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.

The Effect of Topical Antibiotic Powder Application in the Emergency Department on Deep Fracture-Related Infection in Type III Open Lower Extremity Fractures.

OBJECTIVE: Despite advances in management, open fractures are at an elevated risk for deep fracture-related infection (FRI). Time to systemic antibiotic (ABX) administration and intraoperative topical administration of ABX powder have been used to decrease FRI risk. The purpose of this study was to determine whether topical application of antibiotic powder to type III open lower extremity fractures immediately on presentation to the emergency department (ED) reduces the rate of FRI. DESIGN: Prospective cohort compared with retrospective historical control. SETTING: Level I trauma center. INTERVENTION: Application of 1 g of vancomycin and 1.2 g of tobramycin powder directly to open fracture wounds on presentation to the ED. PATIENT SELECTION CRITERIA: Patients with type III open lower extremity fractures treated from July 1, 2019, to September 17, 2022, who received topical ABX powder in the ED were compared with patients from a 4-year historical cohort from July 1, 2015, to June 30, 2019, who were treated without topical ABX powder. OUTCOME MEASURES AND COMPARISONS: Development of a FRI within 6 months of follow-up. Patient demographics, injury characteristics, and postoperative data were analyzed as risk factors for FRI. RESULTS: Sixty-six patients received topical ABX powder in the ED and were compared with 129 patients who were treated without topical ABX powder. The rate of FRI in the trial group was 6/66 (9.09%) versus 22/129 (17.05%) in the control cohort ( P = 0.133). Multivariate analysis demonstrated higher body mass index as a risk factor for development of FRI ( P = 0.036). CONCLUSION: No statistically significant difference in rates of FRI in open lower extremity fractures treated with immediate topical ABX administration in the ED versus standard-of-care treatment without topical ABX was found. These findings may have been limited by insufficient power. Further large-scale study is warranted to determine the significance of topical antibiotic powder application in the ED. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Therapeutic Level III. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

Local Antibiotic Therapy for Open Long Bone Fractures: Appropriate Prophylaxis or Unnecessary Exposure for the Orthopedic Trauma Patient?

INTRODUCTION: Prophylactic local antibiotic therapy (LAbT) to prevent infection in open long bone fracture (OLBF) patients has been in use for many decades despite lack of definitive evidence confirming a beneficial effect. We aimed to evaluate the effect of LAbT on outcomes of OLBF patients on a nationwide scale. MATERIALS AND METHODS: In this retrospective analysis of 2017-2018 American College of Surgeons-Trauma Quality Improvement Program database, all adult (≥18 years) patients with isolated OLBF (non-extremity-Abbreviated Injury Scale < 3) were included. We excluded early deaths (<24 h) and those who had burns or non-extremity surgery. Outcomes were infectious complications (superficial surgical site infection, deep superficial surgical site infection, osteomyelitis, or sepsis), unplanned return to operating room, and hospital and intensive care unit length of stay (LOS). Patients were stratified into two groups: those who received LAbT and those who did not receive LAbT (No-LAbT). Propensity score matching (1:3) and chi-square tests were performed. RESULTS: A total of 61,337 isolated OLBF patients were identified, among whom 2,304 patients were matched (LAbT: 576; No-LAbT: 1,728). Both groups were similar in terms of baseline characteristics. Mean age was 43 ± 17 years, 75% were male, 14% had penetrating injuries, and the median extremity-Abbreviated Injury Scale was 1 (1-2). Most common fracture locations were tibia (66%), fibula (49%), femur (24%), and ulna (11%). About 52% of patients underwent external fixation, 79% underwent internal fixation, and 86% underwent surgical debridement. The median time to LAbT was 17 (5-72) h, and the median time to debridement was 7 (3-15) h (85% within 24 h). The LAbT group had similar rates of infectious complications (3.5% vs. 2.5%, P = 0.24) and unplanned return to the operating room (2.3% vs. 2.0%, P = 0.74) compared to the No-LAbT group. Patients who received LAbT had longer hospital LOS (16 [10-29] vs. 14 [9-24] days, P < 0.001) but similar intensive care unit LOS (4 [3-9] vs. 4 [2-7] days, P = 0.19). CONCLUSIONS: Our findings indicate that prophylactic LAbT for OLBF may not be beneficial over well-established standards of care such as early surgical debridement and systemic antibiotics. Prospective studies evaluating the efficacy, risks, costs, and indications of adjuvant LAbT for OLBF are warranted.

Use of single agent Cefotetan for Gustilo-Anderson type III open fracture prophylaxis.

INTRODUCTION: The prophylactic intravenous antibiotic regimen for Gustilo-Anderson Type III open fractures traditionally consists of cefazolin with an aminoglycoside plus penicillin for gross contamination. Cefotetan, a second-generation cephalosporin, offers a wide spectrum of activity against both aerobes and anaerobes as well as against Gram-positive and Gram-negative bacteria. Cefotetan has not been previously established within orthopedic surgery as a prophylactic intravenous agent. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Cefotetan monotherapeutic prophylaxis versus any other antibiotic regimen (standard/literature-supported and otherwise) was studied for patient encounters between September 2010 and December 2019 within a single Level 1 regional trauma center. Patient comorbidities, preoperative fracture characteristics, and in-hospital/operative metrics (including length of stay [LOS], number of antibiotic doses, and antibiotic costs [US$]) were included for analysis. Postoperative outcomes up to 1 year included rates of surgical site infection (SSI), deep infection necessitating return to the operating room (OR), non-union, prescribed outpatient antibiotics, hospital readmissions, and related returns to the emergency department (ED). Sensitivity analyses were also conducted to include standard/literature-supported antibiotic regimens as a nested random factor within the non-cefotetan cohort. RESULTS: The nested variable accounting for standard/literature-supported antibiotic regimens had no significant effect in any model for any outcome (for each, P ≥ 0.302). Thus, 1-year data for 138 Type III open fractures were included, accounting for only the binary effect of cefotetan (n = 42) versus non-cefotetan cohorts. The cohorts did not differ significantly at baseline. The cefotetan cohort received fewer in-house dose/day antibiotics (P < 0.001), was less likely to receive outpatient antibiotics in the following year (P = 0.023), had decreased return to the OR (35.7% versus 54.2%, P = 0.045), and demonstrated non-union rates of 16.7% versus 28.1% (P = 0.151). When adjusted for length of stay (LOS), the dose/day total costs for antibiotics were $8.71/day more expensive for the cefotetan cohort (P = 0.002). Type III open fractures incurred overall rates of SSI reaching 16.7% in the cefotetan cohort and 14.7% for non-cefotetan (P = 0.773). Deep infections necessitating return to the OR were 9.5% and 11.6%, respectively (P = 0.719). CONCLUSION: Cefotetan alone may provide superior antibiotic stewardship with similar infectious sequalae compared to more traditional antibiotic prophylaxis regimens for Gustilo-Anderson Type III open long bone fractures. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level III Retrospective Cohort Study.

Prophylactic Intrawound Antibiotics Significantly Reduce the Risk of Deep Infections in Fracture Fixation: Subgroup Meta-analyses of the Type of Fracture, Antibiotics, and Organism.

OBJECTIVES: To analyze the efficacy of subgroups of various intrawound local antibiotics in reducing the rate of fracture-related infections. DATA SOURCES AND STUDY SELECTION: PubMed, MEDLINE via Ovid, Web of Science, Cochrane database, and Science Direct were searched for articles in English on July 5, 2022, and December 15, 2022. STUDY SELECTION: All clinical studies comparing the incidence of fracture-related infection between the administration of prophylactic systemic and topical antibiotics in fracture repair were analyzed. DATA EXTRACTION: Cochrane collaboration's assessment tool and the methodological bias and the methodological index for nonrandomized studies were used to detect bias and evaluate the quality of included studies, respectively. DATA SYNTHESIS: RevMan 5.3 software (Nordic Cochrane Centre, Denmark) was used to conduct the meta-analyses and generate forest plots. CONCLUSIONS: From 1990 to 2021, 13 studies included 5309 patients. Nonstratified meta-analysis showed that intrawound administration of antibiotics significantly decreased the overall incidence of infection in both open and closed fractures, regardless of the severity of open fracture and antibiotics class [OR = 0.58, ( P = 0.007)] [OR = 0.33, ( P < 0.00001)], respectively. The stratified analysis revealed that prophylactic intrawound antibiotics significantly lowered infection rate in open fracture patients with Gustilo-Anderson type I (OR = 0.13, P = 0.004), type II (OR = 0.29, P = 0.0002), type III (OR = 0.21, P < 0.00001), when either tobramycin PMMA beads (OR = 0.29, P < 0.00001) or vancomycin powder (OR = 0.51, P = 0.03) was applied. This study demonstrates prophylactic administration of intrawound antibiotics significantly decreases the overall incidence of infection in all subgroups of surgically fixated fractures but does not affect the patient's length of hospital stay. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Therapeutic Level II. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

State of the Union: Timeliness to Antibiotics in Open Fractures.

OBJECTIVE: In open fractures, early administration of systemic antibiotics has recently been recognized as a universal recommendation, with the current American College of Surgeons Trauma Center Verification recommendation for administration within 1 hour of facility arrival. We sought to quantify the baseline rate of timely antibiotic administration and the various factors associated with delay. METHODS: Data from the National Trauma Data Bank were obtained for all patients treated for open fractures in 2019. 65,552 patients were included. Univariate and multivariate analyses were performed, first for patient, prehospital, and hospital factors compared with rate of antibiotic administration within 1 hour of hospital arrival, then with a multivariate analysis of factors affecting these times. RESULTS: The overall rate of antibiotic administration within 1 hour of arrival was 47.6%. Patient factors associated with lower rates of timely antibiotics include increased age, Medicare status, and a higher number of comorbidities. Associated prehospital factors included non-work-related injuries, fixed-wing air or police transport, and walk-in arrival method. Patients with lower extremity open fractures were more likely to receive antibiotics within 1 hour of arrival than those with upper extremity open fractures. Traumatic amputations had a higher rate of timely administration (67.3%). ACS trauma Level II (52.5%) centers performed better than Level III (48.3%), Level I (45.5%), and Level IV (34.5%) centers. Multivariate analysis confirmed the findings of the univariate analysis. CONCLUSIONS: Despite current clinical standards, rates of adherence to rapid antibiotic administration are low. Certain patient, facility, and environmental factors are associated with delays in antibiotic administration and can be a focus for quality improvement processes. We plan to use these data to evaluate how focus on antibiotic administration as this quality standard changes practice over time. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Prognostic Level III. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

Placement of Antibiotic Powder in Open Fracture Wounds during the Emergency Room (POWDER): Design and Rationale for an Investigation of the Acute Application of Topical Antibiotic Powder in Open Fracture Wounds for Infection Prophylaxis.

BACKGROUND: Open fractures are at high risk for complications both in the military and civilian setting. Treatments to prevent fractures are limited in the Role 1 (prehospital, battalion aid station) setting. The goal of this study is to assess the efficacy of topical vancomycin powder, administered within 24 hours of an open fracture injury, in the prevention of infection and infection-related complications. METHODS: The POWDER study is a multicenter, prospective, randomized controlled clinical trial using a pragmatic open-label design. We will recruit 200 long bone open fracture patients from University Hospital at University of Texas Health at San Antonio (UTHSA) and the Brooke Army Medical Center (BAMC). We will screen and randomize patients in a 1:1 ratio to receive either usual care plus 2g topical vancomycin or usual care only. The primary objective of this study is to compare the proportion of infection and infection-related complications which occur in the 2 arms. An additional objective is to develop a risk-prediction model for open fracture wound complications. CONCLUSIONS: The infection rates seen in open fractures remain alarmingly high in both combat and civilian settings. Several orthopedic surgery studies suggest vancomycin powder is effective in reducing surgical site infections when applied topically at the time of wound closure. We expect to see a reduction in infections in open fracture injuries treated acutely with vancomycin powder. This study may provide important information regarding the use of local vancomycin powder during the acute treatment of open fractures. If shown to be efficacious, vancomycin powder could provide a simple, time- and cost-effective infection prophylaxis strategy for these injuries.

[Antibiotic use for prophylaxis and empirical therapy of fracture-related infections in Germany : A survey of 44 hospitals]. / Antibiotikaeinsatz zu Prophylaxe und empirischer Therapie von frakturassoziierten Infektionen in Deutschland : Eine Umfrage an 44 Kliniken.

BACKGROUND: Antibiotics play an important role in the prophylaxis and treatment of infections in orthopedic trauma surgery; however, there seems to be remarkable differences in the clinical antibiotic practice between hospitals, particularly for open fractures and for the empirical therapy of fracture-related infections (FRI). METHODS: Therefore, we intended to evaluate the current clinical praxis in university and workers' compensation hospitals in Germany with a questionnaire on prophylaxis and empirical treatment of FRI. The results were compared with the resistance profile of 86 FRI patients in order to analyze the hypothetical effectiveness of the empirical treatment. RESULTS: A total of 44 hospitals (62.0%) responded. A homogeneous antibiotic prophylaxis (95.5% of all hospitals) with cephalosporins was reported for perioperative prophylaxis of internal fixation of closed fractures. For open fractures, eight different monotherapy and combination treatment concepts were reported. In empirical treatment of FRI, 12 different therapeutic concepts were reported, including aminopenicillins/beta lactamase inhibitors (BLI) (31.8%), cephalosporins (31.8%), and ampicillin/sulbactam + vancomycin (9.1%). In terms of the hypothetical effectiveness of these antibiotic regimes, low sensitivity rates of 65.1% and 74.4% for cephalosporins and aminopenicillins/BLI, respectively, were found. For the combination vancomycin + meropenem, the highest hypothetical sensitivity (91.9%) was detected. DISCUSSION: Based on the existing, institution-specific pathogen spectrum, the combination therapy including meropenem and vancomycin seems to be of value but should be restricted to patients with multiple revision procedures or a septic course of infection in order to prevent the selection of highly resistant pathogens.

Risk of Acute Kidney Injury and Fracture-Related Infection After Antibiotic Prophylaxis With Piperacillin-Tazobactam in Open Fractures.

OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the effects of prophylactic piperacillin-tazobactam (PT) on inpatient acute kidney injury (AKI) and fracture-related infection (FRI) in patients with open fractures. SETTING: The study was conducted at a Level 1 trauma center. PATIENTS: We reviewed 358 Gustilo-Anderson type II and III open fractures at our institution from January 2013 to December 2017. INTERVENTION: Administration of PT (the PT group) or antibiotics other than PT (the historical control group) during the first 48 hours of arrival for open fracture antibiotic prophylaxis. MAIN OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS: The main outcome measurements were rates of inpatient AKI and FRI within six months after definitive fixation. RESULTS: There were 176 patients in the PT group and 182 patients in the historical control group. The PT group had worse American Society of Anesthesiologists class ( P = 0.004) and injury severity scores ( P < 0.001), a higher average number of debridements before closure/coverage ( P = 0.043), and higher rates of gross soil contamination ( P = 0.049) and staged procedures ( P = 0.008) compared with the historical control group.There was no difference in the rate of AKI between the PT and historical control groups (5.7% vs. 2.7%, P = 0.166) nor when stratified by Gustilo-Anderson fracture classification (type II: 5.8% vs. 3.6%, P = 0.702; type III: 5.6% vs. 2.0%, P = 0.283). There was no significant difference in the rate of FRI between the PT and historical control groups (23.6% vs. 19.6%, P = 0.469). CONCLUSION: The use of PT in prophylactic antimicrobial treatment in patients with Gustilo-Anderson type II and III open fractures does not increase the rate of AKI or FRI. We believe PT can be used as an effective monotherapy in these patients without an increased risk of renal injury, but future investigations are necessary. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Therapeutic Level III. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

Adherence to Antibiotic Recommendations and Infection Among Patients With Open Long-Bone Fractures: An Examination of Antibiotic Prioritization in Fracture Management.

Open fractures are at high risk of infection because of exposure of bone and tissue to the environment. Initiation of intravenous antibiotics is recommended within 1 hour of hospital arrival, although the presence of other severe injuries may lead to delays in fracture management. This retrospective study of adult patients with open long-bone fractures admitted to six level 1 trauma centers between January 1, 2018, and December 31, 2019, aimed to examine adherence to antibiotic recommendations. Associations between receiving recommendation-adherent antibiotics and patient and injury characteristics were investigated univariately and in adjusted regression analyses. The most common fracture locations among the 404 patients included were the tibia (43%) and fibula (26%). Fifty-eight percent of patients received recommendation-adherent antibiotics. After adjustment, patient demographics, comorbidities, cause of injury, and overall injury severity did not show significant associations with adherence to recommendations. Concomitant serious abdominal (adjusted odds ratio [AOR]=0.44) and spinal injuries (AOR=0.23) were associated with lower odds of receiving recommendation-adherent antibiotics. Additionally, fractures of certain locations were associated with increased odds of adherence (humerus: AOR=2.78; fibula: AOR=1.64), as were type 3 fractures (AOR=1.55). The overall infection rate was 4%, and adherence to antibiotic recommendations was not associated with infection (3% vs 5% for nonadherent, P=.34). Results suggest that although full recommendation adherence was somewhat low among this patient population, certain injury characteristics were predictive of adherence rates. Current antibiotic recommendations may benefit from consideration of how antibiotic initiation may fit into the prioritization of injury management, especially in patients with polytrauma with other severe injuries. [Orthopedics. 2023;46(1):54-58.].

Antibiotic administration within 1 hour for open lower extremity fractures is not associated with decreased risk of infection.

BACKGROUND: Open fractures have a high risk of infection with limited data correlating timing of prophylactic antibiotic administration and rate of subsequent infection. The Trauma Quality Improvement Program has established a standard of antibiotic administration within 1 hour of arrival, but there is a lack of adequately powered studies validating this quality metric. We hypothesize that open femur and/or tibia fracture patients undergoing orthopedic surgery have a decreased risk of infectious complications (osteomyelitis, deep and superficial surgical site infection) if antibiotics are administered within 1 hour of presentation compared with administration after 1 hour. METHODS: The 2019 Trauma Quality Improvement Program was queried for adults with isolated (Abbreviated Injury Scale <1 for the head/face/spine/chest/abdomen/upper extremity) open femur and/or tibia fractures undergoing orthopedic surgery. Transfer patients were excluded. Patients receiving early antibiotics (EA) within 1 hour were compared with patients receiving delayed antibiotics (DA) greater than 1 hour from arrival. RESULTS: Of 3,367 patients identified, 2,400 (70.4%) received EA. Patients receiving EA had a higher rate of infections compared with DA (1.1% vs. 0.2%, p = 0.011). After adjusting for age, comorbidities, injury severity, nerve/vascular trauma to the lower extremity, washout of the femur/tibia performed in <6 hours, blood transfusion, and admission vitals, patients in the EA group had a similar associated risk of surgical site infection/osteomyelitis compared with the DA cohort ( p = 0.087). These results remained in subset analyses of patients with only femur, only tibia, and combined femur/tibia open fractures (all p > 0.05). CONCLUSION: In this large national analysis, approximately 70% of isolated open femur or tibia fracture patients undergoing surgery received antibiotics within 1 hour. After adjusting for known risk factors of infection, there was no association between timing of antibiotic administration and infection. Reconsideration of the quality metric of antibiotic administration within 1 hour for open fractures appears warranted. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Therapeutic/Care Management; Level IV.

Surgical Infection Society Guidelines: 2022 Updated Guidelines for Antibiotic Use in Open Extremity Fractures.

Background: Open fractures, defined as fractures communicating with the environment through a skin wound, cause substantial morbidity after traumatic injury. Current evidence supports administration of prophylactic systemic antibiotic agents to patients with open extremity fractures to decrease infectious complications. Methods: The Therapeutic and Guidelines Committee of The Surgical Infection Society convened to revise guidelines for antibiotic use in open fractures. PubMed was queried for pertinent studies. Evaluation of the published evidence was performed using the GRADE framework. All committee members voted to accept or reject each recommendation. Results: In type I or II open extremity fractures, we recommend against administration of extended-spectrum antibiotic coverage compared with gram-positive coverage alone to decrease infections complications, hospital length of stay or mortality. In type III open extremity fractures, we recommend antibiotic therapy for no more than 24 hrs after injury, in the absence of clinical signs of active infection, to decrease infectious complications, hospital length of stay or mortality, and we recommend against extended antimicrobial coverage beyond gram-positive organisms to decrease infectious complications, hospital length of stay or mortality. In type III open extremity fractures with associated bone loss, we recommend antibiotic therapy in addition to systemic therapy to decrease infectious complications. Conclusions: Although antibiotic agents remain a standard of care for infection prevention after open extremity fractures, our findings and surveys of clinical practice patterns clearly show that additional robust clinical trials are needed to provide stronger corroborating evidence.

Efficacy of Cefazolin versus Ceftriaxone for Extremity Open Fracture Management at a Level 1 Trauma Center.

Background: Antibiotic agents have been shown to improve outcomes in open extremity fractures. The first-generation cephalosporins, which are used most often, are often under-dosed based on weight and recommended frequency. Ceftriaxone offers a broader coverage and a decreased frequency of administration. Our institution began utilizing ceftriaxone for open fracture management in 2017 to address those concerns. Objective: To examine the efficacy of cefazolin versus ceftriaxone for open fracture management of extremity trauma. Patients and Methods: Retrospective study from 2015-2019 of patients who sustained open extremity fractures. Patients were stratified by antibiotic administered and Gustilo-Anderson grade. Outcomes included non-union/malunion, superficial surgical site infection (SSI), deep SSI, osteomyelitis, re-operation after index hospital visit, re-admission due to prior injury, limb loss, and death. Subgroup analysis stratified each antibiotic group by Gustilo-Anderson grade 1 or 2 and grade 3. Results: Data was collected from 2015 to 2019. Of the 1,149 patients, 619 patients met inclusion criteria. Three hundred fifty-five patients received cefazolin and 264 patients received ceftriaxone. There were no statistically significant differences between groups on specified outcomes. No statistically significant differences existed during subgroup analysis for the specified outcomes. Multivariable analysis demonstrated increased Gustilo-Anderson grade increased risk of infectious outcome. Conclusions: Ceftriaxone is a safe and effective alternative for open fracture extremity management that offers the advantage of 24-hour dosing and single antibiotic coverage for grade 3 open fractures. It does not increase infectious complications and offers benefits of resource efficiency.

Open Fractures in Pediatric Orthopaedics-Can Pathways Improve Care? A 1-Year Pre and Postimplementation Analysis.

BACKGROUND: In the care of open fractures, time to antibiotic administration has been shown to be a critical factor in preventing infection. To help improve outcomes at our institution we designed and implemented an open fracture pathway with the goal of reducing the time from emergency department (ED) arrival to antibiotic administration. Here we evaluate the success of this pathway, propose improvements in the protocol, and provide a framework for initiation at other institutions. METHODS: We compared a retrospective prepathway cohort with a prospective postpathway cohort for 1-year pre and postpathway implementation. First, we analyzed the number of patients from outside facilities who had received antibiotics before transfer. For patients who had not received antibiotics before arriving at our institution, we reviewed pathway metrics including time from ED arrival to the ordering and administration of antibiotics, whether the correct antibiotic type was selected, and time to surgical debridement. RESULTS: There were 50 patients in the prepathway cohort and 29 in the postpathway cohort. Prepathway 60.5% of transfers (23 of 38) received antibiotics before transfer, whereas post-pathway 90.0% of transfers (18 of 20) received antibiotics ( P =0.032). For patients who had not received antibiotics before arriving at our institution and were included in pathway metric analysis, there were no differences in demographics or fracture characteristics. Time from ED arrival to antibiotic order decreased from 115.3 to 63.5 minutes ( P =0.016). Time from antibiotic order to administration was similar between groups (48.0 vs. 35.7 min, P =0.191), but the overall time from ED arrival to antibiotic administration decreased from 163.3 to 99.2 minutes ( P =0.004). There were no significant differences in whether the correct antibiotic type was chosen ( P =0.354) or time from ED arrival to surgery ( P =0.783). CONCLUSIONS: This study provides evidence that for pediatric patients presenting with open fractures, a care pathway can successfully decrease the time from ED arrival to antibiotic administration. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Therapeutic level III-retrospective comparative study.

Assessing the Variability of Antibiotic Management in Patients With Open Hand Fractures Presenting to the Pediatric Emergency Department.

OBJECTIVES: Open hand fractures may be difficult to recognize and treat. There is variability in management and administration of antibiotics for these types of injuries. Unlike open long bone fractures, there is no standardized protocol for antibiotic administration for open hand fractures in children. The objective of this study is to assess the variability of antibiotic management of open hand fractures in children. METHODS: We performed a retrospective chart review at a tertiary hospital in New York of patients with hand injuries between ages 0 and 18 years presenting to the emergency department during January 2019 and December 2020. Patient encounters were reviewed for open fractures of the hand. Descriptive statistics were included for demographic and physical characteristics. RESULTS: There were 80 encounters with open hand fractures, of which the most common being tuft fractures (77.5%). The mean age was 7.6 years (SD, 4.7 years) with male predominance (58.8%). Crush injuries were the most common mechanism of injury (78.8%). Bedside repair was performed on 62 encounters (77.5%), of which 45 (72.5%) required nail bed repair, 56 (90.3%) required suturing, and 24 (38.7%) required reduction. Antibiotics were given to 62 (77.5%) encounters, most commonly oral cefalexin (45.2%), oral amoxicillin-clavulanic acid (27.4%), and intravenous cefazolin (14.5%). Median time to antibiotics from emergency department registration to administration was 150 minutes (interquartile range, 92-216 minutes). Antibiotic prescriptions were sent for 71 encounters (88.8%). Seventy seven (96.3%) of the encounters were discharged home. CONCLUSIONS: Pediatric open hand fractures have a variability of type and timing to antibiotics. Future initiatives should attempt to create standardized guidelines for management of open hand fractures.

Ampicillin/sulbactam versus cefazolin plus aminoglycosides for antimicrobial prophylaxis in management of Gustilo type IIIA open fractures: A retrospective cohort study.

BACKGROUND: The antibiotic regimens for prophylaxis in the management of open fractures remain controversial. Although the use of aminoglycosides is widely accepted for treatment of Gustilo type III open fractures, aminoglycosides are often avoided in patients with risk factors. This study aimed to compare efficacy and safety of two regimens, cephazolin plus aminoglycoside (amikacin or gentamicin) and ampicillin/sulbactam (ABPC/SBT), in patients with Gustilo type IIIA open fractures. METHODS: A total of 95 Gustilo type IIIA fractures in 90 patients were retrospectively reviewed in this study. The cohort was categorized into two groups that were treated in accordance with the institutional prescribed regimen in different periods: (1) cefazolin plus aminoglycoside (January 1, 2014-September 30, 2017) and (2) ABPC/SBT monotherapy (October 1, 2017-September 30, 2020). Cefazolin was used at 1-2 g every 8 h, aminoglycoside (amikacin or gentamicin) was used daily depending on body weight, and ABPC/SBT was used at 3 g every 8 h The antibiotic administration was continued within 3 days or until successful soft tissue coverage was achieved. The infection rate and the incidence of acute kidney injury (AKI) in both groups were assessed. RESULTS: ABPC/SBT was used in 34 patients (36 fractures), and 56 patients (59 fractures) received cefazolin plus aminoglycoside for antibiotic prophylaxis. Infection developed in 2 of 36 fractures in ABPC/SBT group and 4 of 59 fractures in the cefazolin plus aminoglycoside group (p > 0.99). The average serum creatinine levels on admission, baseline, and peak during the hospital stay were not significantly different between the two groups. One case of AKI was identified in each group, indicating that incidence rate of AKI was not significantly different between the two groups. CONCLUSION: We demonstrated the non-inferiority of ABPC/SBT therapy over cefazolin plus aminoglycoside regimen for type IIIA open fractures. The ABPC/SBT regimen may be an alternative option for managing Gustilo type IIIA open fractures. Further prospective studies with larger samples are needed to verify these results.

Management of Seymour Fractures in Children and Adolescents: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

PURPOSE: Seymour fractures are injuries with a potentially high risk of infection and osteomyelitis. The optimal management of this pediatric open fracture is unknown. We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis to summarize the best evidence for these fractures and determine their optional management based on primary clinical studies. METHODS: A Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses-compliant systematic review and meta-analysis was performed. A comprehensive search strategy was applied to the MEDLINE, EMBASE, Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature, Cochrane Library, and gray literature databases (from May 1966 to April 15, 2020). Studies describing patients under the age of 18 years with Seymour fractures were included. Treatment was grouped based on debridement and antibiotic status as well as the timing of these interventions. The primary outcome was infection. The secondary outcomes included malunion, physeal disturbance, and nail dystrophy. RESULTS: The searches helped identify 56 records, of which 10 nonrandomized studies met our inclusion criteria, comprising 352 patients and 355 fractures. Early (<48 hours) debridement was associated with significantly less risk of infection (risk ratio [RR] = 0.28 [95% CI, 0.12-0.64]) and malunion (RR = 0.25 [95% CI, 0.07-0.99]). Prophylactic (<24 hours) antibiotics significantly reduced the risk of infection (RR = 0.21 [95% CI, 0.10-0.43]). In addition, prophylactic antibiotics and debridement were associated with a 70% reduction in the risk of infection (RR = 0.30 [95% CI, 0.11-0.83]). Over one-third of patients with delayed presentation (median 8.5 days) were infected at presentation. CONCLUSIONS: The high-risk nature of Seymour fractures may be mitigated by prompt recognition and early, basic interventions, which can usually be performed in any setting. TYPE OF STUDY/LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Therapeutic IV.

Evaluation of Piperacillin-Tazobactam for Antibiotic Prophylaxis in Traumatic Grade III Open Fractures.

Background: Broad-spectrum antibiotic agents are sometimes utilized for prophylaxis of Gustilo grade III open fractures. However, this practice is not recommended by current guidelines, and it is unknown how patient outcomes are impacted. This study aimed to determine if prophylaxis with piperacillin-tazobactam (PT) results in different rates of infection versus guideline-concordant therapy (GCT). Patients and Methods: This was a single-center, retrospective cohort study of adult trauma patients with Gustilo grade III open long bone fractures admitted between January 2008 and August 2018. The primary outcome of infection (superficial or deep) at six weeks and secondary outcomes of delayed union, nonunion, Clostridioides difficile, and development of resistant organisms were abstracted from medical records. Guideline-concordant therapy was defined as a first-generation cephalosporin with or without an aminoglycoside. Univariable and multivariable analyses controlling for injury severity score (ISS) were performed. Results: One hundred twenty patients were included; 97 (81%) received PT, 23 (19%) received GCT. Common injury mechanisms were motor vehicle/motorcycle accident (57%) and falls (17%), and a majority involved a lower extremity (65%). Baseline characteristics were similar except higher median ISS in PT (14; interquartile range [IQR], 9-22) versus GCT (9; IQR, 9-14). Guideline-concordant therapy was given for a median of four (range, 2-8) days and PT for six (range, 3-11) days (p = 0.078). On univariable analysis, PT patients had more infections at six weeks (23.7% vs. 4.3%; p = 0.042), but multivariable analysis demonstrated no difference (odds ratio [OR], 5.81; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.73-46.25; p = 0.096). Patients receiving prophylaxis with PT had a longer median length of stay at 16 days (range, 10-22) versus nine days (range, 4-16). No statistically significant differences in delayed union, non-union, Clostridioides difficile, or development of resistant organisms were observed. Conclusions: Broad-spectrum antibiotic prophylaxis with PT did not improve infection rates compared to GCT, suggesting it may not be warranted.

Ninety-Day Follow-up Is Inadequate for Diagnosis of Fracture-related Infections in Patients with Open Fractures.

BACKGROUND: Fracture-related infection (FRI) is a challenging complication in musculoskeletal trauma surgery and often complicates the management of open fractures. The CDC currently advocates a surveillance period of 90 days after fracture fixation, but it is unclear what duration of follow-up constitutes adequate surveillance for FRI. Inadequate follow-up will underestimate infections and, in clinical research, will make any interventions studied appear better than they really are, thereby resulting in misleading conclusions. QUESTIONS/PURPOSES: (1) What is the timing of FRI onset in patients with open fractures? (2) What is the proportion of FRIs captured when follow-up is limited to 90 days postoperatively versus when follow-up is extended to 1 year? METHODS: This is a secondary analysis of patient data from a previous retrospective cohort study that investigated whether the duration of perioperative antibiotic prophylaxis was independently associated with FRI in patients with open fractures. Of the 530 eligible patients in the source study, 3% (14) died. Of the remaining 516 patients, 97% (502) patients with 559 long-bone open fractures had 2 years of follow-up constituted the base cohort. Forty-seven fractures in 46 patients were complicated by FRI and were the focus of this secondary analysis. Medical records were reviewed in detail specifically for the current study. Seventy-eight percent (36 of 46) of patients were male, and the mean ± SD age was 42 ± 16 years. The most common mechanism of injury was a motor vehicle accident (63% [29 of 46] of patients), and the tibia was the most involved site (53% [25 of 47] of fractures). The median (interquartile range) time to debridement was 3.0 hours (IQR 2.0 to 4.0). FRIs developed in 3% (7 of 247) of Type I open fractures, 7% (11 of 164) of Type II, 17% (18 of 107) of Type IIIA, 29% (9 of 31) of Type IIIB, and 20% (2 of 10) of Type IIIC open fractures. Each clinic visit of each patient was reviewed, and data about the time of onset of any symptoms and signs suggesting or confirming an FRI, as reported by patients and/or determined by treating surgeons, were recorded. The proportions of FRIs with onset by specific time periods were determined. A Kaplan-Meier survival analysis was performed, and the FRI event rates with 95% confidence intervals were calculated. RESULTS: The median (IQR) time to the onset of FRI was 52 days (IQR 15 to 153). Follow-up of 90 days captured only 64% (30 of 47) of FRIs, whereas follow-up of 1 year captured 89% (42 of 47) of FRIs. The proportion of FRIs with onset within 1 year increased to 95% (42 of 44) in the presence of an already healed fracture. CONCLUSION: Follow-up of 90 days after the management of an open long-bone fracture is inadequate for postoperative surveillance, especially for research purposes. Clinical research on interventions would report results appearing to be much better than they really are, potentially resulting in misleading conclusions. Follow-up of 1 year is preferable because most FRIs will develop before that time, especially when fracture union has occurred. A small percentage of patients may still develop infections beyond the first year after the management of an open fracture. The risk of missing these infections by not extending follow-up beyond 1 year must be balanced against the additional logistical burden. Future prospective multicenter studies and registries with long-term patient follow-up would help clarify this issue.Level of Evidence Level III, diagnostic study.