70 patients who at the time of the arthrodesis were still working could return to work.

Asunto(s)