Prospective Multicenter Surveillance Study of Surgical Site Infection after Spinal Surgery in Korea : A Preliminary Study

Uncovering the Benefits of Povidone Iodine Compared to Other Therapeutic Agents in Wound Infection Prevention and Healing Outcomes: A Scoping Review

Background

The selection of an appropriate chemical solution in wound care reduces the severity of wounds and accelerates the healing process. Povidone-iodine (PV-I), a chemical solution popularly known as an antiseptic, is frequently used in studies of wound care to prevent wound infection and accelerate woud the process of wound healing.

Objective

To identify the latest evidence on the benefits of PV-I in wound infection prevention and healing in all areas.

Methods

This review is a scoping review by Arskey and O'Malley and the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses Extension for Scoping Reviews (PRISMA-ScR) is used for reporting. The literature search used databases including PubMed, CINAHL, and search engines such as Scopus. This study was conducted using thematic analysis.

Results

This review yielded 19 out of 2109 studies that were identified in the initial search. Four outcomes comprised 20 sub-outcomes have been identified. Although strong evidence is lacking, PV-I in the form of foam is effective in improving wound healing, shortening healing time, and producing fewer adverse events than hydrocelluers. Moreover, saline and PV-I are effective as skin disinfectants when compared to saline alone in reducing surgical site infection (SSI), and they are also more effective than hypochlorous acid in improving wound healing. Nevertheless, there was no difference between PV-I and hypochlorous acid in the prevention of SSI and bacterial growth. In terms of healing time, silver foam and hyaluronic acid were more favorable than PV-I. Moreover, the use of chlorhexidine to improve SSI and silver dressing to improve hospital stay is more favorable than that of PV-I.

Conclusion

There is limited evidence regarding the effectiveness of wound care outcomes, and the efficacy of PV-I as a surface disinfectant for wound infection prevention remains controversial. Consequently, PV-I is not highly recommended for wound care, and further investigation into the effectiveness of PV-I as a surface disinfectant is required for various types of surgeries.

Effectiveness of chlorhexidine versus povidone-iodine for preventing surgical site wound infection: A meta-analysis

A systematic evaluation was conducted to assess the efficacy of two disinfectants, chlorhexidine and povidone-iodine, as primary components in preventing surgical site infection (SSI). A comprehensive computerised search was performed in the PubMed, EMBASE, Web of Science, Cochrane Library, CNKI and Wanfang databases for randomised controlled trials (RCTs) on chlorhexidine and povidone-iodine disinfection for the prevention of SSI from inception until July 2023. Two independent researchers completed literature screening, data extraction and quality assessment of the included studies. The meta-analysis was conducted using RevMan 5.4 software. Ultimately, 20 RCTs were included, which included 13 133 patients, with 6460 patients in the chlorhexidine group and 6673 patients in the povidone-iodine group. The meta-analysis results revealed that the incidence rate of surgical site wound infections [odds ratio (OR): 0.67, 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.58-0.78, p < 0.001)], superficial SSI rate (OR: 0.59, 95% CI: 0.46-0.75, p < 0.001) and deep SSI rate (OR: 0.49, 95% CI: 0.31-0.79, p = 0.003) were all lower in patients subjected to chlorhexidine disinfection compared to those patients receiving povidone-iodine disinfection. Existing evidence suggests that chlorhexidine is more effective than povidone-iodine at preventing SSI. However, owing to the potential quality limitations of the included studies, further validation through high-quality large-scale RCTs is warranted.

Deep surgical site infection after posterior instrumented fusion for rheumatoid upper cervical subluxation treated with antibiotic-loaded bone cement: Three case reports

INTRODUCTION

Patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) tend to be immunosuppressed due to RA itself and the therapeutic drugs administered. The management of surgical site infection (SSI) following upper cervical spinal instrumented fusion in RA patients is challenging; however, literature on the treatment for such conditions is scarce. We report 3 consecutive patients with RA, who developed deep SSI following upper cervical posterior fusion and were treated using antibiotic-loaded bone cement (ALBC).

PATIENT CONCERNS

All 3 patients reported in the current study experienced compression myelopathy with upper cervical spinal deformity and received prednisolone and methotrexate for controlling RA preoperatively. The patient in Case 1 underwent C1-2 posterior fusion and developed deep SSI due to methicillin-sensitive Staphylococcus aureus at 3 months postoperatively; the patient in Case 2 underwent occipito-C2 posterior fusion and developed deep SSI due to methicillin-sensitive Staphylococcus aureus at 2 weeks postoperatively; and the patient in Case 3 underwent occipito-C2 posterior instrumented fusion and laminoplasty at C3-7, and developed deep SSI due to methicillin-resistant coagulase negative staphylococci at 3 weeks postoperatively.

DIAGNOSIS

All patients developed deep staphylococcal SSI in the postoperative period.

INTERVENTIONS

All 3 patients were treated using ALBC placed on and around the instrumentation to cover them and occupy the dead space after radical open debridement.

OUTCOMES

The deep infection was resolved uneventfully after the single surgical intervention retaining spinal instrumentation. Good clinical outcomes of the initial surgery were maintained until the final follow-up without recurrence of SSI in all 3 cases.

CONCLUSION

ALBC embedding spinal instrumentation procedure can be a viable treatment for curing SSI in complex cases, such as patients with RA who undergo high cervical fusion surgeries without implant removal.