Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2023 Nov 25;11(12):3143.
doi: 10.3390/biomedicines11123143.

Effect of Vancomycin, Gentamicin and Clindamycin on Cartilage Cells In Vitro

Affiliations

Effect of Vancomycin, Gentamicin and Clindamycin on Cartilage Cells In Vitro

Hermann O Mayr et al. Biomedicines. .

Abstract

Background: The treatment of grafts with vancomycin for ligament reconstruction in knee surgery is the current standard. However, high antibiotic concentrations have chondrotoxic effects.

Purpose: To test the chondrotoxicity of clindamycin, gentamicin and vancomycin in comparable concentrations. In vitro and in vivo effective concentrations hugely vary from drug to drug. To allow for comparisons between these three commonly used antibiotics, the concentration ranges frequently used in orthopedic surgical settings were tested.

Study design: Controlled laboratory study.

Methods: Human cartilage from 10 specimens was used to isolate chondrocytes. The chondrocytes were treated with clindamycin (1 mg/mL and 0.5 mg/mL), gentamicin (10 mg/mL and 5 mg/mL) or vancomycin (10 mg/mL and 5 mg/mL), at concentrations used for preoperative infection prophylaxis in ligament surgery. Observations were taken over a period of 7 days. A control of untreated chondrocytes was included. To test the chondrotoxicity, a lactate dehydrogenase (LDH) test and a water-soluble tetrazolium salt (WST-1) assay were performed on days 1, 3 and 7. In addition, microscopic examinations were performed after fluorescence staining of the cells at the same time intervals.

Results: All samples showed a reasonable vitality of the cartilage cells after 72 h. However, clindamycin and gentamicin both showed higher chondrotoxicity in all investigations compared to vancomycin. After a period of 7 days, only chondrocytes treated with vancomycin showed reasonable vitality.

Conclusions: The preoperative treatment of ligament grafts with vancomycin is the most reasonable method for infection prophylaxis, in accordance with the current study results regarding chondrotoxicity; however, clindamycin and gentamicin cover a wider anti-bacterial spectrum.

Clinical relevance: The prophylactic antibiotic treatment of ligament grafts at concentrations of 5 mg/mL or 10 mg/mL vancomycin is justifiable and reasonable. In specific cases, even the use of gentamicin and clindamycin is appropriate.

Keywords: LDH test; Live Dead staining; WST-1 test; chondrotoxicity of antibiotics; concentration of antibiotics; infection prophylaxis; ligament surgery.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
PI and calcein staining of chondrocytes after 168 h; (a): Clindamycin 1 mg/mL, (b): Clindamycin 0.5 mg/mL, (c): Gentamicin 10 mg/mL, (d): Gentamicin 5 mg/mL, (e): Vancomycin 10 mg/mL, (f): Vancomycin 5 mg/mL, (g): control; images taken with Carl ZEISS Apotome.2, 10x magnification; living cells = green; apoptotic cells = red.
Figure 2
Figure 2
Cytotoxicity over time 24–168 h; 0% (negative control for apoptotic cells); 100% (TritonX-treated cells, positive control for apoptotic cells).
Figure 3
Figure 3
Significances in cytotoxicity after 24 h; Vancomycin (VAN); Clindamycin (CLI); Gentamicin (GEN); significant difference = blue; non-significant difference = black).
Figure 4
Figure 4
WST-1 measurement over time 1–7 d; Clindamycin (CLI); Gentamycin (GNT), Vancomycin (VAN); control (CTR); p < 0.05 (*).
Figure 5
Figure 5
Box Plot WST-1 measurement after 7 d; CLI (Clindamycin (CLI); Gentamycin (GNT), Vancomycin (VAN); control (CTR).

Similar articles

Cited by

References

    1. Ashoobi M.T., Asgary M.R., Sarafi M., Fathalipour N., Pirooz A., Jafaryparvar Z., Rafiei E., Farzin M., Samidoust P., Delshad M.S.E. Incidence rate and risk factors of surgical wound infection in general surgery patients: A cross-sectional study. Int. Wound J. 2023;20:2640–2648. doi: 10.1111/iwj.14137. - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Tiri B., Bruzzone P., Priante G., Sensi E., Costantini M., Vernelli C., Martella L.A., Francucci M., Andreani P., Mariottini A., et al. Impact of antimicrobial stewardship interventions on appropriateness of surgical antibiotic prophylaxis: How to improve. Antibiotics. 2020;9:168. doi: 10.3390/antibiotics9040168. - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Prokuski L. Prophylactic antibiotics in orthopaedic surgery. J. Am. Acad. Orthop. Surg. 2008;16:283–293. doi: 10.5435/00124635-200805000-00007. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Hill C., Mazas F., Flamant R., Evrard J. Prophylactic cefazolin versus placebo in total hip replacement report of a multicentre double-blind randomised trial. Lancet. 1981;317:795–797. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(81)92678-7. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Kanellakopoulou K., Giamarellos-Bourboulis E.J. Carrier systems for the local delivery of antibiotics in bone infections. Drugs. 2000;59:1223–1232. doi: 10.2165/00003495-200059060-00003. - DOI - PubMed

LinkOut - more resources