Literature DB >> 32723127

A meta-analysis of the local application of vancomycin powder to prevent surgical site infection after spinal surgeries.

Shuo Shan1, Laiyong Tu1, Wenfei Gu1, Kahaer Aikenmu1, Jiang Zhao1.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to systematically analyze the effectiveness and safety of the local application of vancomycin powder to prevent surgical site infection (SSI) after spinal surgeries and provide guidance for clinical practice.
METHODS: Two researchers independently searched PubMed, Web of Science, Elsevier, and China National Knowledge Infrastructure using the MeSH terms "spinal surgery," "vancomycin," "local," "topical," "prophylactic," "surgical site infection," and "SSI" to identify studies published between January 2010 and January 2020 on the local application of vancomycin powder for preventing SSI after spinal surgeries. The outcome assessment indicators were analyzed using RevMan 5.3 software.
RESULTS: Three randomized controlled trials, two prospective studies, and 26 retrospective studies were included in the current research. The results of the meta-analysis revealed significant differences between the vancomycin and control groups (non-vancomycin group) concerning the incidence of SSI (risk ratio = 0.39, 95% confidence interval = 0.28-0.55, Z = 5.46), indicating that local application of vancomycin powder can significantly reduce the incidence of SSI.
CONCLUSION: Local application of vancomycin powder is an effective and safe method to prevent SSI after spinal surgeries.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Spinal surgery; antibiotics; clinical practice; meta-analysis; surgical site infection; vancomycin powder

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2020        PMID: 32723127      PMCID: PMC7391445          DOI: 10.1177/0300060520920057

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Int Med Res        ISSN: 0300-0605            Impact factor:   1.671


Background

Surgical site infection (SSI) is one of the most common complications of spinal surgery, occurring at an incidence of 0.3% to 20.0%.[1,2] In spinal surgeries, SSI could result in the development of pseudoarthrosis, spinal cord and neural injury, pyemia, and even patient death. Multiple surgeries and the usage of antibiotics lead to extended hospital stay and increased healthcare costs.[3,4] More than 60% of SSIs are reported to be caused by Staphylococcus aureus and coagulase-negative Staphylococcus, both of which can be controlled by vancomycin. Since its first application in 2011, vancomycin has been used locally to prevent SSI in many surgical centers.[5,6] However, the effects of the local application of vancomycin are not consistent. The current meta-analysis aimed to clarify whether local vancomycin application is an effective and safe method for preventing SSI after spinal surgeries.

Methods

Search of the literature

Two researchers independently searched PubMed, Web of Science, Elsevier, and Chinese National Knowledge Infrastructure using the keywords “spinal surgery,” “vancomycin,” “local,” “surgical site infection,” and “SSI” to identify randomized controlled trials (RCTs), half-randomized studies, prospective cohort studies, and retrospective studies of the local application of vancomycin powder for preventing SSI. Considering the relatively short period of local application of vancomycin in spinal surgeries, only studies published between January 2010 and January 2020 were included in the research. The incidence of SSI was used as the main outcome assessment parameter. Case reports, studies that only reported the outcome of prophylactic vancomycin use, and studies that only compared biochemical test results such as C-reaction protein or procalcitonin levels or the erythrocyte sedimentation rate were excluded from this study. Ethics approval was not required for this meta analysis.

Extraction of data

Two researchers independently extracted information such as the duration of study follow-up, patient age, methods of randomization, vancomycin dosage, method of drug application, and incidence of SSI.

Quality assessment

The quality of the included studies was assessed using the instructions provided by the Cochrane Handbook and Newcastle–Ottawa scale.[7] The criteria used in the current study include the method of randomization, blinding, and the integrity of data.

Statistical analysis

The outcome assessment indicators were analyzed using RevMan 5.3 software. A fixed-effects model was applied when I2 ≤ 50%, and a random-effects model was used when I2 > 50%. Subgroup analysis was performed when necessary.

Results

In total, 992 studies were screened by title, and 31 studies[8-38] were included in the final meta-analysis. The 31 studies included a total of 17,708 patients. Among those patients, 7627 patients were treated with vancomycin after spinal surgeries to prevent SSI, and the remaining 10,081 patients were included as controls (Figure 1, Table 1).
Figure 1.

Schematic chart of study inclusion.

Table 1.

Demographic characteristics of the included studies

Author/yearPatient SizeStudy designType of surgerySite of vancomycin deliveryDose (g)Follow-up (months)Type of SSILevel of evidenceStudy quality
Cannon 201895RetrospectiveNon- instrumented pediatric spinal surgeriesMuscle, fascia, subcutaneous tissue13Deep, superficialII6
Caroom 2013112RetrospectivePosterior cervical decompression, fusion, and internal fixationSubfascia16Deep, superficialII7
Devin 20182056RetrospectivePosterior spinal surgery with internal fixationAll layers11Deep, superficialII7
Emohare 2014303RetrospectivePosterior thoracic and lumbar surgery with or without internal fixationAll layers124Deep, superficialIII6
Eren 2018239ProspectivePosterior thoracolumbar stabilization, fusion, and internal fixationN/A0.514Deep, superficialIII6
Godil 2013110RetrospectivePosterior spinal fusion with internal fixationSpread throughout the surgical wound13Deep, superficialIII6
Garg 2018538RetrospectiveDeformity correction and internal fixationMuscle, fascia, subcutaneous tissue0.5–23DeepIII7
Haimoto 2017515RetrospectiveInstrumented posterior spinal fusionN/A16Deep, superficialIII7
Heller 2015683RetrospectivePosterior spinal and internal fixationMuscle, fascia, subcutaneous tissue0.5–13DeepIII7
Hey 2017389RetrospectiveAny open spinal surgeryMuscle, fascia, subcutaneous tissue13DeepIII6
Hida 2017174RetrospectiveAny open spinal surgeryAll layers0.5–120Deep, superficialIII6
Hill 2014300RetrospectivePosterior spinal procedures involving internal fixationMuscle, fascia, subcutaneous tissue1–21Deep, superficialIII6
Horii 20182859RetrospectiveAny open spinal surgeryMuscle, fascia, subcutaneous tissue1–212Deep, superficialIII6
Kim 201374RetrospectiveSpinal fusion and internal fixationMuscle, fascia, subcutaneous tissue1N/ADeep, superficialIII5
Li Xiucan 2016569RetrospectivePosterior cervical decompression, fusion and internal fixationMuscle, fascia, subcutaneous tissue112Deep, superficialIII6
Maajid 2018303RetrospectivePosterior spinal procedures with internal fixationMuscle, fascia, subcutaneous tissue, skin edges13Deep, superficialII5
Madhuchandra 201880ProspectivePosterior spinal procedures with internal fixationBelow the fascial layer13Deep, superficialIII6
Martin 2015289RetrospectivePosterior cervical decompression and internal fixationMuscle, fascia, subcutaneous tissue2N/ADeepIII6
Martin 2014306RetrospectivePosterior lumbosacral deformity correction and internal fixationMuscle, fascia, subcutaneous tissue2N/ADeepII7
Mirzashahi 2017380RCTPosterior lumbosacral deformity correction and internal fixationOver the fascia1–215Deep, superficialII6
O’Neil 2011110RetrospectivePosterior fracture stabilization and internal fixationMuscle, fascia, subcutaneous tissue1N/ADeep, superficialIII6
Pahys 20131001RetrospectivePosterior cervical decompression and internal fixationN/A0.53Deep, superficialIII7
Strom 2013253RetrospectivePosterior lumbar decompression, fusion, and internal fixationMuscle, fascia, subcutaneous tissue112Deep, superficialII7
Strom 2013171RetrospectivePosterior cervical decompression, fusion, and internal fixationMuscle, fascia, subcutaneous tissue112Deep, superficialII7
Sweet 20111732RetrospectivePosterior lumbar and thoracic fusion with internal fixationDirectly to surgical wound230DeepIII7
Takeuchi 2018230RCTAny open spinal surgeryThroughout the wound112Deep, superficialIII7
Theologis 2014215RetrospectiveThoracolumbar deformity correction, fusion, and internal fixationMuscle, fascia, subcutaneous tissue23–35Deep, superficialIII6
Thompson 2018193RetrospectiveDeformity correction and internal fixationMuscle, fascia, subcutaneous tissue1N/ADeepIII6
TianFeng 2018564RetrospectivePosterior spinal fusion with or without internal fixationMuscle, fascia, subcutaneous tissue1N/ADeep, superficialIII5
Tomov 20152425RetrospectiveAny open spinal surgeryThroughout the wound1N/ADeep, superficialIII6
Tubaki 2013907RCTAny open spinal surgeryMuscle, fascia, subcutaneous tissue13Deep, superficialII7

SSI, surgical site infection; RCT, randomized controlled trial; N/A, not available

Schematic chart of study inclusion. Demographic characteristics of the included studies SSI, surgical site infection; RCT, randomized controlled trial; N/A, not available The 31 studies included three RCTs, two prospective cohort studies, and 25 reported retrospective case series. The studies were conducted from 2011 to 2019, and most of the studies were published between 2013 and 2015. Despite the retrospective nature of most of the included studies, the level of evidence was II to III for most studies, and the Newcastle–Ottawa scale was 5 to 7. A random-effects model was used for the overall analysis of the efficacy of vancomycin for preventing SSI because I2 = 54%. The overall risk ratio (RR) was 0.39 (95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.28–0.55), indicating a significantly lower incidence of SSI in the vancomycin group than in the control group (P < 0.001, Figure 2).
Figure 2.

Overall meta-analysis of all included studies. CI, confidence interval.

Overall meta-analysis of all included studies. CI, confidence interval. RCTs normally have little patient selection bias and better repeatability than retrospective studies. Thus, in this study, we separately analyzed the results of RCTs and retrospective cohort studies. The three RCTs included in the meta-analysis reported the results for a total of 1517 patients, including 742 patients in the vancomycin group and 775 patients in the control group. The overall RR was 1.22 (95% CI = 0.62–2.40), indicating no significant difference between the two groups (P = 0.48, Figure 3). Meanwhile, data from the remaining 28 prospective and retrospective studies including 16,656 patients (7094 in the vancomycin group and 9562 in control group) revealed a significantly lower incidence of SSI in the vancomycin group than in the control group (RR = 0.33, 95% CI = 0.23–0.47, P < 0.01, Figure 3).
Figure 3.

Subgroup analysis according to study design. CI, confidence interval.

Subgroup analysis according to study design. CI, confidence interval. Spinal surgeries with internal fixation usually require more time and result in a higher level of intraoperative hemorrhage. Together with foreign body implantation, patients who undergo internal fixation are more likely to experience SSI than non-instrumented cases. In the current study, 19 studies involving 8015 patients (3533 patients in the vancomycin group and 4482 patients in the control group) reported the results of surgeries with internal fixation. The meta-analysis illustrated that the incidence of SSI was significantly decreased by the local application of vancomycin (RR = 0.30, 95% CI = 0.18–0.48, P < 0.01, Figure 4).
Figure 4.

Meta-analysis of studies only including patients who underwent internal fixation.

Meta-analysis of studies only including patients who underwent internal fixation.

Discussion

Vancomycin is a type of glycopeptide antibody. It was initially used to treat inflammation caused by S. aureus that cannot be controlled by penicillin because of patient allergy or bacterial resistance.[39] The drug adheres to the bacterial cell wall and causes various defects, including changes in the permeability of the bacterial cell membrane and selective inhibition of the formation of several RNAs. The local application of vancomycin ensures that a high concentration of antibiotics accumulates at the surgical site while maintaining low drug concentrations in the blood, killing Gram-positive bacteria in the surgical site while causing little harm to internal organs. One of the first reports of vancomycin locally applied as a means for SSI prevention in spinal surgery was that by Sweet et al.[31] They used 2 g of vancomycin, with 1 g applied to the bone graft and 1 g applied directly on the incision, and the incidence of infection was 0.2%, which was significantly lower than the control rate of 2.6%. After spinal injury or surgery, blood flow is usually disrupted, which makes the intravenous delivery of antibiotics to the injured site difficult. The local administration of vancomycin guarantees that a sufficient antibiotic concentration is achieved at the injured site while avoiding the side effects of high drug concentrations in the circulation system. Most studies identified in our meta-analysis revealed that this strategy significantly reduced the risk of SSI. Although the local application of vancomycin proved to be generally effective in reducing the incidence of SSI, our results indicated that local delivery may not affect the incidence of SSI in patients with no internal fixation. This could be explained by the already significantly lower ratio of SSI after spinal surgeries with no internal fixation. As presented in Table 1, patients in different studies underwent different surgical procedures ranging from more invasive thoracolumbar deformity correction and tumor removal[12,25,26,33,34] to less invasive decompression and fracture stabilization.[8,27-30] For example, the incidence of SSI was as high as 5.2% among patients undergoing deformity correction in the study by Martin et al.,[25] versus less than 1% among patients undergoing posterior cervical spine surgeries.[28] Despite the significantly lower risk of SSI in the vancomycin group than in the control group in most retrospective studies, all three RCTs[26,32,37] reported no significant differences of the SSI risk between the groups. However, one of the RCTs used another locally applied antibiotic, and the other two RCTs were hampered by weak study designs and unreliability. Two of the three RCTs provided no trial registration number, and none of the RCTs was a multi-center study. One RCT compared vancomycin with the antibiotic ampicillin. The repeatability of these RCTs is questionable. Safety is the main concern regarding the preventative application of vancomycin. The intravenous administration of vancomycin can lead to thrombophlebitis, eosinophilia, “red man syndrome,” ototoxicity, and nephrotoxicity.[40] When 1 g of vancomycin powder was administered to a female patient after corpectomy caused by breast cancer metastasis in a study by Mariappan,[41] an allergic reaction and circulatory collapse occurred. Youssef[42] identified an epidural seroma 6 weeks after the local application of 2 g of vancomycin in a female patient undergoing lumbar spine surgery. These are the only reports in the current literature of serious adverse effects associated with locally applied vancomycin. Edin et al.[43] found that when the concentration of vancomycin is lower than 1000 μg/mL, it has little effect on osteoblasts. In a study of Gans et al.,[44] 87 children undergoing surgical intervention for spinal deformity received 500 mg of vancomycin powder locally, and the blood serum concentration of vancomycin was not significantly different from that of patients in the control group. In the study by Armaghani, the serum vancomycin concentration was 2.5 μg/mL immediately after surgery and 1.1 μg/mL 2 days after surgery, which were significantly lower than the concentration that can be toxic to cells (10,000 μg/mL). Meanwhile, the corresponding concentrations in the drainage fluid at these time points were 403.0 and 115.0 μg/mL, respectively.[45] The current meta-analysis included no reports on the adverse effects of local vancomycin application on vital organs. Although most studies confirmed that vancomycin can significantly decrease the incidence of SSI, there is no consensus on the effective vancomycin dose for this purpose. The vancomycin dose has varied from 500 mg to 6 g in different studies, with most studies using doses of 1 to 2 g. The site at which the vancomycin should be applied is also under dispute. There is no consensus regarding whether the drug should be applied in deep or superficial fascia, directly to the bone graft, or on the host bone. Further animal and human studies are needed to study the effect of vancomycin in each of those scenarios. In addition to safety, drug resistance is another important subject concerning the application of antibiotics. Considering that vancomycin is one of the last effective measures against surgical infections, whether local application can lead to vancomycin-resistant bacterial infection is one of the main concerns in the preventive application of this antibiotic. It can be concluded from the current meta-analysis of nearly 20,000 patients that the local application of vancomycin powder during spinal surgery does not increase the incidence of vancomycin-resistant bacterial infection. Other authors such as Bakhsheshian[46] and Texakalidis et al.[47] conducted meta-analyses of studies investigating the effect of vancomycin powder on the incidence of SSI after spinal surgery. Considering that several studies on this subject are newly published, we included larger numbers of studies in patients in our meta-analysis. The current study, despite our comprehensive literature search and inclusion of a large number of patients, has certain disadvantages. First, only three of the included studies were RCTs, which had the opposite result as the overall data, and the remaining studies were reports from retrospective patient series. Second, most studies included relatively small number of patients, which may have led to patient selection bias. However, most studies had relatively high quality, and because of the large overall patient base, the results of this meta-analysis can be used as a reference for decision making in spinal clinics. Increasing numbers of authors agree that the local application of vancomycin is a cost-effective and safe strategy for preventing SSI in spinal clinics. However, the pharmacokinetics of this process is unclear, and all three RCTs indicated that vancomycin provided insignificant advantages over control treatments. More high-quality RCTs involving larger numbers of patients are needed before this method can be recommended as a routine modality in clinical practice.

Conclusions

Based on the current literature, the incidence of SSI after spinal surgeries can be significantly decreased by the local application of vancomycin powder. However, more high-quality RCTs should be conducted to further validate this conclusion.
  43 in total

1.  Critical evaluation of the Newcastle-Ottawa scale for the assessment of the quality of nonrandomized studies in meta-analyses.

Authors:  Andreas Stang
Journal:  Eur J Epidemiol       Date:  2010-07-22       Impact factor: 8.082

2.  Experience with intrawound vancomycin powder for spinal deformity surgery.

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

Review 3.  American College of Surgeons and Surgical Infection Society: Surgical Site Infection Guidelines, 2016 Update.

Authors:  Kristen A Ban; Joseph P Minei; Christine Laronga; Brian G Harbrecht; Eric H Jensen; Donald E Fry; Kamal M F Itani; E Patchen Dellinger; Clifford Y Ko; Therese M Duane
Journal:  J Am Coll Surg       Date:  2016-11-30       Impact factor: 6.113

Review 4.  The use of vancomycin powder in modern spine surgery: systematic review and meta-analysis of the clinical evidence.

Authors:  Joshua Bakhsheshian; Nader S Dahdaleh; Sandi K Lam; Jason W Savage; Zachary A Smith
Journal:  World Neurosurg       Date:  2014-12-19       Impact factor: 2.104

5.  Does Vancomycin Powder Decrease Surgical Site Infections in Growing Spine Surgery?: A Preliminary Study.

Authors:  George H Thompson; Connie Poe-Kochert; Christina K Hardesty; Jochen Son-Hing; R Justin Mistovich
Journal:  J Bone Joint Surg Am       Date:  2018-03-21       Impact factor: 5.284

6.  Adjunctive vancomycin powder in pediatric spine surgery is safe.

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

7.  Methods to decrease postoperative infections following posterior cervical spine surgery.

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

8.  Penicillin skin testing in hospitalized patients with β-lactam allergies: Effect on antibiotic selection and cost.

Authors:  Esther A King; Sridevi Challa; Patrick Curtin; Leonard Bielory
Journal:  Ann Allergy Asthma Immunol       Date:  2016-05-20       Impact factor: 6.347

Review 9.  Intravenous Vancomycin Dosing in the Elderly: A Focus on Clinical Issues and Practical Application.

Authors:  Katie E Barber; Allison M Bell; Kayla R Stover; Jamie L Wagner
Journal:  Drugs Aging       Date:  2016-12       Impact factor: 3.923

10.  The effectiveness of pedicle screw immersion in vancomycin and ceftriaxone solution for the prevention of postoperative spinal infection: A prospective comparative study.

Authors:  Burak Eren; Feyza Karagöz Güzey; Serkan Kitiş; Nezih Özkan; Cafer Korkut
Journal:  Acta Orthop Traumatol Turc       Date:  2018-06-07       Impact factor: 1.511

View more
  2 in total

1.  Editor's Spotlight/Take 5: Can Topical Vancomycin Prevent Periprosthetic Joint Infection in Hip and Knee Arthroplasty? A Systematic Review.

Authors:  Seth S Leopold
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  2021-08-01       Impact factor: 4.755

2.  Irrigation techniques used in spine surgery for surgical site infection prophylaxis: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Authors:  Kabir A Torres; Elliot Konrade; Jacob White; Mauro Costa M Tavares Junior; Joshua T Bunch; Douglas Burton; R Sean Jackson; Jacob Birlingmair; Brandon B Carlson
Journal:  BMC Musculoskelet Disord       Date:  2022-08-26       Impact factor: 2.562

  2 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.