• Users Online: 644
  • Home
  • Print this page
  • Email this page
Home About us Editorial board Ahead of print Current issue Search Archives Submit article Instructions Subscribe Contacts Login 


 
 Table of Contents  
ORIGINAL ARTICLE
Year : 2016  |  Volume : 2  |  Issue : 1  |  Page : 17-22

Treatment of open fractures of the tibia with a locked intramedullary nail with a core release of antibiotics (SAFE DualCore Universal): Comparative study with a standard locked intramedullary nail


Department of Orthopedic Surgery, Reconstruction Unit, Hospital Garcia de Orta, Almada, Portugal

Date of Submission25-Nov-2015
Date of Acceptance05-Apr-2016
Date of Web Publication17-May-2016

Correspondence Address:
Nuno Craveiro-Lopes
R. Margaridas, 48, Herdade da Aroeira, 2820 563 Charneca da Caparica
Portugal
Login to access the Email id

Source of Support: None, Conflict of Interest: None


DOI: 10.4103/2455-3719.182571

Rights and Permissions
  Abstract 

Introduction: The SAFE Dualcore Universal Nail is an interlocking nail with an antibiotic cement core. We compared the clinical and radiological results with a standard interlocking nail for treating open fractures of the tibia.
Materials and Methods: Prospective, controlled cohort trial, including thirty patients with open fractures of the tibia. Patients were divided into two groups according to the treatment method: Group I (STD), consisting of 14 patients treated by delayed interlocking standard nailing, after an antibiotic treatment and bed rest. Group II (SAFE) had 16 patients treated with an interlocking intramedullary nail with a core of polymethyl methacrylate cement with antibiotics. Five of these were temporarily stabilized with an external fixator. We added vancomycin (2 g) and flucloxacillin (2 g) to the bone cement in the core of the nail. The two groups were similar on demographic data (age, gender), fracture, and extent of the wounds (P > 0.05). The mean follow-up was 2.4 years (5 months to 4 years) for the STD group and 2.1 years (4 months to 3 years) for the SAFE group.
Results: Fifteen of the 30 patients had positive cultures, including 13 cases growing Enterobacter, Enterococcus, Pseudomonas, and methicillin-susceptible Staphylococcus aureus (MSSA) groups. The infection rate was significantly more in STD at 43% (6/14 patients) compared to SAFE 6% (1/16 patients), (P = 0.02). Healing times was significantly more for STD group, at an average of 7.5 months (3-18 months) compared to 4.5 months (2-8.5 months) for the SAFE group (P = 0.02). The complication rate was 64% (9/14) in the STD group and 25% (4/16) for the SAFE, including the infection rate, a statistically significant difference (P = 0.03). The six infected STD nailing cases were salvaged with antibiotic coated cement nails, five of which healed. Infection recurred in the sixth case and was treated with the Ilizarov method.
Conclusion: SAFE nails had lesser infection, faster consolidation, and fewer complications compared with standard nails in treating open fractures of tibia. We can choose the type and dose of antibiotics eluted by the nail. The SAFE DualCore Universal nail is mechanical stable as well as biologically active. It allows fixation of intermediate bone segments, shortens hospital stay, healing time, and reduces the cost of treatment.
Level of Evidence: Level III.

Keywords: Bone infection, cement with antibiotic, intramedullary nailing, open fracture, osteomyelitis, tibia


How to cite this article:
Craveiro-Lopes N. Treatment of open fractures of the tibia with a locked intramedullary nail with a core release of antibiotics (SAFE DualCore Universal): Comparative study with a standard locked intramedullary nail. J Limb Lengthen Reconstr 2016;2:17-22

How to cite this URL:
Craveiro-Lopes N. Treatment of open fractures of the tibia with a locked intramedullary nail with a core release of antibiotics (SAFE DualCore Universal): Comparative study with a standard locked intramedullary nail. J Limb Lengthen Reconstr [serial online] 2016 [cited 2019 Sep 15];2:17-22. Available from: http://www.jlimblengthrecon.org/text.asp?2016/2/1/17/182571


  Introduction Top


Bone infections challenge the orthopedic surgeon and are difficult for the patient. We estimate that infection complicates an average of 1% (range: 0.7-4.3%) of all orthopedic procedures. The incidence is increased in the presence of implants. [1],[2],[3] Bacteria adhere to implants and produce a biofilm which prevent the penetration of antibiotics and lead to infection. [4]

We reviewed 176 postoperative infections in 20,000 surgeries (0.9%) over 15 years in our department. Thirty-five percent of these were in long bones of lower limb.

Open fractures have a higher risk of infection after internal fixation: from 5% in Gustillo Type I to 50% in Gustillo Type III. [5],[6],[7] Converting external to internal fixation has a higher (40-70%) risk of infection when the external fixator is used for more than 2 weeks. [8]

Antibiotic-releasing implants have many advantages in the treatment of these disorders. They allow control of infection with the local release of high doses of antibiotics. They provide stability for immediate mobilization and prevent many complications of other methods of fixation.

These devices are available with different vehicles of antibiotics, including polymethyl methacrylate (PMMA), [9],[10] polylactic acid, [11] and hydrogels. [12] The PMMA cement loaded with antibiotics is one of the oldest and most widely used methods for this purpose. [13],[14]

Ender nails [15] and interlocked nails covered with PMMA cement with antibiotics [16] have been used. However, such devices are mechanically weak and cannot allow immediate weight bearing. The procedure to prepare it on the table is time-consuming. Uneven size of the nail can cause it to jam in the canal. Decoupling of the thin layer of cement into the canal can occur while removing the nail. Fracture or bending of the small diameter nail is known.

Fuchs et al. [17] described a nail coated with a layer of reabsorbable polymer with gentamicin to prevent infection in open fractures. Though their device shows promise, its antibacterial spectrum is limited as is its short duration of elution.

To overcome infection problems in open fractures, we developed a new nail which we are using since 2009 [Figure 1]. [18] DualCore refers to its double core of antibiotic-impregnated cement with a metal rod in its center. This combination gives more resistance to both acute bending and fatigue.

The metal core is inserted into the cement before polymerization. Central placement at the fracture ensures that proximal and distal locking holes are free.

Multiple locking holes release the antibiotics and also fix the comminuted fragments. We called it SAFE nail, an acronym for "self-releasing antibiotic fixation endomedular nail" [Figure 1].
Figure 1: SAFE DualCore Universal Nail

Click here to view


Jigs help lock four screws proximally and distally and lock intermediate segments as well.

Mechanical testing showed that the SAFE nail had 220% more resistance than the Grosse nail and withstood more than 1.5 million cycles of load. This was equivalent to walking full weight bearing without union for 10 months. In vitro tests with 2 g of vancomycin showed antibiotic release at 14 times the minimum inhibitory concentration (MIC) for more than a year.

The aim of this study is to compare the clinical and radiographic results of SAFE nail with a standard interlocking nail for the treatment of open fractures of the tibia.


  Materials and Methods Top


We designed a prospective controlled cohort study from 2009 to 2012 including thirty patients with open fractures of the tibia. Patients were divided into two groups according to the treatment method. Both groups were treated initially by debridement, suture, and intravenous 1 g of cefazolin and 80 mg of gentamicin for 1-2 weeks.

Group I (STD), comprising 14 patients were temporarily immobilized with a plaster cast or traction and then treated with a interlocking standard Grosse or T2 nails.

Group II (SAFE) comprising 16 patients were temporarily immobilized with cast 11 or an external fixator 5 and then were treated with a SAFE nail.

Soft tissue injuries in Gustillo Type III lesions were treated immediately or during the first week with musculocutaneous flaps, before nailing.

Conversion to nailing done after stabilization of soft tissue lesions posed less risk of deep infection. This took from 7 to 14 days in both groups: earlier in Gustillo Type I and II lesions and later in Gustillo Type III.

Both groups received prophylactic antibiotics for 48 hours and were discharged on the 3 rd day after partial weight bearing mobilization. Full weight bearing was permitted with crutches after three cortices showed healing on X-rays. The preparation of the SAFE nail is a 10 min procedure. A cement gun injects a mixture of cement and antibiotics inside the nail. A metal rod is inserted in the middle of the soft cement before polymerization, forming the "DualCore." 10 of the 16 cases treated with the SAFE nail had a combination of flucloxacillin and vancomycin where bacteriologic examination was negative. Gentamicin alone in 3, combination of meropenem and gentamicin, vancomycin, and meropenem alone in one each were used after culture.

The two groups were matched for age, gender, mechanism of injury and Gustilo classification. In STD group, the mean age was 40 years (22-77). In SAFE group, mean age was 47 years (18-74) (P = 0.31). In STD group, there were 9 male (64%) and 5 female (36%) and in SAFE group there were 14 (87%) male and 2 (13%) female patients (P = 0.18).

The most common mechanism of injury in all of the patients was motorcycle or car accident. A2 and B2 (AO) were the most common types of fractures in both groups.

Six fractures were Type I, seven Type II, and one was Type IIIA for STD group. Four were Type I, six Type II, and IIIA each in the SAFE group, (P = 0.14).

Ninety percent of the fractures occurred at the middle one-third of the tibia in both groups.

The mean follow-up was 2.4 years (5 months to 4 years) for the STD group and 2.1 years (4 months to 3 years) for the SAFE group (P = 0.19).


  Results Top


In the STD group, six of the fourteen patients developed a postoperative infection with active fistulae [Figure 2]. Serratia, Enterobacter, Enterococcus + Proteus, MSSA, methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus, and mixed flora were identified as causative. Five patients were operated later with a SAFE nail with appropriate antibiotics in five cases, four of which were cured. In one case, the infection recurred and was treated with the Ilizarov method.
Figure 2: This was a 24-year-old man who was run over by a car with open fractures of both legs. He was operated with standard T2 interlocking nails and 1 month later, a fistulae appeared on the right leg and bacteriology revealed an Enterobacter cloacae infection (a and b). We removed the nail, cleaned the medullary canal with the RIA system, and introduced a second generation SAFE nail with meropenem and vancomycin, antibiotics guided by the sensibility tests (c). One month after surgery shows cure of the infection and patient doing full weight bearing (d)

Click here to view


Another case was treated with antibiotics continuously until the fracture healed. The nail was removed and infection healed in 8½ months. The antibiotics were guided by AST and included gentamicin in two cases, meropenem in one, and a combination of vancomycin with meropenem and with flucloxacillin in other two cases.

In the SAFE group, one MSSA and two mixed flora were detected in the patients where external fixation was used previous to the nailing. Pseudomonas aeruginosa, Enterococcus faecalis, and Enterobacter + Pseudomonas were grown in patients subjected to traction. All these patients have healed without visible infection.

One of these patients developed infection after SAFE nailing. The organism was Streptococcus viridans resistant to gentamicin, the preventive antibiotic introduced in the nail. This patient was operated again using a SAFE nail with flucloxacillin and cured uneventfully.

The infection rate after nailing was 43% (6/14 patients) for the standard group and 6% (1/16 cases) for the SAFE group, a statistically significant difference (P = 0.02).

The time to three cortical bridging was a mean of 7.5 months (3-18) for the STD group. For the SAFE group, the mean time to healing was 4.5 months (2-8.5), a statistically significant difference (P = 0.02).

The overall complication rate was 64% (9/14 cases) for the STD group and 25% (4/16 cases) for the SAFE group, a statistically significant difference (P = 0.03). In STD group, this included one transient common peroneal nerve palsy, one knee stiffness, and six cases of nail infection. These needed several surgical interventions, one of them leading to chronic fistulae.

In the SAFE group, we had a fracture of a first generation nail and a nail infection, both converted to a second generation SAFE DualCore nail, leading to consolidation and control of the infection.


  Discussion Top


Intramedullary nailing after external fixation is in use since 1970's for open tibial fractures. [14],[15] Reamed interlocking nailing in open tibial fractures has given disappointingly high rates of infection. [5] Unreamed nailing has been used for Gustilo Types I, II, and III open tibial fractures with controversial results. [7]

PMMA cement spacers or beads impregnated with antibiotics have been used since 1970 [13],[14] in the treatment of bone infection. It is an effective method for prolonged local administration of high doses of antibiotics, while maintaining minimal or undetectable systemic levels. [19],[20]

The release of antibiotic contained in PMMA cement or other carriers in direct contact with the tissues follows a biphasic pattern with a high release phase for about 12 h, followed by a plateau release phase of variable length, some authors reporting levels above MIC for 6-8 months. [21],[22],[23],[24],[25],[26],[27],[28],[29],[30]

Our tests have also shown that the elution from a nail filled with PMMA impregnated with 1 g of vancomycin remained between seven and 12 times MICs. Higher doses of antibiotic release can be achieved with high amount of antibiotic in the cement.

Furthermore, the release of the antibiotic through the holes of the nail controls the level as a continuous and constant concentration, avoiding the initial peak of release observed when the cement is in full contact with the tissues, which could be associated with some described cases of toxicity. [31],[32]

Meta-analyses have shown that patients who received locally delivered antibiotics as prophylaxis, in addition to systemic antibiotics, had significantly lower infection rates than those receiving only systemic antibiotics.

For the most severe cases (GAIII B and C), the incidence of infections fell from over 31% with systemic antibiotics only to under 9% with the addition of local antibiotics. Given the severe consequences for patients and health care systems of such infections, these findings support an antibiotic prophylaxis regimen including locally delivered antibiotics. [33]

Antibiotic-coated interlocking nails are usually made with nails of 8-10 mm diameter. These may not have adequate resistance to fatigue and bending forces. The cement around such nails is prone to decoupling and jamming during insertion and extraction. [16]

The use of an interlocking nail covered with a thin polylactic acid film with gentamicin, releases the antibiotic with a biphasic pattern of short duration, most of it during the first 48 h and has a limited spectrum of coverage. [17]

The SAFE nail can be as thick as 12 mm since the cement is inside the nail. This avoids the problems of stability and cement debonding. Reinforcement with a metallic rod inside the cement provides a much higher resistance to bending and fatigue. [18]

We can also choose the antibiotic, more than one if necessary, and graduate the concentration to be released by the amount introduced in the cement. The added advantage is that the release can last as long as a year as shown in our in vitro tests. [18]

This study had six cases of Gustilo Gr III fractures in the SAFE group as compared to only one in the STD group. We did not have the confidence of using a large diameter nail in Gustillo Type III injuries due to an increased risk of infection, whereas the SAFE nail gave us that confidence.

Only one patient in 16 (6%), treated with the SAFE nail developed a deep infection due to an agent resistant to gentamicin, the antibiotic used at that time in the cement.

This infection healed after exchange of the SAFE nail for another with flucloxacillin, the antibiotic guided by antibiotic susceptibility testing (AST).

In our present study, the use of a standard interlocking nail lead to deep infection in 6 of the 14 patients (43%). Most of those infected nails were changed to a SAFE nail with appropriate antibiotics directed by AST.

Time to union was significantly shorter and the overall complication rate was significantly lower when a SAFE nail was used.


  Conclusion Top


Despite the small sample size of this comparative study, the preliminary finding of advantages of the SAFE nail is very encouraging.

The procedure is simple and can be performed quickly. The nail is 2.2 times more resistant than the Grosse nail. It is possible to interlock intermediate fragments. There is a possibility to choose the right antibiotics and dose. With 2 g of antibiotics, the release is more than 14-fold the MIC throughout the time of implantation of the nail. Prevention of infection and the ability to ream and use a large diameter nail with increased stability lead to a faster consolidation. The clinical results are excellent, with a lower infection rate and with less hospital stay and treatment costs.

We have used a new generation of implant, one which is biologically active, with greater advantages compared with existing methods of treatment of open fractures. It is better than using standard interlocking nails or conversion of external to internal fixation.

Financial support and sponsorship

Nil.

Conflicts of interest

There are no conflicts of interest.

 
  References Top

1.
Court-Brown CM. Antibiotic prophylaxis in orthopaedic surgery. Scand J Infect Dis Suppl 1990;70:74-9.  Back to cited text no. 1
    
2.
Simpson AH, Deakin M, Latham JM. Chronic osteomyelitis. The effect of the extent of surgical resection on infection-free survival. J Bone Joint Surg Br 2001;83:403-7.  Back to cited text no. 2
    
3.
Ikpeme IA, Ngim NE, Ikpeme AA. Diagnosis and treatment of pyogenic bone infections. Afr Health Sci 2010;10:82-8.  Back to cited text no. 3
    
4.
Rohde H, Frankenberger S, Zähringer U, Mack D. Structure, function and contribution of polysaccharide intercellular adhesin (PIA) to Staphylococcus epidermidis biofilm formation and pathogenesis of biomaterial-associated infections. Eur J Cell Biol 2010;89:103-11.  Back to cited text no. 4
    
5.
Gustilo RB, Anderson JT. Prevention of infection in the treatment of one thousand and twenty-five open fractures of long bones: Retrospective and prospective analyses. J Bone Joint Surg Am 1976;58:453-8.  Back to cited text no. 5
[PUBMED]    
6.
Gustilo RB, Gruninger RP, Davis T. Classification of type III (severe) open fractures relative to treatment and results. Orthopedics 1987;10:1781-8.  Back to cited text no. 6
    
7.
Maurer DJ, Merkow RL, Gustilo RB. Infection after intramedullary nailing of severe open tibial fractures initially treated with external fixation. J Bone Joint Surg Am 1989;71:835-8.  Back to cited text no. 7
    
8.
McGraw JM, Lim EV. Treatment of open tibial-shaft fractures. External fixation and secondary intramedullary nailing. J Bone Joint Surg Am 1988;70:900-11.  Back to cited text no. 8
    
9.
Calhoun JH, Henry SL, Anger DM, Cobos JA, Mader JT. The treatment of infected nonunions with gentamicin-polymethylmethacrylate antibiotic beads. Clin Orthop Relat Res 1993;295:23-7.  Back to cited text no. 9
    
10.
Bowyer GW, Cumberland N. Antibiotic release from impregnated pellets and beads. J Trauma 1994;36:331-5.  Back to cited text no. 10
    
11.
Schmidmaier G, Lucke M, Wildemann B, Haas NP, Raschke M. Prophylaxis and treatment of implant-related infections by antibiotic-coated implants: A review. Injury 2006;37 Suppl 2:S105-12.  Back to cited text no. 11
    
12.
Romano CL, Giammona G, Giardino R, Meani E. Antibiotic-loaded resorbable hydrogel coating for infection prophylaxis of orthopaedic implants. Preliminary studies. J Bone Joint Surg Br 2011;93-B:337-8.  Back to cited text no. 12
    
13.
Buchholz HW, Engelbrecht H. Depot effects of various antibiotics mixed with Palacos resins. Chirurg 1970;41:511-5.  Back to cited text no. 13
[PUBMED]    
14.
Klemm K. Gentamicin-PMMA-beads in treating bone and soft tissue infections (author's transl). Zentralbl Chir 1979;104:934-42.  Back to cited text no. 14
[PUBMED]    
15.
Ohtsuka H, Yokoyama K, Higashi K, Tsutsumi A, Fukushima N, Noumi T, et al. Use of antibiotic-impregnated bone cement nail to treat septic nonunion after open tibial fracture. J Trauma 2002;52:364-6.  Back to cited text no. 15
    
16.
Thonse R, Conway JD. Antibiotic cement-coated nails for the treatment of infected nonunions and segmental bone defects. J Bone Joint Surg Am 2008;90 Suppl 4:163-74.  Back to cited text no. 16
    
17.
Fuchs T, Stange R, Schmidmaier G, Raschke MJ. The use of gentamicin-coated nails in the tibia: Preliminary results of a prospective study. Arch Orthop Trauma Surg 2011;131:1419-25.  Back to cited text no. 17
    
18.
Lopes NC, Escalda C, Villacreses C, Carvalho I, Urgueira A. Interlocking nail with a long acting antibiotic releasing core (SAFE nail). In vitro experimental study. Garcia de Orta 2014;1:3.  Back to cited text no. 18
    
19.
Nelson CL, Griffin FM, Harrison BH, Cooper RE. In vitro elution characteristics of commercially and noncommercially prepared antibiotic PMMA beads. Clin Orthop Relat Res 1992;284:303-9.  Back to cited text no. 19
    
20.
Adams K, Couch L, Cierny G, Calhoun J, Mader JT. In vitro and in vivo evaluation of antibiotic diffusion from antibiotic-impregnated polymethylmethacrylate beads. Clin Orthop Relat Res 1992;278:244-52.  Back to cited text no. 20
    
21.
Chohfi M, Langlais F. The orthopedic cement associated with vancomycin. Study of mechanical behavior and diffusion of the antibiotic in a liquid medium. Rev Bras Ortop 1994;29:363-70.  Back to cited text no. 21
    
22.
Bunetel L. Cements and Antibiotics: Experimental diffusion study Rennes: Doctorate Thesis from the University of Rennes I; 1988.  Back to cited text no. 22
    
23.
Holm NJ, Vejlsgaard R. The in vitro elution of gentamicin sulphate from methylmethacrylate bone cement. A comparative study. Acta Orthop Scand 1976;47:144-8.  Back to cited text no. 23
    
24.
Rosenthal AL, Rovell JM, Girard AE. Polyacrylic bone cement containing erythromycin and colistin. I. In vitro bacteriological activity and diffusion properties of erythromycin, colistin and erythromycin/colistin comibination. J Int Med Res 1976;4:296-304.  Back to cited text no. 24
    
25.
Wahlig H, Dingeldein E, Bergmann R, Reuss K. The release of gentamicin from polymethylmethacrylate beads. An experimental and pharmacokinetic study. J Bone Joint Surg Br 1978;60-B:270-5.  Back to cited text no. 25
[PUBMED]    
26.
Welch A. Antibiotics in acrylic bone cement. In vitro studies. J Biomed Mater Res 1978;12:679-700.  Back to cited text no. 26
[PUBMED]    
27.
Zalavras CG, Patzakis MJ, Holtom P. Local antibiotic therapy in the treatment of open fractures and osteomyelitis. Clin Orthop Relat Res 2004;427:86-93.  Back to cited text no. 27
    
28.
Mader JT, Stevens CM, Stevens JH, Ruble R, Lathrop JT, Calhoun JH. Treatment of experimental osteomyelitis with a fibrin sealant antibiotic implant. Clin Orthop Relat Res 2002;403:58-72.  Back to cited text no. 28
    
29.
Bayston R, Milner RD. The sustained release of antimicrobial drugs from bone cement. An appraisal of laboratory investigations and their significance. J Bone Joint Surg Br 1982;64:460-4.  Back to cited text no. 29
[PUBMED]    
30.
Eckman JB Jr., Henry SL, Mangino PD, Seligson D. Wound and serum levels of tobramycin with the prophylactic use of tobramycin-impregnated polymethylmethacrylate beads in compound fractures. Clin Orthop Relat Res 1988;237:213-5.  Back to cited text no. 30
    
31.
Kalil GZ, Ernst EJ, Johnson SJ, Johannsson B, Polgreen PM, Bertolatus JA, et al. Systemic exposure to aminoglycosides following knee and hip arthroplasty with aminoglycoside-loaded bone cement implants. Ann Pharmacother 2012;46:929-34.  Back to cited text no. 31
    
32.
Luu A, Syed F, Raman G, Bhalla A, Muldoon E, Hadley S, et al. Two-stage arthroplasty for prosthetic joint infection: A systematic review of acute kidney injury, systemic toxicity and infection control. J Arthroplasty 2013;28:1490-8.e1.  Back to cited text no. 32
    
33.
Craig J, Fuchs T, Jenks M, Fleetwood K, Franz D, Iff J, et al. Systematic review and meta-analysis of the additional benefit of local prophylactic antibiotic therapy for infection rates in open tibia fractures treated with intramedullary nailing. Int Orthop 2014;38:1025-30.  Back to cited text no. 33
    


    Figures

  [Figure 1], [Figure 2]


This article has been cited by
1 Recent developments on intramedullary nailing: a biomechanical perspective
Natacha Rosa,Miguel Marta,Mário Vaz,S.M.O. Tavares,Ricardo Simoes,Fernão D. Magalhães,Antonio Torres Marques
Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences. 2017;
[Pubmed] | [DOI]



 

Top
 
 
  Search
 
Similar in PUBMED
   Search Pubmed for
   Search in Google Scholar for
 Related articles
Access Statistics
Email Alert *
Add to My List *
* Registration required (free)

 
  In this article
Abstract
Introduction
Materials and Me...
Results
Discussion
Conclusion
References
Article Figures

 Article Access Statistics
    Viewed2325    
    Printed100    
    Emailed0    
    PDF Downloaded17    
    Comments [Add]    
    Cited by others 1    

Recommend this journal


[TAG2]
[TAG3]
[TAG4]