ArticleEuropean journal of trauma and emergency surgery : official publication of the European Trauma Society2025
A single-centre, retrospective study on the impact of omitting preoperative antibiotic prophylaxis on wound infections in minor orthopedic implant removals.
Article in European journal of trauma and emergency surgery : official publication of the European Trauma Society, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe use of preoperative antibiotic prophylaxis (POAP) in elective implant removal (IR) is controversial due to a lack of evidence-based recommendations. First-generation cephalosporins, which are commonly used in orthopedic IR, are believed to reduce wound infection risks. However, the potential for serious side effects had raised concerns about their necessity. This study was intended to evaluate whether omitting POAP in small IR increases the risk of wound infections.
methodsThis retrospective, single-centre cohort study was conducted at a level I trauma centre in Switzerland, including patients who underwent IR between January 1, 2016, and December 31, 2021. The IR procedures involved the upper extremities (UEs), such as the clavicle, olecranon, radius and ulna, as well as the lower extremities (LEs), such as the patella, tibia, fibula, (bi)malleolar and foot. Postoperative follow-up included clinical and radiological evaluations 6 weeks after surgery. The outcomes assessed were deep wound infections, wound healing complications, refractures, persistent pain, bleeding, neurovascular injuries and muscle hernias.
resultsOf the 273 patients (mean age: 42.1 ± 14.5; 44% female), 117 (42.9%) received POAP. In the LE group (n = 141), 51.1% received POAP; in the UE group (n = 132), 34.1% received POAP. Eleven (4.0%) wound-healing disorders were documented, with five (4.3%) in the POAP group and six (3.8%) in the non-POAP group (p = 1). No deep wound infections were observed.
conclusionWithholding POAP in elective IR procedures does not significantly increase wound infection rates, suggesting it may be unnecessary in uncomplicated cases.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.