A single-centre, retrospective study on the impact of omitting preoperative antibiotic prophylaxis on wound infections in minor orthopedic implant removals.

IF 1.9 3区 医学 Q2 EMERGENCY MEDICINE
Cyrill Pfammatter, Jan Hambrecht, Yannik Kalbas, Valentin Neuhaus, Christian Hierholzer, Claudio Canal
{"title":"A single-centre, retrospective study on the impact of omitting preoperative antibiotic prophylaxis on wound infections in minor orthopedic implant removals.","authors":"Cyrill Pfammatter, Jan Hambrecht, Yannik Kalbas, Valentin Neuhaus, Christian Hierholzer, Claudio Canal","doi":"10.1007/s00068-025-02769-y","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>The use of preoperative antibiotic prophylaxis (POAP) in elective implant removal (IR) is controversial due to a lack of evidence-based recommendations. First-generation cephalosporins, which are commonly used in orthopedic IR, are believed to reduce wound infection risks. However, the potential for serious side effects had raised concerns about their necessity. This study was intended to evaluate whether omitting POAP in small IR increases the risk of wound infections.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This retrospective, single-centre cohort study was conducted at a level I trauma centre in Switzerland, including patients who underwent IR between January 1, 2016, and December 31, 2021. The IR procedures involved the upper extremities (UEs), such as the clavicle, olecranon, radius and ulna, as well as the lower extremities (LEs), such as the patella, tibia, fibula, (bi)malleolar and foot. Postoperative follow-up included clinical and radiological evaluations 6 weeks after surgery. The outcomes assessed were deep wound infections, wound healing complications, refractures, persistent pain, bleeding, neurovascular injuries and muscle hernias.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Of the 273 patients (mean age: 42.1 ± 14.5; 44% female), 117 (42.9%) received POAP. In the LE group (n = 141), 51.1% received POAP; in the UE group (n = 132), 34.1% received POAP. Eleven (4.0%) wound-healing disorders were documented, with five (4.3%) in the POAP group and six (3.8%) in the non-POAP group (p = 1). No deep wound infections were observed.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Withholding POAP in elective IR procedures does not significantly increase wound infection rates, suggesting it may be unnecessary in uncomplicated cases.</p>","PeriodicalId":12064,"journal":{"name":"European Journal of Trauma and Emergency Surgery","volume":"51 1","pages":"94"},"PeriodicalIF":1.9000,"publicationDate":"2025-02-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11805721/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"European Journal of Trauma and Emergency Surgery","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s00068-025-02769-y","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"EMERGENCY MEDICINE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: The use of preoperative antibiotic prophylaxis (POAP) in elective implant removal (IR) is controversial due to a lack of evidence-based recommendations. First-generation cephalosporins, which are commonly used in orthopedic IR, are believed to reduce wound infection risks. However, the potential for serious side effects had raised concerns about their necessity. This study was intended to evaluate whether omitting POAP in small IR increases the risk of wound infections.

Methods: This retrospective, single-centre cohort study was conducted at a level I trauma centre in Switzerland, including patients who underwent IR between January 1, 2016, and December 31, 2021. The IR procedures involved the upper extremities (UEs), such as the clavicle, olecranon, radius and ulna, as well as the lower extremities (LEs), such as the patella, tibia, fibula, (bi)malleolar and foot. Postoperative follow-up included clinical and radiological evaluations 6 weeks after surgery. The outcomes assessed were deep wound infections, wound healing complications, refractures, persistent pain, bleeding, neurovascular injuries and muscle hernias.

Results: Of the 273 patients (mean age: 42.1 ± 14.5; 44% female), 117 (42.9%) received POAP. In the LE group (n = 141), 51.1% received POAP; in the UE group (n = 132), 34.1% received POAP. Eleven (4.0%) wound-healing disorders were documented, with five (4.3%) in the POAP group and six (3.8%) in the non-POAP group (p = 1). No deep wound infections were observed.

Conclusion: Withholding POAP in elective IR procedures does not significantly increase wound infection rates, suggesting it may be unnecessary in uncomplicated cases.

一项单中心、回顾性研究,探讨术前省略抗生素预防对微创骨科植入物移除术后伤口感染的影响。
背景:术前抗生素预防(POAP)在选择性植入物移除(IR)中的使用是有争议的,因为缺乏循证建议。第一代头孢菌素通常用于骨科IR,被认为可以降低伤口感染风险。然而,潜在的严重副作用引起了人们对其必要性的担忧。本研究旨在评估在小IR中省略POAP是否会增加伤口感染的风险。方法:这项回顾性单中心队列研究在瑞士一级创伤中心进行,包括2016年1月1日至2021年12月31日期间接受IR治疗的患者。IR手术包括上肢(ue),如锁骨、鹰嘴、桡骨和尺骨,以及下肢(LEs),如髌骨、胫骨、腓骨、(bi)踝骨和足。术后随访包括术后6周的临床和影像学评价。评估的结果为深创面感染、创面愈合并发症、再骨折、持续性疼痛、出血、神经血管损伤和肌肉疝。结果:273例患者(平均年龄:42.1±14.5岁;女性占44%),117例(42.9%)接受POAP治疗。LE组(n = 141) 51.1%接受POAP治疗;UE组(n = 132), 34.1%接受POAP治疗。记录了11例(4.0%)伤口愈合障碍,其中POAP组5例(4.3%),非POAP组6例(3.8%)(p = 1)。无深部伤口感染。结论:在选择性IR手术中保留POAP不会显著增加伤口感染率,提示在无并发症的病例中可能没有必要。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
4.50
自引率
14.30%
发文量
311
审稿时长
3 months
期刊介绍: The European Journal of Trauma and Emergency Surgery aims to open an interdisciplinary forum that allows for the scientific exchange between basic and clinical science related to pathophysiology, diagnostics and treatment of traumatized patients. The journal covers all aspects of clinical management, operative treatment and related research of traumatic injuries. Clinical and experimental papers on issues relevant for the improvement of trauma care are published. Reviews, original articles, short communications and letters allow the appropriate presentation of major and minor topics.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信