Does the Application of Topical Vancomycin Reduce Surgical Site Infections in Spine Surgery? A Meta-analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials

医学 随机对照试验 万古霉素 荟萃分析 外科 梅德林 纳入和排除标准 替代医学 内科学 病理 政治学 遗传学 生物 法学 细菌 金黄色葡萄球菌
作者
Mohammad Daher,Joseph E. Nassar,Christopher L. McDonald,Bassel G. Diebo,Alan H. Daniels
出处
期刊:Clinical Orthopaedics and Related Research [Lippincott Williams & Wilkins]
卷期号:482 (12): 2212-2219 被引量:6
标识
DOI:10.1097/corr.0000000000003179
摘要

Surgical site infections (SSIs) represent a major challenge in spine surgery, leading to severe morbidity, mortality, and increased costs. The local application of antibiotics, particularly vancomycin, has emerged as a potential strategy. Individual randomized controlled trials (RCTs) have disagreed about the efficacy of topical vancomycin in preventing SSIs after spine surgery, and so a meta-analysis that pools data from those RCTs might be helpful to inform clinicians' decisions on the topic. This meta-analysis of RCTs asked: Does intrawound topical vancomycin reduce the risk of (1) SSIs, (2) deep SSIs, and (3) superficial SSIs in patients undergoing spine surgery? PubMed, Cochrane, and Google Scholar (pages 1-20) were searched up through March 13, 2024 (search performed on March 13, 2024). Inclusion criteria consisted of English or non-English-language RCTs comparing the implementation of topical vancomycin in spine surgery to its nonuse and assessing its efficacy in preventing SSI, while exclusion criteria consisted of nonrandomized comparative studies, single-arm noncomparative studies, comparative studies based on national databases or from the same center as other included studies, studies posted to preprint servers, studies reporting incomplete/nonrelevant outcomes, and studies adding another SSI preventive measure. The studies were assessed using the Cochrane Risk of Bias tool. Heterogeneity was evaluated by Q tests and I 2 statistics. We used a random-effects model when considerable heterogeneity was observed (all SSIs, deep SSIs); otherwise, a fixed-effects model was used (all SSIs subanalysis, superficial SSIs). Furthermore, the fragility index was calculated for each of the assessed outcomes when there was no difference between the two groups to assess how many patients were needed to experience the outcomes for a difference to become present. The studied outcomes were the risks of SSIs, deep SSIs, and superficial SSIs. Deep SSIs were defined by the included trials as SSIs underneath the fascia, otherwise they were considered superficial. Six RCTs representing a total of 2140 patients were included, with 1053 patients in the vancomycin group and 1087 in the control group. Using an alpha of 0.05, our meta-analysis had 80% power to detect a risk difference of 1.5% for the primary outcome between patients who did and did not receive vancomycin. The age of the patients in the vancomycin group ranged from 37 to 52 years, while the age in the control group ranged from 34 to 52 years. The surgical procedures consisted of both instrumented and noninstrumented spinal procedures. Overall, the risk of bias in the included studies was either low or unclear, with none of the studies having a high risk of bias in any of the assessed categories (selection bias, performance bias, detection bias, attrition bias, and reporting bias). We found no difference in the risk of SSI between the vancomycin and control groups (3.0% [32 of 1053] versus 3.9% [42 of 1087], relative risk 0.74 [95% CI 0.35 to 1.57]; p = 0.43). Ten additional patients (4.8% infection risk) in the control group would need to experience an SSI for a difference to be observed between the two groups. We found no difference in the risk of deep SSI between the vancomycin and control groups (1.8% [15 of 812] versus 2.7% [23 of 860], relative risk 0.69 [95% CI 0.24 to 2.00]; p = 0.50). Seven additional patients (3.5% infection risk) in the control group would need to experience a deep SSI for a difference to be observed between the two groups. We found no difference in the risk of superficial SSI between the vancomycin and control groups (1.0% [6 of 620] versus 1.4% [9 of 662], relative risk 0.68 [95% CI 0.25 to 1.89]; p = 0.46). Seven additional patients (2.4% infection risk) in the control group would need to experience a superficial SSI for a difference to be observed between the two groups. This meta-analysis of randomized trials examining use of topical vancomycin in spine surgery failed to show efficacy in reducing infection, and thus we do not recommend routine use of topical vancomycin for this indication. Future large-scale trials would be needed if surgeons believe that between-group differences smaller than those for which we were powered here (this meta-analysis had 80% power to detect a between-group difference of 1.5% in infection risk) are clinically important, and large database surveys may be informative in terms of assessing for postoperative adverse events associated with the use of vancomycin powder. Level I, therapeutic study.
最长约 10秒,即可获得该文献文件

科研通智能强力驱动
Strongly Powered by AbleSci AI
更新
PDF的下载单位、IP信息已删除 (2025-6-4)

科研通是完全免费的文献互助平台,具备全网最快的应助速度,最高的求助完成率。 对每一个文献求助,科研通都将尽心尽力,给求助人一个满意的交代。
实时播报
李爱国应助科研通管家采纳,获得10
2秒前
科研通AI2S应助科研通管家采纳,获得10
2秒前
搜集达人应助科研通管家采纳,获得10
2秒前
打地鼠工人完成签到,获得积分10
3秒前
彩色半烟完成签到,获得积分10
5秒前
量子星尘发布了新的文献求助10
9秒前
Ning完成签到,获得积分10
12秒前
图图完成签到,获得积分10
12秒前
勤奋的灯完成签到 ,获得积分10
12秒前
ludong_0完成签到,获得积分10
12秒前
Asumita完成签到,获得积分10
13秒前
双青豆完成签到 ,获得积分10
13秒前
15秒前
fxy完成签到 ,获得积分10
16秒前
合适的幻然完成签到,获得积分10
16秒前
沐雨汐完成签到,获得积分10
18秒前
20秒前
21秒前
jiayoujijin完成签到 ,获得积分10
21秒前
淡然思卉完成签到,获得积分10
22秒前
争当科研巨匠完成签到,获得积分10
22秒前
英姑应助认真的刺猬采纳,获得10
29秒前
好大一只小坏蛋完成签到,获得积分20
29秒前
站走跑完成签到 ,获得积分10
32秒前
步步高完成签到,获得积分10
34秒前
无私的雪瑶完成签到 ,获得积分10
34秒前
小杨完成签到,获得积分20
35秒前
小花完成签到 ,获得积分10
40秒前
宁夕完成签到 ,获得积分10
44秒前
西宁完成签到,获得积分10
44秒前
拼搏的羊青完成签到 ,获得积分10
45秒前
科目三应助asd113采纳,获得10
45秒前
deng203完成签到 ,获得积分20
47秒前
48秒前
时米米米完成签到,获得积分10
48秒前
浅浅完成签到,获得积分10
52秒前
量子星尘发布了新的文献求助10
57秒前
帅气的藏鸟完成签到,获得积分10
1分钟前
加油完成签到 ,获得积分10
1分钟前
健康的宛菡完成签到 ,获得积分10
1分钟前
高分求助中
【提示信息,请勿应助】关于scihub 10000
Les Mantodea de Guyane: Insecta, Polyneoptera [The Mantids of French Guiana] 3000
徐淮辽南地区新元古代叠层石及生物地层 3000
The Mother of All Tableaux: Order, Equivalence, and Geometry in the Large-scale Structure of Optimality Theory 3000
Handbook of Industrial Diamonds.Vol2 1100
Global Eyelash Assessment scale (GEA) 1000
Picture Books with Same-sex Parented Families: Unintentional Censorship 550
热门求助领域 (近24小时)
化学 材料科学 医学 生物 工程类 有机化学 生物化学 物理 内科学 纳米技术 计算机科学 化学工程 复合材料 遗传学 基因 物理化学 催化作用 冶金 细胞生物学 免疫学
热门帖子
关注 科研通微信公众号,转发送积分 4038066
求助须知:如何正确求助?哪些是违规求助? 3575779
关于积分的说明 11373801
捐赠科研通 3305584
什么是DOI,文献DOI怎么找? 1819239
邀请新用户注册赠送积分活动 892655
科研通“疑难数据库(出版商)”最低求助积分说明 815022