ﺑﺎﺯﮔﺸﺖ ﺑﻪ ﺻﻔﺤﻪ ﻗﺒﻠﯽ
خرید پکیج
تعداد آیتم قابل مشاهده باقیمانده : 3 مورد
نسخه الکترونیک
medimedia.ir

Bacterial arthritis: Treatment and outcome in infants and children

Bacterial arthritis: Treatment and outcome in infants and children
Literature review current through: Jan 2024.
This topic last updated: Oct 26, 2022.

INTRODUCTION — Infections of the joints (known as septic arthritis, pyogenic arthritis, suppurative arthritis, purulent arthritis, or pyarthrosis) may be caused by bacteria, fungi, mycobacteria, and viruses. The term "septic arthritis" usually refers to bacterial arthritis or fungal arthritis, but bacterial joint infections are most common [1,2].

The treatment and outcome of bacterial arthritis in infants and children will be reviewed here. The epidemiology, pathogenesis, microbiology, clinical features, and diagnosis of bacterial arthritis in infants and children; acute hematogenous osteomyelitis in infants and children; and the treatment of arthritis caused by Lyme disease are discussed separately:

(See "Bacterial arthritis: Epidemiology, pathogenesis, and microbiology in infants and children".)

(See "Bacterial arthritis: Clinical features and diagnosis in infants and children".)

(See "Hematogenous osteomyelitis in children: Epidemiology, pathogenesis, and microbiology".)

(See "Hematogenous osteomyelitis in children: Clinical features and complications".)

(See "Hematogenous osteomyelitis in children: Evaluation and diagnosis".)

(See "Hematogenous osteomyelitis in children: Management".)

(See "Treatment of Lyme disease", section on 'Arthritis'.)

OVERVIEW — Bacterial arthritis requires prompt recognition and management. Delays in treatment are associated with long-term damage to bones and joints, particularly when the hip or shoulder joint is involved. (See 'Outcome' below.)

Goals — The goals of treatment include sterilization and decompression of the joint space and removal of inflammatory debris to relieve pain and prevent deformity or functional sequelae [1,3]. Drainage of joint fluid and antimicrobial therapy are the cornerstones of therapy.

Indications for consultation — Children with documented or suspected bacterial arthritis should be managed in conjunction with an orthopedic surgeon who is experienced in treating children. Aspiration of the joint should occur as soon as possible when bacterial arthritis is suspected. Joint aspiration provides synovial fluid for analysis and culture and decompresses the joint. Indications for definitive drainage may include bacterial arthritis of the hip and shoulder, failure to improve after 48 hours of antimicrobial therapy, and persistently positive synovial cultures (if obtained). (See "Bacterial arthritis: Clinical features and diagnosis in infants and children", section on 'Synovial fluid' and 'Drainage' below.)

Given the frequency of contiguous osteomyelitis, antibiotic-resistant pathogens, and culture-negative cases, consultation with an expert in infectious diseases is also recommended, particularly for children with [4]:

Postoperative infection

Chronic joint infection

Penetrating injury (may be associated with unusual pathogens; usually is more complex than hematogenous arthritis)

Inadequate response to therapy

Prosthetic joint

Unusual pathogens (eg, Pasteurella multocida, Cutibacterium acnes [in children with prosthetic joints], fungal pathogens)

Antimicrobial allergy

Immunodeficiency or on immunosuppressive treatment

Sepsis or hemodynamic instability

DRAINAGE — Joint drainage is a cornerstone of treatment for bacterial arthritis [5-8]. At the time of presentation, joint infections are essentially closed abscesses. Drainage and lavage are necessary to decompress the joint space and to remove inflammatory debris to preserve synovium and collagen matrix [5,9].

Drainage procedures — Drainage can be accomplished through arthrotomy, arthroscopy, or needle aspiration (single or multiple) [1,10-13].

Arthrotomy – Arthrotomy facilitates thorough debridement of infected tissue, breakdown of loculations, and irrigation of the joint space [9,14,15]. However, arthrotomy requires general anesthesia and is more invasive than arthroscopy or needle aspiration.

Arthroscopy – Arthroscopy with irrigation and debridement is an alternative to arthrotomy for surgical drainage of bacterial arthritis in uncomplicated cases. Arthroscopy is less invasive than arthrotomy, and good outcomes have been reported in young children [16-19]. However, arthroscopic views may be limited, leading to inadequate irrigation or debridement.

Needle aspiration – Aspiration has minimal morbidity and, in the older child, may not require general anesthesia [15]. However, it may provide less satisfactory drainage than arthrotomy or arthroscopy. If the joint is thoroughly drained during diagnostic aspiration, a single aspiration may suffice [20]. Repeat aspiration may be necessary if fluid reaccumulates. However, young children may be difficult to assess and distressed by repeated procedures.

In observational studies in adult patients, the outcome of bacterial arthritis in patients treated with repeated needle aspiration was better than in those treated with surgical drainage [13,21]. Good outcome was defined by restoration of joint function with minimal or no residual pain.

Factors that affect choice of drainage procedure — Decisions regarding the optimal drainage procedure should be individualized according to the site and extent of involvement, duration of symptoms, the suspected organism, and other clinical features [1,9].

Hip or shoulder involvement – For children with bacterial arthritis of the hip or shoulder, we prefer open surgical drainage (arthrotomy) to arthroscopy or needle drainage.

Delayed or inadequate drainage increases the likelihood of adverse outcome. Increased intra-articular pressure can compromise the blood supply to the femoral head, resulting in avascular necrosis [22,23]. Given the potential for long-term complications and adjacent osteomyelitis in children with bacterial arthritis of the hip or shoulder [22-24], open surgical drainage is the optimal approach for thorough debridement, breakdown of loculations, and irrigation of the joint space. (See 'Drainage procedures' above.)

Although there are reports of successful treatment of bacterial arthritis of the hip or shoulder with arthroscopic drainage or needle aspiration, these reports generally involved older children, children with methicillin-susceptible Staphylococcus aureus, pathogens other than S. aureus, or brief duration of symptoms before presentation [15,19,25-33]. Pending additional high-quality studies, we continue to prefer open surgical drainage in children with bacterial arthritis of the hip or shoulder.

Other joints – For joints other than the hip and shoulder, arthroscopy and needle aspiration are alternatives to arthrotomy [12,20,21,34]. If the joint is thoroughly drained during diagnostic aspiration, a single aspiration may suffice [20]. Repeat aspiration may be necessary if fluid reaccumulates.

Penetrating trauma – For children with bacterial arthritis and penetrating trauma, arthrotomy permits thorough debridement and removal of any radiolucent foreign bodies, if present [35].

Concomitant osteomyelitis or large amount of debris or loculations – For children with bacterial arthritis and concomitant osteomyelitis, subperiosteal abscess, or large amount of debris or loculations, arthrotomy may be preferred because it permits better anatomic evaluation (eg, of the femoral neck in hip joint arthritis) and thorough debridement in a single procedure [35].

Gonococcal arthritis – Gonococcal arthritis seldom involves hip or shoulder joints and usually resolves without surgical drainage [36].

ANTIBIOTIC THERAPY

Indications — Antibiotic therapy is necessary to sterilize the joint fluid. Empiric antimicrobial therapy should be initiated as soon as possible after blood and synovial fluid cultures have been obtained in infants and children with characteristic clinical and laboratory features of bacterial arthritis [8,10,37].

Characteristic clinical features include:

Newborns and young infants – Clinical manifestations of sepsis (eg, irritability, poor feeding), pseudoparalysis, evidence of discomfort when being handled, or fever without a focus

Older infants and children – Fever and monoarticular pain, swelling, and limited range of motion

(See "Bacterial arthritis: Clinical features and diagnosis in infants and children", section on 'Clinical features'.)

Characteristic laboratory features include:

Elevated peripheral white blood cell (WBC) count, C-reactive protein (CRP), and /or erythrocyte sedimentation rate (ESR)

Elevated synovial fluid WBC count (>20,000 cells/microL) with a predominance of neutrophils

Organism identified on Gram stain of synovial fluid

(See "Bacterial arthritis: Clinical features and diagnosis in infants and children", section on 'Laboratory evaluation'.)

The differential diagnosis also must be carefully considered to identify disorders with clinical features similar to bacterial arthritis that do not require joint drainage or prolonged antibiotic therapy (eg, transient synovitis, Lyme arthritis, juvenile idiopathic arthritis). (See "Bacterial arthritis: Clinical features and diagnosis in infants and children", section on 'Differential diagnosis'.)

Empiric parenteral therapy

Factors in choice of regimen — Coverage for S. aureus (the most common cause of bacterial arthritis) should be included in the empiric regimen for children of all ages [8]. Coverage for additional pathogens may be necessary based upon the child's age (table 1), particular clinical circumstances (table 2), and Gram stain (table 3) [1,3,35,38]. Empiric therapy can be altered when the susceptibility pattern of the causative bacterium is known.

Few randomized controlled studies have evaluated antibiotic regimens for bacterial arthritis. All antibiotics that have been studied readily enter the joint fluid after systemic administration; intra-articular injection of antibiotics is unnecessary and may be painful. The joint fluid concentration for most penicillins and cephalosporins averages 30 percent of the serum concentration at the time of peak serum concentration, and, because of slow efflux from the joint fluid, may exceed serum concentration immediately before the next dose [39-43].

Children younger than three months — Empiric therapy for bacterial arthritis in infants <3 months of age should be directed against Staphylococcus, group B Streptococcus (GBS), and gram-negative bacilli (table 1). (See "Bacterial arthritis: Epidemiology, pathogenesis, and microbiology in infants and children", section on 'Microbiology'.)

For empiric parenteral therapy in children younger than three months with suspected bacterial arthritis, we generally provide combination therapy with an antistaphylococcal agent and either a third-generation cephalosporin or cefepime (table 4 and table 5). Appropriate regimens vary with the clinical presentation and risk factors for methicillin-resistant S. aureus (MRSA) or coagulase-negative staphylococci (algorithm 1).

For infants with allergy or intolerance to cephalosporins (very uncommon in this age group), we suggest consultation with an expert in pediatric infectious diseases.

Signs of sepsis – For infants <3 months of age with signs of sepsis (eg, tachycardia, poor perfusion, hypotension), we provide empiric therapy with either (algorithm 1):

Vancomycin plus nafcillin or oxacillin plus one of the following:

-Cefotaxime (preferred if available)

-Ceftazidime

-Ceftriaxone (for infants who are not receiving intravenous [IV] calcium-containing solutions [44])

Vancomycin plus cefepime – Although cefepime provides activity against methicillin-susceptible S. aureus (MSSA), some experts would add nafcillin or oxacillin for optimal activity against MSSA in infants with signs of sepsis.

No signs of sepsis but with risk factors for MRSA or coagulase-negative staphylococci – Risk factors for MRSA include care in the intensive care unit for >1 week; mother with, or suspected to have, infection or colonization with community-acquired S. aureus; and increased prevalence of MRSA at the admitting institution (eg, ≥10 percent of S. aureus isolates are methicillin resistant). Prematurity and prolonged or recurrent bacteremia with coagulase-negative staphylococci despite antibiotic therapy are the primary risk factors identified for bacterial arthritis with these organisms in neonates [45-47].

For infants without signs of sepsis but with risk factors for MRSA or coagulase-negative staphylococci, we provide empiric therapy with (algorithm 1):

Vancomycin plus one of the following:

-Cefotaxime (preferred if available)

-Ceftazidime

-Ceftriaxone (for infants who are not receiving IV calcium-containing solutions [44])

-Cefepime (a fourth-generation cephalosporin)

At some institutions, clindamycin is used as an alternative to vancomycin if <10 percent of S. aureus isolates are clindamycin resistant and the infant has localized infection with no signs of sepsis. Other experts may use a different threshold for clindamycin resistance.

No signs of sepsis and no risk factors for MRSA or coagulase-negative staphylococci – For infants without signs of sepsis and without risk factors for MRSA or coagulase-negative staphylococci, appropriate regimens include either:

Combination therapy with (algorithm 1)

-One of the following antistaphylococcal agents: vancomycin, nafcillin, or oxacillin; plus

-One of the following gram-negative agents: cefotaxime (preferred if available), ceftazidime, or ceftriaxone (for infants who are not receiving IV calcium-containing solutions [44])

Cefazolin is an alternative antistaphylococcal agent for infants age one to three months in whom central nervous system infection has been excluded.

Monotherapy with cefepime (a fourth-generation cephalosporin)

Although cefepime provides activity against MSSA, some experts would add nafcillin or oxacillin for additional activity against MSSA.

Children three months and older — Empiric therapy for bacterial arthritis in children ≥3 months should be directed toward S. aureus and other gram-positive organisms (eg, group A streptococci, Streptococcus pneumoniae) (table 1) [3,48,49]. Additional coverage for other pathogens (eg, Kingella kingae, Haemophilus influenzae, N. gonorrhoeae, Salmonella spp) may be necessary in select populations (table 2). (See 'Additional coverage for other pathogens' below.)

Children with hemodynamic instability — For severely ill children (eg, those with hemodynamic instability) who are ≥3 months of age, we suggest empiric combination therapy with either of the following combinations (table 3):

Vancomycin plus ceftriaxone plus one of the following: nafcillin, oxacillin, or cefazolin

Vancomycin plus cefepime

This combination therapy broadly covers the most likely pathogens to cause septic arthritis complicated by septic shock (MRSA, MSSA, and Neisseria meningitidis). Nafcillin, oxacillin, or cefazolin are superior to vancomycin for treatment of serious MSSA infections. Ceftriaxone or cefepime provide activity against N. meningitidis.

We provide empiric antimicrobial therapy for other pathogens as indicated. For children with septic arthritis and hemodynamic instability who are unable to tolerate penicillin and cephalosporin antibiotics, we use vancomycin in combination with a carbapenem or fluoroquinolone until gram-negative bacteremia is excluded. (See 'Additional coverage for other pathogens' below.)

Children who are hemodynamically stable — Agents that provide coverage for S. aureus and other gram-positive pathogens in children who are hemodynamically stable include cefazolin, clindamycin, nafcillin/oxacillin, and vancomycin. The agent of choice depends on the severity of illness, local prevalence of community-associated MRSA (CA-MRSA), the susceptibility of CA-MRSA isolates to clindamycin, and suspicion for other pathogens (table 3) [2,8,50,51]. Initial antimicrobial therapy for bacterial arthritis is usually administered parenterally. Drug doses are provided in the table (table 4).

For hemodynamically stable children, we suggest cefazolin, nafcillin, or oxacillin if <10 percent of community S. aureus isolates are methicillin-resistant. Cefazolin also provides coverage for K. kingae. For children who are unable to tolerate penicillin and cephalosporin antibiotics, we suggest clindamycin if <10 percent of S. aureus isolates are clindamycin resistant. Other experts may use different thresholds for methicillin or clindamycin resistance.

For hemodynamically stable children, we suggest either clindamycin or vancomycin if ≥10 percent of community S. aureus isolates are methicillin-resistant [2,8,50]. Other experts may use a different threshold for methicillin-resistance.

We suggest vancomycin for children who have underlying frequent contact with the health care system or who were hospitalized in the past six months because these children may have an increased risk of clindamycin resistance.

We suggest vancomycin when ≥10 percent of S. aureus isolates in the community are resistant to clindamycin (constitutive and inducible). Other experts may use a different threshold for clindamycin resistance. Vancomycin also provides coverage for penicillin-nonsusceptible S. pneumoniae.

We suggest clindamycin when <10 percent of S. aureus isolates in the community are resistant to clindamycin. Clindamycin also covers many penicillin-resistant S. pneumoniae (although a large proportion of serotype 19A isolates are resistant to multiple drugs, including clindamycin).

Alternatives to vancomycin or clindamycin when MRSA is a concern include linezolid or daptomycin (if the child is ≥1 year of age and has no concomitant pulmonary involvement) [8,50,52]. Ceftaroline is active against many pathogens that cause septic arthritis in children and is under investigation for use in septic arthritis and osteomyelitis in children, but data are limited [53,54].

In the only study comparing antimicrobial agents for osteoarticular infections, outcomes were similar among 169 Finnish children with culture-proven acute osteoarticular infections who were treated with clindamycin versus first-generation cephalosporins [55]. In this study, nearly all cases resulted from infection with MSSA (84 percent), S. pyogenes (9 percent), or S. pneumoniae (5 percent).

Additional coverage for other pathogens — It may be necessary to add empiric coverage for pathogens other than S. aureus and other gram-positives if clinical or laboratory features suggest a specific pathogen (table 2). (See "Bacterial arthritis: Epidemiology, pathogenesis, and microbiology in infants and children", section on 'Microbiology'.)

Gram-negative organisms on Gram stain – A second- or third-generation cephalosporin should be added to empiric antistaphylococcal therapy if gram-negative organisms are identified on Gram stain. Empiric antistaphylococcal therapy should be continued because Gram stain results are subject to observer misinterpretation.

Penetrating trauma or history of penetrating trauma – Penetrating trauma may cause polymicrobial infection. Empiric therapy should include coverage for P. aeruginosa as well as S. aureus. Options for empiric therapy include cefepime alone (for coverage against P. aeruginosa and MSSA) or combination therapy with cefepime or ceftazidime plus an agent with activity against MRSA (eg, clindamycin, vancomycin). Pathogen-directed therapy should include agents directed against all organisms recovered.

Preschool children in day careK. kingae should be considered as a possible pathogen in children 6 to 36 months of age (especially those attending day care and those with a history of oral ulcers preceding the onset of musculoskeletal findings) [56-61]. K. kingae usually is susceptible to cephalosporins (eg, cefazolin, cefotaxime, ceftriaxone) but consistently resistant to vancomycin and often resistant to clindamycin and antistaphylococcal penicillins (eg, oxacillin, nafcillin) [57,58].

We generally do not provide initial empiric coverage for K. kingae in young children because most cases of bacterial arthritis in the United States are caused by S. aureus and other gram-positive pathogens. In addition, initial multidrug therapy may complicate transition to oral therapy if an organism is not identified in culture. K. kingae generally causes relatively mild musculoskeletal infections [58]. (See 'Choice of oral regimen' below.)

For children between 6 and 36 months of age who require vancomycin or clindamycin for empiric coverage of CA-MRSA, empiric coverage for K. kingae with cefazolin may be added if the child does not improve as expected. Alternatively, cefazolin may be substituted for vancomycin or clindamycin if CA-MRSA is not identified in cultures of blood, bone, or soft tissue aspirates. (See 'Response to therapy' below.)

Incomplete Hib immunization – Coverage for Hib (eg, cefotaxime, ceftriaxone) should be added to the empiric regimen for children <2 years of age who are incompletely immunized against Hib (table 6) in areas where Hib immunization rates are low but is not necessary for those in areas with high Hib immunization rates. In the United States, local immunization coverage rates may be available from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention or the American Academy of Pediatrics.

Children at risk for penicillin-nonsusceptible pneumococcal arthritis – Empiric coverage for penicillin-nonsusceptible S. pneumoniae (eg, cefotaxime, ceftriaxone) may be warranted in children [62]:

Younger than two years with incomplete pneumococcal immunization (table 6)

Age two years or older with medical conditions that increase the risk of invasive pneumococcal disease (table 7)

Who received antibiotics within four weeks of diagnosis of bacterial arthritis

In the era of routine pneumococcal vaccination, most cases of pneumococcal arthritis occur in children without risk factors and are caused by serotypes not included in the pneumococcal conjugate vaccine (especially 35B and 33F which were not included in the 10-valent or 13-valent vaccine) (table 8) [63], In the United States, the 15-valent and 20-valent pneumococcal conjugate vaccines, which contain serotype 33F, were licensed in 2022 and 2023, respectively. (See "Pneumococcal vaccination in children", section on 'Conjugate vaccines'.)

Sickle cell disease – Coverage for Salmonella (eg, cefotaxime, ceftriaxone) should be added to the empiric regimen for children with sickle cell disease or related hemoglobinopathies. (See "Evaluation and management of fever in children and adults with sickle cell disease", section on 'Empiric antibiotic therapy'.)

Recent gastrointestinal surgery or complex urinary tract anatomy – Patients with recent gastrointestinal surgery or complex urinary tract anatomy are at risk for infection with enteric gram-negative organisms or Enterococcus. Addition of ampicillin and either 1) a third- or fourth-generation cephalosporin (eg, cefotaxime, ceftriaxone, cefepime) or 2) an aminoglycoside (eg, gentamicin) to the initial empiric regimen may be warranted.

Sexually active adolescents – Coverage for N. gonorrhoeae (eg, ceftriaxone) should be added to antistaphylococcal coverage in sexually active adolescents [64]. Presumptive treatment for chlamydia should also be given unless it has been excluded microbiologically. (See "Disseminated gonococcal infection", section on 'Initial antimicrobial therapy'.)

Injection drug users – Organisms that cause infection among injecting drug users (IDU) vary markedly between different communities. P. aeruginosa has been frequently reported among IDUs with bacterial arthritis. If P. aeruginosa arthritis is a consideration, our initial empiric regime includes ceftazidime as well as antistaphylococcal coverage with nafcillin/oxacillin or vancomycin. (See "Pseudomonas aeruginosa skin and soft tissue infections" and "Principles of antimicrobial therapy of Pseudomonas aeruginosa infections".)

Pathogen-directed therapy — Pathogen-directed therapy is based upon culture and susceptibility results (table 9). Consultation with an expert in infectious diseases is suggested for children with an inadequate response to therapy, unusual organisms (eg, P. multocida, C. acnes, fungal pathogens), immunocompromised individuals [65], and/or drug allergies. (See 'Indications for consultation' above.)

Negative cultures — No organism is identified in 30 to 50 percent of children with clinical bacterial arthritis [41,66-68].

Improvement with empiric therapy – In patients who demonstrate clinical and laboratory improvement with empiric therapy, the initial empiric therapy is continued. Patients who are immunocompetent and fully immunized against Hib and S. pneumoniae (table 6) may be switched to oral therapy if the oral regimen provides the same spectrum of coverage as the initial parenteral empiric regimen. (See 'Oral therapy' below.)

No improvement with empiric therapy – In patients who do not demonstrate clinical and laboratory improvement with empiric therapy, additional infectious agents and diagnoses other than bacterial arthritis must be considered. (See 'Treatment failure' below.)

Oral therapy — In infants and children ≥1 month, parenteral therapy is continued at least until clinical and laboratory improvement have been demonstrated, after which the balance of antibiotic therapy can be administered orally [69]. As long as the patient has demonstrated improvement, successful treatment does not require a minimum duration of parenteral therapy. In randomized and observational studies, treatment of bacterial arthritis in children with intravenous antibiotics for short periods (approximately seven days) followed by oral therapy was as successful as longer courses of parenteral therapy [70-72]. (See 'Response to therapy' below.)

Prerequisites — Our prerequisites for switching from parenteral to oral therapy include [4,71-76]:

The child is ≥1 month of age; (for infants younger than one month of age), we provide the entire course of antimicrobial therapy parenterally; the gastrointestinal absorption of oral antibiotics in neonates is unpredictable [77,78].

The child has improved as expected with parenteral therapy (eg, decreased swelling, tenderness, and erythema; improved joint mobility; decreased or absent fever; decreased CRP). (See 'Response to therapy' below.)

The child is immunocompetent and fully immunized against Hib and S. pneumoniae for their age (table 6).

The child has demonstrated the ability to swallow and retain an appropriate oral medication; the initial doses of oral therapy should be administered while the child is in the hospital to ensure that the drug is tolerated.

The patient and caregiver(s) have received appropriate education, are committed to the follow-up schedule, and are expected to adhere to the antimicrobial regimen. (See 'Outpatient follow-up' below.)

The pathogen has been identified and an oral agent with appropriate coverage is available, or, if cultures are negative, the child has responded as expected to empiric parenteral therapy and an oral regimen with a spectrum similar to the parenteral regimen is available. (See 'Response to therapy' below.)

The clinical course has been uncomplicated.

Choice of oral regimen

Agent(s) – The choice of agent(s) for oral therapy depends upon whether an organism was isolated from the synovial fluid, blood, or other culture. Additional considerations include the bioavailability and palatability of the oral medication. Consultation with an expert in infectious diseases may be helpful in choosing the optimal oral agent, particularly if the child has an unusual pathogen (eg, P. multocida, C. acnes, fungal organisms) or allergy to antibiotics. (See 'Indications for consultation' above.)

Organism isolated – When an organism is isolated, the susceptibility pattern is used to determine an appropriate drug (table 9).

Organism not isolated – When an organism is not isolated, oral therapy is directed toward the most likely pathogen(s) given the child's age (table 1) and clinical presentation (table 2). The chosen regimen should have a spectrum similar to that provided by the parenteral therapy that was associated with improvement. As examples, a child who improved on cefazolin may be switched to cephalexin; a child who improved on parenteral clindamycin could be switched to oral clindamycin.

Dose – Given the possibility of concomitant osteomyelitis and the relatively low penetration of penicillins and certain cephalosporins into bone, antibiotics administered orally for bacterial arthritis are generally given in higher doses than those used for treatment of other infections and recommended in package inserts (table 10) [79-82]. Doses of penicillins, cephalexin, and cefadroxil can be increased to 100 to 150 mg/kg per day without serious adverse side effects [55,79]. Monitoring drug levels may be helpful in exceptional cases if there is a concern about adequate absorption or adherence to the treatment regimen. Nonetheless, it is not generally necessary; clinical examination and laboratory monitoring for markers of inflammation provide sufficient evidence of the efficacy of treatment. (See 'Drug monitoring' below.)

Administration of first dose – We advise that the initial dose of oral therapy be administered while the child is in the hospital to ensure that the drug is tolerated. The child may be discharged home when they are able to tolerate the oral antibiotic and it is clear that the caregiver can administer oral therapy as prescribed. (See 'Outpatient follow-up' below.)

Drug monitoring

Adequacy of therapy – We do not usually monitor drug levels for adequacy of therapy in children with bacterial arthritis. The use of oral antimicrobial agents to complete treatment for septic arthritis has been commonplace for decades and is nearly always associated with success [29]. Measurement of antibiotic levels may be helpful in select patients if there is a concern regarding adequate absorption or adherence to the treatment regimen. Assays are available for most of the antibiotics that are used routinely to treat bacterial arthritis (eg, cephalexin and dicloxacillin).

Adverse effects – Children who are being treated with oral antibiotic therapy for bacterial arthritis require monitoring for potential adverse effects. Adverse effects of high-dose antibiotic therapy include pancytopenia, leukopenia, hepatitis [83], hypersensitivity reactions, hepatotoxicity, kidney dysfunction, and antibiotic-associated diarrhea [84,85].

We obtain complete blood count (CBC) with differential weekly initially, while the patient is receiving beta-lactam antibiotics (eg, penicillins, cephalosporins). It is also reasonable to obtain a biochemical profile, including serum aminotransferases, weekly while the patient is receiving beta-lactam antibiotics, although some experts only obtain serum aminotransferases in children with underlying liver disease. Some experts also obtain CBC with differential every one to two weeks for clindamycin, although hematologic adverse effects are less of a concern. For linezolid, CBCs should be monitored weekly for therapy beyond two weeks. (See 'Outpatient follow-up' below.)

Outpatient parenteral therapy — Outpatient parenteral antimicrobial therapy (OPAT) may be warranted for children ≥1 month of age who have improved as expected with parenteral therapy but do not meet the prerequisites for oral therapy. (See 'Prerequisites' above.)

Insertion of a percutaneously inserted central catheter facilitates prolonged administration of parenteral antibiotics and can be used for OPAT [4]. However, catheter-related complications (eg, malfunction, displacement, bloodstream infection) occur in 30 to 40 percent of children with osteoarticular infections who are treated with OPAT [86,87].

Total duration — The total duration of antimicrobial therapy for bacterial arthritis depends upon the pathogen and response to therapy. We provide the following general guidelines:

S. aureus – Minimum of three weeks

S. pneumoniae, GBS, group A Streptococcus – Two to three weeks

K. kingae, N. meningitidis, H. influenzae – Two to three weeks

Other gram-negative pathogens (eg, Salmonella) – Three weeks, particularly in the setting of penetrating trauma or gastrointestinal surgery

Culture-negative arthritis – Two weeks

Longer courses may be necessary for bacterial arthritis of the hip [20] and for arthritis caused by Enterobacteriaceae or other unusual organisms [8,73,88]. (See 'Indications for consultation' above.)

Antimicrobial therapy may be discontinued if the ESR (if measured) and CRP have returned to normal by these time points and there is no radiographic evidence of osteomyelitis, which occurs concomitantly in as many as 64 percent of cases [51,55,73,89-92].

Culture-negative septic arthritis should be managed in a similar fashion; if no evidence of bony involvement is found and ESR and CRP have normalized by two to three weeks, the empiric treatment can be stopped.

Radiographs should be obtained two to three weeks into the course of treatment to look for bone changes indicative of osteomyelitis [93]. This is of particular concern in cases of septic arthritis of the shoulder and hip in which concomitant osteomyelitis is common [24]. Radiographic findings suggestive of osteomyelitis include lytic lesions (image 1) and periosteal elevation (image 2), thickening, or new bone formation [94]. Osteomyelitis may require surgical intervention or prolongation of antibiotic therapy. (See "Hematogenous osteomyelitis in children: Evaluation and diagnosis", section on 'Advanced imaging' and "Hematogenous osteomyelitis in children: Management".)

Bacterial arthritis with concomitant osteomyelitis is associated with a worse prognosis than bacterial arthritis alone [93]. (See 'Prognostic factors' below.)

The suggested treatment durations are based on studies performed in the 1970s. A multicenter randomized open-label trial performed in Finland between 1983 and 2005 suggested that 10 days of antimicrobial therapy may be adequate for patients with culture-positive bacterial arthritis without adjacent osteomyelitis who demonstrate clinical improvement and either CRP <2 mg/dL (20 mg/L) or two normal CRP levels [20]. However, no cases of MRSA infections were encountered in this series, and 15 percent of children with hip involvement required extension of therapy beyond the planned duration [95]. Given these limitations and the paucity of data from infants (in whom septic arthritis of the hip is frequently associated with sequelae), we continue to treat bacterial arthritis for two to three weeks for most pathogens, and three weeks as a minimum for S. aureus.

ADJUNCTIVE THERAPIES

Analgesia — Pain management is an important aspect of therapy for bacterial arthritis. Opioid therapy may be necessary during initial hospitalization; consultation with the pain management service may be helpful. After discharge, acetaminophen or ibuprofen may be used for pain control [4].

Physical therapy — Attention must be paid to joint position and rapid mobilization to prevent contractures and promote optimal nutrition to the articular cartilage. Physical therapy may be helpful in children who are reluctant to use the joint.

Once discharged home, the child initially may require a wheelchair or walker and continued physical therapy.

Anti-inflammatory agents — The inflammatory response is an important component of the pathogenesis of bacterial arthritis and accounts for at least a portion of the long-term morbidity. Some experts recommend routine nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs), but there are no data to demonstrate that NSAIDS improve recovery or alter outcomes. The author of this topic recommends nonselective NSAIDs if necessary for pain management.

We do not routinely suggest adjunctive glucocorticoid therapy for children with septic arthritis. Although randomized trials and observational studies comparing dexamethasone with placebo in children with septic arthritis have suggested potential benefits, long-term outcomes were inconsistent [96-99]. A meta-analysis that included two randomized trials (a total of 149 patients) found both trials to be at high risk of attrition bias and selective outcome reporting [99]. Additional limitations include the absence of cases of methicillin-resistant S. aureus and the relatively prolonged duration of parenteral antibiotics in some patients. Moreover, the effects of dexamethasone were not compared with those of nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory agents, which are recommended as adjunctive therapy by some experts.

RESPONSE TO THERAPY

Monitoring response — The response to therapy is assessed with serial clinical and laboratory evaluations. During hospitalization, we monitor clinical status (eg, fever; joint pain, swelling, erythema, and mobility) at least daily. We monitor peripheral white blood cell (WBC) count and/or C-reactive protein (CRP) every two to three days and/or if clinical status worsens. We monitor synovial fluid WBC count and culture (if repeated aspirations are necessary).

Monitoring during outpatient oral or parenteral therapy is discussed below. (See 'Outpatient follow-up' below.)

Expected response — Clinical and laboratory improvement is indicated by:

Resolution of fever – Fever usually resolves within three to five days of initiation of treatment [4,70].

Improved joint symptoms – Improvement in joint symptoms (pain, swelling, erythema, mobility) usually occurs within two days of initiation of treatment. The time required for resolution of symptoms and sterilization of the joint fluid is proportional to the duration of symptoms before initiation of appropriate therapy and the synovial fluid WBC count at the time of diagnosis [100-102].

Normalization of the peripheral WBC count and decreased ESR and/or CRP – CRP is more useful than ESR for monitoring acute response to treatment. WBC counts, if initially abnormal, normalize within one week of initiation of treatment [103]. Even with appropriate treatment, the ESR may continue to rise for three to five days, whereas CRP peaks within 36 to 50 hours of onset of infection and quickly falls to normal with appropriate therapy [9,103]. ESR remains useful for determining the duration of therapy since it normalizes as inflammation resolves. Although many children still have a mildly elevated ESR at the end of the prescribed treatment course, they may not require additional therapy if no evidence of associated osteomyelitis is revealed by radiographs.

Decrease in synovial fluid WBC count and sterilization of synovial fluid – In joints that initially were drained with needle aspiration, synovial fluid may reaccumulate, requiring repeated drainage. Infected knees, in particular, may continue to accumulate fluid for 7 to 10 days. When available (from repeat aspiration or a surgical drain), serial synovial fluid analyses should demonstrate sterilization and a decreasing WBC count within one to two days.

Treatment failure — Treatment failure may be indicated by:

Lack of clinical improvement

CRP that continues to rise three to five days after initiation of therapy

Persistently elevated ESR, CRP, peripheral WBC count, or synovial fluid WBC count

Failure to sterilize the synovial fluid in the expected period of one to two days (if repeat cultures are obtained)

Patients who do not respond to empiric or pathogen-directed therapy as expected should be reevaluated. They may require arthrotomy and/or adjustment of antimicrobial therapy.

Reevaluation should generally include magnetic resonance imaging for evidence of osteomyelitis with abscess; review of the history for exposure to unusual organisms (eg, P. multocida, C. acnes) or penetrating trauma; and reconsideration of other conditions in the differential diagnosis. (See "Bacterial arthritis: Epidemiology, pathogenesis, and microbiology in infants and children", section on 'Microbiology' and "Bacterial arthritis: Clinical features and diagnosis in infants and children", section on 'Differential diagnosis'.)

For patients who do not improve after 48 hours of antibiotic therapy or have persistent positive cultures despite appropriate antimicrobial therapy and multiple needle aspirations, arthrotomy may be necessary to ensure thorough debridement of infected tissue, breakdown of loculations, and irrigation of the joint space.

For patients with failure to improve despite appropriate pathogen-directed therapy, it may be helpful to monitor drug levels to ensure adequate serum levels. (See 'Drug monitoring' above.)

For patients with negative cultures, more aggressive attempts to isolate or identify unusual pathogens and fastidious organisms (eg, K. kingae) may be warranted (table 2). This may include:

Aspiration of any involved soft tissue or bone biopsy for histopathologic staining and bacterial culture.

Molecular testing is especially helpful for identifying K. kingae in synovial fluid that is culture negative. (See "Bacterial arthritis: Clinical features and diagnosis in infants and children", section on 'Synovial fluid'.)

Appropriate serologic testing for children with potential exposure to Coccidioides or Brucella. (See "Coccidioidomycosis: Laboratory diagnosis and screening" and "Manifestations and treatment of nonmeningeal extrathoracic coccidioidomycosis" and "Brucellosis: Epidemiology, microbiology, clinical manifestations, and diagnosis".)

Tuberculosis testing if Mycobacterium tuberculosis is suspected. (See "Tuberculosis disease in children: Epidemiology, clinical manifestations, and diagnosis", section on 'Diagnosis'.)

If the more aggressive evaluation does not identify an organism, broadening of empiric therapy to include organisms not covered by the initial regimen (eg, K. kingae in patients initially treated with vancomycin, clindamycin, nafcillin, or oxacillin) may be indicated.

OUTPATIENT FOLLOW-UP — We see children who are being treated for bacterial arthritis as outpatients approximately one week after discharge from the hospital and at one- to two-week intervals thereafter.

We monitor them for continued clinical improvement (including the need to initiate or continue physical therapy) and for complications related to high-dose antibiotic therapy, such as cytopenias, hepatitis [83], impaired liver or renal function, antibiotic-associated diarrhea, and pseudomembranous colitis.

We obtain complete blood count with differential, erythrocyte sedimentation rate, and C-reactive protein at each visit. It is also reasonable to obtain a biochemical profile, including serum aminotransferases, weekly while the patient is receiving beta-lactam antibiotics, although some experts only obtain serum aminotransferases in children with underlying liver disease. If patients are not improving as expected after being transitioned to oral therapy, it may be advisable to revert to intravenous therapy. (See 'Treatment failure' above.)

After treatment is discontinued, children generally should be monitored for long-term complications at routine well-child care visits. Those who are at high risk of damage to cartilage (eg, delayed recognition of septic arthritis of the hip for three or more days) should be monitored by an orthopedic surgeon with experience in pediatrics. (See 'Complications' below.)

OUTCOME

Complications

Short-term complications – Short-term complications of bacterial osteoarticular infections include sepsis, septic shock, deep vein thrombosis, and septic pulmonary emboli [104,105].

Long-term complications – Potential long-term complications of bacterial arthritis include [1,22,24,94,106-108]:

Avascular necrosis

Joint laxity, subluxation, or dislocation

Limited range of motion of the joint

Limb-length discrepancy or angular deformities (if the growth plate is involved)

Enlargement of the femoral head (coxa magna) in bacterial arthritis of the hip

Pathologic fractures

Premature osteoarthritis

The estimated rate of complications ranges from 10 to 29 percent, depending upon the patient population, the involved joint, and the duration of follow-up (prolonged follow-up may be necessary to detect some complications) [1,15,32,67,92,94,109-111]. Studies published after 2015 have reported lower rates of complication (4 to 5 percent), possibly reflecting more awareness and/or improved management strategies [32,92].

Even with appropriate management, up to 40 percent of patients with hip involvement and 10 percent of patients with knee involvement develop significant complications [11,112-114].

Prognostic factors — In observational studies, the following factors were associated with long-term complications [66,67,88,111,114-119]:

Duration of symptoms before treatment, particularly if >4 to 7 days (ie, a delay in diagnosis)

Involvement of the hip

Involvement of the hip or shoulder with concomitant osteomyelitis

Age less than one year, particularly less than one month

Isolation of S. aureus or Enterobacteriaceae compared with other pathogens

Factors that do not appear to be related to outcome include:

The mode of drainage, provided that adequate drainage is achieved

The choice of antibiotic, provided that it is effective against the infecting organism

SOCIETY GUIDELINE LINKS — Links to society and government-sponsored guidelines from selected countries and regions around the world are provided separately. (See "Society guideline links: Septic arthritis and osteomyelitis in children".)

INFORMATION FOR PATIENTS — UpToDate offers two types of patient education materials, "The Basics" and "Beyond the Basics." The Basics patient education pieces are written in plain language, at the 5th to 6th grade reading level, and they answer the four or five key questions a patient might have about a given condition. These articles are best for patients who want a general overview and who prefer short, easy-to-read materials. Beyond the Basics patient education pieces are longer, more sophisticated, and more detailed. These articles are written at the 10th to 12th grade reading level and are best for patients who want in-depth information and are comfortable with some medical jargon.

Here are the patient education articles that are relevant to this topic. We encourage you to print or email these topics to your patients. (You can also locate patient education articles on a variety of subjects by searching on "patient education" and the keyword[s] of interest.)

Basics topic (see "Patient education: Septic arthritis (The Basics)")

SUMMARY AND RECOMMENDATIONS

Overview – Bacterial arthritis requires prompt recognition and management. Drainage of joint fluid and antimicrobial therapy are the cornerstones of therapy. (See 'Overview' above.)

Drainage – Decisions regarding the optimal drainage procedure should be individualized. We prefer arthrotomy for children with bacterial arthritis of the hip or shoulder, penetrating trauma, concomitant osteomyelitis, and/or large amount of debris or loculations. For other joints, arthroscopy and needle aspiration are alternatives to arthrotomy. (See 'Drainage' above.)

Antibiotic therapy – Antibiotic therapy is necessary to sterilize the joint fluid. Antibiotics should be administered as soon as possible after blood and synovial fluid cultures have been obtained. (See 'Antibiotic therapy' above.)

Empiric parenteral therapy – We include coverage for Staphylococcus aureus in the empiric regimen for children of all ages (algorithm 1 and table 3). Coverage for additional pathogens may be necessary based upon the child's age (table 1), particular clinical circumstances (table 2), and Gram stain (table 3). Initial antimicrobial therapy for bacterial arthritis usually is administered parenterally (table 4). (See 'Empiric parenteral therapy' above.)

Pathogen-directed therapy – The antimicrobial regimen can be tailored to a specific pathogen when culture and susceptibility results are available (table 9). Children whose cultures remain negative and improve with empiric therapy usually are continued on the empiric parenteral regimen. (See 'Pathogen-directed therapy' above.)

Route and total duration of therapy – In infants <1 month of age, we provide the entire course of antimicrobial therapy parenterally. Infants who are age one month or older and children may be switched to oral therapy (table 10) if they have demonstrated clinical and laboratory improvement and meet prerequisites for oral therapy. (See 'Oral therapy' above and 'Outpatient parenteral therapy' above and 'Total duration' above.)

S. aureus arthritis is usually treated for at least three weeks; other causes of bacterial arthritis and culture-negative arthritis are usually treated for two to three weeks. Antimicrobial therapy may be discontinued if the erythrocyte sedimentation rate (ESR) and/or C-reactive protein (CRP) have returned to normal by these time points and there is no radiographic evidence of unsuspected osteomyelitis. (See 'Total duration' above.)

Response to therapy – Children receiving appropriate antimicrobial therapy generally demonstrate clinical improvement within three to five days. Clinical improvement is demonstrated by decreased fever; improved joint pain, swelling, erythema, and range of motion; and decreased peripheral white blood cell (WBC) count, ESR and/or CRP, and synovial fluid WBC count and culture (if obtained). (See 'Response to therapy' above.)

Patients who do not respond to treatment as expected should be reevaluated. They may require arthrotomy and/or adjustment of antimicrobial therapy. (See 'Treatment failure' above.)

Outpatient follow-up – We see children who are being treated for bacterial arthritis as outpatients approximately one week after discharge from the hospital and at one- to two-week intervals thereafter. We monitor them for clinical improvement and complications of high-dose antibiotic therapy. We obtain a complete blood count with differential, ESR, and CRP at each visit. It is also reasonable to obtain a biochemical profile, including serum aminotransferases, weekly while the patient is receiving beta-lactam antibiotics, although some experts only obtain serum aminotransferases in children with underlying liver disease. (See 'Outpatient follow-up' above.)

Outcome – Residual joint dysfunction is a major morbidity for children with septic arthritis. Factors related to poor outcome include duration of symptoms before treatment, involvement of the hip, involvement of the hip or shoulder with concomitant osteomyelitis, and age younger than one year. (See 'Outcome' above.)

  1. Nade S. Septic arthritis. Best Pract Res Clin Rheumatol 2003; 17:183.
  2. Krogstad P. Septic arthritis. In: Feigin and Cherry’s Textbook of Pediatric Infectious Diseases, 8th ed, Cherry JD, Harrison G, Kaplan SL, et al (Eds), Elsevier, Philadelphia 2018. p.529.
  3. Hong DK, Gutierrez K. Infectious and inflammatory arthritis. In: Principles and Practice of Pediatric Infectious Diseases, 5th ed, Long SS, Prober CG, Fischer M (Eds), Elsevier, Philadelphia 2018. p.487.
  4. Kocher MS, Mandiga R, Murphy JM, et al. A clinical practice guideline for treatment of septic arthritis in children: efficacy in improving process of care and effect on outcome of septic arthritis of the hip. J Bone Joint Surg Am 2003; 85-A:994.
  5. Smith RL, Schurman DJ. Bacterial arthritis. A staphylococcal proteoglycan-releasing factor. Arthritis Rheum 1986; 29:1378.
  6. Riegels-Nielsen P, Frimodt-Møller N, Sørensen M, Jensen JS. Antibiotic treatment insufficient for established septic arthritis. Staphylococcus aureus experiments in rabbits. Acta Orthop Scand 1989; 60:113.
  7. Nord KD, Dore DD, Deeney VF, et al. Evaluation of treatment modalities for septic arthritis with histological grading and analysis of levels of uronic acid, neutral protease, and interleukin-1. J Bone Joint Surg Am 1995; 77:258.
  8. Saavedra-Lozano J, Falup-Pecurariu O, Faust SN, et al. Bone and Joint Infections. Pediatr Infect Dis J 2017; 36:788.
  9. Stans AA. Musculoskeletal infection. In: Lovell and Winter’s Pediatric Orthopaedics, 7th ed, Weinstein SL, Flynn JM (Eds), Wolters Kluwer Health, Philadelphia 2014. p.369.
  10. Mathews CJ, Coakley G. Septic arthritis: current diagnostic and therapeutic algorithm. Curr Opin Rheumatol 2008; 20:457.
  11. Morrey BF, Bianco AJ Jr, Rhodes KH. Septic arthritis in children. Orthop Clin North Am 1975; 6:923.
  12. Herndon WA, Knauer S, Sullivan JA, Gross RH. Management of septic arthritis in children. J Pediatr Orthop 1986; 6:576.
  13. Goldenberg DL, Brandt KD, Cohen AS, Cathcart ES. Treatment of septic arthritis: comparison of needle aspiration and surgery as initial modes of joint drainage. Arthritis Rheum 1975; 18:83.
  14. Daniel D, Akeson W, Amiel D, et al. Lavage of septic joints in rabbits: effects of chondrolysis. J Bone Joint Surg Am 1976; 58:393.
  15. Smith SP, Thyoka M, Lavy CB, Pitani A. Septic arthritis of the shoulder in children in Malawi. A randomised, prospective study of aspiration versus arthrotomy and washout. J Bone Joint Surg Br 2002; 84:1167.
  16. Stanitski CL, Harvell JC, Fu FH. Arthroscopy in acute septic knees. Management in pediatric patients. Clin Orthop Relat Res 1989; :209.
  17. Johns B, Loewenthal M, Ho E, Dewar D. Arthroscopic Versus Open Treatment for Acute Septic Arthritis of the Knee in Children. Pediatr Infect Dis J 2018; 37:413.
  18. El-Sayed AM. Treatment of early septic arthritis of the hip in children: comparison of results of open arthrotomy versus arthroscopic drainage. J Child Orthop 2008; 2:229.
  19. Thompson RM, Gourineni P. Arthroscopic Treatment of Septic Arthritis in Very Young Children. J Pediatr Orthop 2017; 37:e53.
  20. Peltola H, Pääkkönen M, Kallio P, et al. Prospective, randomized trial of 10 days versus 30 days of antimicrobial treatment, including a short-term course of parenteral therapy, for childhood septic arthritis. Clin Infect Dis 2009; 48:1201.
  21. Broy SB, Schmid FR. A comparison of medical drainage (needle aspiration) and surgical drainage (arthrotomy or arthroscopy) in the initial treatment of infected joints. Clin Rheum Dis 1986; 12:501.
  22. Wenger DR. Childhood hip sepsis: improving the yield of good results. Instr Course Lect 1985; 34:457.
  23. Fabry G, Meire E. Septic arthritis of the hip in children: poor results after late and inadequate treatment. J Pediatr Orthop 1983; 3:461.
  24. Belthur MV, Palazzi DL, Miller JA, et al. A clinical analysis of shoulder and hip joint infections in children. J Pediatr Orthop 2009; 29:828.
  25. Forward DP, Hunter JB. Arthroscopic washout of the shoulder for septic arthritis in infants. A new technique. J Bone Joint Surg Br 2002; 84:1173.
  26. Kim SJ, Choi NH, Ko SH, et al. Arthroscopic treatment of septic arthritis of the hip. Clin Orthop Relat Res 2003; :211.
  27. Nusem I, Jabur MK, Playford EG. Arthroscopic treatment of septic arthritis of the hip. Arthroscopy 2006; 22:902.e1.
  28. Chung WK, Slater GL, Bates EH. Treatment of septic arthritis of the hip by arthroscopic lavage. J Pediatr Orthop 1993; 13:444.
  29. Pääkkönen M, Kallio MJ, Peltola H, Kallio PE. Pediatric septic hip with or without arthrotomy: retrospective analysis of 62 consecutive nonneonatal culture-positive cases. J Pediatr Orthop B 2010; 19:264.
  30. Givon U, Liberman B, Schindler A, et al. Treatment of septic arthritis of the hip joint by repeated ultrasound-guided aspirations. J Pediatr Orthop 2004; 24:266.
  31. Griffet J, Oborocianu I, Rubio A, et al. Percutaneous aspiration irrigation drainage technique in the management of septic arthritis in children. J Trauma 2011; 70:377.
  32. Calvo C, Núñez E, Camacho M, et al. Epidemiology and Management of Acute, Uncomplicated Septic Arthritis and Osteomyelitis: Spanish Multicenter Study. Pediatr Infect Dis J 2016; 35:1288.
  33. Sanpera I, Raluy-Collado D, Sanpera-Iglesias J. Arthroscopy for hip septic arthritis in children. Orthop Traumatol Surg Res 2016; 102:87.
  34. Wilson NI, Di Paola M. Acute septic arthritis in infancy and childhood. 10 years' experience. J Bone Joint Surg Br 1986; 68:584.
  35. Pioro MH, Mandell BF. Septic arthritis. Rheum Dis Clin North Am 1997; 23:239.
  36. Goldenberg DL, Reed JI. Bacterial arthritis. N Engl J Med 1985; 312:764.
  37. Kang SN, Sanghera T, Mangwani J, et al. The management of septic arthritis in children: systematic review of the English language literature. J Bone Joint Surg Br 2009; 91:1127.
  38. Fink CW, Nelson JD. Septic arthritis and osteomyelitis in children. Clin Rheum Dis 1986; 12:423.
  39. Baciocco EA, Iles RL. Ampicillin and kanamycin concentrations in joint fluid. Clin Pharmacol Ther 1971; 12:858.
  40. Balboni V, Shapiro IM, Kydd DM. The penetration of penicillin into joint fluid following intramuscular administration. Am J Med Sci 1945; 210:588.
  41. Nelson JD. The bacterial etiology and antibiotic management of septic arthritis in infants and children. Pediatrics 1972; 50:437.
  42. Plott MA, Roth H. Penetration of clindamycin into synovial fluid. Clin Pharmacol Ther 1970; 11:577.
  43. Nelson JD. Antibiotic concentrations in septic joint effusions. N Engl J Med 1971; 284:349.
  44. Bradley JS, Wassel RT, Lee L, Nambiar S. Intravenous ceftriaxone and calcium in the neonate: assessing the risk for cardiopulmonary adverse events. Pediatrics 2009; 123:e609.
  45. Waldvogel FA, Papageorgiou PS. Osteomyelitis: the past decade. N Engl J Med 1980; 303:360.
  46. Guilbert J, Meau-Petit V, de Labriolle-Vaylet C, et al. [Coagulase-negative staphylococcal osteomyelitis in preterm infants: a proposal for a diagnostic procedure]. Arch Pediatr 2010; 17:1473.
  47. Eggink BH, Rowen JL. Primary osteomyelitis and suppurative arthritis caused by coagulase-negative staphylococci in a preterm neonate. Pediatr Infect Dis J 2003; 22:572.
  48. Bowerman SG, Green NE, Mencio GA. Decline of bone and joint infections attributable to haemophilus influenzae type b. Clin Orthop Relat Res 1997; :128.
  49. Luhmann JD, Luhmann SJ. Etiology of septic arthritis in children: an update for the 1990s. Pediatr Emerg Care 1999; 15:40.
  50. Liu C, Bayer A, Cosgrove SE, et al. Clinical practice guidelines by the infectious diseases society of america for the treatment of methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus infections in adults and children. Clin Infect Dis 2011; 52:e18.
  51. Carrillo-Marquez MA, Hulten KG, Hammerman W, et al. USA300 is the predominant genotype causing Staphylococcus aureus septic arthritis in children. Pediatr Infect Dis J 2009; 28:1076.
  52. Chen CJ, Chiu CH, Lin TY, et al. Experience with linezolid therapy in children with osteoarticular infections. Pediatr Infect Dis J 2007; 26:985.
  53. Pfaller MA, Farrell DJ, Sader HS, Jones RN. AWARE Ceftaroline Surveillance Program (2008-2010): trends in resistance patterns among Streptococcus pneumoniae, Haemophilus influenzae, and Moraxella catarrhalis in the United States. Clin Infect Dis 2012; 55 Suppl 3:S187.
  54. Williams AW, Newman PM, Ocheltree S, et al. Ceftaroline Fosamil Use in 2 Pediatric Patients With Invasive Methicillin-Resistant Staphylococcus aureus Infections. J Pediatr Pharmacol Ther 2015; 20:476.
  55. Peltola H, Pääkkönen M, Kallio P, et al. Clindamycin vs. first-generation cephalosporins for acute osteoarticular infections of childhood--a prospective quasi-randomized controlled trial. Clin Microbiol Infect 2012; 18:582.
  56. Kiang KM, Ogunmodede F, Juni BA, et al. Outbreak of osteomyelitis/septic arthritis caused by Kingella kingae among child care center attendees. Pediatrics 2005; 116:e206.
  57. Yagupsky P. Antibiotic susceptibility of Kingella kingae isolates from children with skeletal system infections. Pediatr Infect Dis J 2012; 31:212.
  58. Yagupsky P, Porsch E, St Geme JW 3rd. Kingella kingae: an emerging pathogen in young children. Pediatrics 2011; 127:557.
  59. Dubnov-Raz G, Ephros M, Garty BZ, et al. Invasive pediatric Kingella kingae Infections: a nationwide collaborative study. Pediatr Infect Dis J 2010; 29:639.
  60. Mallet C, Ceroni D, Litzelmann E, et al. Unusually severe cases of Kingella kingae osteoarticular infections in children. Pediatr Infect Dis J 2014; 33:1.
  61. Amit U, Flaishmakher S, Dagan R, et al. Age-Dependent Carriage of Kingella kingae in Young Children and Turnover of Colonizing Strains. J Pediatric Infect Dis Soc 2014; 3:160.
  62. Bradley JS, Kaplan SL, Tan TQ, et al. Pediatric pneumococcal bone and joint infections. The Pediatric Multicenter Pneumococcal Surveillance Study Group (PMPSSG). Pediatrics 1998; 102:1376.
  63. Olarte L, Romero J, Barson W, et al. Osteoarticular Infections Caused by Streptococcus pneumoniae in Children in the Post-Pneumococcal Conjugate Vaccine Era. Pediatr Infect Dis J 2017; 36:1201.
  64. Workowski KA, Bachmann LH, Chan PA, et al. Sexually Transmitted Infections Treatment Guidelines, 2021. MMWR Recomm Rep 2021; 70:1.
  65. Wang DA, Tambyah PA. Septic arthritis in immunocompetent and immunosuppressed hosts. Best Pract Res Clin Rheumatol 2015; 29:275.
  66. Barton LL, Dunkle LM, Habib FH. Septic arthritis in childhood. A 13-year review. Am J Dis Child 1987; 141:898.
  67. Welkon CJ, Long SS, Fisher MC, Alburger PD. Pyogenic arthritis in infants and children: a review of 95 cases. Pediatr Infect Dis 1986; 5:669.
  68. Wiley JJ, Fraser GA. Septic arthritis in childhood. Can J Surg 1979; 22:326.
  69. Ballock RT, Newton PO, Evans SJ, et al. A comparison of early versus late conversion from intravenous to oral therapy in the treatment of septic arthritis. J Pediatr Orthop 2009; 29:636.
  70. Newton PO, Ballock RT, Bradley JS. Oral antibiotic therapy of bacterial arthritis. Pediatr Infect Dis J 1999; 18:1102.
  71. Jaberi FM, Shahcheraghi GH, Ahadzadeh M. Short-term intravenous antibiotic treatment of acute hematogenous bone and joint infection in children: a prospective randomized trial. J Pediatr Orthop 2002; 22:317.
  72. Kim HK, Alman B, Cole WG. A shortened course of parenteral antibiotic therapy in the management of acute septic arthritis of the hip. J Pediatr Orthop 2000; 20:44.
  73. Tetzlaff TR, McCracken GH Jr, Nelson JD. Oral antibiotic therapy for skeletal infections of children. II. Therapy of osteomyelitis and suppurative arthritis. J Pediatr 1978; 92:485.
  74. Kolyvas E, Ahronheim G, Marks MI, et al. Oral antibiotic therapy of skeletal infections in children. Pediatrics 1980; 65:867.
  75. Arnold JC, Cannavino CR, Ross MK, et al. Acute bacterial osteoarticular infections: eight-year analysis of C-reactive protein for oral step-down therapy. Pediatrics 2012; 130:e821.
  76. Chou AC, Mahadev A. The Use of C-reactive Protein as a Guide for Transitioning to Oral Antibiotics in Pediatric Osteoarticular Infections. J Pediatr Orthop 2016; 36:173.
  77. Perkins MD, Edwards KM, Heller RM, Green NE. Neonatal group B streptococcal osteomyelitis and suppurative arthritis. Outpatient therapy. Clin Pediatr (Phila) 1989; 28:229.
  78. Schwartz GJ, Hegyi T, Spitzer A. Subtherapeutic dicloxacillin levels in a neonate: possible mechanisms. J Pediatr 1976; 89:310.
  79. Nelson JD, Bucholz RW, Kusmiesz H, Shelton S. Benefits and risks of sequential parenteral--oral cephalosporin therapy for suppurative bone and joint infections. J Pediatr Orthop 1982; 2:255.
  80. Bryson YJ, Connor JD, LeClerc M, Giammona ST. High-dose oral dicloxacillin treatment of acute staphylococcal osteomyelitis in children. J Pediatr 1979; 94:673.
  81. Martínez-Aguilar G, Hammerman WA, Mason EO Jr, Kaplan SL. Clindamycin treatment of invasive infections caused by community-acquired, methicillin-resistant and methicillin-susceptible Staphylococcus aureus in children. Pediatr Infect Dis J 2003; 22:593.
  82. Landersdorfer CB, Bulitta JB, Kinzig M, et al. Penetration of antibacterials into bone: pharmacokinetic, pharmacodynamic and bioanalytical considerations. Clin Pharmacokinet 2009; 48:89.
  83. Al-Homaidhi H, Abdel-Haq NM, El-Baba M, Asmar BI. Severe hepatitis associated with oxacillin therapy. South Med J 2002; 95:650.
  84. Olson SC, Smith S, Weissman SJ, Kronman MP. Adverse Events in Pediatric Patients Receiving Long-Term Outpatient Antimicrobials. J Pediatric Infect Dis Soc 2015; 4:119.
  85. Murphy JL, Fenn N, Pyle L, et al. Adverse Events in Pediatric Patients Receiving Long-term Oral and Intravenous Antibiotics. Hosp Pediatr 2016; 6:330.
  86. Ruebner R, Keren R, Coffin S, et al. Complications of central venous catheters used for the treatment of acute hematogenous osteomyelitis. Pediatrics 2006; 117:1210.
  87. Maraqa NF, Gomez MM, Rathore MH. Outpatient parenteral antimicrobial therapy in osteoarticular infections in children. J Pediatr Orthop 2002; 22:506.
  88. Bennett OM, Namnyak SS. Acute septic arthritis of the hip joint in infancy and childhood. Clin Orthop Relat Res 1992; :123.
  89. Yagupsky P. Kingella kingae: from medical rarity to an emerging paediatric pathogen. Lancet Infect Dis 2004; 4:358.
  90. Arnold SR, Elias D, Buckingham SC, et al. Changing patterns of acute hematogenous osteomyelitis and septic arthritis: emergence of community-associated methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus. J Pediatr Orthop 2006; 26:703.
  91. Perlman MH, Patzakis MJ, Kumar PJ, Holtom P. The incidence of joint involvement with adjacent osteomyelitis in pediatric patients. J Pediatr Orthop 2000; 20:40.
  92. Branson J, Vallejo JG, Flores AR, et al. The Contemporary Microbiology and Rates of Concomitant Osteomyelitis in Acute Septic Arthritis. Pediatr Infect Dis J 2017; 36:267.
  93. Jackson MA, Burry VF, Olson LC. Pyogenic arthritis associated with adjacent osteomyelitis: identification of the sequela-prone child. Pediatr Infect Dis J 1992; 11:9.
  94. Krogstad P. Septic arthritis. In: Current Pediatric Therapy, 18th ed, Burg FD, Ingelfinger JR, Polin RA, Gershon AA (Eds), Saunders, Philadelphia 2006. p.665.
  95. Bradley JS. What is the appropriate treatment course for bacterial arthritis in children? Clin Infect Dis 2009; 48:1211.
  96. Odio CM, Ramirez T, Arias G, et al. Double blind, randomized, placebo-controlled study of dexamethasone therapy for hematogenous septic arthritis in children. Pediatr Infect Dis J 2003; 22:883.
  97. Harel L, Prais D, Bar-On E, et al. Dexamethasone therapy for septic arthritis in children: results of a randomized double-blind placebo-controlled study. J Pediatr Orthop 2011; 31:211.
  98. Fogel I, Amir J, Bar-On E, Harel L. Dexamethasone Therapy for Septic Arthritis in Children. Pediatrics 2015; 136:e776.
  99. Delgado-Noguera MF, Forero Delgadillo JM, Franco AA, et al. Corticosteroids for septic arthritis in children. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2018; 11:CD012125.
  100. Ho G Jr, Su EY. Therapy for septic arthritis. JAMA 1982; 247:797.
  101. WARD J, COHEN AS, BAUER W. The diagnosis and therapy of acute suppurative arthritis. Arthritis Rheum 1960; 3:522.
  102. Goldenberg DL, Brandt KD, Cathcart ES, Cohen AS. Acute arthritis caused by gram-negative bacilli: a clinical characterization. Medicine (Baltimore) 1974; 53:197.
  103. Pääkkönen M, Kallio MJ, Kallio PE, Peltola H. Sensitivity of erythrocyte sedimentation rate and C-reactive protein in childhood bone and joint infections. Clin Orthop Relat Res 2010; 468:861.
  104. Funk SS, Copley LA. Acute Hematogenous Osteomyelitis in Children: Pathogenesis, Diagnosis, and Treatment. Orthop Clin North Am 2017; 48:199.
  105. Arkader A, Brusalis C, Warner WC Jr, et al. Update in Pediatric Musculoskeletal Infections: When It Is, When It Isn't, and What to Do. J Am Acad Orthop Surg 2016; 24:e112.
  106. EYRE-BROOK AL. Septic arthritis of the hip and osteomyelitis of the upper end of the femur in infants. J Bone Joint Surg Br 1960; 42-B:11.
  107. Singer JI. The cause of gait disturbance in 425 pediatric patients. Pediatr Emerg Care 1985; 1:7.
  108. Bos CF, Mol LJ, Obermann WR, Tjin a Ton ER. Late sequelae of neonatal septic arthritis of the shoulder. J Bone Joint Surg Br 1998; 80:645.
  109. Howard-Jones AR, Isaacs D, Gibbons PJ. Twelve-month outcome following septic arthritis in children. J Pediatr Orthop B 2013; 22:486.
  110. Yuan HC, Wu KG, Chen CJ, et al. Characteristics and outcome of septic arthritis in children. J Microbiol Immunol Infect 2006; 39:342.
  111. Sukswai P, Kovitvanitcha D, Thumkunanon V, et al. Acute hematogenous osteomyelitis and septic arthritis in children: clinical characteristics and outcomes study. J Med Assoc Thai 2011; 94 Suppl 3:S209.
  112. Betz RR, Cooperman DR, Wopperer JM, et al. Late sequelae of septic arthritis of the hip in infancy and childhood. J Pediatr Orthop 1990; 10:365.
  113. Swami SK, Eppes SC. Bone and joint infections. In: Comprehensive Pediatric Hospital Medicine, 2nd ed, Zaoutis LB, Chiang WV (Eds), McGraw Hill Education, New York 2018. p.566.
  114. Li Y, Zhou Q, Liu Y, et al. Delayed treatment of septic arthritis in the neonate: A review of 52 cases. Medicine (Baltimore) 2016; 95:e5682.
  115. Morrey BF, Bianco AJ, Rhodes KH. Suppurative arthritis of the hip in children. J Bone Joint Surg Am 1976; 58:388.
  116. Lunseth PA, Heiple KG. Prognosis in septic arthritis of the hip in children. Clin Orthop Relat Res 1979; :81.
  117. Goldenberg DL, Cohen AS. Acute infectious arthritis. A review of patients with nongonococcal joint infections (with emphasis on therapy and prognosis). Am J Med 1976; 60:369.
  118. Newman JH. Review of septic arthritis throughout the antibiotic era. Ann Rheum Dis 1976; 35:198.
  119. Ernat J, Riccio AI, Fitzpatrick K, et al. Osteomyelitis is Commonly Associated With Septic Arthritis of the Shoulder in Children. J Pediatr Orthop 2015.
Topic 6033 Version 56.0

References

آیا می خواهید مدیلیب را به صفحه اصلی خود اضافه کنید؟