Timing of Preoperative Surgical Antibiotic Prophylaxis After Primary One-Level to Three-Level Lumbar Fusion

Antibiotic use in spine surgery: A narrative review based in principles of antibiotic stewardship

Background

A growing emphasis on antibiotic stewardship has led to extensive literature regarding antibiotic use in spine surgery for surgical prophylaxis and the treatment of spinal infections.

Purpose

This article aims to review principles of antibiotic stewardship, evidence-based guidelines for surgical prophylaxis and ways to optimize antibiotics use in the treatment of spinal infections.

Methods

A narrative review of several society guidelines and spine surgery literature was conducted.

Results

Antibiotic stewardship in spine surgery requires multidisciplinary investment and consistent evaluation of antibiotic use for drug selection, dose, duration, drug-route, and de-escalation. Developing effective surgical prophylaxis regimens is a key strategy in reducing the burden of antibiotic resistance. For treatment of primary spinal infection, the diagnostic work-up is vital in tailoring effective antibiotic therapy. The future of antibiotics in spine surgery will be highly influenced by improving surgical technique and evidence regarding the role of bacteria in the pathogenesis of degenerative spinal pathology.

Conclusions

Incorporating evidence-based guidelines into regular practice will serve to limit the development of resistance while preventing morbidity from spinal infection. Further research should be conducted to provide more evidence for surgical site infection prevention and treatment of spinal infections.

Relationship Between Types of Warming Devices and Surgical Site Infection in Patients Who Underwent Posterior Fusion Surgery Based on National Data

OBJECTIVE

Perioperative hypothermia can lead to various complications. Although various warming techniques have been used to prevent perioperative hypothermia, the effect of these techniques on surgical site infection (SSI) during posterior fusion surgery is unclear. The effects of warming devices on SSI rates were therefore analyzed using data complied by the Health Insurance and Review Assessment (HIRA) Service in Korea.

METHODS

This study included 5,406 patients in the HIRA Service database who underwent posterior fusion surgery during the years 2014, 2015, and 2017. Factors related to SSI in these patients, including warming devices, antibiotics, and transfusion, were analyzed.

RESULTS

The incidence of SSI was higher in patients who underwent forced air warming than in those who did not undergo active warming (odds ratio [OR], 1.73; p = 0.039), especially above 70 years old (OR, 4.11; p = 0.014). By contrast, the incidence of SSI was not significantly higher in patients who underwent device using conduction. Infection rates were higher in patients who received prophylactic antibiotics within 20 minutes before incision, than within 21 to 60 minutes (OR, 2.07; p = 0.001) and who received more blood transfusions (1 pint < volume ≤ 2 pint; OR, 1.75; p = 0.008, > 2 pint; OR, 2.73; p = 0.004).

CONCLUSION

SSI rates were higher in patients who underwent warming with forced air devices than with devices using conduction, as well as being higher in patients who older age, received blood transfusions and administered antibiotics within 20 minutes before incision. Devices using conduction have more advantages in preventing SSI than forced air warming device. In addition, the reduction of other risk factors for SSI may improve postoperative results.

Preoperative epidural steroid injections do not increase the risk of postoperative infection in patients undergoing lumbar decompression or fusion: a systematic review and meta-analysis

PURPOSE

Epidural corticosteroid injections (ESI) are a mainstay of nonoperative treatment for patients with lumbar spine pathology. Recent literature evaluating infection risk following ESI after elective orthopedic surgery has produced conflicting evidence. Our primary objective was to review the literature and provide a larger meta-analysis analyzing the temporal effects of steroid injections on the risk of infection following lumbar spine surgery.

METHODS

We conducted a query of the PubMed, Embase, and Scopus databases from inception until April 1, 2022 for studies evaluating the risk of infection in the setting of prior spinal steroid injections in patients undergoing lumbar spine decompression or fusion. Three meta-analyses were conducted, (1) comparing ESI within 30-days of surgery to control, (2) comparing ESI within 30-days to ESI between 1 and 3 months preoperatively, and (3) comparing any history of ESI prior to surgery to control. Tests of proportions were utilized for all comparisons between groups. Study heterogeneity was assessed via forest plots, and publication bias was assessed quantiatively via funnel plots and qualitatively with the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale.

RESULTS

Nine total studies were included, five of which demonstrated an association between ESI and postoperative infection, while four found no association. Comparison of weighted means demonstrated no significant difference in infection rates between the 30-days ESI group and control group (2.67% vs. 1.69%, p = 0.144), 30-days ESI group and the > 30-days ESI group (2.34% vs. 1.66%, p = 0.1655), or total ESI group and the control group (1.99% vs. 1.70%, p = 0.544). Heterogeneity was low for all comparisons following sensitivity analyses.

CONCLUSION

Current evidence does not implicate preoperative ESI in postoperative infection rates following lumbar fusion or decompression. Operative treatment should not be delayed due to preoperative steroid injections based on current evidence. There remains a paucity of high-quality data in the literature evaluating the impact of preoperative ESI on postoperative infection rates.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

II.