3.8 Article

Do Preoperative Nasal Antiseptic Swabs Reduce the Rate of Surgical Site Infections After Adult Thoracolumbar Spine Surgery?

出版社

LIPPINCOTT WILLIAMS & WILKINS
DOI: 10.5435/JAAOSGlobal-D-21-00206

关键词

-

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The study investigated the impact of adding preoperative nasal decontamination on the rate of surgical site infections (SSI) in adult thoracolumbar spinal surgeries. The results showed that routine nasal antiseptic swab did not significantly affect the overall rate of SSI in these surgeries.
Introduction: Surgical site infection (SSI) remains a major complication after adult spinal surgery. We investigated whether adding preoperative nasal decontamination by antiseptic swab (skin and nasal antiseptic povidone-iodine, SNA-PI) to our antimicrobial protocol reduces the SSI rate among our patients undergoing thoracolumbar spinal surgery. Methods: We retrospectively reviewed all adult thoracolumbar spinal surgeries performed between June 2015 and May 2017 at a single hospital. Patients were divided into those who received nasal decontamination (SNA-PI+) and those who did not (SNA-PI-). SSI rates and responsible pathogens were compared between the cohorts. Results: A total of 1,555 surgeries with nasal decontamination (SNA-PI+) and 1,423 surgeries without (SNA-PI-) were included. The SSI rate in the SNA-PI+ group was 13 of 1,555 (0.8%) versus 10 of 1,423 (0.7%) for SNA-PI- group (P = 0.68). The infection rate was the highest among posterior instrumented fusions in the SNA-PI+ group (1.4%). Methicillin-sensitive Staphylococcus aureus was responsible for 70% of infections in the SNA-PI- group and 38% in the SNA-PI+ group (P = 0.13). Conclusions: Routine nasal antiseptic swab before spine surgery did not affect the overall rate of SSI in thoracolumbar spinal surgeries. The incidence of methicillin-sensitive S aureus was lower in patients who received nasal decontamination (5/1,555, 0.3%) compared with those who did not (7/1,423, 0.5%); however, this result was not statistically significant (P = 0.57).

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

3.8
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据