[Geriatric Proximal Femoral Fracture and Urinary Tract Infection - Considerations for Perioperative Infection Prophylaxis].

Background: Perioperative infection prophylaxis with cephalosporins is standard in surgical treatment of proximal femoral fractures (PFF). Geriatric patients (pat.) are at risk of chronic infections and the bacteria from these can lead to unknown hygienic problems in an early operation. We therefore characterised the colonisation of the urinary tract in pat. (≥ 65 years) with PFF and observed bacterial development in deep wound infections over a period of 10 years. The aim was to discover gaps in perioperative infection prophylaxis. Patients and Methods: Between September 2013 and November 2015, colonisation of the urinary tract and microbial resistance were investigated on admission of all pat. (≥ 65 years) with the diagnosis of PFF (n = 351; f/m 263/88; median age [∅] 83.57 [65-100] years). Between 2005 and 2014, 2161 pat. with a PFF were operated in our clinic (f/m 1623/538; ∅ 82.35 [65-101] years). 991 pat. (∅ 81.84 [65-101] years) with femoral neck fracture [FNF] were treated with endoprosthesis/osteosynthesis, 1170 pat. (∅ 82,78 [65-101] years) with per-/subtrochanteric fracture [PTF] were treated with osteosynthesis. In a retrospective data analysis, deep wound infections, microbiological composition and changes in microbial resistances over time were identified. Results: Bacteriuria (BU) was detected in the urine sediment of 35.61 % (n = 125) of our pat. In 47.2 % of these pat., BU was accompanied by laboratory signs of manifest urinary tract infection. In 10.4 % of these pat., colonisation of the urinary tract with multi-resistant pathogens was detected; 26.4 % were resistant to cefuroxime. The rate of deep infections in pat. with endoprosthesis/osteosynthesis in FNF was 2.8 % (n = 28; f/m 19/9; ∅ 81.35 [67-92] years), with osteosynthesis in PTF 1,1 % (n = 14; f/m 10/4; ∅ 81.0 [70-91] years). A comparison of the periods 2005-2009 and 2010-2014 showed a shift in the spectrum of pathogens from cephalosporin-sensitive to cephalosporin-resistant enterococci. Resistance of pathogens against cephalosporins increased from 43 to 81 %. Conclusion: We found an increasing risk in geriatric pat. from multiresistant pathogens in the urinary tract and from an increase in the cephalosporin resistance of pathogens in urinary tract infections and in deep wound infections. This indicates that perioperative infection prophylaxis with a cephalosporin is not effective. Especially in nursing homes, development of resistance to antibiotics is an increasing problem. Thus, concepts of perioperative infection prophylaxis in geriatric patients should be reconsidered.