Francesco Taccari

Dr. Francesco Taccari


Research Focus & Metrics

Academic Career Length

10Years (2017-Present)

(Calculated once Scilit publication data is synced: current year − year of first publication + 1)

Representative Publications

View All Publications
23 April 2024 in Healthcare
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
PDF file
RVRaffaele Vitiello
Raffaele Vitiello
ASAlessandro Smimmo
Alessandro Smimmo
EMElena Matteini
Elena Matteini
GMGiulia Micheli
Giulia Micheli
Massimo FantoniMassimo Fantoni
Massimo Fantoni
FTFrancesco Taccari
Francesco Taccari
Background: Periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) is a devastating complication that develops after total joint arthroplasty (TJA), whose incidence is expected to increase over the years. Traditionally, surgical treatment of PJI has been based on algorithms, where early infections are preferably treated with debridement, antibiotics, and implant retention (DAIR) and late infections with two-stage revision surgery. Two-stage revision is considered the “gold standard” for treatment of chronic prosthetic joint infection (PJI) as it enables local delivery of antibiotics, maintenance of limb-length and mobility, and easier reimplantation. Many studies have attempted to identify potential predicting factors for early diagnosis of PJI, but its management remains challenging. In this observational retrospective study, we investigated the potential role of inflammatory blood markers (neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio (NLR), monocyte-to-lymphocyte ratio (MLR), platelet-to-lymphocyte ratio (PLR), systemic inflammatory index (SII), systemic inflammatory response index (SIRI), and aggregate index of systemic inflammation (AISI)) as prognostic factors in two-stage exchange arthroplasty for PJI. Methods: A single-center retrospective analysis was conducted, collecting clinical data and laboratory parameters from patients submitted to prosthetic explantation (EP) for chronic PJI. Laboratory parameters (PCR, NLR, MLR, PLR, SIRI, SII, and AISI) were evaluated at the explantation time; at 4, 6, and 8 weeks after surgery; and at reimplantation time. The correlation between laboratory parameters and surgery success was evaluated and defined as infection absence/resolution at the last follow-up. Results: A total of 57 patients with PJI were evaluated (62% males; average age 70 years, SD 12.14). Fifty-three patients with chronic PJI were included. Nine patients underwent DAIR revision surgery and chronic suppressive therapy; two patients died. Nineteen patients completed the two-stage revision process (prosthetic removal, spacer placement, and subsequent replanting). Among them, none showed signs of reinfection or persistence of infection at the last available follow-up. The other twenty-three patients did not replant due to persistent infection: among them, some (the most) underwent spacer retention; others (fewer in number) were submitted to resection arthroplasty and arthrodesis (Girdlestone technique) or chronic suppressive antibiotic therapy; the remaining were, over time, lost to follow-up. Of the patients who concluded the two-stage revision, the ones with high SIRI values (mean 3.08 SD 1.7 and p-value 0.04) and MLR values (mean 0.4 SD 0.2 and p-value 0.02) at the explantation time were associated with a higher probability of infection resolution. Moreover, higher variation in the SIRI and PCR, also defined, respectively, as delta-SIRI (mean −2.3 SD 1.8 and p-value 0.03) and delta-PCR (mean −46 SD 35.7 and p-value 0.03), were associated with favorable outcomes. Conclusions: The results of our study suggest that, in patients with PJI undergoing EP, the SIRI and MLR values and delta-SIRI and delta-PCR values could be predictive of a favorable outcome. The evaluation of these laboratory indices, especially their determination at 4 weeks after removal, could therefore help to determine which patients could be successfully replanted and to identify the best time to replant. More studies analyzing a wider cohort of patients with chronic PJI are needed to validate the promising results of this study.


31 March 2021 in Neurospine
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
PDF file
APAndrea Perna
Andrea Perna
Luca RicciardiLuca Ricciardi
Luca Ricciardi
Massimo FantoniMassimo Fantoni
Massimo Fantoni
FTFrancesco Taccari
Francesco Taccari
RTRiccardo Torelli
Riccardo Torelli
LPLuca Proietti
Luca Proietti
Vertebral aspergillosis are quite rare conditions, often misdiagnosed, that requires long-term antibiotic therapy and, sometimes, surgical treatments. The present investigations was aimed to investigate epidemiology, clinical-radiological aspects, treatment protocols, and outcomes of Aspergillus-mediated vertebral osteomyelitis. A systematic review of the pertinent English Literature according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines was performed. The research was conducted on Cochrane library, MEDLINE, PubMed and Scopus using as search-terms "Aspergillus", "vertebral osteomyelitis", "spondylodiscitis", "spine infection". A case of vertebral apsergillosis conservatively managed was also reported. Eighty-nine articles were included in our systematic review. Including the reported case, our analysis covered 112 cases of vertebral aspergillosis. Aspergillus fumigatus was isolated in 68 cases (61.2%), Aspergillus flavus in 14 (12.6%), Aspergillus terreus in 4 (3.6%), Aspergillus nidulans in 2 (1.8%). Seventy-three patients (65.7%) completely recovered at last follow-up evaluation; in 7 (6.3%) patients radiological signs of chronic infection were reported, whereas 32 (28.8%) patients died during the follow-up. This systematic review summarized the state of the art on vertebral aspergillosis, retrieving data on clinical features, diagnostic criteria and current limitations, treatment alternatives and their outcomes.

1 April 2019
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
MFM. Fantoni
M. Fantoni
SBS. Borre
S. Borre
RRR. Rostagno
R. Rostagno
GRG. Riccio
G. Riccio
GCG. Carrega
G. Carrega
FTFrancesco Taccari
Francesco Taccari

1 December 2018 in Infection and Drug Resistance
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
PDF file
RITA MURRIRITA MURRI
RITA MURRI
Marta CamiciMarta Camici
Marta Camici
BPBrunella Posteraro
Brunella Posteraro
FGFrancesca Giovannenze
Francesca Giovannenze
FTFrancesco Taccari
Francesco Taccari
MFMassimo Fantoni
Massimo Fantoni
Objectives: To assess the performance of the (1,3)-β-D-glucan (BDG) detection assay in a large cohort of patients with suspected candidemia who were admitted to non-intensive care unit hospital wards. Methods: This observational, retrospective cohort study was conducted in a 1,100-bed university hospital in Rome, where an infectious disease consultation team has been operational. Two groups of patients were included in the analysis: Group 1, patients with Candida bloodstream infection (BSI) who had at least one BDG test performed ±48 hours from the first positive blood culture (Candida BSI Group) and Group 2, patients with risk factors for candidemia who had at least one BDG test but had negative blood cultures (Control Group). Both Group 1 and Group 2 did not receive prior antifungal therapy. Different BDG cutoff values were considered: 80, 200, 300, 400, and ≥500 pg/mL. Sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value (PPV), negative predictive value (NPV), and area under the receiver operating characteristic curve were calculated. Results: A total of 1,296 patients were studied. Of them, 100 patients (candidemic) were in Group 1 and the remaining 1,196 patients (controls) were in Group 2. There were no differences in demographic characteristics between patients of the two groups. According to the above cutoff values, sensitivity (%) and specificity (%) of the BDG assay ranged from 91 to 60.7 and 87.7 to 97.8, respectively, whereas the PPV (%) and NPV (%) ranged from 38.2 to 68.3 and 99.1 to 97.0, respectively. Conclusion: Serum BDG has a very high NPV in a population with~10% prevalence of candidemia. This NPV may support decisions to discontinue antifungal therapy in those patients who were empirically treated because of the suspect of candidemia.

27 June 2024 in Healthcare
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
PDF file
LCLuigi Cianni
Luigi Cianni
FTFrancesco Taccari
Francesco Taccari
MBMaria Beatrice Bocchi
Maria Beatrice Bocchi
GMGiulia Micheli
Giulia Micheli
FSFlavio Sangiorgi
Flavio Sangiorgi
RVRaffaele Vitiello
Raffaele Vitiello
Background: Megaprostheses were first employed in oncological orthopedic surgery, but more recently, additional applications have arisen. These implants are not without any risks and device failure is quite frequent. The most feared complication is undoubtedly the implants’ infection; however, the exact incidence is still unknown. This systematic review aims to estimate in the current literature the overall incidence of megaprosthesis infections and to investigate possible risk/protective factors. Methods: We conducted a systematic search for studies published from July 1971 to December 2023 using specific keywords. To be included, studies needed to report either the megaprosthesis anatomical site, and/or whether the megaprosthesis was coated, and/or the surgical indication as oncological or non-oncological reasons. Results: The initial literature search resulted in 1281 studies. We evaluated 10,456 patients and the overall infection rate was 12%. In cancer patients, the infection rate was 22%, while in non-oncological patients, this was 16% (trauma 12%, mechanical failure 17%, prosthetic joint infections 26%). The overall infection rates comparing coated and uncoated implants were 10% and 12.5%, respectively. Conclusions: The number of megaprosthesis implants is increasing considerably. In traumatological patients, the infection rate is lower compared to all the other subgroups, while the infection rate remains higher in the cancer patient group. As these devices become more common, focused studies exploring epidemiological data, clinical outcomes, and long-term complications are needed to address the uncertainties in prevention and management.