The Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery (American). 2006;88:2167-2174.
doi:10.2106/JBJS.E.00248
© 2006 The Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery, Inc.
This Article
Right arrow Full Text
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow CME: Take the exams for this article:
 Trauma Test 15: Winter 2007 (publication date February 15, 2007; expiration...
Basic Science Test 8: Winter 2007 (publication date February 15, 2007; expi...
CME 4: October, November, December 2006 (publication date January 5, 2007; ...
Right arrow [Supplementary Material]
Right arrow Letters to the Editor: Submit a response
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me when Letters to the Editor are posted
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow E-mail this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to My File Cabinet
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowReprints and Permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Svoboda, M. S. J.
Right arrow Articles by Wenke, J. C.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Svoboda, M. S. J.
Right arrow Articles by Wenke, J. C.
Related Collections
Right arrow Basic Science
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us   Add to Technorati  
What's this?

Comparison of Bulb Syringe and Pulsed Lavage Irrigation with Use of a Bioluminescent Musculoskeletal Wound Model

Major Steven J. Svoboda, MD1, Terry G. Bice, MS1, Heather A. Gooden, BS1, Daniel E. Brooks, BS1, Darryl B. Thomas, MD1 and Joseph C. Wenke, PhD1

1 United States Army Institute of Surgical Research, 3400 Rawley E. Chambers Avenue, Fort Sam Houston, TX 78234-6315. E-mail address for J.C. Wenke: joseph.wenke{at}us.army.mil

Investigation performed at the United States Army Institute of Surgical Research, Fort Sam Houston, Texas

A commentary is available with the electronic versions of this article, on our web site (www.jbjs.org) and on our quarterly CD-ROM (call our subscription department, at 781-449-9780, to order the CD-ROM).

The opinions or assertions contained herein are the private views of the authors and are not to be construed as official or reflecting the views of the Department of Defense or United States government. The authors are employees of the United States government. This work was prepared as part of their official duties and, as such, there is no copyright to be transferred.

The authors did not receive grants or outside funding in support of their research for or preparation of this manuscript. They did not receive payments or other benefits or a commitment or agreement to provide such benefits from a commercial entity. No commercial entity paid or directed, or agreed to pay or direct, any benefits to any research fund, foundation, educational institution, or other charitable or nonprofit organization with which the authors are affiliated or associated.

Background: Despite the fact that wound irrigation is a common surgical procedure, there are many variables, including delivery device, irrigant type, and fluid volume, that have yet to be optimized. The purpose of this study was to compare, with use of transgenic bioluminescent bacteria and standard quantitative microbiological methods, the efficacy of pulsed lavage and bulb syringe irrigation in reducing wound bacterial counts.

Methods: A caprine model of a complex, contaminated musculoskeletal wound was developed with use of a bioluminescent strain of Pseudomonas aeruginosa that can be quantified. Luminescent activity was recorded as relative luminescent units with use of a photon-counting camera six hours after the wound was created and inoculated. Twelve goats were randomly assigned to either the pulsed lavage group or the bulb syringe irrigation group. Each wound was irrigated with normal saline solution in 3-L increments for a total of 9 L and was imaged after each 3-L increment. In addition, quantitative culture samples were obtained from different tissues within the wound before and after irrigation.

Results: Pulsed lavage decreased the amount of relative luminescent units by 52%, 64%, and 70% at 3, 6, and 9 L, respectively. The bulb syringe irrigation reduced the amount of relative luminescent units by 33%, 44%, and 51% at these same time-points. Significant differences in luminescence were noted between the two groups after both 6 and 9 L of irrigation (p ≤ 0.04). The correlation coefficients between relative luminescent units and quantitative cultures for the condition before irrigation and after irrigation were r = 0.96 and 0.83, respectively.

Conclusions: Pulsed lavage was more effective than bulb syringe irrigation in reducing bacterial luminescence after both 6 and 9 L of irrigation. Both device and volume effects can be demonstrated with use of this model. Bioluminescent bacteria provide a method to visualize bacterial distribution and to quantify the bacteria in a wound.

Clinical Relevance: Pulsed lavage is a more effective and efficient method of irrigation to remove bacteria in a complex musculoskeletal wound. In the model we used, pulsed lavage irrigation with 3 L of saline solution resulted in a reduction of approximately the same amount of bacteria as did irrigation with 9 L with use of a bulb syringe.


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Technorati Technorati    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
 JBJSHome page
B. D. Owens and J. C. Wenke
Early Wound Irrigation Improves the Ability to Remove Bacteria
J. Bone Joint Surg. Am., August 1, 2007; 89(8): 1723 - 1726.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]