SpringerLink
Log in

A microbiology study on the wounds of pediatric patients undergoing spinal fusion for scoliosis

  • Case Series
  • Published:
Spine Deformity Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Purpose

Surgical site infection is a significant complication in posterior spinal fusion for scoliosis in pediatric and adolescent patients. Current literature demonstrates a lack of consensus regarding best prophylactic systemic and topical antibiotic regimens for reducing infection rates. This study aims to identify which common microbes are present at particular locations in the spine, and whether these are covered by our current systemic and topical antibiotic prophylaxis regimens.

Methods

A prospective observational study at a National Children’s Hospital was conducted on 21 consecutive patients who underwent elective surgery for spinal deformity. Swabs were taken from four layers of the spine, including the superficial skin surface at the start of the case (after surgical site preparation with povidone-iodine), the deep dermis, and the deep surgical bed at the end of exposure and again after the corrective maneuver prior to closure. At each layer, swabs were taken from the proximal, middle, and distal portion of the wound. Swabs were sent to the laboratory for culture and susceptibility testing.

Results

Thirteen (62%) of patients had positive microbial growth. Two microbes were identified, Staphylococcus epidermidis (9.5% of patients) and Cutibacterium acnes (Propionibacterium acnes) (52% of patients). 100% of these microbes were sensitive to cefazolin and vancomycin. 3% of patients had positive growth at the skin layer, 32% positive at the dermal layer, 17% positive after exposure, and 40% positive at the conclusion of the case (p = 0.006). No difference was observed in microbial presence in the upper thoracic, lower thoracic and lumbar spine.

Conclusion

Despite adequate surgical site preparation and sterile procedure, microbial contamination remains abundant in the dermal layer and deeper in the spinal wound throughout the case.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Subscribe and save

Springer+ Basic
EUR 32.99 /Month
  • Get 10 units per month
  • Download Article/Chapter or Ebook
  • 1 Unit = 1 Article or 1 Chapter
  • Cancel anytime
Subscribe now

Buy Now

Price includes VAT (Germany)

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3

Similar content being viewed by others

Availability of data and material

Data not publicly available but available from corresponding author on request.

Code availability

Not applicable (software application or custom code).

References

  1. Smith J, Shaffrey C, Sansur C et al (2011) Rates of infection after spine surgery based on 108,419 procedures. Spine 36(7):556–563

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Smith J, Shaffrey C, Sansur C et al (2011) Rates of infection after spine surgery based on 108,419 procedures: a report from the Scoliosis Research Society Morbidity and Mortality Committee. Spine 36(7):556–563

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Spina N, Aleem I, Nassr A (2018) Surgical site infections in spine surgery: preoperative prevention strategies to minimize risk. Global Spine J 8:31s-s36

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  4. Glotzbecker M, Vitale M, Shea K et al (2013) Surgeon practices regarding infection prevention for paediatric spinal surgery. J Pediatr Orthop 33(7):694–699

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Glotzbecker M, Riedel M, Vitale M (2013) What’s the evidence? Systematic review of risk factors and preventative strategies for surgical site infection following pediatric spine surgery. J Pediatr Orthop 33(5):485

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Vitale MG, Riedel MD, Glotzbecker MP et al (2013) Building consensus: development of a best practice guideline (BPG) for surgical site infection (SSI) prevention in high-risk pediatric spine surgery. J Pediatr Orthop 33(5):471–586

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Sidwha F, Itani K (2015) Skin preparation before surgery: options and evidence. Surg Infect 16(1):14–23

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Bakhsheshian J, Dahdaleh N, Lam S (2015) The use of vancomycin powder in surgery: systematic review and meta-analysis of the clinical evidence. World Neurosurg 83:816–823

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Hey H, Thiam D, Koh Z (2017) Is intraoperative local vancomycin powder the answer to surgical site infections in spine surgery? Spine 42:267–74

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Godii S, Parker S, O’Neil K (2013) Comparative effectiveness and cost-benefit analysis of location application of vancomycin powder in posterior spinal fusion for spine trauma: clinical article. J Neurosurg Spine 19:331–335

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. O’Neil K, Smith J, Abtahi A (2011) Reduced surgical site infection in patients undergoing posterior spinal stabilisation of traumatic injuries using vancomycin powder. Spine 11:641–6

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Schroeder J, Girardi F, Sandhu H (2016) The use of local vancomycin powder in degenerative spine surgery. Eur Spine J 25:1029–1033

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. **ong L, Pan Q, ** G (2014) Intrawound application of vancomycin powder in addition to intravenous administration of antibiotics: a meta-analysis on the deep infection after spinal surgeries. Orthop Traumatol Surg Res 100:785–789

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Theologis A, Demirkiran G, Callahan M (2014) Local intrawound vancomycin powder decreases the risk of surgical site infections in complex adult deformity reconstruction: a cost analysis. Spine 39:1875–80

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Tomov M, Mitsunaga L, Durbin-Johnson B (2015) Reducing surgical site infections in spinal surgery with betadine irrigation and intrawound vancomycin powder. Spine 40:491–9

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  16. Sweet F, Roh M, Silva C (2011) Intrawound application of vancomycin for prophylaxis in instrumented fusions: efficacy, drug levels, and patient outcomes. Spine 36:2084–8

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Tubaki V, Rajasekaran S, Shetty A (2013) Effects of using intravenous antibiotic only versus local intrawound vancomycin antibiotic powder application in addition to intravenous antibiotics on postoperative infection in spine surgery in 907 patients. Spine 38(25):2149–55

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Martin J, Adogwa O, Brown C et al (2014) Experience with intrawound vancomycin powder for spinal deformity surgery. Spine 39(2):177–84

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Horii C, Yamazaki T, Oka H et al (2018) Does intrawound vancomycin powder reduce surgical site infection after posterior instrumented spinal surgery? A propensity score-matched analysis. Spine J 18(12):2205–12

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Nakatsuji T, Chiang HI, Jiang SB et al (2013) The microbiome extends to subepidermal compartments of normal skin. Nat Commun 4:1431

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Nandyala S, Schwend R (2013) Prevalence of intraoperative tissue bacterial contamination in posterior pediatric spinal deformity surgery. Spine 38(8):E482–E486

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Patel A, Calfee R, Plante M, Fisher S, Green A (2009) Propionibacterium acnes colonization of the human shoulder. J Shoulder Elbow Surg 18(6):897–902

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Elston M, Dupaix J, Opanova M et al (2019) Cutibacterium acnes (formerly Proprionibacterium acnes) and Shoulder Surgery. Hawai’i J Health Soc Welf 78(11 Suppl 2):3

    Google Scholar 

  24. Ha KY, Chung YG, Ryoo SJ (2005) adherence and biofilm formation of staphylococcus epidermidis and mycobacterium tuberculosis on various spinal implants. Spine 30(1):38–43

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Ramage G, Tunney M, Patrick S et al (2003) Formation of Propionibacterium acnes biofilms on orthopaedic biomaterials and their susceptibility to antimicrobials. Biomaterials 24(19):3221–3227

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Warner S, Uppstrom T, Miller A et al (2017) Epidemiology of deep surgical site infections after pediatric spinal fusion surgery. Spine 42(3):E163–E168

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Aubin G, Portillo M, Trampuz A et al (2014) Propionibacterium acnes, an emerging pathogen: from acne to implant-infections, from phylotype to resistance. Med Mal Infect 44(6):241–250

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Girvan RC, Knight DA, O’loughlin CJ et al (2011) MIS416, a non-toxic microparticle adjuvant derived from Propionibacterium acnes comprising immunostimulatory muramyl dipeptide and bacterial DNA promotes cross-priming and Th1 immunity. Vaccine 29(3):545–57

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. Pottinger P, Butler-Wu S, Neradilek MB et al (2012) Prognostic factors for bacterial cultures positive for propionibacterium acnes and other organisms in a large series of revision shoulder arthroplasties performed for stiffness, pain, or loosening. J Bone Joint Surg Am 94(22):2075–2083

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  30. Koh CK, Marsh J, Drinković D et al (2016) Propionibacterium acnes in primary shoulder arthroplasty: rates of colonization, patient risk factors, and efficacy of perioperative prophylaxis. J Shoulder Elbow Surg 25(5):846–852

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  31. Lange-Asschenfeldt B, Marenbach D, Lang C et al (2011) Distribution of bacteria in the epidermal layers and hair follicles of the human skin. Skin Pharmacol Physiol 24(6):305–311

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  32. Cohen LL, Schwend RM, Flynn J et al (2020) Why irrigate for the same contamination rate: wound contamination in pediatric spinal surgery using betadine versus saline. J Pediatr Orthop 40(10):E994–E998

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  33. Aleem I, Tan L, Nassr A et al (2020) Surgical site infection prevention following spine surgery. Global Spine J. 10(1):92S-98S

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  34. Bejko J, Tarzia V, Carrozzini M et al (2015) Comparison of efficacy and cost of iodine impregnated drape vs. standard drape in cardiac surgery: study in 5100 patients. J Cardiovasc Trans Res. 8(7):431–7

    Article  Google Scholar 

  35. Nicholson O, Ho B, Chong C (2020) Use of iodine-impregnated surgical drapes for prevention of surgical site infection: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Wound Pract Res. https://doi.org/10.33235/wpr.28.1.30-37

    Article  Google Scholar 

  36. World Health Organization (2018) Global guidelines for the prevention of surgical site infection, 2nd edn. World Health Organisation, Geneva

    Google Scholar 

  37. Nesvadbova M, Crosera M, Maina G et al (2015) Povidone iodine skin absorption: an ex-vivo study. Toxicol Lett 235(3):155–160

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  38. Dörfel D, Maiwald M, Daeschlein G et al (2021) Comparison of the antimicrobial efficacy of povidone-iodine-alcohol versus chlorhexidine-alcohol for surgical skin preparation on the aerobic and anaerobic skin flora of the shoulder region. Antimicrob Resist Infect Control. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13756-020-00874-8

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

Download references

Funding

Funding received from Wishbone foundation.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Starship Children’s Hospital, Auckland, New Zealand

    Tyler Rudolph, Haemish Crawford & Antony Field

  2. Akron Children’s Hospital, Akron, United States

    Lorena Floccari

Authors
  1. Tyler Rudolph
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Lorena Floccari
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Haemish Crawford
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Antony Field
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Contributions

All authors contributed to the study conception and design. Material preparation, data collection and analysis were performed by Tyler Rudolph, Lorena Floccari and Haemish Crawford. The first draft of the manuscript was written by Tyler Rudolph, Floccari and Crawford. Further revisions were contributed to by Antony Field and amendments to methodology. Antony Field was involved with early data collection, manuscript contributor and proofing.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Tyler Rudolph.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

No conflicts of interest or competing interests to disclose.

Ethical approval

Health and Disabilities Ethics Committee Approval, approval number: 18/NTB/7/AM01.

Consent to participate

Appropriate consent or Assent and Parental consent obtained from all participants.

Consent for publication

Appropriate consent or Assent and Parental consent obtained for publication from all participants.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Springer Nature or its licensor holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Rudolph, T., Floccari, L., Crawford, H. et al. A microbiology study on the wounds of pediatric patients undergoing spinal fusion for scoliosis. Spine Deform 11, 305–312 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1007/s43390-022-00590-w

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s43390-022-00590-w

Keywords

Search

Navigation