Pin tract infection with contemporary external fixation: How much of a problem?
Pin tract infection with contemporary external fixation: How much of a problem?
复制标题
DOI：
10.1097/00005131-200308000-00005
复制
发表时间：
2003-08-01
影响因子：
2.3
通讯作者：
Voor, M
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Parameswaran, AD;Roberts, CS;Voor, M
目的：了解针道感染的发生率。设计：回顾性图表回顾。环境：城市社区的一级创伤中心。患者：在1997-2001年的4年间，共有285例患者，285例骨折。干预：外固定。主要观察指标：针道感染发生率。结果：285例骨折。合并感染32例（11.2%）。环形固定架蒙太奇感染发生率为3.9%(3/77)，单侧固定架感染发生率为12.9%(23/178)，混合型固定架感染发生率为20.0%(6/30)，差异有统计学意义（P < 0.04）。单侧固定架组与混合型固定架组的针道感染发生率无显著差异。结论：混合型外固定架患者与单侧外固定架患者发生针道感染的风险相似。环状固定架组感染率明显低于混合型外固定架组和单侧固定架组。
Objective: To determine the incidence of pin tract infection.Design: Retrospective chart review.Setting: Level 1 trauma center in an urban community.Patients: A total of 285 patients with 285 fractures over a 4-year period (1997-2001).Intervention: External fixation.Main Outcome Measurement: Incidence of pin tract infection.Results: Of 285 fractures. 32 (11.2%) were complicated by infection. The incidence of infection according to montage was 3.9%, (3/77) for ring fixators, which was significantly different (P < 0.04) from the 12.9% incidence (23/178) for unilateral fixators and the 20.0% incidence (6/30) for hybrid fixators (P = 0.004). The incidences of pin tract infection for the unilateral fixator group and the hybrid fixator group were not significantly different.Conclusions: Patients with hybrid external fixators had a similar risk of pin tract infection as patients who had unilateral fixators. The infection rate in the ring fixator group was significantly lower than the hybrid external and unilateral fixator groups.