Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

The vancomycin soaking technique: no differences in autograft re-rupture rate. A comparative study

  • Original Paper
  • Published:
International Orthopaedics Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Purpose

The main aim of this study was to evaluate the re-rupture risk after an anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction (ACL-R) using the vancomycin soaking technique and to compare it with the re-rupture risk in patients on whom this technique was not utilized. The secondary purpose was to compare the functional outcomes of those two subsets of patients operated on for ACL-R.

The hypotheses are that the vancomycin soaking technique does not affect the re-rupture risk or the functional outcomes.

Material and methods

A retrospective historical cohort study was conducted. Two groups were compared in terms of the re-rupture rate (traumatic or atraumatic) and functional outcomes (International Knee Documentation Committee (IKDC), Tegner, and Lysholm). Group 1 consisted of patients that received pre-operative IV antibiotics. In group 2, the patients received pre-operative IV antibiotics along with a graft that had been presoaked in a vancomycin solution. A minimum follow-up of five years was required.

Results

There were 17 patients that suffered a re-rupture in group 1 (4.7%) and 15 in group 2 (3.9%) (n.s.). IKDC was 82.0 in group 1 and 83.9 in group 2 (p = 0.049); Tegner scored 4 in both groups (n.s.) and Lysholm was 90.3 in group 1 and 92.0 in group 2 (p = 0.015).

Conclusion

The vancomycin soaking technique for ACL autografts is a safe procedure for the daily clinical practice, in terms of re-ruptures. Moreover, it does not impair functional outcomes after an ACL-R.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Andrade R, Pereira R, van Cingel R et al (2019) How should clinicians rehabilitate patients after ACL reconstruction? A systematic review of clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) with a focus on quality appraisal (AGREE II). Br J Sports Med. https://doi.org/10.1136/bjsports-2018-100310

  2. Nwachukwu BU, Patel BH, Lu Y et al (2019) Anterior cruciate ligament repair outcomes: an updated systematic review of recent literature. Arthroscopy 35:2233–2247. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.arthro.2019.04.005

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Alentorn-Geli E, Pelfort X, Mingo F et al (2015) An evaluation of the association between radiographic intercondylar notch narrowing and anterior cruciate ligament injury in men: the notch angle is a better parameter than notch width. Arthroscopy 31:2004–2013. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.arthro.2015.04.088

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Karlsson J, Hirschmann MT, Becker R, Musahl V (2015) Individualized ACL surgery. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 23:2143–2144. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00167-015-3690-9

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Kopf S, Musahl V, Perka C et al (2017) The influence of applied internal and external rotation on the pivot shift phenomenon. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 25:1106–1110. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00167-017-4429-6

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Pérez-Prieto D, Trampuz A, Torres-Claramunt R et al (2017) Infections after anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction: which antibiotic after arthroscopic debridement? J Knee Surg 30:309–313. https://doi.org/10.1055/s-0036-1584559

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Torres-Claramunt R, Gelber P, Pelfort X et al (2016) Managing septic arthritis after knee ligament reconstruction. Int Orthop 40:607–614. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00264-015-2884-6

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Vertullo CJ, Quick M, Jones A, Grayson JE (2012) A surgical technique using presoaked vancomycin hamstring grafts to decrease the risk of infection after anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction. Arthroscopy 28:337–342. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.arthro.2011.08.301

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Yazdi H, Yousof Gomrokchi A, Nazarian A et al (2019) The effect of gentamycin in the irrigating solution to prevent joint infection after anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction. Arch Bone Jt Surg 7:67–74

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  10. Baron JE, Shamrock AG, Cates WT et al (2019) Graft preparation with intraoperative vancomycin decreases infection after ACL reconstruction: a review of 1,640 cases. J Bone Joint Surg Am. https://doi.org/10.2106/JBJS.19.00270

  11. Figueroa D, Figueroa F, Calvo R et al (2019) Presoaking of hamstring autografts in vancomycin decreases the occurrence of infection following primary anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction. Orthop J Sports Med 7:2325967119871038. https://doi.org/10.1177/2325967119871038

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  12. Jefferies JG, Aithie JMS, Spencer SJ (2019) Vancomycin-soaked wrapping of harvested hamstring tendons during anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction. A review of the “vancomycin wrap”. Knee 26:524–529. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.knee.2019.04.008

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Naendrup J-H, Marche B, de Sa D et al (2019) Vancomycin-soaking of the graft reduces the incidence of septic arthritis following ACL reconstruction: results of a systematic review and meta-analysis. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00167-019-05353-1

  14. Offerhaus C, Balke M, Hente J et al (2019) Vancomycin pre-soaking of the graft reduces postoperative infection rate without increasing risk of graft failure and arthrofibrosis in ACL reconstruction. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 27:3014–3021. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00167-018-5323-6

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Pérez-Prieto D, Torres-Claramunt R, Gelber PE et al (2016) Autograft soaking in vancomycin reduces the risk of infection after anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 24:2724–2728. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00167-014-3438-y

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Phegan M, Grayson JE, Vertullo CJ (2016) No infections in 1300 anterior cruciate ligament reconstructions with vancomycin pre-soaking of hamstring grafts. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 24:2729–2735. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00167-015-3558-z

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Pérez-Prieto D, Portillo ME, Torres-Claramunt R et al (2018) Contamination occurs during ACL graft harvesting and manipulation, but it can be easily eradicated. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 26:558–562. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00167-017-4735-z

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Grayson JE, Grant GD, Dukie S, Vertullo CJ (2011) The in vitro elution characteristics of vancomycin from tendons. Clin Orthop Relat Res 469:2948–2952. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11999-011-1768-3

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  19. Ferguson J, Athanasou N, Diefenbeck M, McNally M (2019) Radiographic and histological analysis of a synthetic bone graft substitute eluting gentamicin in the treatment of chronic osteomyelitis. J Bone Jt Infect 4:76–84. https://doi.org/10.7150/jbji.31592

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  20. Metsemakers W-J, Fragomen AT, Moriarty TF et al (2019) Evidence-based recommendations for local antimicrobial strategies and dead space management in fracture-related infection. J Orthop Trauma. https://doi.org/10.1097/BOT.0000000000001615

  21. Olesen UK, Juul R, Bonde CT et al (2015) A review of forty five open tibial fractures covered with free flaps. Analysis of complications, microbiology and prognostic factors. Int Orthop 39:1159–1166. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00264-015-2712-z

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Schüttler K-F, Scharm A, Stein T et al (2019) Biomechanical and microbiological effects of local vancomycin in anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction: a porcine tendon model. Arch Orthop Trauma Surg 139:73–78. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00402-018-3006-x

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Pelfort X, Romero A, Brugués M et al (2019) Reduction of periprosthetic Staphylococcus aureus infection by preoperative screening and decolonization of nasal carriers undergoing total knee arthroplasty. Acta Orthop Traumatol Turc. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aott.2019.08.014

  24. Pérez-Prieto D, Portillo ME, Puig-Verdié L et al (2016) Preoperative antibiotic prophylaxis in prosthetic joint infections: not a concern for intraoperative cultures. Diagn Microbiol Infect Dis 86:442–445. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.diagmicrobio.2016.09.014

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Weber WP, Marti WR, Zwahlen M et al (2008) The timing of surgical antimicrobial prophylaxis. Ann Surg 247:918–926. https://doi.org/10.1097/SLA.0b013e31816c3fec

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Edin ML, Miclau T, Lester GE Lindsey RW, Dahners LE (1996) Effect of cefazolin and vancomycin on osteoblasts in vitro. Clin Orthop Relat Res (333):245–251

  27. Pouzaud F, Bernard-Beaubois K, Thevenin M et al (2004) In vitro discrimination of fluoroquinolones toxicity on tendon cells: involvement of oxidative stress. J Pharmacol Exp Ther 308:394–402. https://doi.org/10.1124/jpet.103.057984

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Peñalba Arias P, Furustrand Tafin U, Bétrisey B et al (2015) Activity of bone cement loaded with daptomycin alone or in combination with gentamicin or PEG600 against Staphylococcus epidermidis biofilms. Injury 46:249–253. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.injury.2014.11.014

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. Everhart JS, DiBartola AC, Dusane DH et al (2018) Bacterial deoxyribonucleic acid is often present in failed revision anterior cruciate ligament reconstructions. Arthroscopy 34:3046–3052. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.arthro.2018.06.033

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  30. Flanigan DC, Everhart JS, DiBartola AC et al (2019) Bacterial DNA is associated with tunnel widening in failed ACL reconstructions. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 27:3490–3497. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00167-019-05405-6

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  31. Izakovicova P, Borens O, Trampuz A (2019) Periprosthetic joint infection: current concepts and outlook. EFORT Open Rev 4:482–494. https://doi.org/10.1302/2058-5241.4.180092

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  32. Morgenstern M, Kühl R, Eckardt H et al (2018) Diagnostic challenges and future perspectives in fracture-related infection. Injury 49(Suppl 1):S83–S90. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0020-1383(18)30310-3

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  33. Pérez-Prieto D, Portillo ME, Puig-Verdié L et al (2017) C-reactive protein may misdiagnose prosthetic joint infections, particularly chronic and low-grade infections. Int Orthop 41:1315–1319. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00264-017-3430-5

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  34. Steinmetz S, Wernly D, Moerenhout K et al (2019) Infection after fracture fixation. EFORT Open Rev 4:468–475. https://doi.org/10.1302/2058-5241.4.180093

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  35. Grassi A, Kim C, Marcheggiani Muccioli GM et al (2017) What is the mid-term failure rate of revision ACL reconstruction? A systematic review. Clin Orthop Relat Res 475:2484–2499. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11999-017-5379-5

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  36. Samuelsen BT, Webster KE, Johnson NR et al (2017) Hamstring autograft versus patellar tendon autograft for ACL reconstruction: is there a difference in graft failure rate? A meta-analysis of 47,613 patients. Clin Orthop Relat Res 475:2459–2468. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11999-017-5278-9

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  37. Fernandes TL, Fregni F, Weaver K et al (2014) The influence of femoral tunnel position in single-bundle ACL reconstruction on functional outcomes and return to sports. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 22:97–103. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00167-012-2288-8

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  38. Mouarbes D, Menetrey J, Marot V et al (2019) Anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction: a systematic review and meta-analysis of outcomes for quadriceps tendon autograft versus bone-patellar tendon-bone and hamstring-tendon autografts. Am J Sports Med 363546518825340. https://doi.org/10.1177/0363546518825340

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Traumatology and Orthopaedic Surgery, Hospital del Mar–Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona (UAB), Passeig Marítim, 25, 08003, Barcelona, Spain

    Daniel Pérez-Prieto, Ferran Corcoll & Juan Carlos Monllau

  2. Catalan Institute for Traumatology and Sports Medicine (ICATME), Hospital Universitari Dexeus.–Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona (UAB), Sabino Arana 5-19, 08028, Barcelona, Spain

    Daniel Pérez-Prieto, Simone Perelli & Juan Carlos Monllau

  3. Hospital Regional Talca, Universidad Católica de Maule, Talca, Chile

    Gonzalo Rojas

  4. Clínica Universitaria de Navarra, Pamplona, Spain

    Verónica Montiel

Authors
  1. Daniel Pérez-Prieto
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Simone Perelli
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Ferran Corcoll
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Gonzalo Rojas
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Verónica Montiel
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Juan Carlos Monllau
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Daniel Pérez-Prieto.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Additional information

Publisher’s note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Level of evidence: Level III. Historical cohort study

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Pérez-Prieto, D., Perelli, S., Corcoll, F. et al. The vancomycin soaking technique: no differences in autograft re-rupture rate. A comparative study. International Orthopaedics (SICOT) 45, 1407–1411 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00264-020-04805-5

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00264-020-04805-5

Keywords

Search

Navigation