OBJECTIVE: This study was designed to identify the presence, type and origin of bacteria adjacent to the metal implant in the infected region in a canine model of pyogenic vertebral osteomyelitis treated with single-stage anterior autogenous bone grafting and instrumentation. METHODS: Dogs with pyogenic spondylodiscitis underwent one-stage debridement, autogenous bone grafting and titanium plate instrumentation and perioperative antibiotic therapy. The implants and adjacent vertebral bones were removed surgically at various postoperative time points (4, 8, 12 and 24 weeks) for bacteria detection. Bacteria were detected from retrieved spinal implants as well as surrounding bones by culture and/or pyrosequencing methods in 17 (85%) of all 20 animals. The positive rate for bacteria presence was 45% by culture and 80% by pyrosequencing method. RESULTS: Radiological or macroscopic examination showed no signs for infection recurrence in any animal regardless of bacteria presence at the surgical site. However, organism identical with the causative bacterium for spinal infection was found in only two of nine culture-positive animals. CONCLUSION: Within the confines of the study, the use of metallic implants in an infected area did not lead to a clinically relevant infection although bacteria may exist at the surgical site. The use of metallic implants in an infected area of the spine is safe. The metallic implants may not be the “culprit” for the persistence or recurrence of infection.
OBJECTIVE: This study was designed to identify the presence, type and origin of bacteria adjacent to the metal implant in the infected region in a canine model of pyogenic vertebral osteomyelitis treated with single-stage anterior autogenous bone grafting and instrumentation. METHODS:Dogs with pyogenic spondylodiscitis underwent one-stage debridement, autogenous bone grafting and titanium plate instrumentation and perioperative antibiotic therapy. The implants and adjacent vertebral bones were removed surgically at various postoperative time points (4, 8, 12 and 24 weeks) for bacteria detection. Bacteria were detected from retrieved spinal implants as well as surrounding bones by culture and/or pyrosequencing methods in 17 (85%) of all 20 animals. The positive rate for bacteria presence was 45% by culture and 80% by pyrosequencing method. RESULTS: Radiological or macroscopic examination showed no signs for infection recurrence in any animal regardless of bacteria presence at the surgical site. However, organism identical with the causative bacterium for spinal infection was found in only two of nine culture-positive animals. CONCLUSION: Within the confines of the study, the use of metallic implants in an infected area did not lead to a clinically relevant infection although bacteria may exist at the surgical site. The use of metallic implants in an infected area of the spine is safe. The metallic implants may not be the “culprit” for the persistence or recurrence of infection.
Authors: Andrej Trampuz; Douglas R Osmon; Arlen D Hanssen; James M Steckelberg; Robin Patel Journal: Clin Orthop Relat Res Date: 2003-09 Impact factor: 4.176
Authors: John R Dimar; Leah Y Carreon; Steven D Glassman; Mitchell J Campbell; Michael J Hartman; John R Johnson Journal: Spine (Phila Pa 1976) Date: 2004-02-01 Impact factor: 3.468
Authors: A Shad; S Shariff; J Fairbank; I Byren; P J M A D Teddy; T A D Cadoux-Hudson Journal: Acta Neurochir (Wien) Date: 2003-11 Impact factor: 2.216
Authors: Phillip A Bostian; Jonathan M Karnes; Shari Cui; Lisa J Robinson; Scott D Daffner; Michelle R Witt; Sanford E Emery Journal: J Orthop Res Date: 2017-03-15 Impact factor: 3.494