Cargando…
Treatment of Surgical Site Infection in Posterior Lumbar Interbody Fusion
STUDY DESIGN: A retrospective observational and case control study. PURPOSE: To identify appropriate treatment options according to the types of surgical site infections (SSI) in instrumented posterior lumbar interbody fusion (PLIF). OVERVIEW OF LITERATURE: There has been no agreement or consensus w...
Autores principales: | , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Korean Society of Spine Surgery
2015
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4686387/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26713114 http://dx.doi.org/10.4184/asj.2015.9.6.841 |
_version_ | 1782406431276793856 |
---|---|
author | Lee, Jung Su Ahn, Dong Ki Chang, Byung Kwon Lee, Jae Il |
author_facet | Lee, Jung Su Ahn, Dong Ki Chang, Byung Kwon Lee, Jae Il |
author_sort | Lee, Jung Su |
collection | PubMed |
description | STUDY DESIGN: A retrospective observational and case control study. PURPOSE: To identify appropriate treatment options according to the types of surgical site infections (SSI) in instrumented posterior lumbar interbody fusion (PLIF). OVERVIEW OF LITERATURE: There has been no agreement or consensus with regard to this matter. METHODS: Thirty-two consecutive SSIs were included and followed for more than one year. The elapsed time to diagnosis (ETD) according to the type of SSI was analyzed. The treatment options for each type and consequent clinical results were reviewed. The risk factors of removing the implants were analyzed. RESULTS: There were 6/32 (19%) superficial incisional, 6/32 (19%) deep incisional, and 20/32 (62%) organ/space infection cases (SII, DII, and O/SI, respectively) (p=0.002). ETD was 8.5±2.3 days in SII, 8.7±2.3 days in DII, and 164.5±131.1 days in O/SI (p=0.013). All cases of SII and DII retained implants and were treated by repeated irrigation and secondary closure. Among O/SIs, 10/20 were treated conservatively. Nine out of ten underwent posterior one stage simultaneous revision (POSSR) and in one case, the cage was removed anteriorly. Those who had ETDs longer than 3 months showed a significant risk of implant removal (p=0.008, odds ratio [OR]=40.3). The Oswestry disability index (ODI) improved from 47.3% to 33.8% in SII, from 55.0% to 32.3% in DII, and from 53.4% to 42.1% in O/SI (p=0.002). There was no difference among the three groups (p=0.106); however, there was a partial correlation between ETD and final ODI (r=0.382, p=0.034). CONCLUSIONS: Latent O/SI was the most common type of SSI in PLIF. In cases of SII and DII, early aggressive wound management and secondary closure was effective and implant removal was not necessary. In some cases of O/SI, implant removal was unavoidable. However, implant removal could be averted by an earlier diagnosis. POSSR was feasible and safe. Functional outcomes were improved; however, disability increased as ETD increased. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-4686387 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2015 |
publisher | Korean Society of Spine Surgery |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-46863872015-12-28 Treatment of Surgical Site Infection in Posterior Lumbar Interbody Fusion Lee, Jung Su Ahn, Dong Ki Chang, Byung Kwon Lee, Jae Il Asian Spine J Clinical Study STUDY DESIGN: A retrospective observational and case control study. PURPOSE: To identify appropriate treatment options according to the types of surgical site infections (SSI) in instrumented posterior lumbar interbody fusion (PLIF). OVERVIEW OF LITERATURE: There has been no agreement or consensus with regard to this matter. METHODS: Thirty-two consecutive SSIs were included and followed for more than one year. The elapsed time to diagnosis (ETD) according to the type of SSI was analyzed. The treatment options for each type and consequent clinical results were reviewed. The risk factors of removing the implants were analyzed. RESULTS: There were 6/32 (19%) superficial incisional, 6/32 (19%) deep incisional, and 20/32 (62%) organ/space infection cases (SII, DII, and O/SI, respectively) (p=0.002). ETD was 8.5±2.3 days in SII, 8.7±2.3 days in DII, and 164.5±131.1 days in O/SI (p=0.013). All cases of SII and DII retained implants and were treated by repeated irrigation and secondary closure. Among O/SIs, 10/20 were treated conservatively. Nine out of ten underwent posterior one stage simultaneous revision (POSSR) and in one case, the cage was removed anteriorly. Those who had ETDs longer than 3 months showed a significant risk of implant removal (p=0.008, odds ratio [OR]=40.3). The Oswestry disability index (ODI) improved from 47.3% to 33.8% in SII, from 55.0% to 32.3% in DII, and from 53.4% to 42.1% in O/SI (p=0.002). There was no difference among the three groups (p=0.106); however, there was a partial correlation between ETD and final ODI (r=0.382, p=0.034). CONCLUSIONS: Latent O/SI was the most common type of SSI in PLIF. In cases of SII and DII, early aggressive wound management and secondary closure was effective and implant removal was not necessary. In some cases of O/SI, implant removal was unavoidable. However, implant removal could be averted by an earlier diagnosis. POSSR was feasible and safe. Functional outcomes were improved; however, disability increased as ETD increased. Korean Society of Spine Surgery 2015-12 2015-12-08 /pmc/articles/PMC4686387/ /pubmed/26713114 http://dx.doi.org/10.4184/asj.2015.9.6.841 Text en Copyright © 2015 by Korean Society of Spine Surgery http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/3.0/ This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Non-Commercial License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/3.0/) which permits unrestricted non-commercial use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. |
spellingShingle | Clinical Study Lee, Jung Su Ahn, Dong Ki Chang, Byung Kwon Lee, Jae Il Treatment of Surgical Site Infection in Posterior Lumbar Interbody Fusion |
title | Treatment of Surgical Site Infection in Posterior Lumbar Interbody Fusion |
title_full | Treatment of Surgical Site Infection in Posterior Lumbar Interbody Fusion |
title_fullStr | Treatment of Surgical Site Infection in Posterior Lumbar Interbody Fusion |
title_full_unstemmed | Treatment of Surgical Site Infection in Posterior Lumbar Interbody Fusion |
title_short | Treatment of Surgical Site Infection in Posterior Lumbar Interbody Fusion |
title_sort | treatment of surgical site infection in posterior lumbar interbody fusion |
topic | Clinical Study |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4686387/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26713114 http://dx.doi.org/10.4184/asj.2015.9.6.841 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT leejungsu treatmentofsurgicalsiteinfectioninposteriorlumbarinterbodyfusion AT ahndongki treatmentofsurgicalsiteinfectioninposteriorlumbarinterbodyfusion AT changbyungkwon treatmentofsurgicalsiteinfectioninposteriorlumbarinterbodyfusion AT leejaeil treatmentofsurgicalsiteinfectioninposteriorlumbarinterbodyfusion |