Jason S Hoellwarth, Taylor J Reif, Michael W Henry, Andy O Miller, Austin C Kaidi, S Robert Rozbruch
{"title":"指数骨融合的意外阳性术中培养(UPIC)不会导致术后感染事件的增加。","authors":"Jason S Hoellwarth, Taylor J Reif, Michael W Henry, Andy O Miller, Austin C Kaidi, S Robert Rozbruch","doi":"10.5194/jbji-7-155-2022","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p><b>Introduction</b>: The most common complication following transcutaneous osseointegration for amputees is infection. Although an obvious source of contamination is the permanent stoma, operative site contamination at the time of implantation may be an additional source. This study investigates the impact of unexpected positive intraoperative cultures (UPIC) on postoperative infection. <b>Methods</b>: Charts were reviewed for 8 patients with UPIC and 22 patients with negative intraoperative cultures (NIC) who had at least 1 year of post-osseointegration follow-up. All patients had 24 h of routine postoperative antibiotic prophylaxis, with UPIC receiving additional antibiotics guided by culture results. The main outcome measure was postoperative infection intervention, which was graded as (0) none, (1) antibiotics unrelated to the initial surgery, (2) operative debridement with implant retention, or (3) implant removal. <b>Results</b>: The UPIC vs. NIC rate of infection management was as follows: Grade 0, 6/8 <math><mo>=</mo></math> 75 % vs. 14/22 <math><mo>=</mo></math> 64 %, <i>p</i> <math><mo>=</mo></math> 0.682; Grade 1, 2/8 <math><mo>=</mo></math> 25 % vs. 8/22 <math><mo>=</mo></math> 36.4 % (Fisher's <i>p</i> <math><mo>=</mo></math> 0.682); Grade 2, 1/8 = 12.5 % vs. 0/22 <math><mo>=</mo></math> 0 % (Fisher's <i>p</i> <math><mo>=</mo></math> 0.267); Grade 3, 0/8 <math><mo>=</mo></math> 0 % vs. 1/22 <math><mo>=</mo></math> 4.5 % (Fisher's <i>p</i> <math><mo>=</mo></math> 1.000). No differences were statistically significant. <b>Conclusions</b>: UPIC at index osseointegration, managed with directed postoperative antibiotics, does not appear to increase the risk of additional infection management. The therapeutic benefit of providing additional directed antibiotics versus no additional antibiotics following UPIC is unknown and did not appear to increase the risk of other adverse outcomes in our cohort.</p>","PeriodicalId":15271,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Bone and Joint Infection","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.8000,"publicationDate":"2022-07-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9350876/pdf/","citationCount":"2","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Unexpected positive intraoperative cultures (UPIC) at index osseointegration do not lead to increased postoperative infectious events.\",\"authors\":\"Jason S Hoellwarth, Taylor J Reif, Michael W Henry, Andy O Miller, Austin C Kaidi, S Robert Rozbruch\",\"doi\":\"10.5194/jbji-7-155-2022\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p><b>Introduction</b>: The most common complication following transcutaneous osseointegration for amputees is infection. Although an obvious source of contamination is the permanent stoma, operative site contamination at the time of implantation may be an additional source. This study investigates the impact of unexpected positive intraoperative cultures (UPIC) on postoperative infection. <b>Methods</b>: Charts were reviewed for 8 patients with UPIC and 22 patients with negative intraoperative cultures (NIC) who had at least 1 year of post-osseointegration follow-up. All patients had 24 h of routine postoperative antibiotic prophylaxis, with UPIC receiving additional antibiotics guided by culture results. The main outcome measure was postoperative infection intervention, which was graded as (0) none, (1) antibiotics unrelated to the initial surgery, (2) operative debridement with implant retention, or (3) implant removal. <b>Results</b>: The UPIC vs. NIC rate of infection management was as follows: Grade 0, 6/8 <math><mo>=</mo></math> 75 % vs. 14/22 <math><mo>=</mo></math> 64 %, <i>p</i> <math><mo>=</mo></math> 0.682; Grade 1, 2/8 <math><mo>=</mo></math> 25 % vs. 8/22 <math><mo>=</mo></math> 36.4 % (Fisher's <i>p</i> <math><mo>=</mo></math> 0.682); Grade 2, 1/8 = 12.5 % vs. 0/22 <math><mo>=</mo></math> 0 % (Fisher's <i>p</i> <math><mo>=</mo></math> 0.267); Grade 3, 0/8 <math><mo>=</mo></math> 0 % vs. 1/22 <math><mo>=</mo></math> 4.5 % (Fisher's <i>p</i> <math><mo>=</mo></math> 1.000). No differences were statistically significant. <b>Conclusions</b>: UPIC at index osseointegration, managed with directed postoperative antibiotics, does not appear to increase the risk of additional infection management. The therapeutic benefit of providing additional directed antibiotics versus no additional antibiotics following UPIC is unknown and did not appear to increase the risk of other adverse outcomes in our cohort.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":15271,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Bone and Joint Infection\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.8000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-07-18\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9350876/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"2\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Bone and Joint Infection\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.5194/jbji-7-155-2022\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2022/1/1 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"eCollection\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"INFECTIOUS DISEASES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Bone and Joint Infection","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.5194/jbji-7-155-2022","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2022/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"INFECTIOUS DISEASES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2
摘要
摘要:截肢者经皮骨整合术后最常见的并发症是感染。虽然一个明显的污染来源是永久性造口,但植入时手术部位的污染可能是另一个来源。本研究探讨意外术中培养阳性(UPIC)对术后感染的影响。方法:回顾8例UPIC患者和22例术中培养阴性(NIC)患者的图表,这些患者在骨融合后随访至少1年。所有患者术后给予24 h常规抗生素预防,UPIC根据培养结果给予额外抗生素治疗。主要结局指标为术后感染干预,分为(0)无感染干预,(1)与初始手术无关的抗生素干预,(2)保留种植体的手术清创,或(3)种植体移除。结果:UPIC与NIC感染管理率分别为:0级,6/8 = 75 % vs. 14/22 = 64 %,p = 0.682;1级,2/8 = 25 % vs. 8/22 = 36.4 % (Fisher’s p = 0.682);2级,1/8 = 12.5 % vs. 0/22 = 0 % (Fisher’s p = 0.267);3级,0/8 = 0 % vs. 1/22 = 4.5 %(费雪p = 1.000)。差异无统计学意义。结论:指数骨整合的UPIC,在术后直接使用抗生素治疗,似乎不会增加额外感染管理的风险。在UPIC后提供额外的定向抗生素与不提供额外抗生素的治疗益处尚不清楚,并且在我们的队列中似乎没有增加其他不良后果的风险。
Unexpected positive intraoperative cultures (UPIC) at index osseointegration do not lead to increased postoperative infectious events.
Introduction: The most common complication following transcutaneous osseointegration for amputees is infection. Although an obvious source of contamination is the permanent stoma, operative site contamination at the time of implantation may be an additional source. This study investigates the impact of unexpected positive intraoperative cultures (UPIC) on postoperative infection. Methods: Charts were reviewed for 8 patients with UPIC and 22 patients with negative intraoperative cultures (NIC) who had at least 1 year of post-osseointegration follow-up. All patients had 24 h of routine postoperative antibiotic prophylaxis, with UPIC receiving additional antibiotics guided by culture results. The main outcome measure was postoperative infection intervention, which was graded as (0) none, (1) antibiotics unrelated to the initial surgery, (2) operative debridement with implant retention, or (3) implant removal. Results: The UPIC vs. NIC rate of infection management was as follows: Grade 0, 6/8 75 % vs. 14/22 64 %, p 0.682; Grade 1, 2/8 25 % vs. 8/22 36.4 % (Fisher's p 0.682); Grade 2, 1/8 = 12.5 % vs. 0/22 0 % (Fisher's p 0.267); Grade 3, 0/8 0 % vs. 1/22 4.5 % (Fisher's p 1.000). No differences were statistically significant. Conclusions: UPIC at index osseointegration, managed with directed postoperative antibiotics, does not appear to increase the risk of additional infection management. The therapeutic benefit of providing additional directed antibiotics versus no additional antibiotics following UPIC is unknown and did not appear to increase the risk of other adverse outcomes in our cohort.