CClinicalTrials.gg
Not yet recruitingNCT07458230NGSUpdated Jul 9, 2026

Efficacy of Integrating Next Generation Sequencing for Treatment of Surgical Site Infection After Fracture Fixation:

A Phase 3 interventional study of NGS diagnostic findings in Next Generation Sequencing (NGS), Surgical Site Infection (SSI) and Fracture Fixation, sponsored by Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health. Not yet recruiting at 18 sites in United States. Open to participants aged 18 Years to 84 Years. Per ClinicalTrials.gov, last updated 2026-07-09.

Sponsored by Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health · Phase 3, Interventional, and Treatment

Phase
Phase 3
Study type
Interventional
Enrollment
250
Allocation
Randomized
Ages
18 Years to 84 Years
Sex
All
01

Study summary

The study focuses on the serious problem of infections and wound-healing issues that can happen after high-energy bone fractures. These complications are common and can affect between 10% and 60% of patients, especially those with severe injuries. When a fracture is repaired with surgery and an infection develops afterward, patients often face long recovery times, more pain, and sometimes multiple surgeries. In the worst cases, the infection can lead to permanent disability or even amputation. The current standard test used in hospitals, called a culture, often misses certain bacteria, which can make treatment less effective. Because of this, the study aims to find out whether adding a newer test called Next Generation Sequencing (NGS) can help doctors identify infections more accurately and improve patient outcomes.

The main goal of the study is to see whether using NGS along with standard hospital cultures reduces the number of treatment failures compared to using standard cultures alone. Treatment failure means the infection does not get better and the patient must return to the operating room. The study also wants to learn whether NGS helps doctors make better antibiotic choices and avoid unnecessary or ineffective treatments. Another goal is to understand which NGS results are most helpful when doctors decide to change a patient's antibiotics. By learning this, researchers hope to create a model that explains how NGS information influences treatment decisions.

To join the study, patients must be between 18 and 84 years old and have a deep infection after a fracture was repaired with internal fixation, such as plates, screws, or rods. Patients must also meet infection criteria from either the Fracture-Related Infection (FRI) guidelines or the CDC's infection criteria. A total of 250 patients will be randomly placed into one of two groups: one group will receive treatment guided by both NGS and standard cultures, while the other group will receive treatment based only on standard cultures. Researchers will then compare how often treatment fails in each group.

Treatment failure includes several possible outcomes. The most important is an unplanned return to the operating room because the infection did not improve. Other types of failure include new superficial infections that do not require surgery, bones that fail to heal properly (called nonunion), amputation, and complications caused by antibiotics. Patients will return for follow-up visits at 2 weeks, 6 weeks, 3 months, 6 months, and 12 months after joining the study so researchers can track the patient's progress and monitor for any problems.

Right now, the failure rate for treating these infections using standard hospital cultures is about 30%, which is considered unacceptably high. The researchers believe that adding NGS will help lower this number because NGS can detect more types of bacteria, including ones that are hard to grow in a lab. With better information, doctors can choose antibiotics that are more likely to work the first time, which may reduce the need for additional surgeries and improve healing. This could be especially important for military service members, who often suffer high-energy injuries and face a greater risk of long-term complications if treatment fails.

NGS is already available, covered by Medicare, and fast enough to be useful in real-time medical decisions. If this study shows that NGS improves treatment outcomes, hospitals could begin using it widely and quickly. The researchers hope that this approach will lead to fewer infections, better antibiotic use, faster recovery, and improved long-term function for patients.

02

Conditions studied

  • Next Generation Sequencing (NGS)
  • Surgical Site Infection (SSI)
  • Fracture Fixation

Keywords

  • Next Generation Sequencing (NGS)
03

In context

Surgical Wound Infection

670 studies on the registry are indexed under Surgical Wound Infection; 141 are open to participants now.

This study's planned enrollment of 250 is above the median of 200 across 514 interventional studies indexed under Surgical Wound Infection.

Browse Surgical Wound Infection studies →

Lead sponsor

Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health is the lead sponsor of 364 studies on the registry; 41 are open to participants now.

Of its 5 completed or terminated interventional studies of FDA-regulated products, 3 (60%) have results posted.

Counted across the registry records on this site, refreshed daily.

04

Who can participate

Ages eligible
18 Years to 84 Years
Sexes eligible
All
Accepts healthy volunteers
No

Inclusion criteria

  • Age 18-84 years
  • History of extremity fracture proximal to the metatarsals and carpal bones treated with any type of internal fixation. Note that both healed and unhealed fractures are eligible.
  • Deep infection requiring surgery after fracture fixation as determined by either of the following:

FRI confirmatory criteria CDC criteria (without the timeframe). This includes the possibility of culture negative infection but determined to be infection by treatment team.

  • Plan for treatment includes antibiotic therapy prescribed by Infectious Disease provider(s), regardless of SOCHB culture or NGS results.

Exclusion criteria

Exclusion Criteria:

  • Spine fractures
  • High risk of amputation based on the initial managing physician opinion
  • Incarcerated/institutionalized
  • Patient is too sick to have surgery, i.e., medical co-morbidities which preclude treatment with a general anesthetic
  • Prior history of chronic infection at the surgical site
  • Pathological fractures from a neoplastic process
  • History of Paget's Disease
  • Unavailable for the planned 12 months of follow-up (e.g., planned follow-up at a location other than one of the study sites)
  • Extremity fracture occurred more than 2 years prior to the hospital admission for the presenting infection
05

Study design

Phase
Phase 3
Primary purpose
Treatment
Allocation
Randomized
Intervention model
Parallel assignment
Masking
Double (Participant, Care provider)
Enrollment
250 participants (estimated)

Study arms

  • No intervention
    Standard of Care (Control)

    Participants in this group will receive standard of care treatment for FRI. The care team will Not be provided with NGS data. Treatment strategy will be entirely based on SOCHB culture assessment strategies.

  • Experimental
    Diagnostic Test: NGS diagnostic findings

    Patient will receive antibiotic treatment and course using the NGS results. The clinical care team will be provided with NGS diagnostic findings along with SOCHB culture data.

    Diagnostic Test: NGS diagnostic findings

Interventions

  • Diagnostic testNGS diagnostic findings

    Patient will receive antibiotic treatment and course using the NGS results. the investigators will require antibiotic treatment of any NGS finding that is not treated based on the results of SOCHB culture alone. Site PIs have agreed to integrate NGS results into the treatment plan. If the antibiotic plan contradicts the NGS-based results, alternative antibiotic selection and reason (e.g., allergy to an antibiotic, cost-prohibitive) will be documented in specific CRFs. All other treatments will be per SOC.

06

What researchers measure

Primary outcomes

  1. Infection treatment failure rate

    Infection treatment failure rate, defined as unplanned return to the operating room for infection after randomization. Infection at this time will be similarly defined as in the inclusion criteria, namely FRI confirmatory criteria and/or, CDC criteria (without the timeframe). This includes the possibility of culture negative infection but determined to be infection by the treatment team.

    Time frame: 12 month

07

Study locations

18 sites
  • University of Alabama
    Tuscaloosa, Alabama 35487, United States
    • Clay Spitler, MD · Contact
  • University of Southern California
    Los Angeles, California 90007, United States
    • Joseph Patterson, MD · Contact
  • UCSF Medical Center
    San Francisco, California 94143, United States
    • Saam Morshed, MD · Contact
  • Loyola University Medical Center
    Maywood, Illinois 60153, United States
    • Ashley Levack, MD · Contact
  • Methodist Hospital
    Indianapolis, Indiana 46202, United States
  • R Adams Cowley Shock Trauma Center
    Baltimore, Maryland 21201, United States
    • Robert O'Toole, MD · Contact
  • University of Mississippi Medical Center
    Jackson, Mississippi 39216, United States
    • Patrick Bergin, MD · Contact
  • Dartmouth Hitchcock Medical Center
    Lebanon, New Hampshire 03766, United States
    • Leah Gitajn, MD · Contact
  • Carolinas Medical Center
    Charlotte, North Carolina 28203, United States
    • Madhav Karunakar, MD · Contact
  • Ohio State University Hospital
    Columbus, Ohio 43210, United States
    • Angela Collins, MD · Contact
  • University of Pennsylvania
    Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19104, United States
    • Samir Mehta, MD · Contact
  • Warren Alpert Medical School of Brown University
    Providence, Rhode Island 02903, United States
    • Andy Evans, MD · Contact
  • Vanderbilt University Medical Center
    Nashville, Tennessee 37232, United States
    • William Obremskey, MD · Contact
  • McGovern Medical School at UTHealth Houston
    Houston, Texas 77030, United States
    • Stephen Warner, MD · Contact
  • University of Utah Hospital
    Salt Lake City, Utah 84132, United States
    • Thomas Higgins, MD · Contact
  • UVA Health University Medical Center
    Charlottesville, Virginia 22908, United States
    • David Weiss, MD · Contact
  • Inova Fairfax Medical Campus
    Fairfax, Virginia 22042, United States
    • Greg Gaski, MD · Contact
  • UW Health University Hospital
    Madison, Wisconsin 53792, United States
    • Paul Whiting, MD · Contact
08

Updates

Tracking since Sep 25, 2026
No changes since tracking began. The registry record was last updated on Jul 9, 2026, before this site started recording changes on Sep 25, 2026. Its history is on ClinicalTrials.gov ↗
09

Registry details

Key details

Study ID
NCT07458230
Lead sponsor
Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health
Responsible party
Sponsor
First posted
Mar 9, 2026
Start date
Oct 1, 2026 (estimated)
Primary completion
Oct 1, 2028 (estimated)
Completion
Oct 1, 2028 (estimated)
Last update
Jul 9, 2026

Study contacts

Research Project Director
Contact
schung60@jhu.edu
317-944-9400
Clinical Research Manager
Contact
acarlini@jhu.edu
317-944-9400
Roman M Natoli, MD
principal investigator · Indiana University, Methodist Hospital

Oversight

Data monitoring committee
Yes
FDA-regulated drug
No
FDA-regulated device
No
View the source record on ClinicalTrials.gov ↗

Not currently enrolling

This study is not yet recruiting, as verified in Jul 2026. You cannot join it, but the record below documents what was studied.

Follow this study

Get an email when the registry record changes — status, dates, results — or when someone posts here.

Sign in to follow

Discussion

Questions and observations about this study, from anyone following it. Not medical advice, and not a channel to the study team — their contact details are on the registry record.

Sign in to join the discussion. Reading takes no account; posting does. You choose a display name, and a pseudonym is the default.

Nothing here yet. If you are running this trial, taking part in it, or weighing whether to, this is the place to say so.

Start the discussion