民用弹道关节切开术:感染率和手术与非手术处理。

IF 1.6 3区 医学 Q3 ORTHOPEDICS Journal of Orthopaedic Trauma Pub Date : 2024-02-01 DOI:10.1097/BOT.0000000000002728
Charles Liu, Mahesh Kumar, Andy Liu, Mary Kate Erdman, Anthony Christiano, Adam Lee, Kelly Hynes, Jason Strelzow
{"title":"民用弹道关节切开术:感染率和手术与非手术处理。","authors":"Charles Liu, Mahesh Kumar, Andy Liu, Mary Kate Erdman, Anthony Christiano, Adam Lee, Kelly Hynes, Jason Strelzow","doi":"10.1097/BOT.0000000000002728","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objectives: </strong>The purpose of this study was to determine whether a significant difference existed in the rate of infection after ballistic traumatic arthrotomy managed operatively compared with those managed without surgery.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong></p><p><strong>Design: </strong>Retrospective cohort study.</p><p><strong>Setting: </strong>Academic Level I Trauma Center.</p><p><strong>Patient selection criteria: </strong>Patients with ballistic traumatic arthrotomies of the shoulder, elbow, wrist, hip, knee, or ankle who received operative or nonoperative management.</p><p><strong>Outcome measures and comparisons: </strong>The rates of infection and septic arthritis in those who received operative or nonoperative management.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>One hundred ninety-five patients were studied. Eighty patients were treated nonoperatively (Non-Op group), 16 patients were treated with formal irrigation and debridement in the operating room (I&D group), and 99 patients were treated with formal I&D and open reduction and internal fixation (ORIF) (I&D + ORIF group). Patients in all 3 groups received local wound care and systemic antibiotics. No patients in the Non-Op or I&D group developed an infection. Six patients in the I&D + ORIF group developed extra-articular postoperative infections requiring additional interventions.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>The infection rate in the I&D + ORIF group was consistent with the infection rates reported in orthopaedic literature after fixation alone. In addition, none of the infections were cases of septic arthritis. This suggests that traumatic arthrotomy does not increase the risk for infection beyond what is expected after fixation alone. Importantly, the Non-Op group represented a series of 80 patients who were treated nonoperatively without developing an infection, indicating that I&D may not be necessary to prevent infection after ballistic arthrotomy. The results suggest that septic arthritis after civilian ballistic arthrotomy is a rare complication regardless of the choice of treatment.</p><p><strong>Level of evidence: </strong>Therapeutic Level III. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.</p>","PeriodicalId":16644,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Orthopaedic Trauma","volume":" ","pages":"102-108"},"PeriodicalIF":1.6000,"publicationDate":"2024-02-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Civilian Ballistic Arthrotomies: Infection Rates and Operative Versus Nonoperative Management.\",\"authors\":\"Charles Liu, Mahesh Kumar, Andy Liu, Mary Kate Erdman, Anthony Christiano, Adam Lee, Kelly Hynes, Jason Strelzow\",\"doi\":\"10.1097/BOT.0000000000002728\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Objectives: </strong>The purpose of this study was to determine whether a significant difference existed in the rate of infection after ballistic traumatic arthrotomy managed operatively compared with those managed without surgery.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong></p><p><strong>Design: </strong>Retrospective cohort study.</p><p><strong>Setting: </strong>Academic Level I Trauma Center.</p><p><strong>Patient selection criteria: </strong>Patients with ballistic traumatic arthrotomies of the shoulder, elbow, wrist, hip, knee, or ankle who received operative or nonoperative management.</p><p><strong>Outcome measures and comparisons: </strong>The rates of infection and septic arthritis in those who received operative or nonoperative management.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>One hundred ninety-five patients were studied. Eighty patients were treated nonoperatively (Non-Op group), 16 patients were treated with formal irrigation and debridement in the operating room (I&D group), and 99 patients were treated with formal I&D and open reduction and internal fixation (ORIF) (I&D + ORIF group). Patients in all 3 groups received local wound care and systemic antibiotics. No patients in the Non-Op or I&D group developed an infection. Six patients in the I&D + ORIF group developed extra-articular postoperative infections requiring additional interventions.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>The infection rate in the I&D + ORIF group was consistent with the infection rates reported in orthopaedic literature after fixation alone. In addition, none of the infections were cases of septic arthritis. This suggests that traumatic arthrotomy does not increase the risk for infection beyond what is expected after fixation alone. Importantly, the Non-Op group represented a series of 80 patients who were treated nonoperatively without developing an infection, indicating that I&D may not be necessary to prevent infection after ballistic arthrotomy. The results suggest that septic arthritis after civilian ballistic arthrotomy is a rare complication regardless of the choice of treatment.</p><p><strong>Level of evidence: </strong>Therapeutic Level III. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":16644,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Orthopaedic Trauma\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"102-108\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.6000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-02-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Orthopaedic Trauma\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1097/BOT.0000000000002728\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"ORTHOPEDICS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Orthopaedic Trauma","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1097/BOT.0000000000002728","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"ORTHOPEDICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

目的:本研究的目的是确定手术治疗的弹道创伤性关节切开术与非手术治疗的感染率是否存在显著差异。方法:设计:回顾性队列研究。单位:学术一级创伤中心。患者选择标准:接受手术或非手术治疗的肩、肘、腕、髋、膝或踝创伤性关节切开术患者。结果测量和比较:接受手术或非手术治疗的患者感染和脓毒性关节炎的发生率。结果:研究了195例患者。非手术治疗80例(Non-Op组),手术室内正式冲洗清创16例(I&D组),正式冲洗清创切开复位内固定99例(I&D + ORIF组)。三组患者均接受局部伤口护理和全身抗生素治疗。非手术组和I&D组均未发生感染。I&D + ORIF组中有6例患者出现术后关节外感染,需要额外干预。结论:I&D + ORIF组的感染率与骨科文献中单独固定后的感染率一致。此外,没有一例感染是脓毒性关节炎。这表明创伤性关节切开术不会增加感染的风险,超出了单纯固定后的预期。重要的是,非手术组有80例患者接受了非手术治疗,没有发生感染,这表明在弹道关节切开术后,I&D可能不是预防感染的必要条件。结果提示,无论选择何种治疗方法,民用弹道关节切开术后脓毒性关节炎是一种罕见的并发症。证据等级:治疗性III级。有关证据水平的完整描述,请参见作者说明。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Civilian Ballistic Arthrotomies: Infection Rates and Operative Versus Nonoperative Management.

Objectives: The purpose of this study was to determine whether a significant difference existed in the rate of infection after ballistic traumatic arthrotomy managed operatively compared with those managed without surgery.

Methods:

Design: Retrospective cohort study.

Setting: Academic Level I Trauma Center.

Patient selection criteria: Patients with ballistic traumatic arthrotomies of the shoulder, elbow, wrist, hip, knee, or ankle who received operative or nonoperative management.

Outcome measures and comparisons: The rates of infection and septic arthritis in those who received operative or nonoperative management.

Results: One hundred ninety-five patients were studied. Eighty patients were treated nonoperatively (Non-Op group), 16 patients were treated with formal irrigation and debridement in the operating room (I&D group), and 99 patients were treated with formal I&D and open reduction and internal fixation (ORIF) (I&D + ORIF group). Patients in all 3 groups received local wound care and systemic antibiotics. No patients in the Non-Op or I&D group developed an infection. Six patients in the I&D + ORIF group developed extra-articular postoperative infections requiring additional interventions.

Conclusions: The infection rate in the I&D + ORIF group was consistent with the infection rates reported in orthopaedic literature after fixation alone. In addition, none of the infections were cases of septic arthritis. This suggests that traumatic arthrotomy does not increase the risk for infection beyond what is expected after fixation alone. Importantly, the Non-Op group represented a series of 80 patients who were treated nonoperatively without developing an infection, indicating that I&D may not be necessary to prevent infection after ballistic arthrotomy. The results suggest that septic arthritis after civilian ballistic arthrotomy is a rare complication regardless of the choice of treatment.

Level of evidence: Therapeutic Level III. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

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
Journal of Orthopaedic Trauma
Journal of Orthopaedic Trauma 医学-运动科学
CiteScore
3.90
自引率
8.70%
发文量
396
审稿时长
3-8 weeks
期刊介绍: Journal of Orthopaedic Trauma is devoted exclusively to the diagnosis and management of hard and soft tissue trauma, including injuries to bone, muscle, ligament, and tendons, as well as spinal cord injuries. Under the guidance of a distinguished international board of editors, the journal provides the most current information on diagnostic techniques, new and improved surgical instruments and procedures, surgical implants and prosthetic devices, bioplastics and biometals; and physical therapy and rehabilitation.
期刊最新文献
Benefit of Expedited Time to Hip Fracture Surgery Differs Based on Patient Risk Profile. The Midline Lateral Parapatellar Arthrotomy: A Safe Alternative Approach for Lateral Tibial Plateau Fractures. The Effects of a Stepped-Care Mental Health Program on Trauma Recidivism at a Level 1 Trauma Center. Tibial Malalignment is an Independent Predictor of Nonunion After Intramedullary Nailing of Tibial Shaft Fractures. Are Drains Associated With Infection After Operative Fixation of High-Risk Tibial Plateau and Pilon Fractures?
×
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
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 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 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1