4.5 Article

Predictive Value of Swab Cultures for Cryopreserved Flaps During Delayed Cranioplasties

Journal

WORLD NEUROSURGERY
Volume 157, Issue -, Pages E173-E178

Publisher

ELSEVIER SCIENCE INC
DOI: 10.1016/j.wneu.2021.09.111

Keywords

Cranioplasty; Cryopreserved flaps; Surgical site infection; Swab culture

Ask authors/readers for more resources

A retrospective study on patients undergoing delayed cranioplasties with cryopreserved autografts found that swab cultures of cryopreserved skull flaps have high specificity but low sensitivity in predicting surgical site infections, leading to the conclusion that they should not be routinely performed during these surgeries.
■ OBJECTIVE: To assess the predictive value of swab cultures of cryopreserved skull flaps during cranioplasties for surgical site infections (SSIs). ■ METHODS: A retrospective review was conducted of consecutive patients who underwent delayed cranioplasties with cryopreserved autografts between 2009 and 2017. The results of cultures obtained from swabs and infected sur-gical sites were assessed. The accuracy, sensitivity, and specificity of swab cultures for SSIs were evaluated. ■ RESULTS: The study included 422 patients categorized into two groups, swab and nonswab, depending on whether swab cultures were implemented during cranio-plasties. The overall infection rate was 7.58%. No differ-ence was seen in infection rates between groups. There were 18 false-positive and no true-positive swab culture results. All bacteria between swab cultures and SSI cultures were discordant. Meanwhile, there were 19 false-negative swab cultures. The results showed high speci-ficity but low sensitivity for swab cultures to predict SSI occurrence and the pathogens. ■ CONCLUSIONS: Owing to low accuracy and sensitivity, swab cultures of cryopreserved autografts should not be routinely performed during delayed cranioplasties.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.5
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available