万古霉素粉在骨科骨折手术中的局部应用:目前的实践和趋势。

Lucas S Marchand, Sheila Sprague, Nathan N O'Hara, Chuan Silvia Li, Robert V O'Toole, Manjari Joshi, Darius Viskontas, Nicholas Romeo, Robert A Hymes, William T Obremskey, Thomas F Higgins, Gorden D Potter, Patrick F Bergin, Mark Gage, Joshua L Gary, Mohit Bhandari, Gerard P Slobogean
{"title":"万古霉素粉在骨科骨折手术中的局部应用:目前的实践和趋势。","authors":"Lucas S Marchand,&nbsp;Sheila Sprague,&nbsp;Nathan N O'Hara,&nbsp;Chuan Silvia Li,&nbsp;Robert V O'Toole,&nbsp;Manjari Joshi,&nbsp;Darius Viskontas,&nbsp;Nicholas Romeo,&nbsp;Robert A Hymes,&nbsp;William T Obremskey,&nbsp;Thomas F Higgins,&nbsp;Gorden D Potter,&nbsp;Patrick F Bergin,&nbsp;Mark Gage,&nbsp;Joshua L Gary,&nbsp;Mohit Bhandari,&nbsp;Gerard P Slobogean","doi":"10.1097/OI9.0000000000000223","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objectives: </strong>Surgical site infections in orthopaedic trauma are a significant problem with meaningful patient and health care system-level consequences. Direct application of antibiotics to the surgical field has many potential benefits in reducing surgical site infections. However, to date, the data regarding the local administration of antibiotics have been mixed. This study reports on the variability of prophylactic vancomycin powder use in orthopaedic trauma cases across 28 centers.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Intrawound topical antibiotic powder use was prospectively collected within three multicenter fracture fixation trials. Fracture location, Gustilo classification, recruiting center, and surgeon information were collected. Differences in practice patterns across recruiting center and injury characteristics were tested using chi-square statistic and logistic regression. Additional stratified analyses by recruiting center and individual surgeon were performed.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of 4941 fractures were treated, and vancomycin powder was used in 1547 patients (31%) overall. Local administration of vancomycin powder was more frequent in open fractures 38.8% (738/1901) compared with closed fractures 26.6% (809/3040) (<i>P</i> < 0.001). However, the severity of the open fracture type did not affect the rate at which vancomycin powder was used (<i>P</i> = 0.11). Vancomycin powder use varied substantially across the clinical sites (<i>P</i> < 0.001). At the surgeon level, 75.0% used vancomycin powder in less than one-quarter of their cases.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Prophylactic intrawound vancomycin powder remains controversial with varied support throughout the literature. This study demonstrates wide variability in its use across institutions, fracture types, and surgeons. This study highlights the opportunity for increased practice standardization for infection prophylaxis interventions.</p><p><strong>Level of evidence: </strong>Prognostic-III.</p>","PeriodicalId":74381,"journal":{"name":"OTA international : the open access journal of orthopaedic trauma","volume":"6 1","pages":"e223"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://ftp.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pub/pmc/oa_pdf/18/0a/oi9-6-e223.PMC9953039.pdf","citationCount":"2","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Local administration of vancomycin powder in orthopaedic fracture surgery: current practice and trends.\",\"authors\":\"Lucas S Marchand,&nbsp;Sheila Sprague,&nbsp;Nathan N O'Hara,&nbsp;Chuan Silvia Li,&nbsp;Robert V O'Toole,&nbsp;Manjari Joshi,&nbsp;Darius Viskontas,&nbsp;Nicholas Romeo,&nbsp;Robert A Hymes,&nbsp;William T Obremskey,&nbsp;Thomas F Higgins,&nbsp;Gorden D Potter,&nbsp;Patrick F Bergin,&nbsp;Mark Gage,&nbsp;Joshua L Gary,&nbsp;Mohit Bhandari,&nbsp;Gerard P Slobogean\",\"doi\":\"10.1097/OI9.0000000000000223\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Objectives: </strong>Surgical site infections in orthopaedic trauma are a significant problem with meaningful patient and health care system-level consequences. Direct application of antibiotics to the surgical field has many potential benefits in reducing surgical site infections. However, to date, the data regarding the local administration of antibiotics have been mixed. This study reports on the variability of prophylactic vancomycin powder use in orthopaedic trauma cases across 28 centers.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Intrawound topical antibiotic powder use was prospectively collected within three multicenter fracture fixation trials. Fracture location, Gustilo classification, recruiting center, and surgeon information were collected. Differences in practice patterns across recruiting center and injury characteristics were tested using chi-square statistic and logistic regression. Additional stratified analyses by recruiting center and individual surgeon were performed.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of 4941 fractures were treated, and vancomycin powder was used in 1547 patients (31%) overall. Local administration of vancomycin powder was more frequent in open fractures 38.8% (738/1901) compared with closed fractures 26.6% (809/3040) (<i>P</i> < 0.001). However, the severity of the open fracture type did not affect the rate at which vancomycin powder was used (<i>P</i> = 0.11). Vancomycin powder use varied substantially across the clinical sites (<i>P</i> < 0.001). At the surgeon level, 75.0% used vancomycin powder in less than one-quarter of their cases.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Prophylactic intrawound vancomycin powder remains controversial with varied support throughout the literature. This study demonstrates wide variability in its use across institutions, fracture types, and surgeons. This study highlights the opportunity for increased practice standardization for infection prophylaxis interventions.</p><p><strong>Level of evidence: </strong>Prognostic-III.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":74381,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"OTA international : the open access journal of orthopaedic trauma\",\"volume\":\"6 1\",\"pages\":\"e223\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-03-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://ftp.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pub/pmc/oa_pdf/18/0a/oi9-6-e223.PMC9953039.pdf\",\"citationCount\":\"2\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"OTA international : the open access journal of orthopaedic trauma\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1097/OI9.0000000000000223\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"OTA international : the open access journal of orthopaedic trauma","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1097/OI9.0000000000000223","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2

摘要

目的:骨科创伤手术部位感染是一个重要的问题,有意义的病人和卫生保健系统水平的后果。在外科手术中直接应用抗生素对减少手术部位感染有许多潜在的好处。然而,迄今为止,有关地方抗生素管理的数据喜忧参半。本研究报告了28个中心骨科创伤病例预防性万古霉素粉末使用的可变性。方法:前瞻性收集3个多中心骨折固定试验中伤口外用抗生素粉的使用情况。收集骨折位置、Gustilo分类、招募中心和外科医生信息。采用卡方统计和logistic回归对各招募中心训练模式和损伤特征的差异进行检验。招募中心和个体外科医生进行了额外的分层分析。结果:共治疗骨折4941例,使用万古霉素粉剂1547例(31%)。万古霉素粉剂局部应用于开放性骨折的比例为38.8%(738/1901),高于闭合性骨折26.6% (809/3040)(P < 0.001)。然而,开放性骨折类型的严重程度并不影响万古霉素粉剂的使用率(P = 0.11)。万古霉素粉剂在不同临床部位的使用差异很大(P < 0.001)。在外科医生层面,75.0%的医生在不到四分之一的病例中使用万古霉素粉末。结论:万古霉素粉剂的预防性创面内注射仍有争议,在文献中有不同的支持。这项研究表明,在不同的机构、骨折类型和外科医生中,其使用存在很大的差异。这项研究强调了增加感染预防干预实践标准化的机会。证据等级:预后- iii。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Local administration of vancomycin powder in orthopaedic fracture surgery: current practice and trends.

Objectives: Surgical site infections in orthopaedic trauma are a significant problem with meaningful patient and health care system-level consequences. Direct application of antibiotics to the surgical field has many potential benefits in reducing surgical site infections. However, to date, the data regarding the local administration of antibiotics have been mixed. This study reports on the variability of prophylactic vancomycin powder use in orthopaedic trauma cases across 28 centers.

Methods: Intrawound topical antibiotic powder use was prospectively collected within three multicenter fracture fixation trials. Fracture location, Gustilo classification, recruiting center, and surgeon information were collected. Differences in practice patterns across recruiting center and injury characteristics were tested using chi-square statistic and logistic regression. Additional stratified analyses by recruiting center and individual surgeon were performed.

Results: A total of 4941 fractures were treated, and vancomycin powder was used in 1547 patients (31%) overall. Local administration of vancomycin powder was more frequent in open fractures 38.8% (738/1901) compared with closed fractures 26.6% (809/3040) (P < 0.001). However, the severity of the open fracture type did not affect the rate at which vancomycin powder was used (P = 0.11). Vancomycin powder use varied substantially across the clinical sites (P < 0.001). At the surgeon level, 75.0% used vancomycin powder in less than one-quarter of their cases.

Conclusions: Prophylactic intrawound vancomycin powder remains controversial with varied support throughout the literature. This study demonstrates wide variability in its use across institutions, fracture types, and surgeons. This study highlights the opportunity for increased practice standardization for infection prophylaxis interventions.

Level of evidence: Prognostic-III.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
审稿时长
4 weeks
×
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