Related Experiment Video
Updated: Sep 27, 2025
Surgical Implantation of Chronic Neural Electrodes for Recording Single Unit Activity and Electrocorticographic Signals
Published on: February 24, 2012
A Retrospective Cohort Study of Implantable Pulse Generator Surgical Site Infections After Deep Brain Stimulation
Jamasb J Sayadi1, Adrian J Rodrigues1, Neal A Patel1
1Department of Neurosurgery, Stanford University, Stanford, CA, USA.
Introduction:
Deep brain stimulation (DBS) surgery is an established treatment for many patients with neurologic disease, and a common complication of DBS is surgical site infection (SSI). In 2016, neurosurgeons at our institution began enclosing implantable pulse generators (IPGs) within fully absorbable, antibacterial envelopes in patients who underwent initial DBS implantation. We sought to determine whether the use of antibacterial envelopes reduced IPG-related SSIs.
Materials And Methods:
We performed a retrospective chart review of all adult patients who underwent initial DBS implantation at Stanford Hospital between November 14, 2012, and November 9, 2020. Operative details, perioperative antibiotics, comorbidities, and postoperative complications were extracted for all patients. Univariate and multivariate logistic regression were used to identify factors associated with SSIs within three months of surgery, and interrupted time-series analysis was performed to assess whether the departmental adoption of the antibacterial envelope led to a reduction in IPG SSIs.
Results:
Of 344 patients who underwent initial IPG implantation with the antibacterial envelope, one developed an SSI within three months of surgery (0.3%), compared with six of 204 patients (2.9%) who underwent the same procedure without the antibacterial envelope (odds ratio: 0.10, 95% CI: 0.01-0.80, p = 0.031). Univariate logistic regression revealed that the antibacterial envelope and 2000-mg intravenous cefazolin perioperatively were associated with reduced SSI risk, whereas no other factors reached statistical significance. After adjusting for comorbidities, no association remained statistically significant. Interrupted time-series analysis showed a reduction in SSIs after 2016, but the effect was not significant.
Conclusions:
The adoption of antibacterial envelopes was found to reduce IPG SSIs at the univariate level, but this association did not remain significant after controlling for confounding variables including perioperative antibiotic administration. Although encouraging, this study does not conclusively establish that the use of antibacterial pouches in patients who underwent initial DBS implantation reduces the incidence of IPG SSIs. Future prospective studies that control for confounding variables are necessary to determine the efficacy of antibacterial envelopes in reducing post-DBS infections at the IPG site before clear recommendations can be made.
