Cargando…

Comparison of operating field sterility in open versus minimally invasive microdiscectomies of the lumbar spine

BACKGROUND: Postoperative wound infection is a preventable risk that can lead to significant adverse outcomes and increased cost of care. Minimally invasive surgeries (MIS) have been found to have lower rates of postoperative infection compared with the traditional approach. To assess if the reporte...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Li, Charles H., Yew, Andrew Y., Kimball, Jon A., McBride, Duncan Q., Wang, Jeff C., Lu, Daniel C.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Medknow Publications & Media Pvt Ltd 2013
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3716002/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23878763
http://dx.doi.org/10.4103/2152-7806.111434
_version_ 1782277521058824192
author Li, Charles H.
Yew, Andrew Y.
Kimball, Jon A.
McBride, Duncan Q.
Wang, Jeff C.
Lu, Daniel C.
author_facet Li, Charles H.
Yew, Andrew Y.
Kimball, Jon A.
McBride, Duncan Q.
Wang, Jeff C.
Lu, Daniel C.
author_sort Li, Charles H.
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Postoperative wound infection is a preventable risk that can lead to significant adverse outcomes and increased cost of care. Minimally invasive surgeries (MIS) have been found to have lower rates of postoperative infection compared with the traditional approach. To assess if the reported difference is related to intraoperative contamination or to other factors, we assessed the surgical field for sterility. METHODS: We compared 10 MIS versus 10 traditional microdiscectomies. Swabs of the operating field were obtained before and after the procedure from multiple sites in the operating room. Positive and negative controls were taken of the skin immediately before and after preparation of the incision site. All swabs were plated out on Columbia blood agar plates and grown for 48 hours. Colony counting was performed to determine growth. RESULTS: There was no statistically significant difference in the colony counts of swab sites in traditional microdiscectomies compared with MIS microdiscectomies. There was no significant contamination of the operating field using either approach. CONCLUSIONS: In this prospective study, we found that there was no significant difference in bacterial counts in swabs of operative sites in either traditional or MIS microdiscectomies, suggesting that the decreased rate of postoperative infection in the reported literature for MIS cases may be related to other factors, such as patient selection and/or postoperative care.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-3716002
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2013
publisher Medknow Publications & Media Pvt Ltd
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-37160022013-07-22 Comparison of operating field sterility in open versus minimally invasive microdiscectomies of the lumbar spine Li, Charles H. Yew, Andrew Y. Kimball, Jon A. McBride, Duncan Q. Wang, Jeff C. Lu, Daniel C. Surg Neurol Int Surgical Neurology International: Spine BACKGROUND: Postoperative wound infection is a preventable risk that can lead to significant adverse outcomes and increased cost of care. Minimally invasive surgeries (MIS) have been found to have lower rates of postoperative infection compared with the traditional approach. To assess if the reported difference is related to intraoperative contamination or to other factors, we assessed the surgical field for sterility. METHODS: We compared 10 MIS versus 10 traditional microdiscectomies. Swabs of the operating field were obtained before and after the procedure from multiple sites in the operating room. Positive and negative controls were taken of the skin immediately before and after preparation of the incision site. All swabs were plated out on Columbia blood agar plates and grown for 48 hours. Colony counting was performed to determine growth. RESULTS: There was no statistically significant difference in the colony counts of swab sites in traditional microdiscectomies compared with MIS microdiscectomies. There was no significant contamination of the operating field using either approach. CONCLUSIONS: In this prospective study, we found that there was no significant difference in bacterial counts in swabs of operative sites in either traditional or MIS microdiscectomies, suggesting that the decreased rate of postoperative infection in the reported literature for MIS cases may be related to other factors, such as patient selection and/or postoperative care. Medknow Publications & Media Pvt Ltd 2013-05-06 /pmc/articles/PMC3716002/ /pubmed/23878763 http://dx.doi.org/10.4103/2152-7806.111434 Text en Copyright: © 2013 Li CH http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/3.0 This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.
spellingShingle Surgical Neurology International: Spine
Li, Charles H.
Yew, Andrew Y.
Kimball, Jon A.
McBride, Duncan Q.
Wang, Jeff C.
Lu, Daniel C.
Comparison of operating field sterility in open versus minimally invasive microdiscectomies of the lumbar spine
title Comparison of operating field sterility in open versus minimally invasive microdiscectomies of the lumbar spine
title_full Comparison of operating field sterility in open versus minimally invasive microdiscectomies of the lumbar spine
title_fullStr Comparison of operating field sterility in open versus minimally invasive microdiscectomies of the lumbar spine
title_full_unstemmed Comparison of operating field sterility in open versus minimally invasive microdiscectomies of the lumbar spine
title_short Comparison of operating field sterility in open versus minimally invasive microdiscectomies of the lumbar spine
title_sort comparison of operating field sterility in open versus minimally invasive microdiscectomies of the lumbar spine
topic Surgical Neurology International: Spine
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3716002/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23878763
http://dx.doi.org/10.4103/2152-7806.111434
work_keys_str_mv AT licharlesh comparisonofoperatingfieldsterilityinopenversusminimallyinvasivemicrodiscectomiesofthelumbarspine
AT yewandrewy comparisonofoperatingfieldsterilityinopenversusminimallyinvasivemicrodiscectomiesofthelumbarspine
AT kimballjona comparisonofoperatingfieldsterilityinopenversusminimallyinvasivemicrodiscectomiesofthelumbarspine
AT mcbrideduncanq comparisonofoperatingfieldsterilityinopenversusminimallyinvasivemicrodiscectomiesofthelumbarspine
AT wangjeffc comparisonofoperatingfieldsterilityinopenversusminimallyinvasivemicrodiscectomiesofthelumbarspine
AT ludanielc comparisonofoperatingfieldsterilityinopenversusminimallyinvasivemicrodiscectomiesofthelumbarspine