Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-fbnjt Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-19T10:55:46.205Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Bone Wax as a Risk Factor for Surgical-Site Infection Following Neurospinal Surgery

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  02 January 2015

Laurel Gibbs
Affiliation:
Department of Hospital Epidemiology and Infection Control, University of California San Francisco Medical Center, San Francisco, California
Anthony Kakis
Affiliation:
Department of Hospital Epidemiology and Infection Control, University of California San Francisco Medical Center, San Francisco, California
Philip Weinstein
Affiliation:
Department of Neurosurgery, University of California San Francisco, San Francisco, California
John E. Conte Jr.*
Affiliation:
Departments of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Medicine, and Microbiology and Immunology, University of California San Francisco, San Francisco, California
*
Department of Hospital Epidemiology and Infection Control, 350 Parnassus Avenue, Suite 210, San Francisco, CA 94117

Abstract

Surgical-site infection occurred in 6 of 42 neurospinal cases in which bone wax was used and in 1 of 72 cases in which it was not used during a 3-month period (P < .01). Increased risk of infection should be considered when using bone wax as a hemostatic agent.

Type
Concise Communications
Copyright
Copyright © The Society for Healthcare Epidemiology of America 2004

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1.Katz, SE, Rootman, J. Adverse effects of bone wax in surgery of the orbit. Ophthal Plast Reconstr Surg 1996;12:121126.Google Scholar
2.Robicsek, F, Daugherty, HK, Cook, JW, et al.Mycobacterium fortuitum epidemics after open-heart surgery. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 1978;75:9196.Google Scholar
3.Mangram, AJ, Horan, TC, Pearson, ML, Silver, LC, Jarvis, WR. Guideline for prevention of surgical site infection, 1999: Hospital Infection Control Practices Advisory Committee. Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol 1999;20:250278.Google Scholar
4.National Nosocomial Infections Surveillance (NNIS) System report: data summary from January 1992-June 2002, issued August 2002. Am J Infect Control 2002;30:458475.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
5.Apisarnthanarak, A, Jones, M, Waterman, BM, Carroll, CM, Bernardi, R, Fraser, VJ. Risk factors for surgical-site infections in a community hospital: a case-control study. Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol 2003;24:3136.Google Scholar
6.Olsen, MA, Mayfield, J, Lauryssen, C, et al.Risk factors for surgical site infection in spinal surgery. J Neurosurg 2003;98(suppl):149155.Google ScholarPubMed
7.Momata, Y, Miyamota, , Ishikawa, K, et al.Evaluation of feasibility of hydroxyapatite putty as a local hemostatic agent for bone. J Biomed Mater Res 2002;63:542547.Google Scholar
8.Patel, RB, Kwatler, JA, Hodosh, RM. Bone wax as a cause of body granuloma in the cerebellopontine angle: case illustration. J Neurosurg 2000;92:362.Google Scholar
9.Nelson, DR, Buxton, TB, Quyen, NL, Rissing, P. The promotional effect of bone wax on experimental Staphylococcus aureus osteomyelitis. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 1991;99:977980.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
10.Anfinsen, OG, Sudmann, B, Rait, M, Bang, F, Sudmann, E. Complications secondary to the use of standard bone wax in seven patients. J Foot Ankle Surg 1993;32:505508.Google Scholar
11.Johnson, P, Fromm, D. Effects of bone wax on bacterial clearance. Surgery 1981;89:206209.Google ScholarPubMed
12.Baldauf, R, Kanat, IO. The use of bone wax. J Foot Surg 1986;25:456458.Google Scholar