Randomised controlled trial comparing antibiotic cement bead pouch versus negative pressure wound therapy for the management of severe open tibia fracture wounds: Beads versus VAC (BvV) protocol

INTRODUCTION: Early open fracture management aims to minimise the risk of complications. For the most severe open fracture wounds, multiple irrigation and debridement surgeries are required to overcome severe wound contamination, to reassess the evolving tissue injury or to temporise and plan further surgery. When multiple irrigation and debridement surgeries are needed, uncertainty remains about how the open fracture wound should be managed to best minimise complications. The primary aim of this trial is to compare the antibiotic cement bead pouch vs negative pressure wound therapy in the management of patients with severe open tibia fracture wounds. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: BvV is a multicentre, pragmatic, parallel arm randomised controlled trial that aims to enrol 312 adult patients admitted to a participating centre with a severe open tibia fracture requiring multiple irrigation and debridement surgeries. Participants will be randomly allocated on a 1:1 basis to either antibiotic cement bead pouch or negative pressure wound therapy. The primary outcome will be a composite outcome to evaluate clinical status 6 months after randomisation. Using the win ratio approach, we will hierarchically assess the composite outcome in the following order: (i) all-cause mortality, (ii) injury-related amputation of the lower extremity, (iii) unplanned reoperation to manage wound complications, an infection or promote fracture healing and (iv) clinical fracture healing assessed using the Functional IndeX for Trauma (FIX-IT) instrument. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: The BvV trial has been approved by a central institutional review board (IRB) (Advarra) for clinical sites in the USA, the ethics board at the coordinating centre at McMaster University (Hamilton Integrated Research Ethics Board), and participating sites not using the central institutional IRB (Fraser Health Research Ethics Board, The University of British Columbia Clinical Research Ethics Board, Newfoundland and Labrador Health Research Ethics Board, University of Manitoba Biomedical Research Ethics Board). Additional clinical sites who are in the start-up phase, as well as any new selected clinical sites, will obtain local approvals prior to initiating trial activities. This will include a clinical site in the UK who is in the process of obtaining the necessary approvals. Recruitment began in November 2023. Both interventions are frequently used to manage severe open fracture wounds, ensuring that the trial results can be easily transitioned into clinical practice. The results of this trial will be disseminated to national and international partners through peer-reviewed publications, academic conferences and stakeholder engagement activities. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT05615844.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
BMJ Open
Published
2026-05-01
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2024-088521
Primary Topic
Bone fractures and treatments
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00

Funders

Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Randomised controlled trial comparing antibiotic cement bead pouch versus negative pressure wound therapy for the management of severe open tibia fracture wounds: Beads versus VAC (BvV) protocol

Patrick J. Kellam, Sofia Bzovsky, Robert Zura, A O Harris et al.
BMJ Open
Bone fractures and treatments
article

Randomised controlled trial comparing antibiotic cement bead pouch versus negative pressure wound therapy for the management of severe open tibia fracture wounds: Beads versus VAC (BvV) protocol

Patrick J. Kellam, Sofia Bzovsky, Robert Zura, A O Harris, Franca Mossuto, David Pogorzelski, Ernesto Guerra-Farfán, Patrick F. Bergin, Zachary M. Working, J Elisabeth Wells, Joan Hebden, David W. Grainger, Gerard Slobogean, Lehana Thabane, Nathan N O’Hara, Ashley E Levack, Lucas S Marchand, Gregory J Della Rocca, Gregory M Schrank, Sheila Sprague, Mohit Bhandari, Cassandra Tsoutsounakis, Hailey Pineda, Jennifer E Hagen, Robert V O’Toole, Debra Marvel, I Leah Gitajn, Kyle J Jeray, Roman M Natoli
article en

Abstract

INTRODUCTION: Early open fracture management aims to minimise the risk of complications. For the most severe open fracture wounds, multiple irrigation and debridement surgeries are required to overcome severe wound contamination, to reassess the evolving tissue injury or to temporise and plan further surgery. When multiple irrigation and debridement surgeries are needed, uncertainty remains about how the open fracture wound should be managed to best minimise complications. The primary aim of this trial is to compare the antibiotic cement bead pouch vs negative pressure wound therapy in the management of patients with severe open tibia fracture wounds. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: BvV is a multicentre, pragmatic, parallel arm randomised controlled trial that aims to enrol 312 adult patients admitted to a participating centre with a severe open tibia fracture requiring multiple irrigation and debridement surgeries. Participants will be randomly allocated on a 1:1 basis to either antibiotic cement bead pouch or negative pressure wound therapy. The primary outcome will be a composite outcome to evaluate clinical status 6 months after randomisation. Using the win ratio approach, we will hierarchically assess the composite outcome in the following order: (i) all-cause mortality, (ii) injury-related amputation of the lower extremity, (iii) unplanned reoperation to manage wound complications, an infection or promote fracture healing and (iv) clinical fracture healing assessed using the Functional IndeX for Trauma (FIX-IT) instrument. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: The BvV trial has been approved by a central institutional review board (IRB) (Advarra) for clinical sites in the USA, the ethics board at the coordinating centre at McMaster University (Hamilton Integrated Research Ethics Board), and participating sites not using the central institutional IRB (Fraser Health Research Ethics Board, The University of British Columbia Clinical Research Ethics Board, Newfoundland and Labrador Health Research Ethics Board, University of Manitoba Biomedical Research Ethics Board). Additional clinical sites who are in the start-up phase, as well as any new selected clinical sites, will obtain local approvals prior to initiating trial activities. This will include a clinical site in the UK who is in the process of obtaining the necessary approvals. Recruitment began in November 2023. Both interventions are frequently used to manage severe open fracture wounds, ensuring that the trial results can be easily transitioned into clinical practice. The results of this trial will be disseminated to national and international partners through peer-reviewed publications, academic conferences and stakeholder engagement activities. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT05615844.

BMJ OpenVol. 16(5)
University of Maryland, Baltimore (US), Prisma Health (US), Dartmouth–Hitchcock Medical Center (US), Loyola University Medical Center (US), University of Maryland Medical Center (US), Johns Hopkins University (US), Oregon Health & Science University (US), University of California, Irvine (US), University of Utah (US), Hamilton General Hospital (CA), Indiana Orthopaedic Hospital (US), University of Utah Hospital (US), University of Mississippi Medical Center (US), University of Florida (US), Methodist Hospital (US), University of California, Irvine Medical Center (US), Orthopaedic Trauma Association (US), Vall d'Hebron Hospital Universitari (ES), The University of Texas Health Science Center (US), Impact (CA), University of Baltimore (US), Louisiana State University Health Sciences Center New Orleans (US), University of Missouri (US), McMaster University (CA)
U.S. Department of Defense
Good health and well-being
Openalex Percentile: Top 11%
Bone fractures and treatments
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.