Literature DB >> 34718863

Management and outcome of spinal implant-associated surgical site infections in patients with posterior instrumentation: analysis of 176 cases.

Anne-Katrin Hickmann1,2, Denis Bratelj3, Tatiana Pirvu3, Markus Loibl3, Anne F Mannion4, Dave O'Riordan4, Tamás Fekete3, Deszö Jeszenszky3, Nadia Eberhard5, Marku Vogt6, Yvonne Achermann5, Daniel Haschtmann3.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: The management of implant-associated surgical site infections (SSI) in patients with posterior instrumentation is challenging. Evidence regarding the most appropriate treatment and the need for removal of implants is equivocal. We sought to evaluate the management and outcome of such patients at our institution.
METHODS: We searched our prospectively documented databases for eligible patients with posterior spinal instrumentation, excluding the cervical spine (January 2008-June 2018). Patient files were reviewed, demographic data and treatment details were recorded. Patient-reported outcome (PRO) was assessed with the Core Outcome Measures Index (COMI) preoperatively and postoperatively at 3 and 12 months.
RESULTS: A total of 170 patients underwent 210 revisions for 176 SSIs. Two-thirds presented within four weeks (105/176, 59.7%, median 22.5d, 7d-11.1y). The most common pathogens were Staphylococcus aureus (n = 79/210, 37.6%) and Staphylococcus epidermidis (n = 56/210, 26.7%). Debridement and implant retention was performed in 135/210 (64.3%) revisions and partial replacement in 62/210 (29.5%). In 28/176 SSI (15.9%), persistent infection required multiple revisions (≤ 4). Surgery was followed by intravenous and oral antimicrobial treatment (10-12w). In 139/176 SSIs (79%) with ≥ 1y follow-up, infection was cured in 115/139 (82.7%); relapse occurred in 9 (relapse rate: 5.1%). Two patients (1.4%) died. COMI decreased significantly (8.2 ± 1.5 vs. 4.8 ± 2.9, p < 0.0001) over 12 months. 72.7% of patients were (very) satisfied with their care.
CONCLUSION: Patients with SSI after posterior (thoraco-)lumbo(-sacral) instrumentation can be successfully treated in most cases with surgical and specific antibiotic treatment. An interdisciplinary approach is recommended. Loose implants should be replaced. In some cases, multiple revisions may be necessary. Patient outcomes were satisfactory.
© 2021. The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Fusion surgery; Outcome; Quality of life; Spine; Surgical site infection

Mesh:

Year:  2021        PMID: 34718863     DOI: 10.1007/s00586-021-06978-y

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Eur Spine J        ISSN: 0940-6719            Impact factor:   3.134


  22 in total

1.  Postoperative deep wound infection in adults after posterior lumbosacral spine fusion with instrumentation: incidence and management.

Authors:  R Picada; R B Winter; J E Lonstein; F Denis; M R Pinto; M D Smith; J H Perra
Journal:  J Spinal Disord       Date:  2000-02

2.  Risk of infection following posterior instrumented lumbar fusion for degenerative spine disease in 817 consecutive cases.

Authors:  Kaisorn L Chaichana; Mohamad Bydon; David R Santiago-Dieppa; Lee Hwang; Gregory McLoughlin; Daniel M Sciubba; Jean-Paul Wolinsky; Ali Bydon; Ziya L Gokaslan; Timothy Witham
Journal:  J Neurosurg Spine       Date:  2013-11-08

Review 3.  Impact of spine surgery complications on costs associated with management of adult spinal deformity.

Authors:  Samrat Yeramaneni; Chessie Robinson; Richard Hostin
Journal:  Curr Rev Musculoskelet Med       Date:  2016-09

4.  The product of ORF O located within the domain of herpes simplex virus 1 genome transcribed during latent infection binds to and inhibits in vitro binding of infected cell protein 4 to its cognate DNA site.

Authors:  G Randall; M Lagunoff; B Roizman
Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A       Date:  1997-09-16       Impact factor: 11.205

5.  Preservation of spinal instrumentation after development of postoperative bacterial infections in patients undergoing spinal arthrodesis.

Authors:  Raheel Ahmed; Jeremy D W Greenlee; Vincent C Traynelis
Journal:  J Spinal Disord Tech       Date:  2012-08

6.  Postoperative instrumented spine infections: a retrospective review.

Authors:  Miguel Sierra-Hoffman; Chetan Jinadatha; John L Carpenter; Mark Rahm
Journal:  South Med J       Date:  2010-01       Impact factor: 0.954

7.  Postoperative wound infection after posterior spinal instrumentation: analysis of long-term treatment outcomes.

Authors:  Shih-Hao Chen; Chen-Hsiang Lee; Kuo-Chin Huang; Pang-Hsin Hsieh; Shan-Yin Tsai
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2014-10-29       Impact factor: 3.134

8.  Impact of Readmissions in Episodic Care of Adult Spinal Deformity: Event-Based Cost Analysis of 695 Consecutive Cases.

Authors:  Samrat Yeramaneni; Jeffrey L Gum; Leah Y Carreon; Eric O Klineberg; Justin S Smith; Amit Jain; Richard A Hostin
Journal:  J Bone Joint Surg Am       Date:  2018-03-21       Impact factor: 5.284

9.  Implant removal for the management of infection after instrumented spinal fusion.

Authors:  Jeung Il Kim; Kuen Tak Suh; Seong-Jang Kim; Jung Sub Lee
Journal:  J Spinal Disord Tech       Date:  2010-06

10.  Outcome and treatment of postoperative spine surgical site infections: predictors of treatment success and failure.

Authors:  Keishi Maruo; Sigurd H Berven
Journal:  J Orthop Sci       Date:  2014-02-08       Impact factor: 1.601

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.