BACKGROUND: Intrawound vancomycin powder (VP) has been rapidly adopted in spine surgery with apparent benefit demonstrated in limited, retrospective studies. Randomized trials, basic science, and dose response studies are scarce. PURPOSE: This study aims to test the efficacy and dose effect of VP over an extended time course within a randomized, controlled in vivo animal experiment. STUDY DESIGN/ SETTING: Randomized controlled experiment utilizing a mouse model of spine implant infection with treatment groups receiving vancomycin powder following bacterial inoculation. METHODS: Utilizing a mouse model of spine implant infection with bioluminescent Staphylococcus aureus, 24 mice were randomized into 3 groups: 10 infected mice with VP treatment (+VP), 10 infected mice without VP treatment (No-VP), and 4 sterile controls (SC). Four milligrams of VP (mouse equivalent of 1 g in a human) were administered before wound closure. Bioluminescence imaging was performed over 5 weeks to quantify bacterial burden. Electron microscopy (EM), bacterial colonization assays (Live/Dead) staining, and colony forming units (CFU) analyses were completed. A second dosing experiment was completed with 34 mice randomized into 4 groups: control, 2 mg, 4 mg, and 8 mg groups. RESULTS: The (+VP) treatment group exhibited significantly lower bacterial loads compared to the control (No-VP) group, (p<.001). CFU analysis at the conclusion of the experiment revealed 20% of mice in the +VP group and 67% of mice in the No-VP group had persistent infections, and the (+VP) treatment group had significantly less mean number of CFUs (p<.03). EM and Live/Dead staining revealed florid biofilm formation in the No-VP group. Bioluminescence was suppressed in all VP doses tested compared with sterile controls (p<.001). CFU analysis revealed a 40%, 10%, and 20% persistent infection rate in the 2 mg, 4 mg, and 8 mg dose groups, respectively. CFU counts across dosing groups were not statistically different (p=.56). CONCLUSIONS: Vancomycin powder provided an overall infection prevention benefit but failed to eradicate infection in all mice. Furthermore, the dose when halved also demonstrated an overall protective benefit, albeit at a lower rate. CLINICAL SIGNIFICANCE: Vancomycin powder is efficacious but should not be viewed as a panacea for perioperative infection prevention. Dose alterations can be considered, especially in patients with kidney disease or at high risk for seroma.
BACKGROUND: Intrawound vancomycin powder (VP) has been rapidly adopted in spine surgery with apparent benefit demonstrated in limited, retrospective studies. Randomized trials, basic science, and dose response studies are scarce. PURPOSE: This study aims to test the efficacy and dose effect of VP over an extended time course within a randomized, controlled in vivo animal experiment. STUDY DESIGN/ SETTING: Randomized controlled experiment utilizing a mouse model of spine implant infection with treatment groups receiving vancomycin powder following bacterial inoculation. METHODS: Utilizing a mouse model of spine implant infection with bioluminescent Staphylococcus aureus, 24 mice were randomized into 3 groups: 10 infectedmice with VP treatment (+VP), 10 infectedmice without VP treatment (No-VP), and 4 sterile controls (SC). Four milligrams of VP (mouse equivalent of 1 g in a human) were administered before wound closure. Bioluminescence imaging was performed over 5 weeks to quantify bacterial burden. Electron microscopy (EM), bacterial colonization assays (Live/Dead) staining, and colony forming units (CFU) analyses were completed. A second dosing experiment was completed with 34 mice randomized into 4 groups: control, 2 mg, 4 mg, and 8 mg groups. RESULTS: The (+VP) treatment group exhibited significantly lower bacterial loads compared to the control (No-VP) group, (p<.001). CFU analysis at the conclusion of the experiment revealed 20% of mice in the +VP group and 67% of mice in the No-VP group had persistent infections, and the (+VP) treatment group had significantly less mean number of CFUs (p<.03). EM and Live/Dead staining revealed florid biofilm formation in the No-VP group. Bioluminescence was suppressed in all VP doses tested compared with sterile controls (p<.001). CFU analysis revealed a 40%, 10%, and 20% persistent infection rate in the 2 mg, 4 mg, and 8 mg dose groups, respectively. CFU counts across dosing groups were not statistically different (p=.56). CONCLUSIONS:Vancomycin powder provided an overall infection prevention benefit but failed to eradicate infection in all mice. Furthermore, the dose when halved also demonstrated an overall protective benefit, albeit at a lower rate. CLINICAL SIGNIFICANCE: Vancomycin powder is efficacious but should not be viewed as a panacea for perioperative infection prevention. Dose alterations can be considered, especially in patients with kidney disease or at high risk for seroma.
Authors: Jonathan R Pribaz; Nicholas M Bernthal; Fabrizio Billi; John S Cho; Romela Irene Ramos; Yi Guo; Ambrose L Cheung; Kevin P Francis; Lloyd S Miller Journal: J Orthop Res Date: 2011-08-11 Impact factor: 3.494
Authors: Joel R Martin; Owoicho Adogwa; Christopher R Brown; Carlos A Bagley; William J Richardson; Shivanand P Lad; Maragatha Kuchibhatla; Oren N Gottfried Journal: Spine (Phila Pa 1976) Date: 2014-01-15 Impact factor: 3.468
Authors: Osa Emohare; Charles G Ledonio; Brian W Hill; Rick A Davis; David W Polly; Matthew M Kang Journal: Spine J Date: 2014-03-17 Impact factor: 4.166
Authors: Lukas P Zebala; Tapanut Chuntarapas; Michael P Kelly; Michael Talcott; Suellen Greco; K Daniel Riew Journal: J Bone Joint Surg Am Date: 2014-01-01 Impact factor: 5.284
Authors: Kevin R O'Neill; Jason G Smith; Amir M Abtahi; Kristin R Archer; Dan M Spengler; Matthew J McGirt; Clinton J Devin Journal: Spine J Date: 2011-05-19 Impact factor: 4.166
Authors: George M Ghobrial; David W Cadotte; Kim Williams; Michael G Fehlings; James S Harrop Journal: Neurosurg Focus Date: 2015-10 Impact factor: 4.047
Authors: Itai Gans; John P Dormans; David A Spiegel; John M Flynn; Wudbhav N Sankar; Robert M Campbell; Keith D Baldwin Journal: Spine (Phila Pa 1976) Date: 2013-09-01 Impact factor: 3.468
Authors: Joshua M Pahys; Jenny R Pahys; Samuel K Cho; Matthew M Kang; Lukas P Zebala; Ammar H Hawasli; Fred A Sweet; Dong-Ho Lee; K Daniel Riew Journal: J Bone Joint Surg Am Date: 2013-03-20 Impact factor: 5.284
Authors: Yan Hu; Vishal Hegde; Daniel Johansen; Amanda H Loftin; Erik Dworsky; Stephen D Zoller; Howard Y Park; Christopher D Hamad; George E Nelson; Kevin P Francis; Anthony Scaduto; Nicholas M Bernthal Journal: PLoS One Date: 2017-02-28 Impact factor: 3.240
Authors: Rishi Trikha; Danielle Greig; Benjamin V Kelley; Zeinab Mamouei; Troy Sekimura; Nicolas Cevallos; Thomas Olson; Ameen Chaudry; Clara Magyar; Daniel Leisman; Alexandra Stavrakis; Michael R Yeaman; Nicholas M Bernthal Journal: Front Immunol Date: 2020-09-11 Impact factor: 7.561