• Wajdi W Kanj, John M Flynn, David A Spiegel, John P Dormans, and Keith D Baldwin.
• Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Children’s Hospital of Philadelphia, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, USA.
• Orthopedics. 2013 Feb 1;36(2):138-46.

AbstractCommunity-acquired methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) has been recognized as a public health concern since the mid-1990s. Because of the increase in reports of this pathogen, it has become increasingly tempting for clinicians to provide prophylaxis against this entity using antibiotics known to be effective against MRSA. The goal of this study was to assess the use of MRSA prophylaxis to determine whether it is safe and effective. A systematic search of the literature was performed to identify articles that examined the use of vancomycin in clean orthopedic surgery. Infection rates and adverse events were extracted, and the data were aggregated and analyzed using a DerSimonian and Laird random effects model. Publication bias and study quality were also assessed. No benefit of parenteral administration of vancomycin was identified. Local, vancomycin-impregnated cement and powder are associated with lower infection rates. Few adverse events occurred, and most of those that occurred involved infusion rate.Cost, resistance, and side effects are concerns in using vancomycin therapy in addition to standard antibiotic prophylaxis. Given the lack of efficacy of intravenous vancomycin, the authors do not recommend its routine use in clean orthopedic surgery. However, local administration appears to be safe and effective. The data are most compelling in orthopedic spine surgery in which a patient without prophylaxis is more than 4 times as likely to have a deep postoperative wound infection compared with a patient who received local vancomycin. The authors recommend the use of local antibiotics when possible in clean orthopedic surgery.Copyright 2013, SLACK Incorporated.

10 keywords...

hide…