| Literature DB >> 35840981 |
Michael E Whitely1, Sarah M Helms2, Preeti J Muire2, Alicia L Lofgren2, Rebecca A Lopez2, Joseph C Wenke2.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Treatment of open fractures remains a significant challenge in trauma care as these fractures are accompanied by extensive soft tissue damage, exposing the wound site to contaminants and increasing infection risk. Formation of biofilm, a capsule-like environment that acts as a barrier to treatment, is a primary mode by which infecting pathogens persist at the wound site. Therefore, a pressing need exists to identify irrigation methods that can disrupt biofilm and expose pathogens to treatment. This study aims to evaluate the antibiofilm wound lavage, Bactisure™, in comparison with saline for care of severe musculoskeletal wounds and elucidate potential effects on antibiotic treatment success.Entities:
Keywords: Antibiofilm; Musculoskeletal infection; Open fracture; Wound irrigation
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2022 PMID: 35840981 PMCID: PMC9284756 DOI: 10.1186/s13018-022-03199-x
Source DB: PubMed Journal: J Orthop Surg Res ISSN: 1749-799X Impact factor: 2.677
Experimental groups
| Treatment group | Sample size | Irrigation solution | Systemic treatment | Local treatment |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Saline (−) | 4 | Normal Saline | Cefazolin (5 mg/kg) | – |
| Saline (+) | 16 | Normal Saline | Cefazolin (5 mg/kg) | Vancomycin (50 mg) |
| ABI (+) | 16 | Bactisure™ Wound Lavage | Cefazolin (5 mg/kg) | Vancomycin (50 mg) |
Fig. 1A Radiographic representation of the plate and wire placement in a 6 mm defect model. B Placement of the locally applied vancomycin powder into and immediately surrounding the 6 mm defect in the femur. Scale bar equal to 10 mm
Fig. 2A Assessment of irrigant mediated biofilm dispersal determined by quantification of absorbance of solubilized crystal violet from stained biofilms 0 and 24 h after treatment. B Representative CLSM images of biofilm dispersal and inhibitory activity 0 and 24 h after irrigation. Arrows indicate representative areas of biofilm removal (no staining) following irrigation. Mean ± standard deviation represented, and significance determined between groups using Student’s t-test, *p < 0.05
Fig. 3Irrigant mediated effects on biofilm bacteria viability 24 h after irrigation, with and without subsequent vancomycin treatment. Mean ± standard deviation represented, and significance determined between groups using Student’s t-test, *p < 0.05
Fig. 4A Bacterial enumeration of S. aureus (UAMS-1) in bone tissue (log CFU/g). B Bacterial enumeration of S. aureus (UAMS-1) on removed hardware implant (log CFU/g). Median ± interquartile range represented, and significance determined between groups using Kruskall-Wallis test followed by Dunn's multiple comparisons test, *p < 0.05. Group descriptions: SI (−): Saline irrigant; SI (+): Saline irrigant plus local antibiotic; ABI (+): Antibiofilm irrigant plus local antibiotic. All groups received systemic antibiotic
Proportions of samples with detectable bacteria
| Treatment group | Detectable bone samples (% total) | Detectable hardware samples (% total) |
|---|---|---|
| Saline (−) | 4 (100) | 4 (100) |
| Saline (+) | 12 (75) | 4 (25) |
| ABI (+) | 9 (56) | 3 (18) |
Similarity of the effect of treatment on rate of bacteria detection
| Treatment group | ||
|---|---|---|
| Saline (+) | 0.54 | 0.03 |
| ABI (+) | 0.25 | 0.01 |
P generated by Fisher exact test