• J Trauma · Sep 2011

    Randomized Controlled Trial Multicenter Study

    Fluid lavage of open wounds (FLOW): a multicenter, blinded, factorial pilot trial comparing alternative irrigating solutions and pressures in patients with open fractures.

    • FLOW Investigators, Bradley Petrisor, Xin Sun, Mohit Bhandari, Gordon Guyatt, Kyle J Jeray, Sheila Sprague, Stephanie Tanner, Emil Schemitsch, Parag Sancheti, Jeff Anglen, Paul Tornetta, Michael Bosse, Susan Liew, and Stephen Walter.
    • McMaster University, Hamilton, Ontario, Canada.
    • J Trauma. 2011 Sep 1;71(3):596-606.

    BackgroundOpen fractures are an important source of morbidity and are associated with delayed union, nonunion, and infection. Preventing infection through meticulous irrigation and debridement is an important goal in management, and different lavage fluids and irrigation techniques (e.g., high- or low-pressure lavage) have been described for this purpose. However, there are a limited number of randomized trials comparing irrigating solutions or irrigating technique. We compared the use of castile soap versus normal saline and high- versus low-pressure pulsatile lavage on the rates of reoperations and complications in patients with open fracture wounds.MethodsWe conducted a multicenter, blinded, randomized 2 × 2 factorial pilot trial of 111 patients in whom an open fracture wound was treated with either castile soap solution or normal saline and either high- or low-pressure pulsatile lavage. The primary composite outcome of reoperation, measured at 12 months after initial operative procedure, included infection, wound healing problems, and nonunion. Planned reoperations were not included. Secondary outcomes included all infection, all wound healing problems, and nonunion as well as functional outcomes scores (EuroQol-5 dimensions and short form-12).ResultsEighty-nine patients completed the 1-year follow-up. Among all patients, 13 (23%) in the castile soap group and 13 (24%) in the saline group had a primary outcome event (hazard ratio, 0.91, 95% confidence interval: 0.42-2.00, p = 0.52). Sixteen patients (28%) in the high-pressure group and 10 patients (19%) in the low-pressure group had a primary outcome event (hazard ratio 0.55, 95% confidence interval: 0.24-1.27, p = 0.17). Functional outcome scores showed no significant differences at any time point between groups.ConclusionThe fluid lavage of open wounds pilot randomized controlled trial demonstrated the possibility that the use of low pressure may decrease the reoperation rate for infection, wound healing problems, or nonunion. We have demonstrated the desirability and feasibility of a definitive trial examining the effects of alternative irrigation approaches.

      Pubmed     Full text   Copy Citation     Plaintext  

      Add institutional full text...

    Notes

     
    Knowledge, pearl, summary or comment to share?
    300 characters remaining
    help        
    You can also include formatting, links, images and footnotes in your notes
    • Simple formatting can be added to notes, such as *italics*, _underline_ or **bold**.
    • Superscript can be denoted by <sup>text</sup> and subscript <sub>text</sub>.
    • Numbered or bulleted lists can be created using either numbered lines 1. 2. 3., hyphens - or asterisks *.
    • Links can be included with: [my link to pubmed](http://pubmed.com)
    • Images can be included with: ![alt text](https://bestmedicaljournal.com/study_graph.jpg "Image Title Text")
    • For footnotes use [^1](This is a footnote.) inline.
    • Or use an inline reference [^1] to refer to a longer footnote elseweher in the document [^1]: This is a long footnote..

    hide…