Failure of Particulate Bioglass to Prevent Experimental Staphylococcal Infection of Open Tibial Fractures.

Zong-Ping Xie,Chang-Qing Zhang,Cheng-Qing Yi,Jian-Jun Qiu,Jian-Qiang Wang,Juan Zhou

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/jac/dkn336

2008-01-01

Abstract:range from 355 to 500 mm, consisting of 45 wt% SiO2/24.5 wt% Na2O/24.5 wt% CaO/6 wt% P2O5) in vivo by examining its efficacy in reducing the rate of infection by Staphylococcus aureus after the fixation of open tibial fractures in rabbits. An in vivo test was carried out with male rabbits split into two groups infected with S. aureus ATCC 25923 at the right tibial fracture sites fixed with plates and screws, with 300 mg of particulate Bioglass w implanted in the fracture and surrounding area for the Bioglass w group, in accordance with the guidelines of the Local Animal Welfare Committee. Six weeks after the operation, the anteroposterior and lateral radiographs of the right tibia were taken and scored, the specimens from the plate and the bone were collected for microbiological evaluation, and the tibias were cut off for histopathological examination and scoring. There was no significant difference between the rates of infection in the control group (60%) and the Bioglass w group (66.7%) (P ¼ 0.35; Table 1). Similarly, there were no significant differences between the radiographic and histological scores of the control group (4.5 and 2.5, respectively) and the Bioglass w group (4 and 3, respectively) (P ¼ 0.96 and 0.32, respectively; Wilcoxon test). It has been suggested that bioglass exerts antibacterial activity by increasing pH, osmotic effects and calcium ion concentrations. 4,5 The failure of Bioglass w to prevent infection in this model may reflect the difference between in vitro and in vivo environments. For example, when bioglass particles are released into local body fluids in vivo, the local pH may not change due to the buffering capacity of the fluids. One possible limitation of the current study is that only a single strain of S. aureus was used, and a single body site was investigated. Although the initial results presented here showed no evidence for efficacy of bioglass in vivo, scope remains for studies with other strains or species of bacteria and other body sites.