Comparison of Lavage Techniques for Preventing Incision Infection Following Posterior Lumbar Interbody Fusion

BACKGROUND: The main purpose of this study was to compare the effects of various lavage techniques – traditional saline lavage (SL), pulse lavage (PL), closed drainage (CD), and iodine lavage (IL) – on preventing incision-related infection after posterior lumbar interbody fusion. MATERIAL/METHODS: Patients with prolapsed lumbar (intervertebral) discs (PLID) undergoing posterior lumbar interbody fusion surgery (PLIF) over the course of 2 years were included and were randomly allocated into 4 groups: the SL group, the PL group, the CD group, and the IL group. Relevant data were recorded, including preoperative conditions, intraoperative lavage time, lavage fluid volume, incision outlook, pain perception, results of routine blood tests, and postoperative infection rate. RESULTS: The PL, CD, and IL groups showed less intraoperative lavage time, lavage volume fluid, effusion, infection rate, and muscle and lower pain perception compared with the SL group (all P<0.05). Significant differences in white blood cell (WBC) count, erythrocyte sedimentation rate (ESR), and C-reactive protein (CRP) were observed between preoperative and postoperative data in each group (P<0.01). No significant differences in clinical characteristics, postoperative temperature, suture removal time, incision characteristics, WBC, ESR, and CRP were observed among the PL, CD, IL, and SL groups (P>0.05). CONCLUSIONS: PL, CD, and IL all showed much better postoperative infection prevention in comparison to SL.