{"title":"骨折相关感染的 DAIR 程序--何时以及如何进行","authors":"Susanne Baertl, Markus Rupp, Volker Alt","doi":"10.1016/j.injury.2024.111977","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>This narrative review discusses treatment strategies and key considerations guiding decisions in the surgical management of fracture-related infections (FRI). Treatment options primarily revolve around two approaches: debridement antibiotics and implant retention (DAIR), or implant exchange, either in a one or multiple-stage strategy. Several considerations, including time since infection onset, implant type, stability, causative pathogens, host physiology, and soft tissue conditions, inform the choice of surgical intervention for FRI. Current literature supports the preference for a DAIR approach in cases with a short duration of ongoing symptoms, a stable implant with satisfactory fracture reduction, and a viable soft tissue envelope. Conversely, one- or multiple-stage implant exchange is deemed beneficial in instances of compromised local and systemic host physiology, mature biofilm, difficult-to-treat pathogens, intramedullary implants, and cases involving reinfections or failed DAIR procedures. Notably, these recommendations draw parallels from periprosthetic joint infection treatment strategies, constrained by the limited availability of randomized controlled trials comparing these options specifically in acute FRI. In conclusion, future perspectives call for extensive investigations into biofilm maturation and the impact of time on treatment outcomes. Additionally, there is a need for a standardized classification system for FRI to enhance the comparability of treatment outcomes in FRI management.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":54978,"journal":{"name":"Injury-International Journal of the Care of the Injured","volume":"55 ","pages":"Article 111977"},"PeriodicalIF":2.2000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The DAIR-procedure in fracture-related infection–When and how\",\"authors\":\"Susanne Baertl, Markus Rupp, Volker Alt\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.injury.2024.111977\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><div>This narrative review discusses treatment strategies and key considerations guiding decisions in the surgical management of fracture-related infections (FRI). Treatment options primarily revolve around two approaches: debridement antibiotics and implant retention (DAIR), or implant exchange, either in a one or multiple-stage strategy. Several considerations, including time since infection onset, implant type, stability, causative pathogens, host physiology, and soft tissue conditions, inform the choice of surgical intervention for FRI. Current literature supports the preference for a DAIR approach in cases with a short duration of ongoing symptoms, a stable implant with satisfactory fracture reduction, and a viable soft tissue envelope. Conversely, one- or multiple-stage implant exchange is deemed beneficial in instances of compromised local and systemic host physiology, mature biofilm, difficult-to-treat pathogens, intramedullary implants, and cases involving reinfections or failed DAIR procedures. Notably, these recommendations draw parallels from periprosthetic joint infection treatment strategies, constrained by the limited availability of randomized controlled trials comparing these options specifically in acute FRI. In conclusion, future perspectives call for extensive investigations into biofilm maturation and the impact of time on treatment outcomes. Additionally, there is a need for a standardized classification system for FRI to enhance the comparability of treatment outcomes in FRI management.</div></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":54978,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Injury-International Journal of the Care of the Injured\",\"volume\":\"55 \",\"pages\":\"Article 111977\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.2000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-11-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Injury-International Journal of the Care of the Injured\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S002013832400706X\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"CRITICAL CARE MEDICINE\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Injury-International Journal of the Care of the Injured","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S002013832400706X","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"CRITICAL CARE MEDICINE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
摘要
这篇叙述性综述讨论了骨折相关感染(FRI)手术治疗的治疗策略和主要考虑因素。治疗方案主要围绕两种方法:清创抗生素和植入物保留(DAIR)或植入物交换,可采用一个或多个阶段的策略。在选择 FRI 的手术治疗方法时要考虑多个因素,包括感染发生后的时间、种植体类型、稳定性、致病病原体、宿主生理学和软组织条件。目前的文献支持在症状持续时间短、植入物稳定、骨折复位满意、软组织包膜可行的病例中首选 DAIR 方法。相反,在局部和全身宿主生理学受损、生物膜成熟、病原体难以治疗、髓内植入物以及涉及再感染或 DAIR 手术失败的病例中,单阶段或多阶段植入物交换被认为是有益的。值得注意的是,这些建议借鉴了假体周围关节感染治疗策略,但受限于专门针对急性 FRI 的随机对照试验比较方案有限。总之,从未来的角度来看,需要对生物膜的成熟和时间对治疗效果的影响进行广泛研究。此外,还需要为 FRI 建立标准化的分类系统,以提高 FRI 治疗结果的可比性。
The DAIR-procedure in fracture-related infection–When and how
This narrative review discusses treatment strategies and key considerations guiding decisions in the surgical management of fracture-related infections (FRI). Treatment options primarily revolve around two approaches: debridement antibiotics and implant retention (DAIR), or implant exchange, either in a one or multiple-stage strategy. Several considerations, including time since infection onset, implant type, stability, causative pathogens, host physiology, and soft tissue conditions, inform the choice of surgical intervention for FRI. Current literature supports the preference for a DAIR approach in cases with a short duration of ongoing symptoms, a stable implant with satisfactory fracture reduction, and a viable soft tissue envelope. Conversely, one- or multiple-stage implant exchange is deemed beneficial in instances of compromised local and systemic host physiology, mature biofilm, difficult-to-treat pathogens, intramedullary implants, and cases involving reinfections or failed DAIR procedures. Notably, these recommendations draw parallels from periprosthetic joint infection treatment strategies, constrained by the limited availability of randomized controlled trials comparing these options specifically in acute FRI. In conclusion, future perspectives call for extensive investigations into biofilm maturation and the impact of time on treatment outcomes. Additionally, there is a need for a standardized classification system for FRI to enhance the comparability of treatment outcomes in FRI management.
期刊介绍:
Injury was founded in 1969 and is an international journal dealing with all aspects of trauma care and accident surgery. Our primary aim is to facilitate the exchange of ideas, techniques and information among all members of the trauma team.