Antimicrobial prophylaxis for colorectal surgery

A Modification of the Anoplasty Technique during a Posterior Sagittal Anorectoplasty and Anorectal Vaginal Urethroplasty Closure: The Para-U-Stitch to Prevent Wound Dehiscence

OBJECTIVE

 Wound dehiscence after posterior sagittal anorectoplasty (PSARP) or anorectal vaginal urethroplasty (PSARVUP) for anorectal malformation (ARM) is a morbid complication. We present a novel anoplasty technique employing para-U-stitches along the anterior and posterior portions of the anoplasty, which helps buttress the midline U-stitch and evert the rectal mucosa. We hypothesized that, in addition to standardized pre- and postoperative protocols, this technique would lower rates of wound dehiscence.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

 A retrospective review of patievnts who underwent primary PSARP or PSARVUP with the para-U-stitch technique from 2015 to 2021 was performed. Wound dehiscence was defined as wound disruption requiring operative intervention within 30 days of the index operation. Superficial wound separations were excluded. Descriptive statistics were calculated. The final cohort included 232 patients.

RESULTS

 Rectoperineal fistula (28.9%) was the most common ARM subtype. PSARP was performed in 75% and PSARVUP in 25%. The majority were reconstructed with a stoma in place (63.4%). Wound dehiscence requiring operative intervention occurred in four patients, for an overall dehiscence rate of 1.7%. The dehiscence rate was lower in PSARPs compared with PSARVUPs (0.6 vs. 5.2%) and lower for reconstruction without a stoma compared with a stoma (1.2 vs. 2.0%). There were additional six patients (2.6%) with superficial wound infections managed conservatively.

CONCLUSION

 We present the para-U-stitch anoplasty technique, which is an adjunct to the standard anoplasty during PSARP and PSARVUP. In conjunction with standardized pre- and postoperative protocols, this technique can help decrease rates of wound dehiscence in this patient population.

Pre-operative mechanical bowel preparation and prophylactic oral antibiotics for pediatric patients undergoing elective colorectal surgery: a protocol for a randomized controlled feasibility trial

BACKGROUND

Infections after elective colorectal surgery remain a significant burden for patients and the healthcare system. Adult studies suggest that the combination of oral antibiotics and mechanical bowel preparation is effective at reducing infections after colorectal surgery. In children, there is limited evidence for either of these practices and the utility of combining oral antibiotics with mechanical bowel preparation remains uncertain.

METHODS

This study aims to determine the feasibility of conducting a randomized controlled trial assessing the efficacy of oral antibiotics, with or without mechanical bowel preparation, in reducing the rates of post-operative infection in pediatric colorectal surgery. Participants aged 3 months to 18 years undergoing elective colorectal surgery will be randomized pre-operatively to one of three trial arms: (1) oral antibiotics; (2) oral antibiotics and mechanical bowel preparation; or (3) standard care. Twelve patients will be included in each trial arm. Feasibility outcomes of interest include the rate of participant recruitment, post-randomization exclusions, protocol deviations, adverse events, and missed follow-up appointments. Secondary outcomes include the rate of post-operative surgical site infections, length of hospital stay, time to full enteral feeds, reoperation, readmission, and complications.

DISCUSSION

If the results of this trial prove feasible, a multi-center trial will be completed with sufficient power to evaluate the optimal pre-operative bowel preperation for pediatric patients undergoing elective colorectal surgery.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT03593252.

Efficacy of a 1 day Rifaximin and Metronidazole Regimen and Mechanical Bowel Preparation for Preventing Surgical Site Infection in Minimally Invasive Colorectal Cancer Surgery: A Prospective Observational Study

BACKGROUND

A combination of oral antibiotics and mechanical bowel preparation is recommended for patients scheduled to undergo elective colorectal surgery on the basis of recent large trials that have reported the superiority of this approach in preventing surgical site infections (SSIs). However, there are no standard recommendations for this approach. Therefore, in this study, we evaluated the efficacy of rifaximin and metronidazole and mechanical bowel preparation for preventing SSIs in cases of minimally invasive surgery for colorectal cancer.

METHODS

This single-arm prospective observational study included 256 individuals. The primary end point was the rate of SSI. Rifaximin 400 mg and metronidazole 500 mg were administered twice daily (10 am and 10 pm), and mechanical bowel preparation was administered the day before the operation.

RESULTS

After excluding 15 patients, 241 were enrolled. No adverse event occurred following the administration of oral antibiotics and mechanical bowel preparation; there was 100% compliance. The total SSI rate was 2.9%; the rates of incisional and organ/space SSIs were 1.2% and 1.7%, respectively. All patients were treated conservatively. Univariate analyses revealed preoperative anemia, hypoalbuminemia, and transfusion and postoperative transfusion were significantly associated with SSIs.

DISCUSSION

A 1 day rifaximin and metronidazole regimen with mechanical bowel preparation for elective minimally invasive surgery for colorectal cancer was associated with a favorable SSI rate of 2.9%, safety, and high compliance. This approach is appropriate for inclusion in the current guidelines for perioperative management of patients scheduled to undergo minimally invasive surgery for colorectal cancer.

Perioperative Considerations for the Surgical Treatment of Crohn's Disease with Discussion on Surgical Antibiotics Practices and Impact on the Gut Microbiome

Crohn's disease, a chronic inflammatory process of the gastrointestinal tract defined by flares and periods of remission, is increasing in incidence. Despite advances in multimodal medical therapy, disease progression often necessitates multiple operations with high morbidity. The inability to treat Crohn's disease successfully is likely in part because the etiopathogenesis is not completely understood; however, recent research suggests the gut microbiome plays a critical role. How traditional perioperative management, including bowel preparation and preoperative antibiotics, further changes the microbiome and affects outcomes is not well described, especially in Crohn's patients, who are unique given their immunosuppression and baseline dysbiosis. This paper aims to outline current knowledge regarding perioperative management of Crohn's disease, the evolving role of gut dysbiosis, and how the microbiome can guide perioperative considerations with special attention to perioperative antibiotics as well as treatment of Mycobacterium avium subspecies paratuberculosis. In conclusion, dysbiosis is common in Crohn's patients and may be exacerbated by malnutrition, steroids, narcotic use, diarrhea, and perioperative antibiotics. Dysbiosis is also a major risk factor for anastomotic leak, and special consideration should be given to limiting factors that further perturb the gut microbiota in the perioperative period.

Antibiotics in anesthesia and critical care

Sepsis is life-threatening organ dysfunction due to a dysregulated host response to an underlying acute infection. Sepsis is a major worldwide healthcare problem. An annual estimated 48.9 million incident cases of sepsis is reported, with 11 million (20%) sepsis-related deaths. Administration of appropriate antimicrobials is one of the most effective therapeutic interventions to reduce mortality. The severity of illness informs the urgency of antimicrobial administration. Nevertheless, even used properly, they cause adverse effects and contribute to the development of antibiotic resistance. Both inadequate and unnecessarily broad empiric antibiotics are associated with higher mortality and also select for antibiotic-resistant germs. In this narrative review, we will first discuss important factors and potential confounders which may influence the occurrence of surgical site infection (SSI) and which should be considered in the provision of perioperative antibiotic prophylaxis (PAP). Then, we will summarize recent advances and perspectives to optimize antibiotic therapy in the intensive care unit (ICU). Finally, the major role of the microbiota and the impact of antimicrobials on it will be discussed. While expert recommendations help guide daily practice in the operating theatre and ICU, a thorough knowledge of pharmacokinetic/pharmacodynamic (PK/PD) rules is critical to optimize the management of complex patients and minimize the emergence of multidrug-resistant organisms.

Mechanical bowel preparation in elective colorectal surgery: a propensity score-matched analysis of the Italian colorectal anastomotic leakage (iCral) study group prospective cohorts

Retrospective evaluation of the effects of mechanical bowel preparation (MBP) on data derived from two prospective open-label observational multicenter studies in Italy regarding elective colorectal surgery. MBP for elective colorectal surgery remains a controversial issue with contrasting recommendations in current guidelines. The Italian ColoRectal Anastomotic Leakage (iCral) study group, therefore, decided to estimate the effects of no MBP (treatment variable) versus MBP for elective colorectal surgery. A total of 8359 patients who underwent colorectal resection with anastomosis were enrolled in two consecutive prospective studies in 78 surgical centers in Italy from January 2019 to September 2021. A retrospective PSMA was performed on 5455 (65.3%) cases after the application of explicit exclusion criteria to eliminate confounders. The primary endpoints were anastomotic leakage (AL) and surgical site infections (SSI) rates; the secondary endpoints included SSI subgroups, overall and major morbidity, reoperation, and mortality rates. Overall length of postoperative hospital stay (LOS) was also considered. Two well-balanced groups of 1125 patients each were generated: group A (No MBP, true population of interest), and group B (MBP, control population), performing a PSMA considering 21 covariates. Group A vs. group B resulted significantly associated with a lower risk of AL [42 (3.5%) vs. 73 (6.0%) events; OR 0.57; 95% CI 0.38-0.84; p = 0.005]. No difference was recorded between the two groups for SSI [73 (6.0%) vs. 85 (7.0%) events; OR 0.88; 95% CI 0.63-1.22; p = 0.441]. Regarding the secondary endpoints, no MBP resulted significantly associated with a lower risk of reoperation and LOS > 6 days. This study confirms that no MBP before elective colorectal surgery is significantly associated with a lower risk of AL, reoperation rate, and LOS < 6 days when compared with MBP.

Wound infection prevention strategies in colorectal endoscopic mucosal resection: A meta-analysis of prophylactic measures

Colorectal endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR) is associated with the risk of postoperative wound infections, prompting investigations into effective prophylactic measures. This meta-analysis aimed to evaluate the efficacy of various prophylactic interventions in reducing the incidence of wound infections following EMR. Adhering to PRISMA guidelines, we conducted a comprehensive search across multiple databases for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and cohort studies from 2015 to 2022. We included studies that compared the efficacy of antibiotic prophylaxis and antiseptic measures, with clear data on post-procedure infection rates. Eight studies met our inclusion criteria, and data were extracted for meta-analysis. The risk of bias was assessed using the Cochrane Collaboration tool and the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale. The meta-analysis included 3765 patients from eight RCTs. Prophylactic antibiotics (cefixime and cefuroxime) showed moderate to high efficacy, with infection rates as low as 0% and 0.76%. Prophylactic endoscopic closure and clipping showed the highest efficacy, with zero reported infections. The standardized surgical site infection prevention bundle had lower effectiveness, with an infection incidence of 3.83%. The risk of bias assessment indicated potential performance bias due to lack of blinding, but overall evidence quality was upheld by proper random sequence generation and diligent outcome data monitoring. The effectiveness of specific prophylactic measures, notably prophylactic antibiotics and mechanical closure techniques, has been shown in significantly reducing the risk of wound infections following colorectal EMR.

Antibiotics for preventing infection at the surgical site: Single dose vs. multiple doses

Background

Surgical site infections are common and expensive infections that can cause fatalities or poor patient outcomes. To prevent these infections, antibiotic prophylaxis is used. However, excessive antibiotic use is related to higher costs and the emergence of antimicrobial resistance.

Objectives

The present meta-analysis aimed to compare the effectiveness of a single dosage versus several doses of antibiotics in preventing the development of surgical site infections.

Methods

PubMed was used to find clinical trials evaluating the effectiveness of a single dosage versus several doses of antibiotics in avoiding the development of surgical site infections. The study included trials that were published between 1984 and 2022. Seventy-four clinical trials were included in the analysis. Odds ratios were used to compare groups with 95% confidence intervals. The data were displayed using OR to generate a forest plot. Review Manager (RevMan version 5.4) was used to do the meta-analysis.

Results

Regarding clean operations, there were 389 surgical site infections out of 5,634 patients in a single dose group (6.90%) and 349 surgical site infections out of 5,621 patients in multiple doses group (6.21%) (OR = 1.11, lower CI = 0.95, upper CI = 1.30). Regarding clean-contaminated operations, there were 137 surgical site infections out of 2,715 patients in a single dose group (5.05%) and 137 surgical site infections out of 2,355 patients in multiple doses group (5.82%) (OR = 0.87, lower CI = 0.68, upper CI = 1.11). Regarding contaminated operations, there were 302 surgical site infections out of 3,262 patients in a single dose group (9.26%) and 276 surgical site infections out of 3,212 patients in multiple doses group (8.59%) (OR = 1.11, lower CI = 0.84, upper CI = 1.47). In general, there were 828 surgical site infections out of 11,611 patients in a single dose group (7.13%) and 762 surgical site infections out of 11,188 patients in multiple doses group (6.81%) (OR = 1.05, lower CI = 0.93, upper CI = 1.20). The difference between groups was not significant.

Conclusion

The present study showed that using a single-dose antimicrobial prophylaxis was equally effective as using multiple doses of antibiotics in decreasing surgical site infections.

Meta-analysis of efficacy of perioperative oral antibiotics in intestinal surgery with surgical site infection

OBJECTIVES

Surgical site infection (SSI) is a serious complication of intestinal surgery. In this meta-analysis, we aimed to explore the efficacy and safety of different preoperative oral antibiotic preparation (OABP) compared with intravenous antibiotic preparation (IVAP) and/or mechanical bowel preparation (MBP).

METHODS

A meta-analysis consisting of adult patients adopting oral antibiotics versus other regimens during the preoperative preparation of elective intestinal surgery was performed. The outcome included overall SSI, organ space SSI, superficial SSI, deep SSI, and mortality rate.

RESULTS

A total of 35 randomized controlled trials (RCTs) consisting of 8445 adult patients were included in our present analysis. OABP regimens were combined with IVAP in 29 RCTs. In general, the incidence of overall SSI in the OABP group was less compared with the IVAP alone or IVAP+MBP group (RR 0.56, 95% CI 0.46-0.69, P < .00001, I2 = 47%). Metronidazoles plus quinolones or aminoglycosides showed the best effect on reducing the overall SSI. OABP in combination with preoperative and postoperative IVAP was both significantly associated with reduced SSI. IVAP before and within 24 h after surgery showed the best advantage. No difference was found between the OABP without IVAP group and the control group in reducing SSI. OABP regimens also demonstrated a lower incidence rate of organ space SSI, superficial SSI, deep SSI, and mortality.

CONCLUSION

OABP in combination with preoperative IVAP and within 24 h post-operation significantly reduced the incidence of SSI in intestinal surgery. Metronidazoles accompanied with quinolones or aminoglycosides might be the appropriate combinations for OABP regimens.

Surveillance of surgical site infection after colorectal surgery: comprehensiveness and impact of risk factors

OBJECTIVE

The incidence of surgical site infection (SSI) is highest after colorectal surgery. We assessed the impact of risk factors for SSI using the population attributable fraction (PAF).

DESIGN

Retrospective cohort study.

SETTING

Portuguese hospitals performing regular surveillance.

PATIENTS

We identified patients who underwent colorectal procedures in hospitals that reported colorectal surgeries every year between 2015 and 2019. Among 42 reporting hospitals, 18 hospitals were included.

METHODS

Risk-factor incidence was estimated using the National Epidemiological Surveillance platform from 2015 to 2019. This platform follows the methodology recommended by the European Centre for Disease Prevention and Control. American Society of Anaesthesiologists (ASA) physical classification, wound classification, open surgery, urgent operation, antibiotic prophylaxis, operation time, and male sex were included as risk factors. Measures of association were retrieved from published meta-analyses. PAFs were calculated using the Levin formula. To account for interaction between risk factors, communality of risk factors was used in a weighted-sum approach, providing a combined value that serves as a measure of the comprehensiveness of surveillance.

RESULTS

Among 11,219 reported procedures, the cumulative SSI incidence was 16.8%. The proportion of SSI attributed to all risk factors was 61%. Modifiable variables accounted for 31% of procedures; the highest was laparotomy (16.8%), and urgent operations (2.7%) had the lowest value. Nonmodifiable factors accounted for 28.7%; the highest was wound classification (14.3%).

CONCLUSIONS

A relevant proportion (39%) of SSI remains unaccounted for by current surveillance. Almost one-third of SSI cases have potentially modifiable factors. Interventions focusing on shorter, less invasive procedures may be optimally effective in reducing the SSI incidence.

"A breach in the protocol for no good reason": a surgical antimicrobial prophylaxis experience in an Ethiopian academic medical center

BACKGROUND

An appropriately administered surgical antimicrobial prophylaxis decreases the rate of surgical site infections. Although evidence-based clinical practice guidelines have been published on surgical antimicrobial prophylaxis, the rate of adherence to the protocol and the impact of extending antimicrobial prophylaxis postoperatively is yet to be well elucidated.

METHOD

A total of general surgery and vascular surgery patients with clean and clean contaminated wound undergoing elective surgical procedures were included in the study. The rate of surgical antimicrobial prophylaxis utilization, the proportion of patients whom had their antimicrobial prophylaxis extended beyond 24 h and the rate of surgical site infections across groups were evaluated.

RESULTS

The surgical antimicrobial prophylaxis utilization rate was 90.5%. Of these patients, 12.6% were unnecessarily administered with antibiotics. An "extended" antibiotics administration beyond 24 h after the surgery was found in 40.2%. Gastrointestinal and hepato-pancreatico-biliary surgery patients had 7.9-fold rate of "extended" surgical antimicrobial prophylaxis beyond 24 h, AOR 7.89 (95% CI 3.88-20.715.62, p value < 0.0001). The overall rate of surgical site infection was 15(6.8%). The "extended" regimen of prophylactic antibiotics had no effect on the rate of surgical site infections.

CONCLUSION

Less than half of the patients included here had surgical antimicrobial prophylaxis regimen in accordance with the existing guidelines. The most common protocol violation was noted as extension of antimicrobial prophylaxis for more than 24 h after surgery. The extension of antimicrobial prophylaxis did not decrease the rate of surgical site infections, reaffirming the evidence that prophylactic extension of surgical antimicrobial prophylaxis is unnecessary.

Optimal timing for antimicrobial prophylaxis to reduce surgical site infections: a retrospective analysis of 531 patients

It has been revealed that the administration of an antimicrobial prophylaxis (AP) reduces the rate of surgical site (SSI) following colorectal cancer surgery. Nevertheless, the optimal timing of this medication remains unclear. The aim of this study was to determine more precisely the optimal time for administering antibiotics and to see if this could reduce the number of possible surgical site infections. The files of individuals who underwent colorectal cancer surgery at the University Hospital Brandenburg an der Havel (Germany) between 2009 and 2017 were analyzed. Piperacillin/tazobactam, cefuroxime/metronidazole and mezlocillin/sulbactam were administered as AP regimens. Timing of AP was obtained. The primary objective was the rate of SSIs based on CDC criteria. Multivariate analysis took place to identify risk factors for SSIs. A total of 326 patients (61.4%) received an AP within 30 min, 166 (31.3%) between 30 and 60 min, 22 (4.1%) more than 1 h before surgery, and 15 (2.8%) after surgery. In 19 cases (3.6%) a SSI occurred during hospital stay. A multivariate analysis did not identify AP timing as a risk factor for the occurrence of SSIs. With significance, more surgical site occurrences (SSO) were diagnosed when cefuroxime/metronidazole was given. Our results suggest that AP with cefuroxime/metronidazole is less effective in reducing SSO compared with mezlocillin/sulbactam and tazobactam/piperacillin. We assume that the timing of this AP regimen of < 30 min or 30-60 min prior to colorectal surgery does not impact the SSI rate.

Is There a Role for Mechanical and Oral Antibiotic Bowel Preparation for Patients Undergoing Minimally Invasive Colorectal Surgery? A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

INTRODUCTION

To date, all meta-analyses on oral antibiotic prophylaxis (OA) and mechanical bowel preparation (MBP) in colorectal surgery have included results of both open and minimally invasive approaches. Mixing both procedures may lead to false conclusions. The aim of the study was to assess the available evidence of mechanical and oral antibiotic bowel preparation in reducing the incidence of surgical site infection (SSI) and other complications following minimally invasive elective colorectal surgery.

METHODS

We searched PubMed, Science Direct, Google Scholar and Cochrane Library from 2000 to May 1, 2022. Comparative randomized and non-randomized studies were included. We reviewed the use of oral OA, MBP and combinations of these treatments. The methodological quality of the included studies was assessed using the Rob v2 and Robins-I tools.

RESULTS

We included 18 studies (7 randomized controlled trials and 11 cohort studies). Meta-analysis of the included studies showed that the combination of MBP + OA was associated with a significant reduction in SSI, AL and overall morbidity compared with the other options no preparation, MBP only and OA only.  CONCLUSION: Adding OA with MBP has a positive impact in reducing the incidence of SSI, AL and overall morbidity after minimally invasive colorectal surgery. Therefore, the combination of OA and MBP should be encouraged in this selected group of patients undergoing minimally invasive surgery.

Preoperative combined mechanical and oral antibiotic bowel preparation for preventing complications in elective colorectal surgery

BACKGROUND

The success of elective colorectal surgery is mainly influenced by the surgical procedure and postoperative complications. The most serious complications include anastomotic leakages and surgical site infections (SSI)s, which can lead to prolonged recovery with impaired long-term health.  Compared with other abdominal procedures, colorectal resections have an increased risk of adverse events due to the physiological bacterial colonisation of the large bowel. Preoperative bowel preparation is used to remove faeces from the bowel lumen and reduce bacterial colonisation. This bowel preparation can be performed mechanically and/or with oral antibiotics. While mechanical bowel preparation alone is not beneficial, the benefits and harms of combined mechanical and oral antibiotic bowel preparation is still unclear.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the evidence for the use of combined mechanical and oral antibiotic bowel preparation for preventing complications in elective colorectal surgery.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched MEDLINE, Embase, CENTRAL and trial registries on 15 December 2021. In addition, we searched reference lists and contacted colorectal surgery organisations.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) of adult participants undergoing elective colorectal surgery comparing combined mechanical and oral antibiotic bowel preparation (MBP+oAB) with either MBP alone, oAB alone, or no bowel preparation (nBP). We excluded studies in which no perioperative intravenous antibiotic prophylaxis was given.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We used standard methodological procedures as recommended by Cochrane. Pooled results were reported as mean difference (MD) or risk ratio (RR) and 95 % confidence intervals (CIs) using the Mantel-Haenszel method. The certainty of the evidence was assessed with GRADE.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 21 RCTs analysing 5264 participants who underwent elective colorectal surgery. None of the included studies had a high risk of bias, but two-thirds of the included studies raised some concerns. This was mainly due to the lack of a predefined analysis plan or missing information about the randomisation process. Most included studies investigated both colon and rectal resections due to malignant and benign surgical indications. For MBP as well as oAB, the included studies used different regimens in terms of agent(s), dosage and timing.  Data for all predefined outcomes could be extracted from the included studies. However, only four studies reported on side effects of bowel preparation, and none recorded the occurrence of adverse effects such as dehydration, electrolyte imbalances or the need to discontinue the intervention due to side effects. Seventeen trials compared MBP+oAB with sole MBP. The incidence of SSI could be reduced through MBP+oAB by 44% (RR 0.56, 95% CI 0.42 to 0.74; 3917 participants from 16 studies; moderate-certainty evidence) and the risk of anastomotic leakage could be reduced by 40% (RR 0.60, 95% CI 0.36 to 0.99; 2356 participants from 10 studies; moderate-certainty evidence). No difference between the two comparison groups was found with regard to mortality (RR 0.87, 95% CI 0.27 to 2.82; 639 participants from 3 studies; moderate-certainty evidence), the incidence of postoperative ileus (RR 0.89, 95% CI 0.59 to 1.32; 2013 participants from 6 studies, low-certainty of evidence) and length of hospital stay (MD -0.19, 95% CI -1.81 to 1.44; 621 participants from 3 studies; moderate-certainty evidence). Three trials compared MBP+oAB with sole oAB. No difference was demonstrated between the two treatment alternatives in terms of SSI (RR 0.87, 95% CI 0.34 to 2.21; 960 participants from 3 studies; very low-certainty evidence), anastomotic leakage (RR 0.84, 95% CI 0.21 to 3.45; 960 participants from 3 studies; low-certainty evidence), mortality (RR 1.02, 95% CI 0.30 to 3.50; 709 participants from 2 studies; low-certainty evidence), incidence of postoperative ileus (RR 1.25, 95% CI 0.68 to 2.33; 709 participants from 2 studies; low-certainty evidence) or length of hospital stay (MD 0.1 respectively 0.2, 95% CI -0.68 to 1.08; data from 2 studies; moderate-certainty evidence). One trial (396 participants) compared MBP+oAB versus nBP. The evidence is uncertain about the effect of MBP+oAB on the incidence of SSI as well as mortality (RR 0.63, 95% CI 0.33 to 1.23 respectively RR 0.20, 95% CI 0.01 to 4.22; low-certainty evidence), while no effect on the risk of anastomotic leakages (RR 0.89, 95% CI 0.33 to 2.42; low-certainty evidence), the incidence of postoperative ileus (RR 1.18, 95% CI 0.77 to 1.81; low-certainty evidence) or the length of hospital stay (MD 0.1, 95% CI -0.8 to 1; low-certainty evidence) could be demonstrated.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Based on moderate-certainty evidence, our results suggest that MBP+oAB is probably more effective than MBP alone in preventing postoperative complications. In particular, with respect to our primary outcomes, SSI and anastomotic leakage, a lower incidence was demonstrated using MBP+oAB. Whether oAB alone is actually equivalent to MBP+oAB, or leads to a reduction or increase in the risk of postoperative complications, cannot be clarified in light of the low- to very low-certainty evidence. Similarly, it remains unclear whether omitting preoperative bowel preparation leads to an increase in the risk of postoperative complications due to limited evidence. Additional RCTs, particularly on the comparisons of MBP+oAB versus oAB alone or nBP, are needed to assess the impact of oAB alone or nBP compared with MBP+oAB on postoperative complications and to improve confidence in the estimated effect. In addition, RCTs focusing on subgroups (e.g. in relation to type and location of colon resections) or reporting side effects of the intervention are needed to determine the most effective approach of preoperative bowel preparation.

Long-term functional results of transvaginal anal sphincter repair for faecal incontinence; a retrospective case series

INTRODUCTION AND HYPOTHESIS

We report our experience with a transvaginal approach with overlapping anal sphincter repair. The aim of this cohort study was to evaluate long-term functional outcomes. Women who had undergone transvaginal anal sphincteroplasty for anal incontinence from July 2005 to July 2020 and attended a multidisciplinary team of urogynaecologists and colorectal surgeons at the Mercy Hospital Perineal clinic were included.

METHODS

One hundred seven women were included in the study with a median follow-up of 57.5 months. We analysed outcomes by comparing patient's St Mark's score difference before and after surgery. Meaningful clinical difference (MID) was set at 5 points; complications and patient demographics were recorded along with a question about whether they would recommend this treatment to a friend.

RESULTS

An improvement was seen in 69.3% of women with a marked improvement in 46.5%. Furthermore, 70% said they would recommend the procedure to a friend, if they were in a similar situation. Wound infection or partial perineal breakdown was reported in 45% of women but did not have a significant impact on outcomes.

CONCLUSION

Transvaginal anal sphincter repair is associated with significant improvements in patients' St. Mark's score. Our data show that the long-term success rate of transvaginal/perineal AS repair may be better than previously reported in the literature with 70% of women satisfied at 57 months. Another benefit of the transvaginal route is the possibility of performing a pelvic floor and perineal repair at the time of surgery.

The implication of gut microbiota in recovery from gastrointestinal surgery

Recovery from gastrointestinal (GI) surgery is often interrupted by the unpredictable occurrence of postoperative complications, including infections, anastomotic leak, GI dysmotility, malabsorption, cancer development, and cancer recurrence, in which the implication of gut microbiota is beginning to emerge. Gut microbiota can be imbalanced before surgery due to the underlying disease and its treatment. The immediate preparations for GI surgery, including fasting, mechanical bowel cleaning, and antibiotic intervention, disrupt gut microbiota. Surgical removal of GI segments also perturbs gut microbiota due to GI tract reconstruction and epithelial barrier destruction. In return, the altered gut microbiota contributes to the occurrence of postoperative complications. Therefore, understanding how to balance the gut microbiota during the perioperative period is important for surgeons. We aim to overview the current knowledge to investigate the role of gut microbiota in recovery from GI surgery, focusing on the crosstalk between gut microbiota and host in the pathogenesis of postoperative complications. A comprehensive understanding of the postoperative response of the GI tract to the altered gut microbiota provides valuable cues for surgeons to preserve the beneficial functions and suppress the adverse effects of gut microbiota, which will help to enhance recovery from GI surgery.

The Use of Mechanical Bowel Preparation and Oral Antibiotic Prophylaxis in Elective Colorectal Surgery: A Call for Change in Practice

Elective colorectal surgery is associated with one of the highest rates of surgical site infections (SSIs), which result in prolonged length of stay, morbidity, and mortality for these patients and have a significant financial burden to healthcare systems. In an effort to reduce the frequency of SSI rates associated with colorectal surgery, the 2018 World Health Organisation (WHO) guidelines recommend the routine use of mechanical bowel preparation (MBP) and oral antibiotic prophylaxis (OAP) in adult patients undergoing elective colorectal surgery. However, this recommendation remains a topic of debate internationally. The National Institute of Clinical Excellence (NICE) guidelines, last revised in 2019, recommend against the routine use of MBP and do not address the issue of OAP. In this communication, we reviewed the current guidelines and examined the most recent evidence from randomised-control trials (RCTs) and meta-analyses on the effect of MBP and OAP on SSI rates since the 2019 NICE guideline review. This recent evidence clearly demonstrated an SSI-risk-reduction benefit with the additional use of OAP and the combination of MBP and OAP in this group of patients, and we therefore highlight the need for change of the current NICE guidelines.

Effect of oral antimicrobial prophylaxis on surgical site infection after elective colorectal surgery: multicentre, randomised, double blind, placebo controlled trial

OBJECTIVE

To investigate whether oral antimicrobial prophylaxis as an adjunct to intravenous antibiotic prophylaxis reduces surgical site infections after elective colorectal surgery.

DESIGN

Multicentre, randomised, double blind, placebo controlled trial.

SETTING

11 university and non-university hospitals in France between 25 May 2016 and 8 August 2019.

PARTICIPANTS

926 adults scheduled for elective colorectal surgery.

INTERVENTION

Patients were randomised to receive either a single 1 g dose of ornidazole (n=463) or placebo (n=463) orally 12 hours before surgery, in addition to intravenous antimicrobial prophylaxis before surgical incision.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

The primary outcome was the proportion of patients with surgical site infection within 30 days after surgery. Secondary outcomes included individual types of surgical site infections and major postoperative complications (Clavien-Dindo classification grade 3 or higher) within 30 days after surgery.

RESULTS

Of the 960 patients who were enrolled, 926 (96%) were included in the analysis. The mean age of participants was 63 years and 554 (60%) were men. Surgical site infection within 30 days after surgery occurred in 60 of 463 patients (13%) in the oral prophylaxis group and 100 of 463 (22%) in the placebo group (absolute difference -8.6%, 95% confidence interval -13.5% to -3.8%; relative risk 0.60, 95% confidence interval 0.45 to 0.80). The proportion of patients with deep infections was 4.8% in the oral prophylaxis group and 8.0% in the placebo group (absolute difference -3.2%, 95% confidence interval -6.4% to -0.1%). The proportion of patients with organ space infections was 5.0% in the oral prophylaxis group and 8.4% in the placebo group (absolute difference -3.4%, -6.7% to -0.2%). Major postoperative complications occurred in 9.1% patients in the oral prophylaxis group and 13.6% in the placebo group (absolute difference -4.5%, -8.6% to -0.5%).

CONCLUSION

Among adults undergoing elective colorectal surgery, the addition of a single 1 g dose of ornidazole compared with placebo before surgery significantly reduced surgical site infections.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov NCT02618720.

Surgical site infections: a scoping review on current intraoperative prevention measures

INTRODUCTION

Surgical site infections (SSIs) remain a significant cause of morbidity for surgical patients worldwide and with growing rates of antibiotic resistance, the development of new nonantimicrobial techniques to target SSI reduction is crucial. This review aimed to explore available nonantibiotic intraoperative interventions to reduce the risk of SSI.

METHODS

A literature search was undertaken using Medline, Web of Science, Embase, and Cochrane Library databases. Any study published from 1 January 1980 to 1 September 2021 that described any nonantibiotic intraoperative physical technique aiming to reduce SSI rates, with a primary or secondary outcome of SSI rates, was included.

FINDINGS

A total of 45 articles were included in the final scoping review. The current nonantibiotic intraoperative interventions advised for use include chlorhexidine skin preparation with alcohol, pressurised wound irrigation, Triclosan-coated sutures for skin closure, and negative pressure wound therapy. Many other widely used surgical practices do not have the supporting evidence to validate their routine use in clinical practice to reduce SSI rates.

CONCLUSIONS

We identified several techniques that can be used in the operating theatre to provide additional opportunities to reduce SSI rates. However, strict adherence to current established SSI prevention guidelines remains the mainstay of ensuring SSI rates remain low.

Is Previous Postoperative Infection an Independent Risk Factor for Postoperative Infection after Second Unrelated Abdominal Operation?

BACKGROUND

Infections after abdominal surgery remain a significant problem. Although preoperative antibiotic prophylaxis is a primary strategy used to reduce postoperative infections, it is typically prescribed based on standardized protocols, without attention to previous infection or antibiotic history. Patients with a previous infection after surgery may be at higher risk for infectious complications after subsequent operations owing to antibiotic resistance. We hypothesized that a previous postoperative infection is a significant risk factor for the development of infection after a second unrelated surgery.

STUDY DESIGN

We performed a retrospective study of patients who had undergone 2 unrelated abdominal operations at a tertiary care center from 2012 to 2018. Clinical variables and microbiological culture results were abstracted. Univariate and multivariable regression models were constructed.

RESULTS

Of 758 patients, 15.0% (n = 114) developed an infection after the first operation. After the second operation, 22.8% (n = 26) of those with a previous infection developed another infection, whereas the incidence of an infection after the second operation was only 9.5% (n = 61) in patients who did not develop an infection after the first operation. Multivariable analysis demonstrated that previous infection (odds ratio 2.49, 95% CI 1.46 to 4.25) was associated with future infection risk. Microbiological analysis found that infections after the second surgery were significantly more likely to be antibiotic resistant than infections after the first surgery (82.3% vs 64.1%; p = 0.036). Strikingly, 49% of infections after the second surgery were resistant to the antibiotic prophylaxis given at the time of incision.

CONCLUSIONS

Previous postoperative infection is an independent risk factor for a subsequent postoperative infection and is associated with resistance to standard prophylaxis. Individualization of antibiotic prophylaxis in patients with a previous postoperative infection is warranted.

Guidelines for Perioperative Care in Elective Abdominal and Pelvic Surgery at Primary and Secondary Hospitals in Low-Middle-Income Countries (LMIC's): Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS) Society Recommendation

BACKGROUND

This is the first Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS®) Society guideline for primary and secondary hospitals in low-middle-income countries (LMIC's) for elective abdominal and gynecologic care.

METHODS

The ERAS LMIC Guidelines group was established by the ERAS® Society in collaboration with different representatives of perioperative care from LMIC's. The group consisted of seven members from the ERAS® Society and eight members from LMIC's. An updated systematic literature search and evaluation of evidence from previous ERAS® guidelines was performed by the leading authors of the Colorectal (2018) and Gynecologic (2019) surgery guidelines (Gustafsson et al in World J Surg 43:6592-695, Nelson et al in Int J Gynecol Cancer 29(4):651-668). Meta-analyses randomized controlled trials (RCTs), prospective and retrospective cohort studies from both HIC's and LMIC's were considered for each perioperative item. The members in the LMIC group then applied the current evidence and adapted the recommendations for each intervention as well as identifying possible new items relevant to LMIC's. The Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation system (GRADE) methodology was used to determine the quality of the published evidence. The strength of the recommendations was based on importance of the problem, quality of evidence, balance between desirable and undesirable effects, acceptability to key stakeholders, cost of implementation and specifically the feasibility of implementing in LMIC's and determined through discussions and consensus.

RESULTS

In addition to previously described ERAS® Society interventions, the following items were included, revised or discussed: the Surgical Safety Checklist (SSC), preoperative routine human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) testing in countries with a high prevalence of HIV/AIDS (CD4 and viral load for those patients that are HIV positive), delirium screening and prevention, COVID 19 screening, VTE prophylaxis, immuno-nutrition, prehabilitation, minimally invasive surgery (MIS) and a standardized postoperative monitoring guideline.

CONCLUSIONS

These guidelines are seen as a starting point to address the urgent need to improve perioperative care and to effect data-driven, evidence-based care in LMIC's.

Comparative effectiveness of oral antibiotics, probiotics, prebiotics, and synbiotics in the prevention of postoperative infections in patients undergoing colorectal surgery: A network meta-analysis

Oral antibiotics (OAB), probiotics, prebiotics, and synbiotics are reported to be effective for preventing postoperative infection following colorectal surgery, but the comparative effectiveness between them has not been studied. To compare these interventions through a network meta-analysis. Ovid Medline, Embase, and the Cochrane Controlled Register of Trials (CENTRAL) were searched from inception to January 1, 2022 without any language restriction. Two reviewers independently screened the retrieved articles, assessed risk of bias, and extracted information from the included randomised controlled trials (RCTs). The primary outcome was infection rate, and the secondary outcome was anastomotic leakage rate. 4322 records were retrieved after literature search, and 20 RCTs recruiting 3726 participants were finally included. The analysis showed that usual care (UC) + Synbiotics ranked the most effective treatment (SUCRA = 0.968), UC + OAB ranked the second (SUCRA = 0.797), and UC + IAB ranked the third (SUCRA = 0.678) for preventing postoperative infection rate, but only UC + OAB achieved statistical significance. UC + OAB was the most effective treatment (SUCRA = 0.927) for preventing anastomotic leakage rate. Our study confirmed that preoperative administration of OAB was associated with lower infection rate and anastomotic leakage rate than placebo and UC alone. However, the beneficial effect of probiotics and synbiotics should still be investigated by large-scale randomised controlled trials.

Relationship between pre‑operative glycated haemoglobin and surgical site infection in patients undergoing elective colon cancer surgery

Surgical site infections remain a significant cause of morbidity following colon cancer surgery. Although diabetes has been recognised as a risk factor, patients with asymptomatic diabetes are likely underdiagnosed. The aim of the present study was to determine the relationship between preoperative glycated haemoglobin (HbA1C), clinicopathological characteristics and the influence on surgical site infection in a cohort of patients undergoing potentially curative colon cancer surgery. Patients who underwent elective, potentially curative colon cancer surgery between January 2011 and December 2014 were assessed for HbA1C levels (mmol/mol) measured within 3 months preoperatively. Clinicopathological data were recorded in a maintained database. A multivariate binary logistic regression model was used to assess the relationship between HbA1C, clinicopathological characteristics and surgical site infections. A total of 362 patients had HbA1C levels preoperatively recorded. HbA1C was significantly associated with body mass index (BMI), diabetes, smoking status, visceral fat area and skeletal muscle index. As determined by multivariate analysis, preoperative HbA1C levels remained independently associated with an increased risk of surgical site infections (OR 1.69, 95% CI 1.05-2.7; P=0.031) together with BMI (OR 1.91, 95% CI 1.36-2.67; P<0.001). Notably, in the present study, tumour-based factors, such as tumour location and TNM status, were not associated with infective complications. By contrast, host factors, such as BMI and pre-operative HbA1C were associated with surgical site infections suggesting that these factors were of more importance in determining short-term outcomes. In conclusion, objective measurements of BMI and HbA1C effectively stratified the risk of developing surgical site infection from 8 to 59%; therefore, HbA1C levels should be determined to allow for preoperative optimisation.

Adherence to Perioperative Antibiotic Prophylaxis Recommendations and Its Impact on Postoperative Surgical Site Infections

Introduction Surgical site infections (SSIs) are common and carry a significant risk of morbidity and mortality and lead to increased healthcare costs. Perioperative antibiotic prophylaxis decreases the risk of SSIs. There are several guidelines on the use of perioperative antibiotic prophylaxis. The American College of Surgeons (ACS) recommends weight-based antibiotic administration within 60 minutes prior to (two hours for vancomycin/fluoroquinolones) incision and redosing by drug half-life. There are limited data regarding adherence to existing recommendations. Furthermore, there are scarce data on the relationship between adherence to recommendations and the risk of postoperative SSI. Objectives In this study, we aimed to assess the adherence to ACS guidelines for perioperative antimicrobial prophylaxis in the Seattle Children's Hospital (SCH) National Surgical Quality Improvement Program (NSQIP) pediatric cohort and to determine whether adherence to ACS guidelines is associated with a decreased risk of SSI. the secondary objective was to identify risk factors associated with SSI in our patient population. Materials and methods We conducted a secondary analysis of an institutional NSQIP pediatric data cohort between Jan 1, 2012, and Dec 31, 2017. We calculated summary statistics to assess adherence to ACS recommendations and fit a logistic regression model to identify factors associated with the risk of SSI. Patients who did not receive antibiotic prophylaxis were excluded. Results  A total of 6,072 surgeries among 5,532 patients met the inclusion criteria. Adherence was achieved for weight-based dosing in 35% of surgeries, administration prior to the incision in 91%, administration within 60 minutes (two hours for vancomycin/fluoroquinolones) in 86%, correct redosing in 97%, and to all recommendations in 29%. There were no significant associations between any adherence metrics and SSI, although confidence intervals were wide for some metrics. Factors associated with SSI when adherence was met included urgent case status, wound class 2 or 4, the American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) class 2-5, and surgery duration. Conclusion There was varying adherence to ACS recommendations on antibiotic prophylaxis in our cohort. More evidence is needed to better understand the effects of adherence to any or all components of the recommendations on SSI. We identified a group of pediatric patients at risk of SSI and a need for further research and targeted interventions.

Selective decontamination of the digestive tract in colorectal surgery reduces anastomotic leakage and costs: a propensity score analysis

Purpose

Anastomotic leakage (AL) and surgical site infection (SSI) account for most postoperative complications in colorectal surgery. The aim of this retrospective trial was to investigate whether perioperative selective decontamination of the digestive tract (SDD) reduces these complications and to provide a cost-effectiveness model for elective colorectal surgery.

Methods

All patients operated between November 2016 and March 2020 were included in our analysis. Patients in the primary cohort (PC) received SDD and those in the historical control cohort (CC) did not receive SDD. In the case of rectal/sigmoid resection, SDD was also applied via a transanally placed Foley catheter (TAFC) for 48 h postoperatively. A propensity score-matched analysis was performed to identify risk factors for AL and SSI. Costs were calculated based on German diagnosis-related group (DRG) fees per case.

Results

A total of 308 patients (154 per cohort) with a median age of 62.6 years (IQR 52.5–70.8) were analyzed. AL was observed in ten patients (6.5%) in the PC and 23 patients (14.9%) in the CC (OR 0.380, 95% CI 0.174–0.833; P = 0.016). SSI occurred in 14 patients (9.1%) in the PC and 30 patients in the CC (19.5%), representing a significant reduction in our SSI rate (P = 0.009). The cost-effectiveness analysis showed that SDD is highly effective in saving costs with a number needed to treat of 12 for AL and 10 for SSI.

Conclusion

SDD significantly reduces the incidence of AL and SSI and saves costs for the general healthcare system.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s00423-022-02540-6.

The Pathology and Physiology of Ileostomy

An ileostomy is a surgery that is commonly performed to protect low pelvic anastomoses or prevent high-risk anastomotic leakages. However, various postoperative complications remain of major concern. After an ileostomy, the distal intestinal segment is left open for an extended period and is in a non-functional state. Consequently, the intestinal mucosa, smooth muscle, and microbiota undergo significant changes that are closely related to postoperative recovery and complications. A systematic description of these changes is necessary to understand the relationship among them and take more effective measures for postoperative intervention.

Surgical Antimicrobial Prophylaxis in Abdominal Surgery for Neonates and Paediatrics: A RAND/UCLA Appropriateness Method Consensus Study

Surgical site infections (SSIs), i.e., surgery-related infections that occur within 30 days after surgery without an implant and within one year if an implant is placed, complicate surgical procedures in up to 10% of cases, but an underestimation of the data is possible since about 50% of SSIs occur after the hospital discharge. Gastrointestinal surgical procedures are among the surgical procedures with the highest risk of SSIs, especially when colon surgery is considered. Data that were collected from children seem to indicate that the risk of SSIs can be higher than in adults. This consensus document describes the use of preoperative antibiotic prophylaxis in neonates and children that are undergoing abdominal surgery and has the purpose of providing guidance to healthcare professionals who take care of children to avoid unnecessary and dangerous use of antibiotics in these patients. The following surgical procedures were analyzed: (1) gastrointestinal endoscopy; (2) abdominal surgery with a laparoscopic or laparotomy approach; (3) small bowel surgery; (4) appendectomy; (5) abdominal wall defect correction interventions; (6) ileo-colic perforation; (7) colorectal procedures; (8) biliary tract procedures; and (9) surgery on the liver or pancreas. Thanks to the multidisciplinary contribution of experts belonging to the most important Italian scientific societies that take care of neonates and children, this document presents an invaluable reference tool for perioperative antibiotic prophylaxis in the paediatric and neonatal populations.

Oncologic colorectal surgical site infection: oral or not oral antibiotic preparation, that is the question

PURPOSE

Surgical wound infection is the most frequent postoperative complication in abdominal surgery, especially at the colorectal level. The aim of this study is analysing the results of mechanical colon preparation combined with oral antibiotic versus mechanical colon preparation without antibiotic therapy in patients with colorectal cancer undergoing elective surgery.

METHODS

This retrospective cohort study had been developed from November 2017 to February 2020. We have included a total of 281 consecutive patients undergoing elective colon and rectal oncological surgeries by the same surgical group using laparoscopic and open approaches. Transanal minimally invasive surgery (TAMIS) and transanal total mesorectal excision (TaTME) approaches were excluded. Exposed patients undergoing colon and rectal cancer surgery received mechanical bowel preparation and oral antibiotics with three doses of neomycin 1 g and erythromycin 500 mg the day before surgery.

RESULTS

The primary outcome was reduction in surgical wound infection rates before and after starting the oral antibiotic therapy from 17 to 6% (p < 0.05). As a secondary analysis, we evaluated the anastomotic dehiscence rate, corresponding with a decrease from 12 to 3% (p < 0.05).

CONCLUSION

Mechanical bowel preparation combined with oral antibiotic therapy is still not unanimously carried out in all the medical hospitals. In this report, we show that mechanical bowel preparation in combination with oral antibiotic reduces the risk of surgical wound infection and anastomotic leakage in patients undergoing colon and rectal cancer surgery.

Practice Summary of Antimicrobial Therapy for Commonly Encountered Conditions in the Neonatal Intensive Care Unit: A Canadian Perspective

Neonates are highly susceptible to infections owing to their immature cellular and humoral immune functions, as well the need for invasive devices. There is a wide practice variation in the choice and duration of antimicrobial treatment, even for relatively common conditions in the NICU, attributed to the lack of evidence-based guidelines. Early decisive treatment with broad-spectrum antimicrobials is the preferred clinical choice for treating sick infants with possible bacterial infection. Prolonged antimicrobial exposure among infants without clear indications has been associated with adverse neonatal outcomes and increased drug resistance. Herein, we review and summarize the best practices from the existing literature regarding antimicrobial use in commonly encountered conditions in neonates.

Strategies for Antibiotic Administration for Bowel Preparation Among Patients Undergoing Elective Colorectal Surgery: A Network Meta-analysis

Importance

There are discrepancies in guidelines on preparation for colorectal surgery. While intravenous (IV) antibiotics are usually administered, the use of mechanical bowel preparation (MBP), enemas, and/or oral antibiotics (OA) is controversial.

Objective

To summarize all data from randomized clinical trials (RCTs) that met selection criteria using network meta-analysis (NMA) to determine the ranking of different bowel preparation treatment strategies for their associations with postoperative outcomes.

Data Sources

Data sources included MEDLINE, Embase, Cochrane, and Scopus databases with no language constraints, including abstracts and articles published prior to 2021.

Study Selection

Randomized studies of adults undergoing elective colorectal surgery with appropriate aerobic and anaerobic antibiotic cover that reported on incisional surgical site infection (SSI) or anastomotic leak were selected for inclusion in the analysis. These were selected by multiple reviewers and adjudicated by a separate lead investigator. A total of 167 of 6833 screened studies met initial selection criteria.

Data Extraction and Synthesis

NMA was performed according to Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses (PRISMA) reporting guidelines. Data were extracted by multiple independent observers and pooled in a random-effects model.

Main Outcomes and Measures

Primary outcomes were incisional SSI and anastomotic leak. Secondary outcomes included other infections, mortality, ileus, and adverse effects of preparation.

Results

A total of 35 RCTs that included 8377 patients were identified. Treatments compared IV antibiotics (2762 patients [33%]), IV antibiotics with enema (222 patients [3%]), IV antibiotics with OA with or without enema (628 patients [7%]), MBP with IV antibiotics (2712 patients [32%]), MBP with IV antibiotics with OA (with good IV antibiotic cover in 925 patients [11%] and with good overall antibiotic cover in 375 patients [4%]), MBP with OA (267 patients [3%]), and OA (486 patients [6%]). The likelihood of incisional SSI was significantly lower for those receiving IV antibiotics with OA with or without enema (rank 1) and MBP with adequate IV antibiotics with OA (rank 2) compared with all other treatment options. The addition of OA to IV antibiotics, both with and without MBP, was associated with a reduction in incisional SSI by greater than 50%. There were minimal differences between treatments in anastomotic leak and in any of the secondary outcomes.

Conclusions and Relevance

This NMA demonstrated that the addition of OA to IV antibiotics were associated with a reduction in incisional SSI by greater than 50%. The results support the addition of OA to IV antibiotics to reduce incisional SSI among patients undergoing elective colorectal surgery.

Oral and Parenteral vs. Parenteral Antibiotic Prophylaxis for Patients Undergoing Laparoscopic Colorectal Resection: An Intervention Review with Meta-Analysis

This study aims to systematically assess the efficacy of parenteral and oral antibiotic prophylaxis compared to parenteral-only prophylaxis for the prevention of surgical site infection (SSI) in patients undergoing laparoscopic surgery for colorectal cancer resection. Published and unpublished randomized clinical trials comparing the use of oral and parenteral prophylactic antibiotics vs. parenteral-only antibiotics in patients undergoing laparoscopic colorectal surgery were collected searching electronic databases (MEDLINE, CENTRAL, EMBASE, SCIENCE CITATION INDEX EXPANDED) without limits of date, language, or any other search filter. The outcomes included SSIs and other infectious and noninfectious postoperative complications. Risk of bias was assessed using the Cochrane revised tool for assessing risk of bias in randomized trials (RoB 2). A total of six studies involving 2252 patients were finally included, with 1126 cases in the oral and parenteral group and 1126 cases in the parenteral-only group. Meta-analysis results showed a statistically significant reduction of SSIs (OR 0.54, 95% CI 0.40 to 0.72; p < 0.0001) and anastomotic leakage (OR 0.55, 95% CI 0.33 to 0.91; p = 0.02) in the group of patients receiving oral antibiotics in addition to intravenous (IV) antibiotics compared to IV alone. Our meta-analysis shows that a combination of oral antibiotics and intravenous antibiotics significantly lowers the incidence of SSI compared with intravenous antibiotics alone.

Enhanced recovery after surgery: operation-related factors

Background: The enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) program, which has been recently introduced in the field of perioperative care, represents a multimodal strategy to attenuate the loss, and improve the restoration, of functional capacity after surgery. This program aims to reduce morbidity and enhance recovery by reducing surgical stress, optimizing pain control, and facilitating early resumption of an oral diet and early mobilization. Considering this perspective, protocols for enhanced recovery should include comprehensive and evidence-based guidelines for best perioperative care. Appropriate protocol implementation may reduce complication rates and enhance functional recovery and thereby reduce the duration of hospitalization.Current Concepts: In major abdominal surgeries, the recommended ERAS protocols involve common items such as preoperative counseling, preoperative optimization, prehabilitation, preoperative nutrition, fasting and carbohydrate loading, bowel preparation, thromboprophylaxis, antimicrobial prophylaxis, surgical access, drainage, nasogastric intubation, urinary drainage, early mobilization and prevention of postoperative ileus, postoperative glycemic control, and postoperative nutritional care. These items have been briefly reviewed with the relevant evidence.Discussion and Conclusion: ERAS is a comprehensive and evidence-based guideline for optimal perioperative care. Although a number of ERAS items still require high-level evidence through well-designed randomized controlled trials, the ERAS guidelines can serve as adequate recommendations for our practice. Thus, these items can be introduced and adopted with evidence. In addition, it is important to remove items that are not supported by evidence from routine procedures.

Oral Antibiotic Prophylaxis Lowers Surgical Site Infection in Elective Colorectal Surgery: Results of a Pragmatic Cohort Study in Catalonia

BACKGROUND

The role of oral antibiotic prophylaxis (OAP) and mechanical bowel preparation (MBP) in the prevention of surgical site infection (SSI) after colorectal surgery is still controversial. The aim of this study was to analyze the effect of a bundle including both measures in a National Infection Surveillance Network in Catalonia.

METHODS

Pragmatic cohort study to assess the effect of OAP and MBP in reducing SSI rate in 65 hospitals, comparing baseline phase (BP: 2007-2015) with implementation phase (IP: 2016-2019). To compare the results, a logistic regression model was established.

RESULTS

Out of 34,421 colorectal operations, 5180 had SSIs (15.05%). Overall SSI rate decreased from 18.81% to 11.10% in BP and IP, respectively (OR 0.539, CI95 0.507-0.573, p < 0.0001). Information about bundle implementation was complete in 61.7% of cases. In a univariate analysis, OAP and MBP were independent factors in decreasing overall SSI, with OR 0.555, CI95 0.483-0.638, and OR 0.686, CI95 0.589-0.798, respectively; and similarly, organ/space SSI (O/S-SSI) (OR 0.592, CI95 0.494-0.710, and OR 0.771, CI95 0.630-0.944, respectively). However, only OAP retained its protective effect at both levels at multivariate analyses.

CONCLUSIONS

oral antibiotic prophylaxis decreased the rates of SSI and O/S-SSI in a large series of elective colorectal surgery.

Interventions to reduce the incidence of surgical site infection in colorectal resections: systematic review with multicomponent network meta-analysis (INTRISSI): study protocol

OBJECTIVE

To assess the relative contribution of intravenous antibiotic prophylaxis, mechanical bowel preparation, oral antibiotic prophylaxis, and combinations thereof towards the reduction of surgical site infection (SSI) incidence in elective colorectal resections.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

A systematic search of randomised controlled trials comparing interventions to reduce SSI incidence will be conducted with predefined search terms in the following databases: MEDLINE, LILACS, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) and the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews (CDSR). Additionally, several online databases will be searched for ongoing trials, and conference proceedings and reference lists of retrieved articles will be hand searched. The title-abstract screening will be partly performed by means of a semiautomated supervised machine learning approach, which will be trained on a subset of the identified titles and abstracts identified through traditional screening methods.The primary analysis will be a multicomponent network meta-analysis, as we expect to identify studies that investigate combinations of interventions (eg, mechanical bowel preparation combined with oral antibiotics) as well as studies that focus on individual components (mechanical bowel preparation or oral antibiotics). By means of a multicomponent network meta-analysis, we aim at estimating the effects of the separate components along the effects of the observed combinations. To account for between-trial heterogeneity, a random-effect approach will be combined with inverse variance weighting for estimation of the treatment effects. Associated 95% CIs will be calculated as well as the ranking for each component in the network using P scores. Results will be visualised by network graphics and forest plots of the overall pairwise effect estimates. Comparison-adjusted funnel plots will be used to assess publication bias.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

Ethical approval by the Ethical Committee of the Medical Faculty of the Martin-Luther-University Halle-Wittenberg (ID of approval: 2021-148). Results shall be disseminated directly to decision-makers (eg, surgeons, gastroenterologists, wound care specialists) by means of publication in peer-reviewed journals, presentation at conferences and through the media (eg, radio, TV, etc).

PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER

CRD42021267322.

Risk factors for surgical site infections following open versus laparoscopic colectomies: a cohort study

Background

Surgical site infections (SSIs) are among the most common healthcare-associated infections. Evaluating risk factors for SSIs among patients undergoing laparoscopic and open colorectal resections can aid in selecting appropriate candidates for each modality.

Methods

A cohort of all consecutive patients undergoing elective colorectal resections during 2008–2017 in a single center was analyzed. SSIs were prospectively assessed by infection control personnel. Patient data were collected from electronic medical records. Risk factors for SSIs were compared between patients who underwent laparoscopic and open surgeries. A multivariate analysis was performed for significant variables.

Results

During the study period, 865 patients underwent elective colorectal resection: 596 laparoscopic and 269 open surgeries. Mean age was 68.2 ± 15.1 years, weight 72.5 ± 18.3 kg and 441 (51%) were men. The most common indication for surgery was malignancy, in 767 patients (88.7%) with inflammatory bowel diseases and diverticulitis following (4.5% and 3.9%, respectively). Patients undergoing laparoscopic surgery were younger, had fewer comorbidities, shorter pre-operative hospitalizations, lower risk index scores, and lower rates of SSI, compared with open surgery. Independent risk factors for SSI following laparoscopic surgery were chronic obstructive pulmonary disease [odds ratio (OR) 2.655 95% CI (1.267, 5.565)], risk index ≥ 2 [OR 2.079, 95% CI (1.041,4.153)] and conversion of laparoscopic to open surgery [OR 2.056 95%CI (1.212, 3.486)]. Independent risk factors for SSI following open surgery were immunosuppression [OR 3.378 95% CI (1.071, 10.655)], chronic kidney disease [OR 2.643 95% CI (1.008, 6.933)], and need for a second dose of prophylactic antibiotics [OR 2.519 95%CI (1.074, 5.905)].

Conclusions

Risk factors for SSIs differ between laparoscopic and open colorectal resections. Knowledge of specific risk factors may inform patient selection for these modalities.

The Effect of the Nutraceutical "MICODIGEST 2.0" on the Colorectal Cancer Surgery With Curative Intent Complications Rate: A Study Protocol for a Placebo-Controlled Double-blind Randomized Clinical Trial (Preprint)

Background

Most colorectal cancer patients diagnosed are candidates for surgical resection with curative intent, although colorectal surgery is associated with some complications that could be life-threatening. Antibiotic prophylaxis is commonly used for the prevention of infectious postoperative complications. However, this intervention can change the composition of intestinal microbiota and promote adverse inflammatory outcomes in colorectal cancer patients. The combination of different fungal extracts could be beneficial because of their role in gut microbiota modulation and their anti-inflammatory activity.

Objective

Based on this hypothesis, we have designed a double-bind, randomized clinical trial to evaluate the effect of the nutraceutical fungal extract Micodigest 2.0 on complications of surgery for colorectal cancer resection.

Methods

Colorectal cancer candidates for surgery will be considered for inclusion in the study. After evaluation by the multidisciplinary tumor board, patients who meet selection criteria will be screened, stratified according to tumor location, and randomly allocated to be treated with Micodigest 2.0 or placebo. Treatment will be continued until admission for surgery (4-6 weeks). Participants will undergo a medical and clinical evaluation including baseline and preadmission quality of life, microbiome composition, inflammatory and nutritional status, adverse events, and adherence assessments. The main end point of the study is the surgery complication rate. We will evaluate complications using the Clavien-Dindo classification. It will be necessary to recruit 144 patients to find a relevant clinical difference. We will also evaluate the effect of the nutraceutical on microbiome composition, inflammatory response, nutritional status, and quality of life, as well as the effect of these variables on surgical complications.

Results

This study was funded in 2020 by the Center for Industrial Technology Development. Recruitment began in September 2021 and is expected to be completed in September 2022. Data will be analyzed and the results will be disseminated in 2023.

Conclusions

The results of this protocol study could help to reduce surgery complications in patients with colorectal cancer using the new treatment Micodigest. This study could also identify new features associated with colorectal surgery complications. In summary, this study trial could improve the management of colorectal cancer patients.

Trial Registration

Clinical Trials.gov NCT04821258; https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT04821258

International Registered Report Identifier (IRRID)

DERR1-10.2196/34292

Is Single-Dose Antimicrobial Prophylaxis Sufficient to Control Infections in Gastrointestinal Oncological Surgeries?

Surgical site infections (SSIs) represent one of the most important complications occurring postoperatively following surgical procedures. The SSI incidence is higher following gastrointestinal (GI) surgeries compared to any other surgery. It contributes to the majority of morbidity and mortality in patients undergoing GI surgeries. The accepted practice worldwide for the prevention and control of SSIs is providing antimicrobial prophylaxis. The appropriate antimicrobial and dose are chosen depending on the microbial flora, complications, and patient risk factors. The objective of this review was to determine the sufficient number of prophylactic antimicrobial doses that would be efficacious and safe in controlling the SSIs following GI oncological surgeries. Single-dose antimicrobial prophylaxis has shown the same efficacy as the multiple-dose antimicrobial regimen in controlling SSIs in esophageal, gastric, and colorectal surgeries. The advantages of a single-dose regimen include less chance of emergence of resistance, less chance for allergies or toxicity, and less cost. The addition of metronidazole with single-dose antimicrobial prophylaxis in colorectal surgery should be considered due to its beneficial effect in further reducing infections. Further randomized controlled trials are needed for the literature to determine the efficacy and safety of single-dose antimicrobial prophylaxis in patients undergoing esophageal and colorectal surgeries. In addition, studies are required to determine the individual effectiveness of metronidazole in controlling SSIs in colorectal surgeries.

Oral Antibiotic Prophylaxis Reduces Surgical Site Infection and Anastomotic Leakage in Patients Undergoing Colorectal Cancer Surgery

BACKGROUND

Surgical-site infection (SSI) and anastomotic leakage (AL) are major complications following surgical resection of colorectal carcinoma (CRC). The beneficial effect of prophylactic oral antibiotics (OABs) on AL in particular is inconsistent. We investigated the impact of OABs on AL rates and on SSI.

METHODS

A systematic review and meta-analysis of recent RCTs and cohort studies was performed including patients undergoing elective CRC surgery, receiving OABs with or without mechanical bowel preparation (MBP). Primary outcomes were rates of SSI and AL. Secondarily, rates of SSI and AL were compared in broad-spectrum OABs and selective OABs (selective decontamination of the digestive tract (SDD)) subgroups.

RESULTS

Eight studies (seven RCTs and one cohort study) with a total of 2497 patients were included. Oral antibiotics combined with MBP was associated with a significant reduction in SSI (RR = 0.46, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.31-0.69), I² = 1.03%) and AL rates (RR = 0.58, 95% CI 0.37-0.91, I² = 0.00%), compared to MBP alone. A subgroup analysis demonstrated that SDD resulted in a significant reduction in AL rates compared to broad-spectrum OABs (RR = 0.52, 95% CI 0.30 to 0.91), I² = 0.00%).

CONCLUSION

OABs in addition to MBP reduces SSI and AL rates in patients undergoing elective CRC surgery and, more specifically, SDD appears to be more effective compared to broad-spectrum OABs in reducing AL.

Oral neomycin and bacitracin are effective in preventing surgical site infections in elective colorectal surgery: a multicentre, randomized, parallel, single-blinded trial (COLORAL-1)

Several regimens of oral and intravenous antibiotics (OIVA) have been proposed with contradicting results, and the role of mechanical bowel preparation (MBP) is still controversial. This study aims to assess the effectiveness of oral antibiotic prophylaxis in preventing Surgical Site Infections (SSI) in elective colorectal surgery. In a multicentre trial, we randomized patients undergoing elective colorectal resection surgery, comparing the effectiveness of OIVA versus intravenous antibiotics (IVA) regimens to prevent SSI as the primary outcome (NCT04438655). In addition to intravenous Amoxicillin/Clavulanic, patients in the OIVA group received Oral Neomycin and Bacitracin 24 h before surgery. MBP was administered according to local habits which were not changed for the study. The trial was terminated during the COVID-19 pandemic, as many centers failed to participate as well as the pandemic changed the rules for engaging patients. Two-hundred and four patients were enrolled (100 in the OIVA and 104 in the IVA group); 3 SSIs (3.4%) were registered in the OIVA and 14 (14.4%) in the IVA group (p = 0.010). No difference was observed in terms of anastomotic leak. Multivariable analysis indicated that OIVA reduced the rate of SSI (OR 0.21 / 95% CI 0.06–0.78 / p = 0.019), while BMI is a risk factor of SSI (OR 1.15 / 95% CI 1.01–1.30 p = 0.039). Subgroup analysis indicated that 0/22 patients who underwent OIVA/MBP + vs 13/77 IVA/MBP- experienced an SSI (p = 0.037). The early termination of the study prevents any conclusion regarding the interpretation of the data. Nonetheless, Oral Neomycin/Bacitracin and intravenous beta-lactam/beta-lactamases inhibitors seem to reduce SSI after colorectal resections, although not affecting the anastomotic leak in this trial. The role of MBP requires more investigation.

Barriers and Facilitators in Perioperative Antibiotic Prophylaxis: A Mixed-Methods Study in a Small Island Setting

Few studies have addressed antibiotic guideline adherence in small island settings, such as Aruba. This study aimed to evaluate the appropriateness of perioperative antibiotic prophylaxis (PAP) and identify barriers for PAP guideline adherence. A mixed-methods study was carried out at the operating theatre (OT) in the Dr. Horacio E. Oduber Hospital (HOH) in Aruba. First, a prospective audit was performed on the appropriateness of guideline-derived quality indicators (QIs). Then, interviews based on the Flottorp framework were conducted to identify barriers for guideline adherence. Finally, a survey was distributed to verify the outcomes of the interviews. The appropriateness of QIs was measured: correct indication (50.6%); antimicrobial agent (30.8%); dose (94.4%); timing (55.0%); route of administration (100%); duration (89.5%); and redosing (95.7%). The overall appropriateness was 34.9%. The main barriers discovered were poor knowledge about PAP and the guidelines and professional interactions regarding PAP, specifically poor communication and lack of clarity about responsibilities regarding PAP. This study was the first to evaluate the appropriateness and to identify barriers for PAP guideline adherence in a small island hospital. The overall appropriateness of PAP was poor with just 34.9%. Future interventions should be focused on communication, education and awareness of the possibility to consult an ID physician or microbiologist.

Impact of preoperative antibiotics and other variables on integrated microbiome-host transcriptomic data generated from colorectal cancer resections

BACKGROUND

Integrative multi-omic approaches have been increasingly applied to discovery and functional studies of complex human diseases. Short-term preoperative antibiotics have been adopted to reduce site infections in colorectal cancer (CRC) resections. We hypothesize that the antibiotics will impact analysis of multi-omic datasets generated from resection samples to investigate biological CRC risk factors.

AIM

To assess the impact of preoperative antibiotics and other variables on integrated microbiome and human transcriptomic data generated from archived CRC resection samples.

METHODS

Genomic DNA (gDNA) and RNA were extracted from prospectively collected 51 pairs of frozen sporadic CRC tumor and adjacent non-tumor mucosal samples from 50 CRC patients archived at a single medical center from 2010-2020. The 16S rRNA gene sequencing (V3V4 region, paired end, 300 bp) and confirmatory quantitative polymerase chain reaction (qPCR) assays were conducted on gDNA. RNA sequencing (IPE, 125 bp) was performed on parallel tumor and non-tumor RNA samples with RNA Integrity Numbers scores ≥ 6.

RESULTS

PERMANOVA detected significant effects of tumor vs nontumor histology (P = 0.002) and antibiotics (P = 0.001) on microbial β-diversity, but CRC tumor location (left vs right), diabetes mellitus vs not diabetic and Black/African Ancestry (AA) vs not Black/AA, did not reach significance. Linear mixed models detected significant tumor vs nontumor histology*antibiotics interaction terms for 14 genus level taxa. QPCR confirmed increased Fusobacterium abundance in tumor vs nontumor groups, and detected significantly reduced bacterial load in the (+)antibiotics group. Principal coordinate analysis of the transcriptomic data showed a clear separation between tumor and nontumor samples. Differentially expressed genes obtained from separate analyses of tumor and nontumor samples, are presented for the antibiotics, CRC location, diabetes and Black/AA race groups.

CONCLUSION

Recent adoption of additional preoperative antibiotics as standard of care, has a measurable impact on -omics analysis of resected specimens. This study still confirmed increased Fusobacterium nucleatum in tumor.

Periprocedural Peritonitis Prophylaxis: A Summary of the Microbiology and the Role of Systemic Antimicrobials

Background

Peritonitis is a leading complication of peritoneal dialysis (PD). One strategy that the International Society for Peritoneal Dialysis (ISPD) has used to help mitigate the morbidity and mortality associated with peritonitis is through prevention, including antibiotic prophylaxis utilization in high-risk situations. The aim of this study is to summarize our current understanding of postprocedural peritonitis and discuss the existing data behind periprocedural antibiotic prophylaxis, focusing primarily on PD catheter insertion, dental procedures, colonoscopies, upper endoscopies with gastrostomy, and gynecologic procedures.

Summary

The ISPD currently recommends intravenous antibiotics prior to PD catheter insertion, colonoscopies, and invasive gynecologic procedures, though prophylaxis has only demonstrated benefit in a prospective, randomized control setting for PD catheter insertion. However, multiple retrospective studies exist that support the use of antibiotic prophylaxis for the other 2 procedures. No specific antibiotic regimen has been established as most optimal to prevent peritonitis for any of the 3 procedures. Antibiotic coverage should include the Enterobacteriaceae family, as well as Gram-positive organisms commonly found on the skin flora for PD catheter insertion, anaerobes for colonoscopies, and common organisms from the urogenital flora in gynecologic procedures. Additionally, the ISPD currently recommends oral amoxicillin prior to dental procedures. There is currently no ISPD recommendation to provide antibiotic prophylaxis prior to an upper endoscopy with or without gastrostomy, though this is a potential area for research.

Key Messages

PD patients are at high risk for developing peritonitis after typical procedures. Antibiotic prophylaxis is a potential strategy that the ISPD utilizes to prevent these infections. However, further research needs to be done to determine the optimal antibiotic regimen.

A Review of Bowel Preparation Before Colorectal Surgery

Infectious complications are the biggest problem during bowel surgery, and one of the approaches to minimize them is the bowel cleaning method. It was expected that bowel cleaning could facilitate bowel manipulation as well as prevent infectious complications and further reduce anastomotic leakage. In the past, with the development of antibiotics, bowel cleaning and oral antibiotics (OA) were used together. However, with the success of emergency surgery and Enhanced Recovery After Surgery, bowel cleaning was not routinely performed. Consequently, bowel cleaning using OA was gradually no longer used. Recently, there have been reports that only bowel cleaning is not helpful in reducing infectious complications such as surgical site infection (SSI) compared to OA and bowel cleaning. Accordingly, in order to reduce SSI, guidelines are changing the trend of only intestinal cleaning. However, a consistent regimen has not yet been established, and there is still controversy depending on the location of the lesion and the surgical method. Moreover, complications such as Clostridium difficile infection have not been clearly analyzed. In the present review, we considered the overall bowel preparation trends and identified the areas that require further research.

The gut microbiota and colorectal surgery outcomes: facts or hype? A narrative review

BACKGROUND

The gut microbiota (GM) has been proposed as one of the main determinants of colorectal surgery complications and theorized as the "missing factor" that could explain still poorly understood complications. Herein, we investigate this theory and report the current evidence on the role of the GM in colorectal surgery.

METHODS

We first present the findings associating the role of the GM with the physiological response to surgery. Second, the change in GM composition during and after surgery and its association with colorectal surgery complications (ileus, adhesions, surgical-site infections, anastomotic leak, and diversion colitis) are reviewed. Finally, we present the findings linking GM science to the application of the enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) protocol, for the use of oral antibiotics with mechanical bowel preparation and for the administration of probiotics/synbiotics.

RESULTS

According to preclinical and translational evidence, the GM is capable of influencing colorectal surgery outcomes. Clinical evidence supports the application of an ERAS protocol and the preoperative administration of multistrain probiotics/synbiotics. GM manipulation with oral antibiotics with mechanical bowel preparation still has uncertain benefits in right-sided colic resection but is very promising for left-sided colic resection.

CONCLUSIONS

The GM may be a determinant of colorectal surgery outcomes. There is an emerging need to implement translational research on the topic. Future clinical studies should clarify the composition of preoperative and postoperative GM and the impact of the GM on different colorectal surgery complications and should assess the validity of GM-targeted measures in effectively reducing complications for all colorectal surgery locations.

Impact of oral antibiotic prophylaxis on surgical site infection after rectal surgery: results of randomized trial

AIM

To evaluate the impact of oral antibiotic prophylaxis on surgical site infection (SSI) rate after rectal surgery.

METHODS

It was a single-center 1:1 randomized controlled open parallel trial (registration number NCT03436719). The patients undergoing rectal resection for benign and malignant tumors were assigned randomly to two groups: the oral plus intravenous (IV) antibiotic prophylaxis (AP) and the IV antibiotic prophylaxis only. The primary endpoint was the overall rate of SSI.

RESULTS

Between November 2017 and December 2018, 116 (male-55, the mean age-64 years) patients were enrolled into the trial. Of them, 57 had oral erythromycin 500 mg + metronidazole 500 mg a day before surgery and 1,000 mg of cephalosporin IV 30-90 min before operation. In the other group, 59 patients had the same IV antibiotics only. The incidence of SSIs was 22% (13/59) and 3.5% (2/57) correspondingly (р = 0.002). The statistically significant difference was detected for superficial SSI 0 (0%) vs. 5 (8.5%) (p = 0.03) and organ/space SSI 2 (3.5%) vs. 9 (15.3%) (p = 0.03), respectively. A multivariate analysis of risk factors of SSI identified two independent ones: bacterial contamination of the pelvic cavity ≥ 10⁵ CFU at the end of surgery OR 17.9, 95% CI 2.1-150.0 (p = 0.008) and oral antimicrobial prophylaxis OR 0.2, 95% CI 0.03-0.8 (p = 0.02).

CONCLUSION

Oral-parenteral AP significantly reduced the risk of SSI following elective rectal surgery. Bacterial contamination of the pelvic cavity ≥ 10⁵ CFU at the end of surgery and oral antimicrobial prophylaxis were independent risk factors of SSI.

Enteral resorbable diet versus standard diet in primary sphincter reconstruction: a prospective randomised trial

AIM

Bowel movements after reconstructive anorectal surgery may negatively affect surgical outcome. This study was aimed to assess any differences between a standard diet (SD) and the enteral resorbable diet (ED) in terms of operative outcomes and patient tolerance after fistulectomy with primary sphincter reconstruction.

METHOD

Adult patients undergoing elective fistulectomy with primary sphincter reconstruction for anorectal and rectovaginal fistulas were eligible for inclusion. Patients were intraoperatively randomised to receive either the ED and peristalsis-inhibiting medication (ED) or a SD. The primary endpoint was the healing rate. Secondary endpoints included continence scores, complications and quality of life. Sample size calculation resulted in the analysis of 60 patients to detect a difference in fistula recurrence of 30% with 70% power and a 5% significance level.

RESULTS

Sixty-six patients (24 women) were prospectively and randomly assigned to the ED (n = 34: 51%) or a SD (n = 32; 48%); mean age was 47 (18-74) years. The primary healing rate was 64 out of 66 patients (96%). No statistical difference in healing rate was seen between the groups. However, patient satisfaction was significantly higher in the SD group (P < 0.0001).

CONCLUSIONS

Fistulectomy with primary sphincter reconstruction is a safe method with low complication rates. Postoperative stool behaviour has no significant influence on the healing rate but has a significant negative impact on patient satisfaction. Therefore, maintaining a standard diet seems to be preferable following reconstructive anal surgery.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

The trial was registered with the German Clinical Trials Register ( DRKS00020524 ).

Role of mechanical and oral antibiotic bowel preparation in children with Hirschsprung's disease undergoing colostomy closure and pull-through

BACKGROUND

Mechanical and oral antibiotic bowel preparation (MOABP) has been performed routinely before colorectal surgery in children, but the necessity was questioned recently. We evaluated the utility of MOABP in children with Hirschsprung's disease (HSCR) undergoing colostomy closure and pull-through.

METHODS

The medical records of pediatric patients with HSCR who underwent colostomy closure and pull-through in a single center from January 2010 to January 2020 were reviewed. The use of MOABP was noted. The incidence of postoperative complications, duration of postoperative antibiotic therapy, total hospital cost and length-of-stay were compared between patients receiving MOABP and no bowel preparation (NBP).

RESULTS

A total of 64 patients were included in the study: 33 received MOABP and 31 had NBP. The respective postoperative complications in the MOABP and NBP groups were: intra-abdominal infection (18.2% vs. 29.0%), wound infection (9.1% vs. 16.1%), anastomotic leak (0 vs. 0), intestinal obstruction (6.1% vs. 0) and enterocolitis (3.03% vs. 12.90%). The duration of antibiotic therapy was 4.91±4.21 and 5.23±3.77 days (P=0.75) and hospitalization was 18.21±7.26 and 16.26±6.63 days (P=0.27) respectively. The total hospital cost in the MOABP group (4,720.14±1,858.89 USD) was higher than in the NBP group (3,749.06±2,009.97 USD) (P=0.049).

CONCLUSIONS

We did not find any clear benefit of MOABP in children with HSCR before colostomy closure and pull-through. However, a multicenter randomized controlled trial is needed to more definitely determine the best preoperative approach for children with HSCR.

Incidence and root causes of surgical site infections after gastrointestinal surgery at a public teaching hospital in Sudan

Background

Surgical site infections (SSIs) are common healthcare-associated infections and associated with prolonged hospital stays, additional financial burden, and significantly hamper the potential benefits of surgical interventions. Causes of SSIs are multi-factorials and patients undergoing gastrointestinal tract procedures carry a high risk of bacterial contamination. This study aimed to determine the prevalence, associated factors, and causing microorganisms of SSIs among patients undergoing gastrointestinal tract surgeries.

Methods

A hospital based, cross-sectional study conducted at Soba University Hospital in Khartoum, Sudan. We included all patients from all age groups attending the gastrointestinal tract surgical unit between 1st September and 31st December 2017. We collected data about the socio-demographic characteristics, risk factors of SSI, and isolated microorganisms from patients with SSIs. A Chi-square test was conducted to determine the relationship between the independent categorical variables and the occurrence of SSI. The significance level for all analyses was set at p < .05.

Results

A total of 80 participants were included in the study. The mean age was 51 +/- 16 years and most of the patients (67.5%) did not have any chronic illness prior to the surgical operation. Most of them (46.3%) of them underwent large bowel surgery. Twenty-two patients (27.5%) developed SSI post operatively and superficial SSI was the most common type of SSIs (81.8%). Occurrence of SSI was found to be associated with long operation time (p > .001), malignant nature of the disease (p > .001), intra-operative blood loss (p > .001), and intra-operative hypotension (p = .013). The most prevalent microorganism isolated from SSI patients was E coli (47.8%), followed by Enterococcus fecalis (13.0%) and combined Pseudomonas aeruginosa + E coli infection (13.0%).

Conclusions

The results showed a high prevalence of SSIs among patients attending the gastrointestinal tract surgical unit and the most prevalent microorganism isolated from them was E coli. Measures should be taken to reduce the magnitude of SSI by mitigating the identified associated factors.