Evaluation of effectiveness of 10% polyvinylpyrrolidone-iodine solution against infections in wire and pin holes for Ilizarov external fixators

"No Care Pin Care" Following Charcot Reconstruction With Static External Fixation

Charcot reconstruction with static external fixation provides stability in deformity correction. Concern for pin site health remains forefront to prevent premature fixator removal should infection develop. While previous investigations examined a spectrum of pin care protocol with a similar variation in outcomes, this study assesses results following a "no care pin care" routine. A retrospective analysis of patients with Charcot neuroarthropathy treated with static external fixation was performed where all pin sites were dressed using a chlorhexidine-soaked sponge without postoperative maintenance. Demographics, reconstruction-specific, and postoperative variables including pin site irritation, pin site infection, and pin tract infection were collected through frame removal. A comparison between uncomplicated and complicated pin sites was made. Statistical significance was set as p ≤ .05. Among 85 patients and their respective pin holes that posed potential spots of infection, 6 (7%) experienced pin site irritation and 5 (6%) experienced pin site infection. Moreover, 2 (2%) experienced a pin tract infection requiring removal. Out of the 768 wires/half-pins 2 (0.3%) were removed. There existed no statistically significant predictors of pin site irritation/infection other than age (p = .03). "No care pin care" proves an effective means at pin site care following static external fixation in Charcot reconstruction. Limited maintenance reduces the postoperative burden on providers and patients.

Pin-site Infection: A Systematic Review of Prevention Strategies

Introduction

Circular frame fixation remains a key tool in the armamentarium of the limb reconstruction surgeon. One of the key drawbacks is the onset of pin-site infection (PSI). As a result of limited evidence and consensus of PSI prevention, a wide variation in practice remains.

Aim

The principal aim of this review is to synthesise primary research concerning all aspects of treatment regarded as relevant to PSI in frame constructs.

Materials and methods

Comparative studies until week 26, 2021, were included in the trial. Studies were included that concerned patients undergoing management of a musculoskeletal condition in which pin-site care is necessary for over 4 weeks.

Results

Eighteen studies over a 13-year period were captured using the search strategy. Sulphadiazine and hydrogen peroxide cleansing was found to reduce PSI, with the use of low-energy fine wires and hydroxyapatite (HA)-coated pins also associated with lower infection rate. The remainder of studies found no significant improvement across interventions.

Conclusion

There is no superiority between weekly and daily care. Low-energy pin-insertion technique had lower rates of infection. Sulphadiazine has positive results as a pin-care solution, but more research is necessary to determine the most effective care regime. Current literature is limited by absence of established definitions and by a lack of studies addressing all aspects of care relevant to PSI.

How to cite this article

Shields DW, Iliadis AD, Kelly E, et al. Pin-site Infection: A Systematic Review of Prevention Strategies. Strategies Trauma Limb Reconstr 2022;17(2):93–104.

The PINS Trial: a prospective randomized clinical trial comparing a traditional versus an emollient skincare regimen for the care of pin-sites in patients with circular frames

AIMS

Pin-site infection remains a significant problem for patients treated by external fixation. A randomized trial was undertaken to compare the weekly use of alcoholic chlorhexidine (CHX) for pin-site care with an emollient skin preparation in patients with a tibial fracture treated with a circular frame.

METHODS

Patients were randomized to use either 0.5% CHX or Dermol (DML) 500 emollient pin-site care. A skin biopsy was taken from the tibia during surgery to measure the dermal and epidermal thickness and capillary, macrophage, and T-cell counts per high-powered field. The pH and hydration of the skin were measured preoperatively, at follow-up, and if pin-site infection occurred. Pin-site infection was defined using a validated clinical system.

RESULTS

Out of 116 patients who were enrolled in the study, 23 patients (40%) in the CHX group and 26 (44%) in the DML group had at least one bad or ugly pin-site infection. This difference was not statistically significant (p = 0.71). There was no significant relationship between pH or hydration of the skin and pin-site infection. The epidermal thickness was found to be significantly greater in patients who had a pin-site infection compared with those who did not (p = 0.01). Skin irritation requiring a change of treatment occurred in four patients (7%) using CHX, and none using DML.

CONCLUSION

We found no significant difference in the incidence of pin-site infection between the CHX and DML treatment groups. Dermol appeared to offer a small but significant advantage in terms of tolerability. We did not find a significant association between patient or treatment related factors and pin-site infection. It is therefore difficult to make specific recommendations based upon these results. The use of either cleaning agent appears to be appropriate. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2021;103-B(2):279-285.

Experimental study on the effects of different disinfectants in preventing pin-site infection after using Ilizarov circular external fixators

The present study aimed to investigate the effects of different disinfectants in preventing pin-site infection. A total of 32 healthy New Zealand white rabbits were selected as the research subjects. The rabbits were placed in an Ilizarov 3/4 circular external fixator for a period of time after feeding. They were then divided into four groups of eight animals each. After surgery, pin-site nursing was performed twice a day with a different disinfectant for each group (chlorhexidine gluconate alcohol disinfectant, Maokang iodine, 75% alcohol and physiological saline). Each pin site’s surrounding conditions were visually observed daily, and bacterial culture of the pin-site secretions was promptly performed. The changes of C-reactive protein (CRP) and white blood cell upon the first day, first week, second week, fourth week, and sixth week after the operation were compared, as were infection statuses and morphological changes in the surrounding tissue at the sixth week post operation. The differences in the CRP and white blood cell values and infection rates among the four groups were found to be statistically significant (P < 0.05), but the difference in infection levels among the four groups was not statistically significant (P>0.05). In addition, the difference in the pathologically inflammatory cells among the four groups at the sixth week post operation was statistically significant (P < 0.05).It was concluded that the effect of chlorhexidine gluconate alcohol disinfectant in preventing pin-site infection was superior compared to the other three disinfectants.

Carboxymethyl chitosan-zinc coating for prevention of pin tract infection: An animal model

BACKGROUND

Pin tract infection is a common problem in orthopedic and traumatology surgery. The aim of this study was to investigate the efficacy of an implant coated with carboxymethyl chitosan-zinc (CMC-Zn²⁺) in prevention of pin tract infection.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Twenty-four male New Zealand White rabbits were randomized into two equal groups ( n = 12, uncoated and CMC-Zn²⁺). The implants were colonized with 1 × 10⁶ colony forming units of Staphylococcus aureus and inserted into the lateral right proximal tibia in each rabbit. In each group, at 2 and 4 weeks post-surgery, five and seven rabbits were killed, respectively, to harvest the soft tissues around the implant as well as the hard tissue for histological analysis. The bone cross-sectional view, X-ray, and micro-computed tomography (μCT) were performed.

RESULTS

The surgical sites in each animal were evaluated individually at both time points. No evident signs of infections were found in the CMC-Zn²⁺ group, while a high rate of infection was observed in the uncoated group where minor infections were 85.71% ( n = 12) and major infections 14.29% ( n = 12). The radiography, μCT, and histological analysis showed no evident signs of infection in both groups at 2 weeks post-surgery. However, at 4 weeks, signs of infection were found in all the animals in the uncoated group, whereas in the CMC-Zn²⁺ group, no infections were observed. The difference between the two groups was highly significant ( p = 0.00).

CONCLUSIONS

Our study showed that CMC-Zn²⁺-coated implants were effective in preventing pin tract infection.

Pin tract infection prophylaxis and treatment

Pin tract infection in external fixation (ExFix) is a frequent finding which can eventually lead to loosening, osteomyelitis and loss of fixation. Its diagnosis is based on high empiricism and low validity, although it is possible to distinguish between minor and major infection. The first is limited to soft tissues, whereas the latter includes bone involvement. The rate of infection after conversion of external fixation to intramedullary nailing (IMN) is not well known. Unfortunately, papers referring to infection after the conversion of ExFix to intramedullary nailing (IMN) are of evidence level IV or V. It is suggested that conversion of ExFix to IMN should be carried out in a 2 step regimen. The time interval of 2 step regimen is uncertain although some authors have recommended to occur within 9 days. There is no consensus as to which prophylaxis protocol should be applied prior to conversion. In order to throw more light into this important issue, registries capturing important related parameters to the development of infection should be established.

No role for antiseptics in routine pin site care in Ilizarov fixators: A randomised prospective single blinded control study

INTRODUCTION

Pin site infection is the commonest complication of Ilizarov external fixation. The aim of the study was to examine if use of antiseptics was superior over control and further if daily dressing was superior to weekly dressing in regular pin site care in reducing the burden of pin site infection in Ilizarov fixators.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

A total of 114 patients (2363 pin sites) were randomised to receive regular pin site care alone (30 patients, 638 pin sites) or with additional application of povidone iodine (27 patients, 561 pin sites), silver sulfadiazine (27 patients, 570 pin sites) and chlorhexidine (30 patients, 594 pin sites). The pin tracts were sub-randomised to receive daily (1212 pin sites) or weekly (1151 pin sites) dressings. The primary outcome was pin site infection days rate across all four groups. The secondary outcomes were - mean duration to first episode of infection, differences between daily and weekly dressing groups, mean duration of antibiotic therapy and incidence of re-interventions and sequelae. We also recorded frequency of bacterial pathogens in all microbiological samples submitted. Block randomization using computer-generated random numbers was used. The assessor of outcome was blinded.

RESULTS

All patients completed the study. Pin site infection rate days per 1000 pin site days observed was marginally less in chlorhexidine group, but was not statistically significant compared to other antiseptics and control group (Absolute value in control, povidone iodine, silver sulphadiazine and chlorhexidine groups were respectively 2.04 ± 4.27, 2.04 ± 3.65, 1.85 ± 3.37, 1.37 ± 2.35, p value 0.92). Daily dressing category showed slightly less pin site infection days rate within each group and overall, but this was also not statistically significant (1.56 ± 3.99 versus 2.10 ± 5.1, p value 0.35). There was no statistically significant difference among the groups with regard to other secondary outcomes. Methicillin Sensitive Staphylococcus aureus was the most common bacterial pathogen isolated.

CONCLUSION

Use of antiseptics does not offer any advantage in regular pin site care in Ilizarov external fixation and daily pin site care is not superior to weekly pin site care. Empirical therapy in early and low grade pin site infections must be targeted against Staphylococcus.

A web-based survey to identify current practice in skeletal pin site management

Infections associated with percutaneous pins and wires are common complications which can have a significant impact on patient outcomes. A survey was undertaken to identify current practice and gain insight into variations of clinical practice. Invitations were sent by email to complete an electronic questionnaire using SurveyMonkey. The survey was left open for 100 days. The single largest group of respondents (37.4%, n = 120) cleansed pin sites daily, with significant differences identified between medical and nursing professions (P = 0.02), and country of practice (P < 0.001). Significant differences were also identified in the use of different cleansing solutions between medical and nursing professions (P < 0.001) and country (P < 0.001). The majority group preferences were saline 30% (n = 96) and alcoholic chlorhexidine 29.6% (n = 95). Pin site crusts were routinely removed by 57.9% (n = 186). Pin sites were left exposed by 50.3% (n = 160). Dry gauze was identified as the most common dressing used to dress pin sites, however, substantial variation was identified in the types of dressings used. Compression was not routinely applied to pin sites by 51.6% (n = 165). There remains considerable diversity of practice when caring for pin sites. Further research is required to identify the most effective methods in preventing pin site infection.

Prevention of pin site infection in external fixation: a review of the literature

Pin site infections are a common complication of external fixation that places a significant burden on the patient and healthcare system. Such infections increase the number of clinic visits required during a patient’s course of treatment, can result in the need for additional treatment including antibiotics and surgery, and most importantly can compromise patient outcomes should osteomyelitis or instability result from pin loosening or need for pin or complete construct removal. Factors that may influence the development of pin site infections include patient-specific risk factors, surgical technique, pin design characteristics, use of prophylactic antibiotics, and the post-operative pin care protocol including cleansing, dressing changes, and showering. Despite numerous studies that work to derive evidence-based recommendations for prevention of pin site infections, substantial controversy exists in regard to the optimal protocol. This review comprehensively evaluates the current literature to provide an overview of factors that may influence the incidence of pin site infections in patients undergoing treatment with external fixators, and concludes with a description of the preferred surgical and post-operative pin site protocols employed by the senior authors (ATF and SRR).

External Fixation: Principles and Applications

The modularity and ease of application of modern external fixation has expanded its potential use in the management of fractures and other musculoskeletal conditions. In fracture care, it can be used for provisional and definitive fixation. Short-term provisional applications include "damage control" and periarticular fracture fixation. The risk:benefit ratio of added stability needs to be assessed with each fixator. Soft-tissue management is critical during pin insertion to lessen the risk of loosening and infection. Although provisional fixation is safe for early conversion to definitive fixation, several factors affect the timing of definitive surgery, including the initial injury, external fixator stability, infection, and the physiologic state of the patient.

Assessment of an implant-skin interface scoring system for external skeletal fixation of dogs

OBJECTIVE To assess intraobserver repeatability and interobserver and in vivo versus photographic agreement of a scoring system for the implant-skin interface (ISI) of external skeletal fixation (ESF). SAMPLE 42 photographs of ISIs from 18 dogs for interobserver agreement and intraobserver repeatability and 27 photographs of ISIs from 6 dogs for in vivo versus photograph agreement. PROCEDURES An ISI inflammation scoring system was developed. It included scales for 6 metrics (erythema, drainage amount, drainage type, swelling, hair loss or lack of hair regrowth, and granulation tissue). Photographs of the ISI of ESF were obtained by use of a standard protocol and evaluated to determine intraobserver repeatability and interobserver agreement (Cronbach α; 4 raters) of the ISI score. Agreement between in vivo and photographic ISI scores (2 raters) and correlation between median scores across metrics were evaluated. RESULTS 42 photographs met the inclusion criteria. Overall intraclass correlation coefficients ranged from 0.922 to 0.975. Interobserver overall Cronbach α ranged from 0.835 to 0.943. For in vivo versus photographic assessment, 27 ISIs in 6 dogs and their photographs were evaluated. The Cronbach α for both raters ranged from 0.614 to 0.938. Overall, the Cronbach α ranged from 0.725 to 0.932. Mean photographic scores were greater than mean in vivo scores for each metric. Pearson correlation coefficients ranged from 0.221 to 0.923. Erythema, swelling, and granulation were correlated with all other metrics. CONCLUSIONS AND CLINICAL RELEVANCE In this study, an ISI scoring system used in this study had high repeatability and agreement and may therefore be considered for use in clinical situations. Photographic scores were not equivalent to in vivo scores and should not be used interchangeably.

Pin-site care: can we reduce the incidence of infections?

BACKGROUND

This study was conducted to determine the pin-site care protocols currently in use and to analyse their effectiveness and outcomes.

METHODS

PubMed, the Cochrane Library and Embase databases were screened for manuscripts that described comparative studies of different methods of pin-site care and referred to complications related to any kind of external fixator application.

RESULTS

A total of 369 manuscripts were screened and only 13 of these met the inclusion criteria evaluating different protocols of pin-site care. This review is based on a total of 574 patients. Infection rates were very variable depending on the type of implant used and the protocol of pin-site care applied.

CONCLUSIONS

None of the different protocols of pin-site care that were evaluated in this study were associated with a 0% infection rate. There is currently no consensus in the international literature about which protocol should be applied universally. Meticulous surgical technique during pin insertion and implementation of one of the existing protocols of pin-site care are the mainstay of prevention and/or reduction of the incidence of pin-site infections.

Pin site care for preventing infections associated with external bone fixators and pins

BACKGROUND

Metal pins are used to apply skeletal traction or external fixation devices in the management of orthopaedic fractures. These percutaneous pins protrude through the skin, and the way in which they are treated after insertion may affect the incidence of pin site infection. This review set out to summarise the evidence of pin site care on infection rates.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effect on infection rates of different methods of cleansing and dressing orthopaedic percutaneous pin sites.

SEARCH METHODS

In September 2013, for this third update, we searched the Cochrane Wounds Group Specialised Register; The Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) (The Cochrane Library); Ovid MEDLINE; Ovid MEDLINE (In-Process & Other Non-Indexed Citations); Ovid EMBASE; and EBSCO CINAHL.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We evaluated all randomised controlled trials (RCTs) that compared the effect on infection and other complication rates of different methods of cleansing or dressing orthopaedic percutaneous pin sites.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently assessed the citations retrieved by the search strategies for reports of relevant RCTs, then independently selected trials that satisfied the inclusion criteria, extracted data and undertook quality assessment.

MAIN RESULTS

A total of eleven trials (572 participants) were eligible for inclusion in the review but not all participants contributed data to each comparison. Three trials compared a cleansing regimen (saline, alcohol, hydrogen peroxide or antibacterial soap) with no cleansing (application of a dry dressing), three trials compared alternative sterile cleansing solutions (saline, alcohol, peroxide, povidone iodine), three trials compared methods of cleansing (one trial compared identical pin site care performed daily or weekly and the two others compared sterile with non sterile techniques), one trial compared daily pin site care with no care and six trials compared different dressings (using different solutions/ointments and dry and impregnated gauze or sponges). One small blinded study of 38 patients found that the risk of pin site infection was significantly reduced with polyhexamethylene biguanide (PHMB) gauze when compared to plain gauze (RR 0.23, 95% CI 0.12 to 0.44) (infection rate of 1% in the PHMB group and 4.5% in the control group) but this study was at high risk of bias as the unit of analysis was observations rather than patients. There were no other statistically significant differences between groups in any of the other trials.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

The available trial evidence was not extensive, was very heterogeneous and generally of poor quality, so there was insufficient evidence to be able to identify a strategy of pin site care that minimises infection rates. Adequately-powered randomised trials are required to examine the effects of different pin care regimens, and co-interventions - such as antibiotic use - and other extraneous factors must be controlled in the study designs.

Pin site care for preventing infections associated with external bone fixators and pins

BACKGROUND

Metal pins are used to apply skeletal traction or external fixation devices in the management of orthopaedic fractures. These pins protrude through the skin (described as 'percutaneous') and the way in which they are treated after insertion may affect the incidence of pin site infection. This review set out to summarise the evidence on the effect of pin site care on infection rates.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effect on infection rates of different methods of cleansing and dressing orthopaedic percutaneous pin sites.

SEARCH STRATEGY

For this first update the following electronic databases were searched: the Wounds Group Specialised Trials Register (searched June 2008); CENTRAL (2008, Issue 2); Ovid Medline (1950 to May 2008), Ovid EMBASE (1980 to May 2008) and Ovid CINAHL (1982 to May 2008). In addition, reference lists of review articles and relevant trials were also searched and some handsearching undertaken.

SELECTION CRITERIA

All randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing the effect on infection and other complication rates of different methods of cleansing or dressing orthopaedic percutaneous pin sites were evaluated.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently assessed the citations retrieved by the search strategies for reports of relevant RCTs, independently selected trials that satisfied the inclusion criteria, extracted data and undertook quality assessment.

MAIN RESULTS

For this first update an additional five trials were identified, in total six trials (349 participants) were eligible for inclusion in the review. Three trials compared a cleansing regimen with no cleansing, 2 trials compared cleansing solutions, 1 trial compared identical pin site care performed daily or weekly and 4 trials compared dressings. One of these trials reported that infection rates were lower (9%) with a regimen that included cleansing with half strength hydrogen peroxide and application of Xeroform dressing when compared with other regimens with different cleansing and dressing regimens (rates >26%) but this may be a chance difference. There was no evidence of a difference between groups in any of the other trials. No trials were identified that compared any dressing versus no dressing or different massage regimens.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

There is insufficient evidence for a particular strategy of pin site care which minimises infection rates. Adequately powered randomised trials are required to examine the effects of different pin care regimens and co interventions such as antibiotic use and other extraneous factors must be controlled in the study designs.