The vancomycin soaking technique: no differences in autograft re-rupture rate. A comparative study.

PURPOSE: The main aim of this study was to evaluate the re-rupture risk after an anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction (ACL-R) using the vancomycin soaking technique and to compare it with the re-rupture risk in patients on whom this technique was not utilized. The secondary purpose was to compare the functional outcomes of those two subsets of patients operated on for ACL-R. The hypotheses are that the vancomycin soaking technique does not affect the re-rupture risk or the functional outcomes. MATERIAL AND METHODS: A retrospective historical cohort study was conducted. Two groups were compared in terms of the re-rupture rate (traumatic or atraumatic) and functional outcomes (International Knee Documentation Committee (IKDC), Tegner, and Lysholm). Group 1 consisted of patients that received pre-operative IV antibiotics. In group 2, the patients received pre-operative IV antibiotics along with a graft that had been presoaked in a vancomycin solution. A minimum follow-up of five years was required. RESULTS: There were 17 patients that suffered a re-rupture in group 1 (4.7%) and 15 in group 2 (3.9%) (n.s.). IKDC was 82.0 in group 1 and 83.9 in group 2 (p = 0.049); Tegner scored 4 in both groups (n.s.) and Lysholm was 90.3 in group 1 and 92.0 in group 2 (p = 0.015). CONCLUSION: The vancomycin soaking technique for ACL autografts is a safe procedure for the daily clinical practice, in terms of re-ruptures. Moreover, it does not impair functional outcomes after an ACL-R.

Vancomycin Soaking Is Highly Cost-Effective in Primary ACLR Infection Prevention: A Cost-Effectiveness Study.

BACKGROUND: Although presoaking grafts in vancomycin has been demonstrated to be effective in observational studies for anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction (ACLR) infection prevention, the economic benefit of the technique is uncertain. PURPOSE: To 1) determine the cost-effectiveness of vancomycin presoaking during primary ACLR to prevent postoperative joint infections and 2) to establish the break-even cost-effectiveness threshold of the technique and determine its cost-effectiveness across various international health care settings. STUDY DESIGN: Economic and decision analysis; Level of evidence, 2. METHODS: A Markov model was used to determine cost-effectiveness and the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of additional vancomycin presoaking compared with intravenous antibiotic prophylaxis alone. A repeated search of the PubMed, SCOPUS, and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials databases, using the same criteria as a recent meta-analysis, was completed. A repeated meta-analysis of 9 cohort studies (level 3 evidence) was completed to determine the odds ratio of infection with vancomycin presoaking compared with intravenous antibiotics alone. Estimated costs of the vancomycin technique, treatment of infection, and further surgery were sourced from local hospitals and literature. Transitional probabilities for further surgery, including revision reconstruction and primary arthroplasty, were obtained from the literature. Probabilistic sensitivity analyses and a 1-way sensitivity analysis were performed to evaluate the ACLR infection rate break-even threshold for which the vancomycin technique would be no longer cost-effective. RESULTS: The vancomycin soaking technique provides expected cost savings of $660 (USA), A$581 (Australia), and €226 (Spain) per patient. There was an improvement in the quality-adjusted life-years of 0.007 compared with intravenous antibiotic prophylaxis alone (4.297 vs 4.290). If the infection rate is below 0.014% with intravenous antibiotics alone, the vancomycin wrap would no longer be cost-effective. CONCLUSION: The vancomycin presoaking technique is a highly cost-effective method to prevent postoperative septic arthritis after primary ACLR.