Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 2 de 2
Filter
Add more filters










Database
Language
Publication year range
1.
Spine Deform ; 11(4): 815-823, 2023 07.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-36920741

ABSTRACT

PURPOSE: To evaluate the effectiveness of vancomycin prophylaxis on spinal implant metal types. METHODS: 42 rabbits underwent posterior, single-level instrumentation at L5-L6 with stainless steel (n = 18), cobalt chrome (n = 12), or titanium (n = 12) wire. All implants were inoculated with 1 × 106 colony forming units (CFU) of methicillin-resistant S. Aureus (MRSA). In the intrawound vancomycin subgroup (n = 18, 6 from each metal type), 40 mg of vancomycin powder was placed in the wound. In the IV vancomycin subgroup (n = 6, all stainless steel), 15 mg/kg of IV vancomycin was given preoperatively. Local soft tissue and implants were harvested 1-week postoperatively and separately cultured. RESULTS: Intrawound vancomycin significantly reduced the rate of soft tissue infection (44.4% vs 100%) and implant infection (27.8% vs 100%) (p < 0.001). Within the intrawound vancomycin subgroup, cobalt chrome implants were associated with higher median soft tissue MRSA growth (130 CFU) than stainless steel (0 CFU) or titanium (0 CFU) (p = 0.02). Cobalt chrome implants were also more likely to develop soft tissue MRSA infection (83.3%) as compared to stainless steel (16.7%) or titanium (33.3%) (p = 0.04). Median soft tissue MRSA growth among stainless steel implants without prophylaxis, with IV vancomycin, and with vancomycin powder was 1.18 × 107, 195, and 0 CFU, respectively. The rate of soft tissue MRSA infection without prophylaxis, with IV vancomycin, and with vancomycin powder was 100, 66.7, and 16.7%, respectively (p = 0.015). CONCLUSION: Intrawound vancomycin is more effective than IV vancomycin and effectively reduces the risk of infection, but is less effective in cobalt chrome implants due to residual soft tissue infection.


Subject(s)
Methicillin-Resistant Staphylococcus aureus , Prosthesis-Related Infections , Soft Tissue Infections , Spinal Diseases , Animals , Rabbits , Vancomycin/therapeutic use , Anti-Bacterial Agents/therapeutic use , Titanium , Soft Tissue Infections/drug therapy , Powders/therapeutic use , Stainless Steel , Cobalt/therapeutic use
2.
Asian Spine J ; 15(2): 244-251, 2021 Apr.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-32703925

ABSTRACT

STUDY DESIGN: Prospective randomized controlled equivalence trial. PURPOSE: To compare the clinical outcomes between patients with lumbosacral radiculopathy that received caudal epidural steroid injection (CESI) at injection rates of 40 mL/min (fast rate) and 20 mL/min (slow rate) and to identify the complications associated with these different CESI rates. OVERVIEW OF LITERATURE: CESI is widely used for chronic low back pain with lumbar radiculopathy. However, the influence of CESI rates on clinical outcomes has not been well studied. METHODS: Ninety patients were randomized into two CESI groups. Two patients did not complete the study. Eighty-eight were included in the final analysis: 44 patients were in the fast infusion group, and 44 patients were in the slow infusion group. Intragroup and intergroup comparisons were conducted with regard to the Visual Analog Scale (VAS), Roland 5-point pain scale, standing tolerance test, walking tolerance test, and patient satisfaction scale at pre-injection, 2 weeks, 6 weeks, and 12 weeks post-injection. Complications associated with the different rates were recorded. RESULTS: Both groups demonstrated clinical improvement in all parameters, except for VAS, after injection. There were no statistically significant differences in any outcomes at each time point between the two groups. One patient in the fast rate group and no patients in the slow rate group experienced nausea and vomiting after injection (p =0.320). Eight patents in the fast rate group and two patients in the slow rate group experienced pain at the injection site (p =0.044). CONCLUSIONS: Although there were no significant differences between injection rates in the short-term clinical improvement outcomes, the fast injection rate group experienced more pain at the injection site, suggesting that the use of the slow injection rate may be considered.

SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL
...