Skip to main content

Advertisement

Log in

Does the Type of Metal Instrumentation Affect the Risk of Surgical Site Infection in Pediatric Scoliosis Surgery?

  • Published:
Spine Deformity Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Study Design

Retrospective cohort study.

Objectives

To determine the association of implant metal composition with the risk of surgical site infection (SSI) following pediatric spine surgery.

Summary of Background Data

SSI is a well-described complication following pediatric spine surgery. Many risk factors have been identified in the literature, but controversy remains regarding metal composition as a risk factor.

Methods

This was a retrospective study of patients who underwent posterior spinal instrumentation procedures between January 1, 2006, and December 31, 2008, at three large children’s hospitals for any etiology of scoliosis and had at least 1 year of postoperative follow-up. Procedures included posterior spinal fusion, growth-friendly instrumentation, and revision of spinal instrumentation. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention definition of SSI was used. A chi-squared test was performed to determine the relationship between type of metal instrumentation and development of an SSI.

Results

The study included 874 patients who underwent 1,156 total procedures. Overall, 752 (65%) procedures used stainless steel instrumentation, 238 (21%) procedures used titanium instrumentation, and the remaining 166 (14%) procedures used cobalt chrome and titanium hybrid instrumentation. The overall risk of infection was 6.1% (70/1,156) per procedure, with 5.9% (44/752) for stainless steel, 6.7% (12/238) for titanium, and 6.0% (10/166) for cobalt chrome. The multiple regression analysis found no significant differences in the metal type used between patients with and without infection (p =.886) adjusting for etiology, instrumentation to pelvis, and type of procedures. When stratified based on etiology, the multiple regression analyses also found no significant difference in SSI between two metal type groups.

Conclusions

This study found no difference in risk of infection with stainless steel, titanium, or cobalt chrome/titanium instrumentation and is adequately powered to detect a true difference in risk of SSI.

Level of Evidence

Level II, prognostic.

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

Access this article

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

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Labbe AC, Demers AM, Rodrigues R, et al. Surgical-site infection following spinal fusion: a case-control study in a children’s hospital. Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol 2003;24:591–5.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Ho C, Skaggs DL, Weiss JM, et al. Management of infection after instrumented posterior spine fusion in pediatric scoliosis. Spine 2007;32:2739–44.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Linam WM, Margolis PA, Staat MA, et al. Risk factors associated with surgical site infection after pediatric posterior spinal fusion procedure. Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol 2009;30:109–16.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Cahill PJ, Warnick DE, Lee MJ, et al. Infection after spinal fusion for pediatric spinal deformity: thirty years of experience at a single institution. Spine 2010;35:1211–7.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Mackenzie WG, Matsumoto H, Williams BA, et al. Surgical site infection following spinal instrumentation for scoliosis: a multicenter analysis of rates, risk factors, and pathogens. J Bone Joint Surg Am 2013;95:800–6.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Vitale MG, Riedel MD, Glotzbecker MP, et al. Building consensus: development of a Best Practice Guideline (BPG) for surgical site infection (SSI) prevention in high-risk pediatric spine surgery. J Pediatr Orthop 2013;33:471–8.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Glotzbecker MP, Riedel MD, Vitale MG, et al. What’s the evidence? Systematic literature review of risk factors and preventive strategies for surgical site infection following pediatric spine surgery. J Pediatr Orthop 2013;33:479–87.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Chang CC, Merritt K. Infection at the site of implanted materials with and without preadhered bacteria. J Orthop Res 1994;12:526–31.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  9. Arens S, Schlegel U, Printzen G, et al. Influence of materials for fixation implants on local infection. J Bone Joint Surg Br 1996;78:647–51.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  10. Ha KY, Chung YG, Ryoo SJ. Adherence and biofilm formation of Staphylococcus epidermidis and Mycobacterium tuberculosis on various spinal implants. Spine 2005;30:38–43.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Gracia E, Fernandez A, Conchello P, et al. Adherence of Staphylococcus aureus slime-producing strain variants to biomaterials used in orthopaedic surgery. Int Orthop 1997;21:46–51.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  12. DiSilvestre M, Bakaloudis G, Lolli F, et al. Late developing infection following posterior fusion for adolescent idiopathic scoliosis. Eur Spine J 2011;20:S121–7.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Marks MC, Newton PO, Bastrom TP, et al. Surgical site infection in adolescent idiopathic scoliosis surgery. Spine Deformity 2013;1:352–8.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Horan TC, Andrus M, Dudeck MA. CDC/NHSN surveillance definition of healthcare-associated infection and criteria for specific types of infections in the acute care setting. Am J Infect Control 2008;36:309–32.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Waxnas TA. Reduced Rate of Late Infection after Posterior Spine Instrumentation with Titanium-Alloy vs. Stainless Steel Implants (presented abstract #78). Scoliosis Research Society Annual Meeting, 2012.

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Margaret L. Wright BS.

Additional information

Author disclosures

MLW (none), DLS (grants from POSNA & SRS, personal fees from Biomet & Medtronic, nonfinancial support from Growing Spine Study Group, Scoliosis Research Society, Growing Spine Foundation, Medtronic Strategic Advisory Board, personal fees from expert testimony, personal fees from Biomet, Medtronic, and Stryker, personal fees from Wolters Kluwer Health–Lippincott Williams & Wilkins, other from Medtronic, other from Stryker, Biomet, and Medtronic outside the submitted work; in addition, he has a patent Medtronic issued), HM (grants from SRS, POSNA, CWSDRF, CPIRF, other from Biomet, Medtronic, DePuy Synthes, Stryker, outside the submitted work), RPW (none), AT (none), JMF (other from Biomet, other from LWW, outside the submitted work), MGV (grants from SRS, POSNA, CWSDRF, other from Biomet, Medtronic, DePuy Synthes, Stryker, other from Biomet, outside the submitted work).

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Wright, M.L., Skaggs, D.L., Matsumoto, H. et al. Does the Type of Metal Instrumentation Affect the Risk of Surgical Site Infection in Pediatric Scoliosis Surgery?. Spine Deform 4, 206–210 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jspd.2015.11.002

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jspd.2015.11.002

Keywords

Navigation