Imipenem prophylaxis in elective colorectal surgery

Assessing morinidazole for surgical site infection in class III wounds prevention: a multi-centre, randomized, single-blind, parallel-controlled study

INTRODUCTION

Surgical site infections (SSIs) are significant postoperative risks; antibiotic prophylaxis is crucial due to the presence of anaerobic bacteria. This study investigated the efficacy and safety of a novel nitroimidazole, morinidazole, in SSI reduction in class III wounds, as there is currently a lack of evidence in the existing literature.

METHODS

A multi-centre randomized clinical trial was conducted from December 2020 to October 2022 in the general surgery departments of 12 tertiary hospitals in China, including 459 patients in two treatment groups using morinidazole plus ceftriaxone or ceftriaxone alone. Efficacy and safety were evaluated including SSI incidence, adverse events, and compliance. Statistical analysis employed SAS 9.4 software. Data analysis was performed from February to May 2023.

RESULTS

A total of 440 participants (median (interquartile range, IQR) age, 63.0 (54.0, 70.0) years; 282 males (64.09%); 437 patients were of Han race (99.32%) and were randomized. The experimental group exhibited a significantly lower SSI rate compared with the control group (31 (14.49%) vs 52 (23.01%); risk difference, 1.76%, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.08-2.88%; P=0.0224). The superficial incisional site infections revealed a marked reduction in the experimental group (12 (5.61%) vs 31 (13.37%); risk difference, 2.68%; 95% CI 1.34-5.36%; P=0.0042). Non-surgical site infections, severe postoperative complications, and total adverse events showed no statistically significant differences between the groups (P>0.05).

CONCLUSION

The significant decrease in SSI rates and superficial incisional infections demonstrates morinidazole to be a valuable prophylactic antibiotic. Our findings provide valuable insights for clinical practice, where this new-generation nitroimidazole can play a crucial role in SSI prevention.

New WHO recommendations on intraoperative and postoperative measures for surgical site infection prevention: an evidence-based global perspective

Surgical site infections (SSIs) are the most common health-care-associated infections in developing countries, but they also represent a substantial epidemiological burden in high-income countries. The prevention of these infections is complex and requires the integration of a range of preventive measures before, during, and after surgery. No international guidelines are available and inconsistencies in the interpretation of evidence and recommendations in national guidelines have been identified. Considering the prevention of SSIs as a priority for patient safety, WHO has developed evidence-based and expert consensus-based recommendations on the basis of an extensive list of preventive measures. We present in this Review 16 recommendations specific to the intraoperative and postoperative periods. The WHO recommendations were developed with a global perspective and they take into account the balance between benefits and harms, the evidence quality level, cost and resource use implications, and patient values and preferences.

Antimicrobial prophylaxis for colorectal surgery

BACKGROUND

Research shows that administration of prophylactic antibiotics before colorectal surgery prevents postoperative surgical wound infection. The best antibiotic choice, timing of administration and route of administration remain undetermined.

OBJECTIVES

To establish the effectiveness of antimicrobial prophylaxis for the prevention of surgical wound infection in patients undergoing colorectal surgery. Specifically to determine:1. whether antimicrobial prophylaxis reduces the risk of surgical wound infection;2. the target spectrum of bacteria (aerobic or anaerobic bacteria, or both);3. the best timing and duration of antibiotic administration;4. the most effective route of antibiotic administration (intravenous, oral or both);5. whether any antibiotic is clearly more effective than the currently recommended gold standard specified in published guidelines;6. whether antibiotics should be given before or after surgery.

SEARCH METHODS

For the original review published in 2009 we searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) in The Cochrane Library, MEDLINE (Ovid) and EMBASE (Ovid). For the update of this review we rewrote the search strategies and extended the search to cover from 1954 for MEDLINE and 1974 for EMBASE up to 7 January 2013. We searched CENTRAL on the same date (Issue 12, 2012).

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised controlled trials of prophylactic antibiotic use in elective and emergency colorectal surgery, with surgical wound infection as an outcome.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Data were abstracted and reviewed by one review author and checked by another only for the single, dichotomous outcome of surgical wound infection. Quality of evidence was assessed using GRADE methods.

MAIN RESULTS

This updated review includes 260 trials and 68 different antibiotics, including 24 cephalosporins and 43,451 participants. Many studies had multiple variables that separated the two study groups; these could not be compared to other studies that tested one antibiotic and had a single variable separating the two groups. We did not consider the risk of bias arising from attrition and lack of blinding of outcome assessors to affect the results for surgical wound infection.Meta-analyses demonstrated a statistically significant difference in postoperative surgical wound infection when prophylactic antibiotics were compared to placebo/no treatment (risk ratio (RR) 0.34, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.28 to 0.41, high quality evidence). This translates to a reduction in risk from 39% to 13% with prophylactic antibiotics. The slightly higher risk of wound infection with short-term compared with long-term duration antibiotic did not reach statistical significance (RR 1.10, 95% CI 0.93 to 1.30). Similarly risk of would infection was slightly higher with single-dose antibiotics when compared with multiple dose antibiotics, but the results are compatible with benefit and harm (RR 1.30, 95% CI 0.81 to 2.10). Additional aerobic coverage and additional anaerobic coverage both showed statistically significant improvements in surgical wound infection rates (RR 0.44, 95% CI 0.29 to 0.68 and RR 0.47, 95% CI 0.31 to 0.71, respectively), as did combined oral and intravenous antibiotic prophylaxis when compared to intravenous alone (RR 0.56, 95% CI 0.43 to 0.74), or oral alone (RR 0.56, 95% CI 0.40 to 0.76). Comparison of an antibiotic with anaerobic specificity to one with aerobic specificity showed no significant advantage for either one (RR 0.84, 95% CI 0.30 to 2.36). Two small studies compared giving antibiotics before or after surgery and no significant difference in this timing was found (RR 0.67, 95% CI 0.21 to 2.15). Established gold-standard regimens recommended in major guidelines were no less effective than any other antibiotic choice.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

This review has found high quality evidence that antibiotics covering aerobic and anaerobic bacteria delivered orally or intravenously (or both) prior to elective colorectal surgery reduce the risk of surgical wound infection. Our review shows that antibiotics delivered within this framework can reduce the risk of postoperative surgical wound infection by as much as 75%. It is not known whether oral antibiotics would still have these effects when the colon is not empty. This aspect of antibiotic dosing has not been tested. Further research is required to establish the optimal timing and duration of dosing, and the frequency of longer-term adverse effects such as Clostridium difficile pseudomembranous colitis.

Antimicrobial prophylaxis for colorectal surgery

BACKGROUND

Research shows that administration of prophylactic antibiotics before colorectal surgery prevents postoperative surgical wound infection (SWI). The best antibiotic choice, timing of administration and route of administration remain undetermined.

OBJECTIVES

To establish the effectiveness of antimicrobial prophylaxis for the prevention of SWI in patients undergoing colorectal surgery: specifically to determine, 1 Whether it reduces risk of SWI. 2 The target spectrum/a of bacteria (aerobic and/or anaerobic). 3 The best timing and duration of antibiotic administration. 4 The most effective route of antibiotic administration (intravenous, oral or both). 5 Whether any antibiotic is clearly more effective than the currently recommended gold standard.

SEARCH STRATEGY

CENTRAL, MEDLINE, and EMBASE, were searched from January, 1980 to December, 2007.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised controlled trials of prophylactic antibiotic use in elective and emergency colorectal surgery, with SWI as an outcome.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Data were abstracted and reviewed by three authors for only the single, dichotomous outcome of SWI.

MAIN RESULTS

The review included 182 trials (30,880 participants), and 50 different antibiotics, including 17 cephalosporins. Many studies had multiple variables that separated the two study groups and could not be compared to other studies that tested one antibiotic and had a single variable separating the two groups. Meta-analyses demonstrated a statistically significant difference in postoperative SWI when prophylactic antibiotics were compared to placebo/no treatment (relative risk (RR) 0.30, 95% confidence intervals (CI) 0.22 to 0.41). No statistically significant differences were shown when comparing short- and long-term duration of prophylaxis (RR 1.06, 95% CI 0.89 to 1.27); or single dose versus multiple dose antibiotics (RR 1.17, 95% CI 0.67 to 2.05). Additional aerobic coverage and additional anaerobic coverage both showed statistically significant improvements in SWI rates (RR 0.41, 95% CI 0.23 to 0.71 and RR 0.55, 95% CI 0.35 to 0.85, respectively); as did combined oral and intravenous antibiotic prophylaxis when compared to intravenous alone (RR 0.55, 95% CI 0.41 to 0.74), or oral alone (RR 0.34, 95% CI 0.13 to 0.87). Established gold standard regimens were no less effective than any other antibiotic choice.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Antibiotics covering aerobic and aerobic bacteria should be delivered orally and intravenously prior to colorectal surgery. Antibiotics delivered within this framework will reduce the risk of postoperative SWI by at least 75%. Further research is required to establish the optimal timing and duration of dosing, and frequency of longer-term adverse effects such as Clostridium difficile pseudomembranous colitis.

New developments in carbapenems

Antibiotic resistance among Gram-negative pathogens in hospitals is a growing threat to patients and is driving the increased use of carbapenems. Carbapenems are potent members of the beta-lactam family of antibiotics, with a history of safety and efficacy for serious infections that exceeds 20 years. Original and review articles were identified from a Medline search (1979-2008). Reference citations from identified publications, abstracts from the Interscience Conferences on Antimicrobial Agents and Chemotherapy and package inserts were also used. Carbapenems are effective in treating severe infections at diverse sites, with relatively low resistance rates and a favourable safety profile. Carbapenems are the beta-lactams of choice for the treatment of infections caused by multidrug-resistant organisms. Optimized dosing of carbapenems should limit the emergence of resistance and prolong the utility of these agents. The newly approved doripenem should prove to be a valuable addition to the currently available carbapenems: imipenem, meropenem and ertapenem.

Complete single-stage management of left colon cancer obstruction with a new device

BACKGROUND

A newly developed device that enables easy intraoperative colonic irrigation and subsequent colonoscopy was introduced recently.

METHODS

To evaluate the efficacy of the single-stage procedure with a new device and the significance of on-table colonoscopy, 112 patients with obstructive left colon cancer were recruited.

RESULTS

Primary anastomosis after tumor resection was performed in 104 cases. The volume of saline used for irrigation averaged 13.5 l over 12.1 min. Subsequent colonoscopic examination added an average of 10.4 min to the operative time. There were three anastomotic leaks, two wound infections, four acute renal failures, and two operative mortalities. On-table colonoscopy resulted in extended resection in 17 cases.

CONCLUSIONS

The new device enabled safe, simple, and time-saving, single-stage surgical management of left colon cancer obstruction. The ability to perform on-table colonoscopy enabled treatment and recognition of synchronous bowel pathology.

Antimicrobial prophylaxis in colorectal surgery: a systematic review of randomized controlled trials

BACKGROUND

A systematic review was carried out to assess the relative efficacy of antimicrobial prophylaxis for the prevention of postoperative wound infection in patients undergoing colorectal surgery.

METHODS

MEDLINE, EMBASE, the Cochrane Trials Register and the references cited in retrieved studies were searched to identify relevant trials published between 1984 and 1995.

RESULTS

Some 147 relevant trials were identified. The quality of trials has improved over the past 12 years. The results confirm that the use of antimicrobial prophylaxis is effective for the prevention of surgical wound infection after colorectal surgery. There was no significant difference in the rate of surgical wound infections between many different regimens. However, certain regimens appear to be inadequate (e.g. metronidazole alone, doxycycline alone, piperacillin alone, oral neomycin plus erythromycin on the day before operation). A single dose administered immediately before the operation (or short-term use) is as effective as long-term postoperative antimicrobial prophylaxis (odds ratio 1.17 (95 per cent confidence interval (c.i.) 0.90-1.53)). There is no convincing evidence to suggest that the new-generation cephalosporins are more effective than first-generation cephalosporins (odds ratio 1.07 (95 per cent c.i. 0.54-2.12)).

CONCLUSION

Antibiotics selected for prophylaxis in colorectal surgery should be active against both aerobic and anaerobic bacteria. Administration should be timed to make sure that the tissue concentration of antibiotics around the wound area is sufficiently high when bacterial contamination occurs. Guidelines should be developed locally in order to achieve a more cost-effective use of antimicrobial prophylaxis in colorectal surgery.

Metronidazole. A therapeutic review and update

The nitroimidazole antibiotic metronidazole has a limited spectrum of activity that encompasses various protozoans and most Gram-negative and Gram-positive anaerobic bacteria. Metronidazole has activity against protozoans like Entamoeba histolytica, Giardia lamblia and Trichomonas vaginalis, for which the drug was first approved as an effective treatment. Anaerobic bacteria which are typically sensitive are primarily Gram-negative anaerobes belonging to the Bacteroides and Fusobacterium spp. Gram-positive anaerobes such as peptostreptococci and Clostridia spp. are likely to test sensitive to metronidazole, but resistant isolates are probably encountered with greater frequency than with the Gram-negative anaerobes. Gardnerella vaginalis is a pleomorphic Gram-variable bacterial bacillus that is also susceptible to metronidazole. Helicobacter pylori has been strongly associated with gastritis and duodenal ulcers. Classic regimens for eradicating this pathogen have included metronidazole, usually with acid suppression medication plus bismuth and amoxicillin. The activity of metronidazole against anaerobic bowel flora has been used for prophylaxis and treatment of patients with Crohn's disease who might develop an infectious complication. Treatment of Clostridium difficile-induced pseudomembraneous colitis has usually been with oral metronidazole or vancomycin, but the lower cost and similar efficacy of metronidazole, coupled with the increased concern about imprudent use of vancomycin leading to increased resistance in enterococci, have made metronidazole the preferred agent here. Metronidazole has played an important role in anaerobic-related infections. Advantages to using metronidazole are the percentage of sensitive Gram-negative anaerobes, its availability as oral and intravenous dosage forms, its rapid bacterial killing, its good tissue penetration, its considerably lower chance of inducing C. difficile colitis, and expense. Metronidazole has notable effectiveness in treating anaerobic brain abscesses. Metronidazole is a cost-effective agent due to its low acquisition cost, its pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics, an acceptable adverse effect profile, and its undiminished antimicrobial activity. While its role as part of a therapeutic regimen for treating mixed aerobic/anaerobic infections has been reduced by newer, more expensive combination therapies, these new combinations have not been shown to have any therapeutic advantage over metronidazole. Although the use of metronidazole on a global scale has been curtailed by newer agents for various infections, metronidazole still has a role for these and other therapeutic uses. Many clinicians still consider metronidazole to be the 'gold standard' antibiotic against which all other antibiotics with anaerobic activity should be compared.

Amoxycillin/clavulanic acid prophylaxis in elective colorectal surgery: a prospective randomized trial

In a randomized trial of 440 patients undergoing elective colorectal surgery, the prophylactic efficacy and the safety of amoxycillin/clavulanic acid were compared with that of a control regimen of clindamycin and gentamicin. Surgical wound healing was assessed by the ASEPSIS points scale; it was normal in 86% of patients and the scores for both groups were not statistically different (amoxycillin/clavulanic acid: 11.1; clindamycin + gentamicin: 10.9). Intra-abdominal infections were more frequent in the clindamycin + gentamicin arm of the study (Fisher's exact test, P = 0.035). It is concluded that amoxycillin/clavulanic acid is as effective and safe as clindamycin + gentamicin in the prevention of wound infection and may provide better protection against intra-abdominal infections.

Imipenem/cilastatin: an update of its antibacterial activity, pharmacokinetics and therapeutic efficacy in the treatment of serious infections

The prototype carbapenem antibacterial agent imipenem has a very broad spectrum of antibacterial activity, encompassing most Gram-negative and Gram-positive aerobes and anaerobes, including most beta-lactamase-producing species. It is coadministered with a renal dehydropeptidase inhibitor, cilastatin, in order to prevent its renal metabolism in clinical use. Extensive clinical experience gained with imipenem/cilastatin has shown it to provide effective monotherapy for septicaemia, neutropenic fever, and intra-abdominal, lower respiratory tract, genitourinary, gynaecological, skin and soft tissues, and bone and joint infections. In these indications, imipenem/cilastatin generally exhibits similar efficacy to broad-spectrum cephalosporins and other carbapenems and is at least equivalent to standard aminoglycoside-based and other combination regimens. Imipenem/cilastatin is generally well tolerated by adults and children, with local injection site events, gastrointestinal disturbances and dermatological reactions being the most common adverse events. Seizures have also been reported, occurring mostly in patients with impaired renal function or CNS pathology, or with excessive dosage. Although it is no longer a unique compound, as newer carbapenems such as meropenem are becoming available, imipenem/cilastatin nevertheless remains an important agent with established efficacy as monotherapy for moderate to severe bacterial infections. Its particular niche is in treating infections known or suspected to be caused by multiresistant pathogens.

Surgical antibiotic prophylaxis

Improvements in antibiotic prophylaxis, including the timing of initial administration, appropriate choice of antibiotic agents, and the limiting of the duration of administration, have more clearly defined the value of this technique in many clinical surgical settings. Studies of antibiotic prophylaxis designed during the next decade should strongly consider individual patient risk factors when new antibiotic agents are tested or administration techniques are refined. A concentrated effort should be made in areas of clinical surgery in which the value of antibiotic prophylaxis has not been proven. When in doubt, it appears that a one-dose systemic regimen of an appropriately chosen cephalosporin given during the immediate preoperative period is safe and the indicated practice.