Mener Amanda, Staley Christopher, Boissonneault Adam, Reisman William, Schenker Mara, Hernandez-Irizarry Roberto
Emory University School of Medicine, Atlanta, GA.
Philadelphia College of Osteopathic Medicine, Suwanee, GA.
J Surg Res. 2021 Dec;268:33-39. doi: 10.1016/j.jss.2021.05.048. Epub 2021 Jul 17.
Current standards recommend antibiotic prophylaxis administered after open fracture injury. The purpose of this study was to assess culture results in patients with open fracture-associated infections, hypothesizing that cultures obtained do not vary by Gustilo-Anderson (GA) classification.
We examined cultured bacterial species from patients with open long bone fractures that underwent irrigation and debridement at a Level 1 trauma center (2008-2016), evaluating our current and two hypothetical antibiotic protocols to assess whether they provided appropriate coverage. The antibiotic protocols included protocols 1 (cefazolin, with gentamicin added for type III fractures), 2 (vancomycin and cefepime) and 3 (ceftriaxone).
GA classification was not associated with bacterial gram stain (P = 0.161), nor was it predictive of mono- versus polymicrobial infection (P = 0.094). Of 42 culture-positive infections, 31 were type III and 11 were type I or II fractures. 27% of the infections for type I or II fractures were caused by organisms targeted by protocol 1 (OR 0.18, 95% CI 0.04-0.82; P = 0.027). There was no difference in coverage by fracture type among protocol 2 (P = 0.771) or protocol 3 (P = 0.891). For type III fractures, protocol 2 provided 94% appropriate coverage compared to 68% and 61% coverage by protocols 1 and 3, respectively.
For open fractures complicated by infection, isolated bacterial organisms do not correlate with GA open fracture classification, suggesting that hypothetical protocol 2 should be used for all fracture types. Protocol 2's broad coverage, across all GA fracture types, may prevent infection by organisms not covered by current antibiotic prophylaxis.
当前标准推荐在开放性骨折损伤后进行抗生素预防。本研究的目的是评估开放性骨折相关感染患者的培养结果,假设所获得的培养结果不会因 Gustilo-Anderson(GA)分类而有所不同。
我们检查了在一级创伤中心接受冲洗和清创的开放性长骨骨折患者的培养细菌种类(2008 - 2016 年),评估我们当前的以及两种假设的抗生素方案,以评估它们是否提供了适当的覆盖范围。抗生素方案包括方案 1(头孢唑林,III 型骨折加用庆大霉素)、方案 2(万古霉素和头孢吡肟)和方案 3(头孢曲松)。
GA 分类与细菌革兰氏染色无关(P = 0.161),也不能预测单微生物感染与多微生物感染(P = 0.094)。在 42 例培养阳性感染中,31 例为 III 型骨折,11 例为 I 型或 II 型骨折。I 型或 II 型骨折感染中有 27%是由方案 1 针对的微生物引起的(比值比 0.18,95%可信区间 0.04 - 0.82;P = 0.027)。方案 2(P = 0.771)或方案 3(P = 0.891)在不同骨折类型的覆盖范围上没有差异。对于 III 型骨折,方案二提供了 94%的适当覆盖范围,而方案 1 和方案 3 的覆盖范围分别为 68%和 61%。
对于并发感染的开放性骨折,分离出的细菌种类与 GA 开放性骨折分类无关,这表明应将假设的方案 2 用于所有骨折类型。方案 2 对所有 GA 骨折类型的广泛覆盖范围,可能预防当前抗生素预防措施未覆盖的微生物引起的感染。