Surgical Site Infection After Arthroplasty: Comparative Effectiveness of Prophylactic Antibiotics: Do Surgical Care Improvement Project Guidelines Need to Be Updated?

BACKGROUND Prophylactic antibiotics decrease surgical site infection (SSI) rates, and their timing, choice, and discontinuation are measured and reported as part of the Surgical Care Improvement Project (SCIP). The aim of this study was to assess the comparative effectiveness of the SCIP-approved antibiotics for SSI prevention. METHODS This retrospective cohort study utilized national Veterans Affairs (VA) data on patients undergoing elective hip or knee arthroplasty from 2005 to 2009. Data on prophylactic antibiotics were merged with VA Surgical Quality Improvement Program data to identify patient and procedure-related risk factors for SSI. Patients were stratified by documented penicillin allergy. Chi-square and Wilcoxon rank-sum tests were used to compare SSI rates among patients receiving SCIP-approved prophylactic antibiotics. RESULTS A total of 18,830 elective primary arthroplasties (12,823 knee and 6007 hip) were included. Most patients received prophylactic cefazolin as the sole agent (81.9%), followed by vancomycin as the sole agent (8.0%), vancomycin plus cefazolin (5.6%), and clindamycin (4.5%). Documented penicillin allergy accounted for 54.1% of cases involving vancomycin administration compared with 94.6% of cases involving clindamycin. The overall thirty-day SSI rate was 1.4%, and the unadjusted rate was 2.3% with vancomycin only, 1.5% with vancomycin plus cefazolin, 1.3% with cefazolin only, and 1.1% with clindamycin. Unadjusted analysis of penicillin-allergic patients revealed an SSI rate of 2.0% with vancomycin only compared with 1.0% with clindamycin (p = 0.18). For patients without penicillin allergy, the SSI rate was 2.6% with vancomycin only compared with 1.6% with vancomycin plus cefazolin (p = 0.17) and 1.3% with cefazolin only (p < 0.01). CONCLUSIONS Current SCIP guidelines address antibiotic timing but not antibiotic dosage. (The generally accepted recommendation for vancomycin is 15 mg/kg.) Although vancomycin is a narrower-spectrum antibiotic than either cefazolin or clindamycin, our finding of higher SSI rates following prophylaxis with vancomycin only may suggest a failure to use an appropriate dosage rather than an inequality of antibiotic effectiveness. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE Therapeutic Level IV. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

[1]  M. Hawn,et al.  Choice of intravenous antibiotic prophylaxis for colorectal surgery does matter. , 2013, Journal of the American College of Surgeons.

[2]  Brian R Wolf,et al.  Total knee arthroplasty volume, utilization, and outcomes among Medicare beneficiaries, 1991-2010. , 2012, JAMA.

[3]  Eric B. Smith,et al.  Is it time to include vancomycin for routine perioperative antibiotic prophylaxis in total joint arthroplasty patients? , 2012, The Journal of arthroplasty.

[4]  A. Eskelinen,et al.  Obesity, diabetes, and preoperative hyperglycemia as predictors of periprosthetic joint infection: a single-center analysis of 7181 primary hip and knee replacements for osteoarthritis. , 2012, The Journal of bone and joint surgery. American volume.

[5]  S. Kurtz,et al.  Patient-related risk factors for periprosthetic joint infection and postoperative mortality following total hip arthroplasty in Medicare patients. , 2012, The Journal of bone and joint surgery. American volume.

[6]  Gwo-Chin Lee,et al.  Does Dual Antibiotic Prophylaxis Better Prevent Surgical Site Infections in Total Joint Arthroplasty? , 2012, Clinical orthopaedics and related research.

[7]  K. Garvin,et al.  Infection following total knee arthroplasty: prevention and management. , 2011, Instructional course lectures.

[8]  O. Mahoney,et al.  Cementation of tibial inserts into nonmatching base plates in revision total knee arthroplasty. , 2012, The Journal of arthroplasty.

[9]  P. Choong,et al.  Risk factors for prosthetic hip and knee infections according to arthroplasty site. , 2011, The Journal of hospital infection.

[10]  M. Hawn,et al.  Surgical Site Infection Prevention: Time to Move Beyond the Surgical Care Improvement Program , 2011, Annals of surgery.

[11]  R. Sawyer,et al.  The surgical care improvement project and prevention of post-operative infection, including surgical site infection. , 2011, Surgical infections.

[12]  L. Prokuski.  Prophylactic Antibiotics in Orthopaedic Surgery , 2008, Instructional course lectures.

[13]  J. Singh,et al.  Accuracy of VA databases for diagnoses of knee replacement and hip replacement. , 2010, Osteoarthritis and cartilage.

[14]  E. Lambiris,et al.  Antibiotic prophylaxis in primary hip and knee arthroplasty: comparison between cefuroxime and two specific antistaphylococcal agents. , 2010, The Journal of arthroplasty.

[15]  David C Aron,et al.  Adherence to surgical care improvement project measures and the association with postoperative infections. , 2010, JAMA.

[16]  Hien H. Nguyen,et al.  Prophylactic antibiotics in hip and knee arthroplasty. , 2009, The Journal of bone and joint surgery. American volume.

[17]  S. Ponzer,et al.  Effects of a Perioperative Smoking Cessation Intervention on Postoperative Complications: A Randomized Trial , 2008, Annals of surgery.

[18]  M. Zwahlen,et al.  The Timing of Surgical Antimicrobial Prophylaxis , 2008, Annals of surgery.

[19]  R. Laskin,et al.  ASA physical status classification is not a good predictor of infection for total knee replacement and is influenced by the presence of comorbidities. , 2008, Acta orthopaedica Belgica.

[20]  W. Henderson,et al.  Assessment of the reliability of data collected for the Department of Veterans Affairs national surgical quality improvement program. , 2007, Journal of the American College of Surgeons.

[21]  S. Kurtz,et al.  Projections of primary and revision hip and knee arthroplasty in the United States from 2005 to 2030. , 2007, The Journal of bone and joint surgery. American volume.

[22]  D. Bratzler,et al.  The surgical infection prevention and surgical care improvement projects: national initiatives to improve outcomes for patients having surgery. , 2006, Clinical infectious diseases : an official publication of the Infectious Diseases Society of America.

[23]  Khaled Saleh,et al.  Predictors of wound infection in hip and knee joint replacement: results from a 20 year surveillance program , 2002, Journal of orthopaedic research : official publication of the Orthopaedic Research Society.

[24]  S. Milo,et al.  Vancomycin versus cefazolin prophylaxis for cardiac surgery in the setting of a high prevalence of methicillin-resistant staphylococcal infections. , 2002, The Journal of thoracic and cardiovascular surgery.

[25]  A. Møller,et al.  Effect of preoperative smoking intervention on postoperative complications: a randomised clinical trial , 2002, The Lancet.

[26]  F. Grover,et al.  The Department of Veterans Affairs' NSQIP: the first national, validated, outcome-based, risk-adjusted, and peer-controlled program for the measurement and enhancement of the quality of surgical care. National VA Surgical Quality Improvement Program. , 1998, Annals of surgery.

[27]  F. Grover,et al.  Risk adjustment of the postoperative mortality rate for the comparative assessment of the quality of surgical care: results of the National Veterans Affairs Surgical Risk Study. , 1997, Journal of the American College of Surgeons.