The use of cephalosporins for surgical site infection (SSI) prevention has become a clinical routine, however, high-level evidence regarding the optimal generation for open fractures is currently limited. This study aims to investigate the association between the generation of cephalosporins and SSI risk in open fractures.

This prospective cohort study used data from the Surgical Site Infection in Orthopedic Surgery (SSIOS), a prospectively maintained database, conducted at a tertiary orthopedic university hospital from October 2014 to December 2020. The primary outcome was occurrence of SSI within 1 year after operation, and its association with the generation of cephalosporins was examined using multivariable logistic regressions and generalized estimating equations. Generalized additive models were used to calculate the relative contribution of potential factors likely influencing SSI.

A total of 3582 eligible patients, 74.6% males, with a mean age of 43.7 ± 14.1 years, were included. First-, second-, and third-generation cephalosporins were used in 1957 (54.6%), 1219 (34.0%), and 406 (11.3%) patients. Compared to first-generation cephalosporins, the use of second-generation cephalosporins was significantly associated with a higher risk of SSI (absolute risk difference [ARD] = 3.70%; 95% CI, 1.90%-5.51%; adjusted OR [aOR] = 1.604; 95% CI, 1.212-2.124), whereas third-generation cephalosporins were not (ARD = 1.02%; 95% CI, -1.78% to 3.82%; aOR = 1.234; 95% CI, 0.790-1.880). Among the 28 potential factors considered, the generation of cephalosporins was ranked 9th in terms of its impact on the risk of SSI.

Perioperative use of higher-generation cephalosporins was not associated with a reduction in postoperative surgical site infections in open fractures. Our study supports existing guidelines that recommend the use of first-generation cephalosporins as the preferred agents for preventing SSIs in open fractures.

This study aimed to describe the clinical characteristics of patients with pulmonary arterial hypertension, treatment received, and factors predicting initial or earlier combination therapy.

The Adelphi Real World Pulmonary Arterial Hypertension (PAH) Disease Specific Programme™ is a cross-sectional survey with retrospective data collection conducted in the USA, Europe (France, Germany, Italy, Spain, and the UK), and Japan from March to August 2022. Physicians reported patient characteristics, treatment history, and reasons for treatment selection. Descriptive statistics were grouped by country and World Health Organization functional classification. A multivariable Cox regression analysis investigated factors predicting initial or earlier combination therapy use.

Data for 1173 patients was provided by 293 physicians. Patients' mean (standard deviation) age was 58.7 (13.8) years and 54.6% were female. Overall, 91.2% of patients were receiving, or had previously received, PAH-specific treatment. About three-quarters of the cohort were still taking the initial treatment strategy: for this group, 54% were prescribed monotherapy and 32% combination therapy; 15% of patients received supportive therapy alone. The proportion of patients receiving PAH-specific treatment was lowest in the USA (82.0%) and highest in France (94.6%). The proportion of patients receiving PAH on combination therapy was lowest in the USA (23.8%) and highest in Germany (36.5%). Treatment was prescribed for PAH in 87.6%, 89.8%, 89.3%, and 75.0% of patients who were functional class I, II, III, and IV, respectively, and combination therapy usage was more likely for those with more advanced functional class. Higher risk status, care by a pulmonologist, Japanese residence, more complete assessments, and hospitalization in the past 12 months were statistically associated with decreased time to combination therapy for PAH. Older age was statistically associated with increased time to combination therapy.

In this real-world, geographically diverse sample, monotherapy treatment was common, even among patients with advanced disease.

One of the primary concerns associated with open fractures is the development of a fracture-related infection (FRI). To minimize the risk of developing an FRI and subsequent morbidity, prophylactic antibiotics should be administered to patients with open fractures as soon as possible. While the antibiotic recommendations for severe open fractures are somewhat debatable, the use of a cephalosporin remains a mainstay of prophylactic treatment. Though administration of prehospital antibiotics does represent an expansion of EMS responsibilities, there have been several other treatment expansions in the prehospital setting, such as the administration of tranexamic acid and the application of pelvic binders. The administration of antibiotics, specifically cefazolin, is inexpensive, technically simple, and does not require special storage. The following recommendations are supported by and represent consensus of the COT, OTA, ACEP, NAEMSP and NAEMT with regards to prehospital antibiotic prophylaxis for suspected fractures: In a responsive patient with no history of penicillin or cephalosporin allergy, the administration by EMS of a 1st generation cephalosporin should be performed after the management of life threats. This intervention should not delay transport.In an obtunded patient, the administration by EMS of a 1st generation cephalosporin should be performed after the management of life-threats. This intervention should not delay transport.In a responsive patient with a documented penicillin allergy, the administration by EMS of a 1st generation cephalosporin should be performed with close monitoring after the management of life-threats. This intervention should not delay transport.

The modern management of open fractures was established after the foundational work of Gustilo and Anderson, but we continue to strive to determine the optimal treatment of open fractures to diminish the risk of infection. The ideal timing of antibiotics, presentation to the operating room, and timing of procedures such as flap coverage continue to be investigated with incremental changes recommended over the years. This article aims to provide the most recent review of the literature regarding the timing and management of both upper and lower extremity open fractures, pediatric open fractures, current topics of controversy, and the data supporting current treatment recommendations.

Gustilo III fractures have a high incidence and are difficult to treat. Patients often experience difficulty in wound healing. Negative pressure drainage technology can help shorten wound healing time and has positive value in improving patient prognosis.

To explore the clinical value of the negative pressure sealing drainage technique in wound healing of Gustilo IIIB and IIIC open fractures.

Eighty patients with Gustilo IIIB and IIIC open fractures with skin and soft tissue injuries who were treated in the Second People's Hospital of Dalian from March 2019 to December 2021 were selected as the research subjects. They were divided into a study group (n = 40, healed with negative pressure closed drainage) and a control group (n = 40, healed with conventional dressing changes) according to the variation in the healing they received. The efficacy of the clinical interventions, the variations in the regression indicators (time to wound healing, time to fracture healing, time to hospitalization), and the conversion and healing of bacterial wounds were compared 1-3 mo after the intervention.

The total effective rate of patients among the study group was 95.00% (38/40), which was notably higher than 75.00% (30/40) among the control group (P < 0.05). The wound healing time, fracture healing time, and hospital stay of the patients in the study group was shorter than the control group (P < 0.05). After the intervention, the negative bacterial culture at the wound site rate and wound healing rate of the patients among the study group increased compared to the control group (P < 0.05).

Negative pressure sealing and drainage technology has a good therapeutic effect on patients with Gustilo IIIB and IIIC open fracture wounds with skin and soft tissue injury. It can notably enhance the wound healing rate and the negative rate of bacteria on the wound surface and help to speed up the recovery process of patients.

Guidelines on the management of open tibia fractures recommend timely treatment in a limb reconstruction center which offer joint orthopedic-trauma and plastic surgery services. However, patient's transfer between centers remains inevitable. This review aims to evaluate the clinical outcomes and hospital factors for patients directly admitted and transferred patients to a limb-reconstruction center.

A research protocol adhering to PRISMA standards was established. The search included databases like MEDLINE, EMBASE, and the Cochrane library up until March 2023. Nine articles met the inclusion criteria, focusing on open tibia fractures. Exclusion criteria were experimental studies, animal studies, and case reports. Outcomes of interest were operation and infection rates, nonunion, limb salvage, and the Enneking limb score.

The analysis involved data from 520 patients across nine studies published between 1990 and 2023, with the majority (83.8%) having Gustilo Anderson type III open tibia fractures. Directly admitted patients showed lower overall infection rates (RR 0.30; 95% CI 0.10-0.90; P = 0.03) and fewer deep infections (RR 0.39; 95% CI 0.22-0.68; P = 0.001) compared to transferred patients. Transferred patients experienced an average five-day delay in soft tissue closure and extended hospital stays by eight days. Patients transferred without initial surgical management underwent fewer total surgical procedures. The direct admission group displayed more favorable functional outcomes.

Low- to moderate-quality evidence indicates worse clinical outcomes for transferred patients compared to directly admitted patients. Early treatment in specialized limb reconstruction units is essential for improved results in the management of open tibia fractures.

Therapeutic level IIa.

To characterize the Orthopaedic Trauma Association Open Fracture Classification (OTA-OFC) and Gustilo-Anderson classification of open extremity fractures and determine if there is meaningful alignment between these grading systems.

Retrospective case series.

Level I academic trauma center.

Adult patients with at least 1 operatively treated open extremity fracture and surgeon-assigned OTA-OFC and Gustilo-Anderson classification.

Frequency, distribution, and association measures of OTA-OFC category scores and Gustilo-Anderson classification types.

Two thousand twenty-seven patients (mean age, 43.1 ± 17.5 years) with 2215 fractures were included. Gustilo-Anderson type I or II fractures (n = 961; 43%) most frequently had the least severe scores for all OTA-OFC categories. Type IIIA fractures (n = 978; 44%) were most often assigned intermediate scores for OTA-OFC Bone Loss (n = 564; 58%). Type IIIB fractures (n = 204, 9%) were most often assigned intermediate OTA-OFC Skin scores (n = 120; 59%). Type IIIC fractures (n = 72; 3%) were most often assigned the most severe OTA-OFC Arterial score (n = 60; 83%). In the multivariable model, OTA-OFC Contamination scores showed little association (β = 0.05; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.01-0.09) with Gustilo-Anderson classification severity. Conversely, higher OTA-OFC Arterial (β = 0.50; 95% CI 0.44-0.56) and Skin (β = 0.46; 95% CI, 0.40-0.51) scores were strongly associated with more severe Gustilo-Anderson classifications.

OTA-OFC Contamination scores were weakly associated with Gustilo-Anderson classification severity for open fractures. The study findings suggest that the current Gustilo-Anderson classification does not adequately account for injury contamination, a known predictor of infection.

Diagnostic Level IV. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

Postoperative surgical site infection (SSI) is common in open long bone fractures, so early administration of prophylactic antibiotics is critical to prevent SSI. However, the necessity of initial broad-spectrum coverage for Gram-positive and -negative pathogens remains unclear. The purpose of this study was to clarify the effectiveness of prophylactic broad-spectrum antibiotics in a large, national-wide sample. We reviewed an open fracture database of prospectively collected data from 111 institutions managed by our society. A retrospective cohort study was designed to compare the rates of deep SSI between narrow- and broad-spectrum antibiotics, which were initiated within three hours after injury. A total of 1041 type III fractures were evaluated at three months after injury. Overall deep SSI rates did not differ significantly between the narrow-spectrum group (43/538, 8.0%) and broad-spectrum group (49/503, 9.8%) (p = 0.320). During propensity score-matched analysis, 425 pairs were analyzed. After matching, no significant difference in the SSI rate was seen between the narrow- and broad-spectrum groups, with 42 SSIs (9.9%) and 40 SSIs (9.4%), respectively (p = 0.816). The probability of deep SSI was not reduced by broad-spectrum antibiotics compared with narrow-spectrum antibiotics in type III open long bone fractures.

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.

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.

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.

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.

Prognostic Level III. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

Open fractures represent a major source of morbidity. Surgical site infections (SSIs) after open fractures are associated with a high rate of reoperations and hospitalizations, which are associated with a lower health-related quality of life. Early antibiotic delivery, typically chosen through an assessment of the size and contamination of the wound, has been shown to be an effective technique to reduce the risk of SSI in open fractures. The Gustilo-Anderson classification (GAC) was devised as a grading system of open fractures after a complete operative debridement of the wound had been undertaken but is commonly used preoperatively to help with the choice of initial antibiotics. Incorrect preoperative GAC, leading to less aggressive initial management, may influence the risk of SSI after open fracture. The objectives of this study were to determine (1) how often the GAC changed from the initial to definitive grading, (2) the injury and patient characteristics associated with increases and decreases of the GAC, and (3) whether a change in GAC was associated with an increased risk of SSI.

Using data from the FLOW trial, a large multicenter randomized study, we used descriptive statistics to quantify how frequently the GAC changed from the initial to definitive grading. We used regression models to determine which injury and patient characteristics were associated with increases and decreases in GAC and whether a change in GAC was associated with SSI.

Of the 2420 participants included, 305 participants had their preoperative GAC change (12.6%). The factors associated with upgrading the GAC (from preoperative score to the definitive assessment) included fracture sites other than the tibia, bone loss at presentation, width of wound, length of wound, and skin loss at presentation. However, initial misclassification of type III fractures as type II fractures was not associated with an increased risk of SSI (P = 0.14).

When treating patients with open fracture wounds, surgeons should consider that 12% of all injuries may initially be misclassified when using the GAC, particularly fractures that have bone loss at presentation or those located in sites different than the tibia. However, even in misclassified fractures, it did not seem to increase the risk of SSI.

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.

The study was conducted at a Level 1 trauma center.

We reviewed 358 Gustilo-Anderson type II and III open fractures at our institution from January 2013 to December 2017.

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.

The main outcome measurements were rates of inpatient AKI and FRI within six months after definitive fixation.

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).

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.

Therapeutic Level III. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

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.].

Infection following open fracture is a significant source of morbidity and mortality. Therefore, a central tenet of treatment is to minimize the risk of infection. The initial risk of infection is determined by wound characteristics, such as size, soft tissue coverage, vascular injury, and contamination. While no consensus exists on optimal antibiotic regimen, early administration of prophylactic antibiotics, within an hour of injury, when possible, has been shown definitively to decrease the risk of infection. Infection risk is further reduced by early irrigation with normal saline and aggressive debridement of devitalized tissue. Patient factors that increase risk of infection following open fracture include diabetes mellitus, smoking, male gender, and lower extremity fracture.

A lack of research has become a barrier to the common use of prehospital antibiotics. The objective of this study is to further the limited research of prehospital antibiotics through evaluating the clinical impact, safety, and reliability of prehospital cefazolin administration in trauma patients.

We completed a retrospective evaluation of adult trauma patients who were transported by a single air and ground critical care transport program between January 1, 2014, and June 30 2017. Two hundred eighty-two patients received prehospital cefazolin for deep wounds or open fractures before their arrival at a single level 2 trauma center during the study period. Patient demographics, mechanism of injury, injury type, infection rate, and identification of allergic reactions to cefazolin were also collected.

Of 278 patients in the final analysis, 35.3% (n = 98) were diagnosed with an open fracture and 58.6% (n = 163) had a deep tissue injury. Eighty-two percent of prehospital open fracture diagnoses were confirmed in the emergency department. The overall infection rate was 6%; 31.3% of patients received a second dose of cefazolin in the emergency department during the study period. No patients receiving prehospital cefazolin had allergic or anaphylactic reactions. The overadministration rate was 5% (n = 14).

Prehospital providers reliably identified open fractures, and prehospital cefazolin administration was not associated with anaphylactic reactions. This study population's infection rate of open fractures caused by traumatic injury was found to be 6%, and there was a low inappropriate administration rate.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.