Antibiotic Prophylaxis for Grade 3 Open Fractures: A Retrospective Comparison of Ceftriaxone Plus Vancomycin Versus Cefazolin Plus Gentamicin.

Background: Because of the established path of bacterial entry and contamination-associated mechanisms, grade 3 open orthopedic fractures represent a substantial infection risk. The Eastern Association for the Surgery of Trauma (EAST) guidelines recommended covering Staphylococcus aureus and adding aminoglycoside gram-negative coverage. Local institutional guidelines rely on ceftriaxone for gram negative coverage and add methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus coverage with vancomycin. Patients and Methods: The electronic health records of adults admitted for a grade 3 open fracture between January 1, 2016, and October 31, 2021, were retrospectively reviewed. Patients who received cefazolin and gentamicin (CZ+GM) or ceftriaxone and vancomycin (CRO+VA) as prophylaxis were included. We recorded the rate of a composite treatment failure outcome of receipt of antibiotic agents, infection-related hospitalization, or subsequent debridement for injury-site skin and soft tissue infection or osteomyelitis. The presence of acute kidney injury (AKI) was also evaluated. Results: There were 65 patients included in the CZ+GM group and 53 patients in the CRO+VA group. Patients in the CZ+GM group were younger (mean 42.6 compared with 50.6 years; p = 0.02). Otherwise, there were no significant differences between groups' demographics, mechanism and site of injury, timeline of care, or surgical interventions. More patients in the CZ+GM arm met the composite treatment failure outcome, but it was not statistically significant (45% vs. 32%; p = 0.2). There were similar rates of treatment failure at 30 days (21% vs. 26%; p = 0.5) and for only osteomyelitis (8% vs. 9%; p = 1). Conclusions: The trend in numerically lower treatment failure rates in the CRO+VA group across outcomes provides sufficient evidence to continue the current local recommendations. Given our sample size, type 2 error may have occurred, and studies with greater power should analyze this question.

Administration of andexanet alfa for traumatic intracranial hemorrhage in the setting of massive apixaban overdose: A case report.

PURPOSE: Apixaban is a direct-acting oral anticoagulant that selectively inhibits factor Xa. Reversal strategies utilized to treat factor Xa inhibitor-associated bleeding include andexanet alfa, prothrombin complex -concentrate (PCC), and activated PCC (aPCC). The optimal treatment of traumatic intracranial hemorrhage in the setting of an apixaban overdose is unknown. SUMMARY: This case report describes a 69-year-old female who initially presented to an emergency department at a community hospital due to a ground-level fall with traumatic intracranial hemorrhage. The patient reportedly ingested apixaban 275 mg, carvedilol 250 mg, atorvastatin 1,200 mg, and unknown amounts of amlodipine and ethanol. Anti-inhibitor coagulant complex, an aPCC, was administered approximately 3 hours after presentation. Initial thromboelastography performed approximately 4 hours after presentation showed a prolonged reaction time of 16.8 minutes. Ongoing imaging and evidence of coagulopathy prompted repeated aPCC administration to a cumulative dose of approximately 100 U/kg. The patient underwent craniotomy with hematoma evacuation. Postoperative imaging showed expansion of the existing intracranial hemorrhage and new areas of hemorrhage. Andexanet alfa was administered approximately 18 hours after presentation, followed by repeat craniotomy with evacuation of the hematoma. No further expansion of the intracranial hemorrhage was observed, and the reaction time on thromboelastography was normalized at 6.3 minutes. CONCLUSION: This case suggests that andexanet alfa may have a role in the management of traumatic hemorrhage in the setting of an acute massive apixaban overdose. Use of andexanet alfa, PCC, and aPCC in this context requires further research.