ACR Meeting Abstracts

ACR Meeting Abstracts

  • Meetings
    • ACR Convergence 2024
    • ACR Convergence 2023
    • 2023 ACR/ARP PRSYM
    • ACR Convergence 2022
    • ACR Convergence 2021
    • ACR Convergence 2020
    • 2020 ACR/ARP PRSYM
    • 2019 ACR/ARP Annual Meeting
    • 2018-2009 Meetings
    • Download Abstracts
  • Keyword Index
  • Advanced Search
  • Your Favorites
    • Favorites
    • Login
    • View and print all favorites
    • Clear all your favorites
  • ACR Meetings

Abstract Number: 1317

Do Patients with MRSA-Positive Septic Arthritis Differ Clinically from Non-MRSA-Positive Counterparts?

Mary Louise Fowler1, Kevin Byrne1, Sarah B. Lieber2, Andy Moore3, Robert Shmerling4 and Ziv Paz2, 1Boston University School of Medicine, Boston, MA, 2Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center, Boston, MA, 3Division of Rheumatology, Cambridge Health Alliance, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, 4Rheumatology, Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center, Boston, MA

Meeting: 2016 ACR/ARHP Annual Meeting

Date of first publication: September 28, 2016

Keywords: Bacterial infections, Infection, outcome measures and patient

  • Tweet
  • Email
  • Print
Session Information

Date: Monday, November 14, 2016

Title: Infection-related Rheumatic Disease - Poster

Session Type: ACR Poster Session B

Session Time: 9:00AM-11:00AM

Do patients with MRSA-positive septic arthritis differ clinically from non-MRSA-positive counterparts? Mary Louise Fowler3, Kevin Byrne3, Sarah B. Lieber1, Andrew Moore2, Robert H. Shmerling1, Ziv Paz1, 1Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center, 2Cambridge Health Alliance, Harvard Medical School, 3Boston University School of Medicine

Background/Purpose: The incidence of methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) septic arthritis (SA) has increased over the past decade. While MRSA SA is thought to be more severe than non-MRSA SA, there is little published evidence suggesting these patients differ in their presentation and outcomes in the adult population. Our objective: To define the epidemiology, clinical characteristics and outcomes of patients with MRSA SA compared to non-MRSA SA patients.

Methods: We conducted a retrospective study that included all patients 18 and older admitted to a single, tertiary-care hospital between 1998 and 2015 diagnosed with culture-positive monoarticular SA and were surgically treated. We excluded cases of osteomyelitis, polyarticular infection or septic bursitis.

Results: Of the 425 patients with SA, 63 (14.8%) were due to MRSA. Compared to patients with non-MRSA SA, those with MRSA SA: were older (63.2 vs 58.3 years, p=0.04); had a higher prevalence of chronic kidney injury (p=0.004); had more end-stage liver disease (p=0.04); and were more likely to have shoulder involvement (p=0.004). In addition, MRSA SA was more likely to affect patients with recent (0-42 days) prosthetic implantation (p=0.05). There were no significant differences in rates of fever or sepsis but mean ESR (87.5 vs 74.3 mm/hour, p=0.04) and mean % of blood polymorphonuclear (PMN) (80.4 vs 77.3%, p= 0.05) were significantly higher in those with MRSA SA. Importantly, the length of hospital stay (LOS) was significantly longer for patients with MRSA SA (12.6 vs 10.4 days, p=0.05), as well as the rates of discharge to rehabilitation was higher (73.7 vs 54%, p=0.005) and expiration within 30 days (11.4 vs 4.4 %, p=0.03).

Conclusion: MRSA SA is common, representing nearly 15% of SA cases. Our study confirms that MRSA SA patients tend to be older, have more comorbidities and worse outcomes than those infected with other organisms.  Despite these findings, patients with MRSA SA do not, on average, appear to be sicker at the time of presentation. Table 1. Demographic and clinical features of patients with culture-positive septic arthritis, Methicillin-Resistant Staphylococcus Aureus (MRSA) vs. non-MRSA

MRSA (n=63) Non-MRSA (n=362) p-Value
Demographic Data:
Age (yrs), mean (SD) 63.2 (19.4) 58.3 (17.8) 0.04
Female gender, N (%) 29 (46) 159 (43.9) 0.76
Risk Factors for SA:
DM, N (%) 22 (34.9) 116 (32) 0.65
CKI, N (%) 17 (27) 47 (13) 0.004
HIV, N (%) 1 (1.6) 11 (3) 0.52
ESLD, N (%) 5 (8) 10 (2.8) 0.04
IVDU, N (%) 6 (9.5) 17 (4.7) 0.12
History of septic arthritis, N (%) 17 (27) 60 (16.6) 0.05
RA, N (%) 5 (7.9) 20 (5.5) 0.45
Previous joint trauma, N (%) 10 (15.9) 53 (14.6) 0.80
Recent procedure in joint, N (%) 29 (46) 141 (39.1) 0.30
Clinical features:
Fever (>100 F), N (%) 23 (36.5) 129 (35.6) 0.78
Sepsis (defined by SIRS criteria), N (%) 17 (27) 121 (33.4) 0.43
Mean peripheral WBC (in thousands), (SD) 12.3 (6.1) 11.5 (5.2) 0.31
Mean peripheral PMN (%), (SD) 80.4 (9.9) 77.3 (11.1) 0.05
Mean ESR (mm/hr), (SD) 87.5 (36.4) 74.3 (37.9) 0.04
Mean CRP (mg/L), (SD) 151.5 (111.3) 135.9 (105.9) 0.40
Mean synovial WBC (in thousands), (SD) 105.6 (118.4) 83.8 (112) 0.22
Mean synovial fluid PMN (%), (SD) 89.4 (15.9) 87.1 (17.8) 0.39
SD: Standard deviation; DM: Diabetes Mellitus; CKI: Chronic Kidney Injury; HIV: Human Immunodeficiency Virus; ESLD: End Stage Liver Disease; IVDU: Intravenous Drug Use; RA: Rheumatoid arthritis; WBC: White blood cell; PMN: Polymorphonuclear leukocyte; ESR: Erythrocyte sedimentation rate; CRP: C-reactive protein

Table 2. Joints affected and outcomes in patients with culture-positive septic arthritis, MRSA vs. non-MRSA.

MRSA Non-MRSA P-Value
Joint:
Knee, N (%) 32 (50.8) 206 (56.9) 0.37
Hip, N (%) 8 (12.7) 72 (19.9) 0.18
Shoulder, N (%) 14 (22.2) 35 (9.7) 0.004
Infected 0-42 days of prosthetic insertion, N (%) 6 (30) 17 (12.8) 0.05
Infected 43-365 days of prosthetic insertion, N (%) 6 (30) 43 (32.3) 0.84
Infected >365 days since prosthetic insertion, N (%) 8 (40) 73 (54.9) 0.21
ICU, N (%) 12 (19.4) 59 (16.3) 0.56
Detection of pus by surgeon, N (%) 26 (74.3) 154 (65.8) 0.32
Mean LOS in days, N (SD) 12.6 (9.1) 10.4 (8.1) 0.05
Discharge to rehabilitation, N (%) 42 (73.7) 185 (54) 0.005
ICU: Intensive Care Unit; LOS: Length of Stay

Disclosure: M. L. Fowler, None; K. Byrne, None; S. B. Lieber, None; A. Moore, None; R. Shmerling, None; Z. Paz, None.

To cite this abstract in AMA style:

Fowler ML, Byrne K, Lieber SB, Moore A, Shmerling R, Paz Z. Do Patients with MRSA-Positive Septic Arthritis Differ Clinically from Non-MRSA-Positive Counterparts? [abstract]. Arthritis Rheumatol. 2016; 68 (suppl 10). https://acrabstracts.org/abstract/do-patients-with-mrsa-positive-septic-arthritis-differ-clinically-from-non-mrsa-positive-counterparts/. Accessed .
  • Tweet
  • Email
  • Print

« Back to 2016 ACR/ARHP Annual Meeting

ACR Meeting Abstracts - https://acrabstracts.org/abstract/do-patients-with-mrsa-positive-septic-arthritis-differ-clinically-from-non-mrsa-positive-counterparts/

Advanced Search

Your Favorites

You can save and print a list of your favorite abstracts during your browser session by clicking the “Favorite” button at the bottom of any abstract. View your favorites »

All abstracts accepted to ACR Convergence are under media embargo once the ACR has notified presenters of their abstract’s acceptance. They may be presented at other meetings or published as manuscripts after this time but should not be discussed in non-scholarly venues or outlets. The following embargo policies are strictly enforced by the ACR.

Accepted abstracts are made available to the public online in advance of the meeting and are published in a special online supplement of our scientific journal, Arthritis & Rheumatology. Information contained in those abstracts may not be released until the abstracts appear online. In an exception to the media embargo, academic institutions, private organizations, and companies with products whose value may be influenced by information contained in an abstract may issue a press release to coincide with the availability of an ACR abstract on the ACR website. However, the ACR continues to require that information that goes beyond that contained in the abstract (e.g., discussion of the abstract done as part of editorial news coverage) is under media embargo until 10:00 AM ET on November 14, 2024. Journalists with access to embargoed information cannot release articles or editorial news coverage before this time. Editorial news coverage is considered original articles/videos developed by employed journalists to report facts, commentary, and subject matter expert quotes in a narrative form using a variety of sources (e.g., research, announcements, press releases, events, etc.).

Violation of this policy may result in the abstract being withdrawn from the meeting and other measures deemed appropriate. Authors are responsible for notifying colleagues, institutions, communications firms, and all other stakeholders related to the development or promotion of the abstract about this policy. If you have questions about the ACR abstract embargo policy, please contact ACR abstracts staff at [email protected].

Wiley

  • Online Journal
  • Privacy Policy
  • Permissions Policies
  • Cookie Preferences

© Copyright 2025 American College of Rheumatology