Plastic iodophor drape during liver surgery operative use of the iodophor-impregnated adhesive drape to prevent wound infection during high risk surgery

Effectiveness of iodine-impregnated incise drapes for preventing surgical site infection in patients with clean or clean contaminated wounds: A systematic literature review and cost-consequence analysis

BACKGROUND

Surgical site infection is a serious complication associated with significant morbidity, mortality and health care expenditure.

AIMS

To determine the clinical effectiveness and economic impact of using iodine-impregnated incise drapes for preventing surgical site infection.

METHODS

MEDLINE, Embase, Cochrane Library and CINAHL databases were systematically searched. Critical appraisal and synthesis of clinical evidence informed a decision analytical cost-consequence model.

FINDINGS

Nine studies were included in the systematic literature review. Evidence from cardiac surgery patients was considered appropriate to inform the cost analysis. The economic model evaluation estimated cost savings of £549 per patient with the iodophor-impregnated drape in the deterministic analysis and a mean cost saving per patient of £554,172 per 1000 in the probabilistic analysis.

CONCLUSION

Using iodine-impregnated drapes in cardiac surgery patients may effectively reduce infections and provide cost-savings, but further research is required.

[Prehabilitation prior to radical cystectomy]

Urothelial carcinoma of the urinary bladder places a significant burden on the healthcare system in Germany, with 30,000 new cases annually. Radical cystectomy still remains the standard treatment for nonmetastatic, muscle invasive bladder cancer. Radical cystectomy represents the standard uro-oncologic procedure with the highest mortality. Due to the aging population, the number of elderly patients with urothelial carcinoma of the urinary bladder and reduced physical fitness and numerous comorbidities before the procedure is increasing. Prehabilitation before cystectomy aims to preoperatively identify patients at risk for postoperative complications and improve their physical condition. This includes conditioning and strength training, breathing exercises to improve lung capacity, and nutritional education. Studies on prehabilitation before various abdominal tumor surgeries have shown heterogeneous results so far. Positive effects have been shown for the improvement of functional parameters, but not for a reduction of complications or mortality. Further research, especially in the German healthcare system, is needed to confirm the benefit of prehabilitation, for example, in cystectomy.

Evaluation of Incise Drape Lift Using 2% Chlorhexidine Gluconate/70% Isopropyl Alcohol Preoperative Skin Preparations in a Human Volunteer Knee Model

Background

Before surgery, skin is prepped with antiseptics to reduce risk of surgical site infections. An incise drape can be used as an additional modality to immobilize any remaining bacteria. Good adhesion of this drape is critical for infection prevention.

Methods

This is a randomized controlled study using a human volunteer knee model (n = 30) to evaluate the adhesion performance of an incise drape comparing 2 skin preparations. A new investigational 2% chlorhexidine gluconate/70% isopropyl alcohol skin prep (prep A) was compared with an existing skin prep containing the same active agents (prep B). Two samples of an iodine-impregnated incise drape were placed on each knee after prepping. Knees were flexed in dry conditions, under a saline-soaked gauze, and after saline lavage. The frequency of drape lift was recorded after each challenge.

Results

After dry flex, 4 of 60 samples (6.7%) had lifted on prep A and 0 on prep B (P = .125). After wet flex, 20 of 60 samples (33%) had lifted on prep A, whereas 42 of 60 samples (70%) had lifted on prep B (P < .0001). After lavage, 23 of 60 samples (38%) had lifted on prep A, whereas 48 of 60 samples (80%) had lifted on prep B (P < .0001). Both preps were well tolerated with minimal erythema and no edema, rash, dryness, or denudation observed. No adverse events were reported.

Conclusions

Prep A resulted in reduced frequency of incise drape lift from skin under wet conditions in this model compared with prep B.

Use of plastic adhesive skin drapes in cancer patients undergoing totally implantable vascular access port (TIVAP) placement-a randomized controlled pilot study

PURPOSE

A totally implantable vascular access port (TIVAP) is commonly required in cancer patients. Possible adverse events after TIVAP implantation include surgical site infection (SSI) and port-related bacteremia. This study examined whether adhesive surgical drapes can reduce the risk of SSI.

METHODS

A total of 100 mostly cancer patients were randomized into two groups before undergoing TIVAP implantation by surgical cut-down. In one group, an adhesive, non-impregnated drape was applied to the skin prior to incision, while the control group underwent surgery without a drape. Swabs were taken from the surgical site and sent for microbiologic testing. SSI rates were compared between groups.

RESULTS

No SSI occurred within 30 days after surgery. In each group, two patients died. There were 5 complications (port thrombosis, port dislocation, two cases of pneumothorax, skin allergy), all in the intervention group (p = 0.056). Using the incision drape prolonged procedure time by + 5 min (95% CI - 1 to + 10, p = 0.125). Microbiologic swab testing failed to detect any effect of the incision drape.

CONCLUSIONS

Plastic adhesive skin drapes may be unnecessary in cancer patients who undergo surgical implantation of a TIVAP.

Prevention of Periprosthetic Joint Infection in Total Hip and Knee Replacement: One European Consensus

Periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) is a devastating complication in total hip and knee replacement. Its prevention is key to decrease the incidence and avoid some consequences that seriously impact patients and health systems. In view of the variety of recommendations and guidelines, we decided to conduct an expert, peer-reviewed European consensus analysis about the pre-, intra-, and postoperative prevention of PJI. A multinational group of practicing orthopedic experts developed a series of 47 consensus statements in 6 main groups of intervention, and a 2-stage Delphi approach was launched with a threshold for agreement at 75% and for very high agreement at more than 90%. A total of 306 orthopedic surgeon responses were gathered from 9 countries. Consensus was reached for 42/47 statements, 31/47 of which achieved a very high consensus. Many preoperative actions gathered strong consensus, although areas like the use of alcoholic chlorhexidine or the timing of hair removal did not attain strong consensus, despite available evidence. Intra- and postoperative actions showed more variability regarding incise drapes, skin suturing techniques, and wound follow-up. This study confirms an important consensus among orthopedic surgeons across Europe in many areas well known to contribute to the prevention of PJI; however, there are still grounds for improvement.

Delphi Consensus on Intraoperative Technical/Surgical Aspects to Prevent Surgical Site Infection after Colorectal Surgery

BACKGROUND

Previous studies have focused on the development and evaluation of care bundles to reduce the risk of surgical site infection (SSI) throughout the perioperative period. A focused examination of the technical/surgical aspects of SSI reduction during CRS has not been conducted. This study aimed to develop an expert consensus on intraoperative technical/surgical aspects of SSI prevention by the surgical team during colorectal surgery (CRS).

STUDY DESIGN

In a modified Delphi process, a panel of 15 colorectal surgeons developed a consensus on intraoperative technical/surgical aspects of SSI prevention undertaken by surgical personnel during CRS using information from a targeted literature review and expert opinion. Consensus was developed with up to three rounds per topic, with a prespecified threshold of ≥70% agreement.

RESULTS

In 3 Delphi rounds, the 15 panelists achieved consensus on 16 evidence-based statements. The consensus panel supported the use of wound protectors/retractors, sterile incision closure tray, preclosure glove change, and antimicrobial sutures in reducing SSI along with wound irrigation with aqueous iodine and closed-incision negative pressure wound therapy in high-risk, contaminated wounds.

CONCLUSIONS

Using a modified Delphi method, consensus has been achieved on a tailored set of recommendations on technical/surgical aspects that should be considered by surgical personnel during CRS to reduce the risk of SSI, particularly in areas where the evidence base is controversial or lacking. This document forms the basis for ongoing evidence for the topics discussed in this article or new topics based on newly emerging technologies in CRS.

Perioperative Interventions to Reduce Surgical Site Infections: A Review

Surgical site infections (SSIs) contribute to increased health care costs and morbidity after procedures as well as prolonged length of stay. Perioperative personnel can use a variety of interventions to help reduce SSI incidence; however, all strategies are not effective for all patients (eg, antibiotic prophylaxis). Results of randomized controlled trials show that some SSI reduction strategies are generally effective, including preoperative skin antisepsis with an alcohol-based agent, closing surgical wounds with triclosan-coated suture, and applying a negative pressure wound therapy device to open and closed wounds. Study results do not show that irrigating clean wounds with crystalloid solutions containing antibiotics or routinely using plastic drapes with or without impregnated iodophor or silver nylon-impregnated dressings significantly reduces SSI incidence. Perioperative leaders should support the implementation of strategies to prevent SSIs and work with interdisciplinary team members to develop an SSI prevention bundle that will meet the needs of their patients.

Impact of Advancing Age on the Status and Risk of Postoperative Infections After Liver Resection

BACKGROUND

Despite the recently increasing number of elderly patients undergoing liver resection, the impact of advancing age on postoperative infections (PIs) incidence and risk remains unclear. This study aimed to investigate the impact of advancing age on PIs incidence and status.

METHODS

This retrospective study included 744 patients undergoing liver resection without biliary reconstruction or combined resection of other organs. Multivariable analysis with a restricted cubic spline was used to evaluate the impact of advancing age on PIs and to determine its association with PIs risk in patients undergoing open and laparoscopic liver resection (OLR and LLR, respectively).

RESULTS

Multivariable analysis demonstrated that advancing age was significantly associated with increased PIs risk (P = 0.017). The spline curve showed that the odds ratio for PIs sharply increased starting approximately at 65 years of age. Unadjusted restricted cubic splines assessing the subcategories of PIs demonstrated that advancing age was associated with increased risks of organ/space surgical site infection and sepsis (P = 0,064 and 0.048, respectively). Multivariable analysis revealed that LLR was associated with the lower PIs risk compared with OLR (P = 0.025), whereas the lower PIs risk with LLR was not significantly obscured by advancing age (P = 0.29).

CONCLUSIONS

Advancing age was associated with increased risk of PIs, including organ/space surgical site infections and sepsis, after liver resection especially in patients aged ≥ 65 years.

Preliminary analysis of the antimicrobial activity of a novel surgical incise drape containing chlorhexidine gluconate against methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) in an in vivo porcine, incisional-wound model

BACKGROUND

Surgical site infections occur in at least 2%-4% of all patients. A proposed, risk-reduction strategy has been the use of adhesive, plastic incise drapes to reduce the risk of surgical site infection. The present investigation reports the efficacy of a novel chlorhexidine gluconate (CHG) adhesive surgical drape to reduce the risk of horizontal bacterial migration into surgical wounds, using a porcine model of wound contamination.

METHODS

Using a standardized inoculum, and a predetermined randomization schedule, a porcine model was used to assess the efficacy of a CHG-impregnated adhesive drape to prevent MRSA contamination of a simulated surgical wound and intact skin surface compared with an iodophor-impregnated incise drape and a nonantimicrobial incise drape in 0, 1, and 4-hour surgeries.

RESULTS

MRSA recovery from incisional wounds was lowest in sites treated with the CHG drape. The difference was statistically significant (P < .001) at all time points, both between the CHG drape and the nonantimicrobial control as well as between the CHG and iodophor drapes. Mean MRSA recovery from wounds treated with iodophor drapes was slightly lower than nonantimicrobial drapes. The difference was not statistically significant at 0- or 1-hour (P = .065 and P = .089, respectively), however the differences were significant at 4-hours (P = .024).

DISCUSSION

These preliminary results show that a novel CHG surgical incise drape reduced MRSA contamination of a surgical incision site and showed significant antimicrobial activity against contamination of intact skin surfaces compared with an iodophor- impregnated drape.

CONCLUSIONS

A novel CHG surgical drape was effective in significantly reducing MRSA contamination in an incisional wound model. Future studies are needed to assess its clinical efficacy.

The Japan Society for Surgical Infection: guidelines for the prevention, detection, and management of gastroenterological surgical site infection, 2018

BACKGROUND

The guidelines for the prevention, detection, and management of gastroenterological surgical site infections (SSIs) were published in Japanese by the Japan Society for Surgical Infection in 2018. This is a summary of these guidelines for medical professionals worldwide.

METHODS

We conducted a systematic review and comprehensive evaluation of the evidence for diagnosis and treatment of gastroenterological SSIs, based on the concepts of the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) system. The strength of recommendations was graded and voted using the Delphi method and the nominal group technique. Modifications were made to the guidelines in response to feedback from the general public and relevant medical societies.

RESULTS

There were 44 questions prepared in seven subject areas, for which 51 recommendations were made. The seven subject areas were: definition and etiology, diagnosis, preoperative management, prophylactic antibiotics, intraoperative management, perioperative management, and wound management. According to the GRADE system, we evaluated the body of evidence for each clinical question. Based on the results of the meta-analysis, recommendations were graded using the Delphi method to generate useful information. The final version of the recommendations was published in 2018, in Japanese.

CONCLUSIONS

The Japanese Guidelines for the prevention, detection, and management of gastroenterological SSI were published in 2018 to provide useful information for clinicians and improve the clinical outcome of patients.

Incidence and risk factors of surgical site infection following colorectal surgery in China: a national cross-sectional study

Purposes

Surgical site infection (SSI) after colorectal surgery is a frequent complication associated with the increase in morbidity, medical expenses, and mortality. To date, there is no nationwide large-scale database of SSI after colorectal surgery in China. The aim of this study was to determine the incidence of SSI after colorectal surgery in China and to further evaluate the related risk factors.

Methods

Two multicenter, prospective, cross-sectional studies covering 55 hospitals in China and enrolling adult patients undergoing colorectal surgery were conducted from May 1 to June 30 of 2018 and the same time of 2019. The demographic and perioperative characteristics were collected, and the main outcome was SSI within postoperative 30 days. Multivariable logistic regressions were conducted to predict risk factors of SSI after colorectal surgery.

Results

In total, 1046 patients were enrolled and SSI occurred in 74 patients (7.1%). In the multivariate analysis with adjustments, significant factors associated with SSI were the prior diagnosis of hypertension (OR, 1.903; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.088–3.327, P = 0.025), national nosocomial infection surveillance risk index score of 2 or 3 (OR, 3.840; 95% CI, 1.926–7.658, P < 0.001), laparoscopic or robotic surgery (OR, 0.363; 95% CI, 0.200–0.659, P < 0.001), and adhesive incise drapes (OR, 0.400; 95% CI, 0.187–0.855, P = 0.018). In addition, SSI group had remarkably increased length of postoperative stays (median, 15.0 d versus 9.0d, P < 0.001), medical expenses (median, 74,620 yuan versus 57,827 yuan, P < 0.001), and the mortality (4.1% versus 0.3%, P = 0.006), compared with those of non-SSI group.

Conclusion

This study provides the newest data of SSI after colorectal surgery in China and finds some predictors of SSI. The data presented in our study can be a tool to develop optimal preventive measures and improve surgical quality in China.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12879-020-05567-6.

Contemporary Review to Reduce Groin Surgical Site Infections in Vascular Surgery

Surgical site infection (SSIs) in lower extremity vascular procedures is a major contributor to patient morbidity and mortality. Despite previous advancements in preoperative and postoperative care, the surgical infection rate in vascular surgery remains high, particularly when groin incisions are involved. However, successfully targeting modifiable risk factors reduces the surgical site infection incidence in vascular surgery patients. We conducted an extensive literature review to evaluate the efficacy of various preventive strategies for groin surgical site infections. We discuss the role of preoperative showers, preoperative and postoperative antibiotics, collagen gentamicin implants, iodine impregnated drapes, types of skin incisions, negative pressure wound therapy, and prophylactic muscle flap transposition in preventing surgical site infection in the groin after vascular surgical procedures.

Surgical site infection prevention measures in General Surgery: Position statement by the Surgical Infections Division of the Spanish Association of Surgery

Surgical site infection is associated with prolonged hospital stay and increased morbidity, mortality and healthcare costs, as well as a poorer patient quality of life. Many hospitals have adopted scientifically-validated guidelines for the prevention of surgical site infection. Most of these protocols have resulted in improved postoperative results. The Surgical Infection Division of the Spanish Association of Surgery conducted a critical review of the scientific evidence and the most recent international guidelines in order to select measures with the highest degree of evidence to be applied in Spanish surgical services. The best measures are: no removal or clipping of hair from the surgical field, skin decontamination with alcohol solutions, adequate systemic antibiotic prophylaxis (administration within 30-60minutes before the incision in a single preoperative dose; intraoperative re-dosing when indicated), maintenance of normothermia and perioperative maintenance of glucose levels.

Giving short-term prophylactic antibiotics in patients undergoing open and laparoscopic hepatic resection

AIM

The 2016 guidelines of the Japan Society for Surgical Infection and the Japan Society of Chemotherapy advocate giving prophylactic antibiotics 1 hour before surgery and until 24 hours after surgery in patients undergoing elective hepatic resection. However, the efficacy of short-term antimicrobial prophylaxis has not been evaluated according to surgical approach. We evaluated the efficacy of giving prophylactic antibiotics in patients undergoing open or laparoscopic hepatic resection.

METHODS

The study comprised 218 and 185 patients undergoing open and pure laparoscopic hepatic resection, respectively. Incidence rates of postoperative infectious complications were compared between patients who received flomoxef sodium as the prophylactic antibiotic before and until 24 hours after surgery (short-term group) and those who received flomoxef sodium until 72 hours after surgery (long-term group) among patients undergoing open or laparoscopic hepatic resection. Propensity score matching analysis was carried out to adjust for confounding factors between the short- and long-term groups.

RESULTS

There was no significant difference in the postoperative infectious complication incidence between the short- and long-term groups among patients undergoing open (18.9% vs 12.2%; P = 0.36) or laparoscopic (3.3% vs 1.7%; P > 0.99) hepatic resection after propensity score matching. Incidence rate of surgical site infections was comparable between the short- and long-term groups among patients undergoing open (13.5% vs 10.8%; P = 0.80) or laparoscopic (3.3% vs 1.7%; P > 0.99) hepatic resection.

CONCLUSION

Giving short-term prophylactic antibiotics might be sufficient in preventing postoperative infectious complications in patients undergoing open and laparoscopic hepatic resection.

Effect of Incise Drape on Contamination Rate of Surgical Wound during Surgical Procedures of Lumbar Spine

Background:

The aim of this study was to investigate the effect of the incise drape (ID) on surgical wound bacterial contamination during lumbar spine surgical procedures in treatment group (with ID) and control group (without ID).

Materials and Methods:

The present study was conducted on 88 patients who were a candidate for lumbar spine surgery. The patients were randomly assigned to one of the two groups, treatment and control. The ID was only used in the treatment group. The surgical wound sampling for bacterial culture was done in two steps, immediately after surgical incision (IASI) and immediately prior to the surgical wound closure (IPSWC). The samples were then sent to the laboratory.

Results:

The mean total bacterial count of the surgical wound in the stage IASI was not significantly different between treatment and control groups (0.09 vs. 0.02, P = 0.31). However, this means in the stage IPSWC in treatment group was significantly more than the control group (18.6 vs. 0.41, P = 0.04). The frequency distribution of Staphylococcus aureus (25% vs. 3%, P = 0.02) and Staphylococcus epidermidis (36.4% vs. 9.1%, P = 0.002) was significantly higher in the treatment group compared with control group in the stage IPSWC.

Conclusion:

The results suggest that the use of ID is unable to reduce surgical wound bacterial contamination in clean lumbar spine surgery. Therefore, based on the results obtained in our study, the application of ID is not recommended as an essential action for the prevention of surgical wound contamination.

Adverse oncological outcome of surgical site infection after liver resection for colorectal liver metastases

PURPOSES

Postoperative complications are associated with poor overall and cancer-specific survival after resection of various types of cancer, including primary colorectal cancer. However, the oncological impact of surgical site infection (SSI) after liver resection for colorectal liver metastases (CLM) is unclear. The aim of this study was to investigate the oncological impact of SSI after liver resection for CLM.

METHODS

We reviewed data from 367 consecutive patients treated by curative liver resection for CLM between 1994 and 2015. Patients who underwent simultaneous resection of colorectal cancer and synchronous liver metastases (n = 86) were excluded from the analysis. Short- and long-term outcomes were analyzed.

RESULTS

SSI developed in 18 (6.4%) of the 281 patients in the analytic cohort (SSI group). The remaining 93.6% (n = 263) did not suffer this complication (no-SSI group). The operative duration was significantly longer in the SSI group than in the No-SSI group (p = 0.002). The overall survival rates 5 years after liver resection for CLM were 33.3% in the SSI group vs. 50.7% in the No-SSI group (p = 0.043). Multivariate analysis indicated that a liver tumor size ≥ 5 cm, R1 resection, and SSI were independently associated with overall survival after liver resection.

CONCLUSIONS

SSI after liver resection for CLM is associated with adverse oncological outcomes.

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.

Risk factors for incisional and organ space surgical site infections after liver resection are different

BACKGROUND

Surgical site infection (SSI) is a common cause of major morbidity after liver resection. This study aimed to identify the risk factors for incisional and organ/space SSIs after liver resection.

METHODS

Our liver surgery database was retrospectively analyzed for patients treated between January 2009 and November 2012 in a tertiary care Swiss hospital. Univariate and multivariate analyses were conducted on preoperative, intraoperative, and postoperative variables to identify risk factors for incisional and organ/space SSIs.

RESULTS

In a total of 226 patients, SSI incidences were 12.8 % (incisional), 4.0 % (organ/space), and 1.8 % (both). Univariate analysis showed that incisional SSIs were associated with high American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) scores, preoperative anemia, hypoalbuminemia, low prothrombin time, viral or alcoholic chronic hepatitis, liver cirrhosis, and prolonged operation times. Organ/space SSIs were associated with high rates of red blood cell transfusions, concomitant bowel surgery, and prolonged operation times. Multivariate analysis revealed that risk factors for incisional SSIs were anemia [odds ratio (OR) 2.82], high ASA scores (OR 2.88), presence of hepatitis or cirrhosis (OR 5.07), and prolonged operation times (OR 9.61). The only risk factor for organ/space SSIs was concomitant bowel surgery (OR 5.53). Hospital stays were similar in organ/space and incisional SSI groups, but significantly longer for those with both organ/space and incisional SSIs.

CONCLUSIONS

High ASA scores, anemia, chronic hepatitis or liver cirrhosis, and prolonged operations increased the risk of incisional SSIs; concomitant bowel surgery increased the risk of organ/space SSI. Specific precautions to prevent organ/space and incisional SSIs may shorten hospital stays.

Perioperative Bundle Decreases Postoperative Hepatic Surgery Infections

BACKGROUND

Postoperative infections are a costly and morbid complication. The introduction of perioperative infection prevention bundles have decreased surgical site infections (SSIs) in patients undergoing colorectal and pancreatic surgery.

AIM

The purpose of this study was to determine if the implementation of a perioperative bundle would reduce postoperative infectious complications in patients undergoing hepatic surgery.

METHODS

An evidence-based, low cost, perioperative infection bundle was created, and a retrospective review of a prospectively maintained database was performed on 163 consecutive patients undergoing hepatic surgery. Patient characteristics, operative details, outcomes, and complications were reviewed, and differences pre- and post-bundle were assessed with univariate and multivariate analyses.

RESULTS

A total of 113 patients received standard infection prophylaxis, while 50 received the perioperative bundle. Twenty-five patients had infections (16 deep abscesses, 3 superficial SSIs, 4 urinary tract infections, 1 pneumonia, 1 bacteremia). The overall infection rate decreased from 20.4 % (23/133) pre-bundle to 4 % (2/50) post-bundle. The SSI rate also decreased from 15 % (17/113) to 4 % (2/50). Univariate analysis showed that institution of the bundle was associated with a lower overall infection rate (p = 0.008), lower SSI rate (p = 0.06), and lower overall complication rate (p = 0.04). Multivariate analysis confirmed that the use of the bundle was independently associated with a lower infection (p = 0.008) and SSI (p = 0.05) rate. The primary length of stay (LOS) and LOS for 60 days postoperatively both significantly decreased post-bundle (from median of 5-4 days, p ≤ 0.001; 6-4 days, p ≤ 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

Implementation of a perioperative infection prevention bundle significantly decreased overall infections, SSIs, and postoperative LOS in patients undergoing hepatic surgery.

Use of plastic adhesive drapes during surgery for preventing surgical site infection

BACKGROUND

Surgical site infection has been estimated to occur in about 15% of clean surgery and 30% of contaminated surgery cases. Using plastic adhesive drapes to protect the wound from organisms that may be present on the surrounding skin during surgery is one strategy used to prevent surgical site infection. Results from non-randomised studies have produced conflicting results about the efficacy of this approach. A systematic review was required to guide clinical practice.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effect of adhesive drapes used during surgery on surgical site infection, cost, mortality and morbidity.

SEARCH METHODS

For this fourth update we searched the Cochrane Wounds Group Specialised Register (searched 4th March 2015); the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) (The Cochrane Library 2015, Issue 2); Ovid MEDLINE (2012 to 3rd March 2015); Ovid MEDLINE (In-Process & Other Non-Indexed Citations, 2012 to 3rd March 2015); Ovid EMBASE (2012 to 3rd March 2015); and EBSCO CINAHL (2012 to 4th March 2015).

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised controlled trials comparing any plastic adhesive drape with no plastic adhesive drape, used alone or in combination with woven (material) drapes or disposable (paper) drapes, in patients undergoing any type of surgery. Ring drapes were excluded.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently selected and assessed studies for trial quality and both independently extracted data. We contacted study authors for additional information.

MAIN RESULTS

We identified no new studies for this fourth update. The review includes five studies involving 3082 participants comparing plastic adhesive drapes with no drapes and two studies involving 1113 participants comparing iodine-impregnated adhesive drapes with no drapes. A significantly higher proportion of patients in the adhesive drape group developed a surgical site infection when compared with no drapes (risk ratio (RR) 1.23, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.02 to 1.48, P = 0.03). Iodine-impregnated adhesive drapes had no effect on the surgical site infection rate (RR 1.03, 95% CI 0.06 to 1.66, P = 0.89). Length of hospital stay was similar in the adhesive drape and non-adhesive drape groups.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

There was no evidence from the seven trials that plastic adhesive drapes reduce surgical site infection rates, and some evidence that they increase infection rates. Further trials may be justified, using blinded outcome assessment to examine the effect of adhesive drapes on surgical site infection, based on different wound classifications.

Preoperative skin antiseptics for preventing surgical wound infections after clean surgery

BACKGROUND

Surgical site infection rates in the month following clean surgery vary from 0.6% (knee prosthesis) to 5% (limb amputation). Due to the large number of clean surgical procedures conducted annually the costs of these surgical site infections (SSIs) can be considerable in financial and social terms. Preoperative skin antisepsis using antiseptics is performed to reduce the risk of SSIs by removing soil and transient organisms from the skin where a surgical incision will be made. Antiseptics are thought to be toxic to bacteria and therefore aid their mechanical removal. The effectiveness of preoperative skin preparation is thought to be dependent on both the antiseptic used and the method of application, however, it is unclear whether preoperative skin antisepsis actually reduces postoperative wound infection, and, if so, which antiseptic is most effective.

OBJECTIVES

To determine whether preoperative skin antisepsis immediately prior to surgical incision for clean surgery prevents SSI and to determine the comparative effectiveness of alternative antiseptics.

SEARCH METHODS

For this third update we searched just the Cochrane Wounds Group Specialised Register (searched 27 January 2015); The Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) (The Cochrane Library 2014, Issue 12).

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised controlled trials evaluating the use of preoperative skin antiseptics applied immediately prior to incision in clean surgery. There was no restriction on the inclusion of reports based on language of publication, date or publication status.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Data extraction and assessment of risk of bias were undertaken independently by two review authors.

MAIN RESULTS

There were no new studies added to the review in the third updateThirteen studies were included in this review (2,623 participants). These evaluated several different types of skin antiseptics - leading to 11 different comparisons being made. Although the antiseptics evaluated differed between studies, all trials involved some form of iodine. Iodine in alcohol was compared to alcohol alone in one trial; one trial compared povidone iodine paint (solution type not reported) with soap and alcohol. Six studies compared different types of iodine-containing products with each other and five compared iodine-containing products with chlorhexidine-containing products.There was evidence from one study suggesting that preoperative skin preparation with 0.5% chlorhexidine in methylated spirits led to a reduced risk of SSI compared with an alcohol based povidone iodine solution: RR 0.47 (95% CI 0.27 to 0.82). However, it is important to note that the trial does not report important details regarding the interventions (such as the concentration of povidone iodine paint used) and trial conduct, such that risk of bias was unclear.There were no other statistically significant differences in SSI rates in the other comparisons of skin antisepsis. Overall the risk of bias in included studies was unclear.A mixed treatment comparison meta-analysis was conducted and this suggested that alcohol-containing products had the highest probability of being effective - however, again the quality of this evidence was low.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

A comprehensive review of current evidence found some evidence that preoperative skin preparation with 0.5% chlorhexidine in methylated spirits was associated with lower rates of SSIs following clean surgery than alcohol-based povidone iodine paint. However this single study was poorly reported. Practitioners may therefore elect to consider other characteristics such as costs and potential side effects when choosing between alternatives.The design of future trials should be driven by the questions of high priority to decision makers. It may be that investment in at least one large trial (in terms of participants) is warranted in order to add definitive and hopefully conclusive data to the current evidence base. Ideally any future trial would evaluate the iodine-containing and chlorhexidine-containing solutions relevant to current practice as well as the type of solution used (alcohol vs. aqueous).

Preoperative Skin Antiseptic Preparations for Preventing Surgical Site Infections: A Systematic Review

Objective.

To evaluate the clinical effectiveness of preoperative skin antiseptic preparations and application techniques for the prevention of surgical site infections (SSIs).

Design.

Systematic review of the literature using Medline, EMBASE, and other databases, for the period January 2001 to June 2011.

Methods.

Comparative studies (including randomized and nonrandomized trials) of preoperative skin antisepsis preparations and application techniques were included. Two researchers reviewed each study and extracted data using standardized tables developed before the study. Studies were reviewed for their methodological quality and clinical findings.

Results.

Twenty studies (n = 9,520 patients) were included in the review. The results indicated that presurgical antiseptic showering is effective for reducing skin flora and may reduce SSI rates. Given the heterogeneity of the studies and the results, conclusions about which antiseptic is more effective at reducing SSIs cannot be drawn.

Conclusions.

The evidence suggests that preoperative antiseptic showers reduce bacterial colonization and may be effective at preventing SSIs. The antiseptic application method is inconsequential, and data are lacking to suggest which antiseptic solution is the most effective. Disinfectant products are often mixed with alcohol or water, which makes it difficult to form overall conclusions regarding an active ingredient. Large, well-conducted randomized controlled trials with consistent protocols comparing agents in the same bases are needed to provide unequivocal evidence on the effectiveness of one antiseptic preparation over another for the prevention of SSIs.

Bacterial recolonization of the skin and wound contamination during cardiac surgery: a randomized controlled trial of the use of plastic adhesive drape compared with bare skin

BACKGROUND

Sternal wound infection after cardiac surgery is a serious complication. Various perioperative strategies, including plastic adhesive drapes, are used to reduce bacterial contamination of surgical wounds.

AIM

To compare plastic adhesive drape to bare skin regarding bacterial growth in wound and time to recolonization of the adjacent skin intraoperatively, in cardiac surgery patients.

METHODS

This single-blinded randomized controlled trial (May 2010 to May 2011) included 140 patients scheduled for cardiac surgery via median sternotomy. The patients were randomly allocated to the adhesive drape (chest covered with plastic adhesive drape) or bare skin group. Bacterial samples were taken preoperatively and intraoperatively every hour during surgery until skin closure.

RESULTS

Disinfection with 0.5% chlorhexidine solution in 70% alcohol decreased coagulase-negative staphylococci (CoNS), while the proportion colonized with Propionibacterium acnes was not significantly reduced and was still present in more than 50% of skin samples. P. acnes was significantly more common in men than in women. Progressive bacterial recolonization of the skin occurred within 2-3 h. At 120 min there were significantly more positive cultures in the adhesive drape group versus bare skin group for P. acnes (63% vs 44%; P = 0.034) and for CoNS (45% vs 24%; P = 0.013). The only statistically significant difference in bacterial growth in the surgical wound was higher proportion of CoNS at the end of surgery in the adhesive drape group (14.7% vs 4.4%; P = 0.044).

CONCLUSION

Plastic adhesive drape does not reduce bacterial recolonization. P. acnes colonized men more frequently, and was not decreased by disinfection with chlorhexidine solution in alcohol.

Preoperative skin antiseptics for preventing surgical wound infections after clean surgery

BACKGROUND

Surgical site infection rates in the month following clean surgery vary from 0.6% (knee prosthesis) to 5% (limb amputation). Due to the large number of clean surgical procedures conducted annually the costs of these surgical site infections (SSIs) can be considerable in financial and social terms. Preoperative skin antisepsis using antiseptics is performed to reduce the risk of SSIs by removing soil and transient organisms from the skin where a surgical incision will be made. Antiseptics are thought to be toxic to bacteria and therefore aid their mechanical removal. The effectiveness of preoperative skin preparation is thought to be dependent on both the antiseptic used and the method of application, however, it is unclear whether preoperative skin antisepsis actually reduces postoperative wound infection, and, if so, which antiseptic is most effective.

OBJECTIVES

To determine whether preoperative skin antisepsis immediately prior to surgical incision for clean surgery prevents SSI and to determine the comparative effectiveness of alternative antiseptics.

SEARCH METHODS

For this second update we searched the The Cochrane Wounds Group Specialised Register (searched 7 August 2012), The Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) (The Cochrane Library 2012, Issue 7), Ovid MEDLINE  (1950 to July Week 4 2012), Ovid MEDLINE (In-Process & Other Non-Indexed Citations August 06, 2012), Ovid EMBASE (1980 to 2012 Week 31), EBSCO CINAHL (2007 to 3 August 2012).

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised controlled trials evaluating the use of preoperative skin antiseptics applied immediately prior to incision in clean surgery. There was no restriction on the inclusion of reports based on language of publication, date or publication status.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Data extraction and assessment of risk of bias were undertaken independently by two review authors.

MAIN RESULTS

Thirteen studies were included in this review (2,623 participants). These evaluated several different types of skin antiseptics - leading to 11 different comparisons being made. Although the antiseptics evaluated differed between studies, all trials involved some form of iodine. Iodine in alcohol was compared to alcohol alone in one trial; one trial compared povidone iodine paint (solution type not reported) with soap and alcohol. Six studies compared different types of iodine-containing products with each other and five compared iodine-containing products with chlorhexidine-containing products.There was evidence from one study suggesting that preoperative skin preparation with 0.5% chlorhexidine in methylated spirits led to a reduced risk of SSI compared with an alcohol based povidone iodine solution: RR 0.47 (95% CI 0.27 to 0.82). However, it is important to note that the trial does not report important details regarding the interventions (such as the concentration of povidone iodine paint used) and trial conduct, such that risk of bias was unclear.There were no other statistically significant differences in SSI rates in the other comparisons of skin antisepsis. Overall the risk of bias in included studies was unclear.A mixed treatment comparison meta-analysis was conducted and this suggested that alcohol-containing products had the highest probability of being effective - however, again the quality of this evidence was low.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

A comprehensive review of current evidence found some evidence that preoperative skin preparation with 0.5% chlorhexidine in methylated spirits was associated with lower rates of SSIs following clean surgery than alcohol-based povidone iodine paint. However this single study was poorly reported. Practitioners may therefore elect to consider other characteristics such as costs and potential side effects when choosing between alternatives.The design of future trials should be driven by the questions of high priority to decision makers. It may be that investment in at least one large trial (in terms of participants) is warranted in order to add definitive and hopefully conclusive data to the current evidence base. Ideally any future trial would evaluate the iodine-containing and chlorhexidine-containing solutions relevant to current practice as well as the type of solution used (alcohol vs. aqueous).

Use of plastic adhesive drapes during surgery for preventing surgical site infection

BACKGROUND

Surgical site infection has been estimated to occur in about 15% of clean surgery and 30% of contaminated surgery cases. Using plastic adhesive drapes to protect the wound from organisms that may be present on the surrounding skin during surgery is one strategy used to prevent surgical site infection. Results from non-randomised studies have produced conflicting results about the efficacy of this approach, but no systematic review has been conducted to date to guide clinical practice.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effect of adhesive drapes used during surgery on surgical site infection, cost, mortality and morbidity.

SEARCH METHODS

For this third update we searched the Cochrane Wounds Group Specialised Register (searched 19 July 2012); the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) (The Cochrane Library 2012, Issue 7); Ovid MEDLINE (1946 to July Week 2, 2012); Ovid MEDLINE (In-Process & Other Non-Indexed Citations, July 18, 2012); Ovid EMBASE (1974 to Week 28, 2012); and EBSCO CINAHL (1982 to July 6, 2012).

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised controlled trials comparing any plastic adhesive drape with no plastic adhesive drape, used alone or in combination with woven (material) drapes or disposable (paper) drapes, in patients undergoing any type of surgery.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently selected and assessed studies for trial quality and both independently extracted data. We contacted study authors for additional information.

MAIN RESULTS

We identified no new studies for this third update. The review includes five studies involving 3082 participants comparing plastic adhesive drapes with no drapes and two studies involving 1113 participants comparing iodine-impregnated adhesive drapes with no drapes. A significantly higher proportion of patients in the adhesive drape group developed a surgical site infection when compared with no drapes (risk ratio (RR) 1.23, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.02 to 1.48, P = 0.03). Iodine-impregnated adhesive drapes had no effect on the surgical site infection rate (RR 1.03, 95% CI 0.06 to 1.66, P = 0.89). Length of hospital stay was similar in the adhesive drape and non-adhesive drape groups.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

There was no evidence from the seven trials that plastic adhesive drapes reduce surgical site infection rates, and some evidence that they increase infection rates. Further trials may be justified, using blinded outcome assessment to examine the effect of adhesive drapes on surgical site infection, based on different wound classifications.

Standard abdominal wound edge protection with surgical dressings vs coverage with a sterile circular polyethylene drape for prevention of surgical site infections (BaFO): study protocol for a randomized controlled trial

Background

Postoperative surgical site infections cause substantial morbidity, prolonged hospitalization, costs and even mortality and remain one of the most frequent surgical complications. Approximately 14% to 30% of all patients undergoing elective open abdominal surgery are affected and methods to reduce surgical site infection rates warrant further investigation and evaluation in randomized controlled trials.

Methods/design

To investigate whether the application of a circular plastic wound protector reduces the rate of surgical site infections in general and visceral surgical patients that undergo midline or transverse laparotomy by 50%. BaFO is a randomized, controlled, patient-blinded and observer-blinded multicenter clinical trial with two parallel surgical groups. The primary outcome measure will be the rate of surgical site infections within 45 days postoperative assessed according to the definition of the Center for Disease Control. Statistical analysis of the primary endpoint will be based on the intention-to-treat population. The global level of significance is set at 5% (2 sided) and sample size (n = 258 per group) is determined to assure a power of 80% with a planned interim analysis for the primary endpoint after the inclusion of 340 patients.

Discussion

The BaFO trial will explore if the rate of surgical site infections can be reduced by a single, simple, inexpensive intervention in patients undergoing open elective abdominal surgery. Its pragmatic design guarantees high external validity and clinical relevance.

Trial registration

http://www.clinicaltrials.gov NCT01181206. Date of registration: 11 August 2010; date of first patient randomized: 8 September 2010

The role of perioperative care in reducing rates of methicillin resistant Staphylococcus aureus

Methicillin resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) is defined as any strain of Staphylococcus aureus resistant to beta-lactam antibiotics, including the penicillins and cephalosporins. Over the past ten years the UK has seen a dramatic increase in MRSA prevalence in healthcare facilities and the community, with an estimated 30-50% of healthy adults thought to be colonised with MRSA. Surgical patients are among those at highest risk. With potential sequelae including septicaemia, septic shock, septic arthritis, osteomyelitis, meningitis, pneumonia or endocarditis, it is vital that all care facilities have up to date evidence-based guidelines to tackle this problem. The purpose of this review is to highlight the current evidence supporting some of the key perioperative measures which may be implemented in preventing MRSA.

Perioperative surgical care bundle reduces pancreaticoduodenectomy wound infections

BACKGROUND

Pancreaticoduodenectomy (PD) is a complex surgical procedure with a historically high morbidity rate. The goal of this study was to determine if the implementation of a 12-measure perioperative surgical care bundle (SCB) was successful in reducing infectious and other complications in patients undergoing PD compared with a routine preoperative preparation group (RPP).

METHODS

In this retrospective cohort study utilizing the HPB surgery database at the Thomas Jefferson University, we analyzed clinical data from 233 consecutive PDs from October 2005 to May 2008 on patients who underwent RPP, and compared them with 233 consecutive PDs from May 2008 to May 2010 following the implementation of the SCB. The SCB was the product of multidisciplinary discussion and extensive literature review.

RESULTS

The RPP group and the SCB group had similar demographic characteristics. The overall rate of postoperative morbidity was similar between groups (42.1% versus 37.8%). However, wound infections were significantly lower in the SCB group (15.0% versus 7.7%, P = 0.01).The rates of other common complications, as well as postoperative hospital length of stay, readmissions, and 30-d postoperative mortality were similar between groups.

CONCLUSIONS

The implementation of a SCB was followed by a significant decline in wound infection in patients undergoing PD.

Prevention of postoperative wound infections by covering the surgical field with iodine-impregnated incision drape (Ioban 2)

The literature is used to analyse the significance of the use of iodine-impregnated incision drape (Ioban(®) 2) for the prevention of postoperative wound infections (SSI). The drape has a microbiocidal effect in vitro. Consequently an antiseptic effect also occurs under the incision drape when it is applied to the skin; at the same time, bacterial wound contamination is reduced. Overall, based on the efficacy strength of the antiseptic incision drape, a reduction of the SSI rate can, however, be confirmed only with a large sample size. A meta analysis which evaluated four prospective studies and one retrospective study was able to provide significant confirmation of a reduction in the SSI rate. There are no limitations in terms of the biocompatibility of the iodine-impregnated incision drape.

Antimicrobial-impregnated surgical incise drapes in the prevention of mesh infection after ventral hernia repair

BACKGROUND

Antimicrobial surgical incise drapes are used in an effort to lower the risk of mesh infection after hernia repair. The effect such drapes on infection rates was examined.

METHODS

Ventral or incisional hernia repairs with mesh from March, 2002, to June, 2006 gathered from the local American College of Surgeons-National Surgical Quality Improvement Project database, chart review, and operating room database were reviewed. Mesh infection was defined as infection necessitating mesh removal. Significant univariate predictors of infection were included in a logistic regression model. Mesh infections were divided into early (0-7 days), midterm (8-50 days), and late (>50 days) onset for subgroup analysis.

RESULTS

Five hundred six hernia repairs and 42 mesh infections (8.3%) were identified (range 1-947 days), the latter consisting of seven early (16.7%), 13 midterm (31.0%), and 22 late (53.4%) infections. Antimicrobial-impregnated incise drapes were used in 206 cases in the entire series (59.1%). By multivariable analysis, factors significantly associated with incise drape use were laparoscopic repair (odds ratio [OR] 3.03; p < 0.0001), per-year resident level (OR 1.21; p = 0.0012), high-volume surgeon (OR 1.74; p = 0.021), clean wound classification (OR 2.21; p = 0.0076), current or recent smoking (OR 1.61; p = 0.039), and chronic steroid use (OR 0.31; p = 0.044). Predictors of mesh infection in multivariable analysis were repair of recurrent hernia (OR 3.72; p < 0.0001), current or recent smoking (OR 2.18; p = 0.027), and per-minute operation time (OR 1.007; p = 0.0004). Missed enterotomy was the only factor significantly associated with time to mesh infection (75% in the early group; p < 0.0001).

CONCLUSION

At our institution, antimicrobial-impregnated incise drapes are most likely to be used by the highest-volume hernia repair surgeons and more experienced residents in clean, elective, laparoscopic cases. However, reduction in the mesh infection rate was not observed with their use. Independent predictors of mesh infection included repeat surgery, smoking, and longer operating time. The time from operation to mesh infection differed greatly. Not unexpectedly, mesh infection within seven days after implantation was strongly related to a missed enterotomy.

Use of plastic adhesive drapes during surgery for preventing surgical site infection

BACKGROUND

Surgical site infection has been estimated to occur in about 15% of clean surgery and 30% of contaminated surgery. Using plastic adhesive drapes to protect the wound from organisms that may be present on the surrounding skin during surgery is one strategy used to prevent surgical site infection. Results from non-randomised studies have produced conflicting results about the efficacy of this approach but no systematic review has been conducted to date to guide clinical practice.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effect of adhesive drapes used during surgery on surgical site infection, cost, mortality and morbidity.

SEARCH STRATEGY

We searched the Cochrane Wounds Group Specialised Register (last searched 24/4/07), the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) (The Cochrane Library Issue 2,2007), Ovid MEDLINE (1950 to April Week 2, 2007), Ovid EMBASE (1980 to 2007 Week 16), and Ovid CINAHL (1982 to 1980 to April Week 2 2007).

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised controlled trials comparing any plastic adhesive drape with no adhesive drape, used alone or in combination with woven (material) drapes or disposable (paper) drapes in patients undergoing any type of surgery.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two authors independently selected and assessed studies for trial quality and both independently extracted data. Study authors were contacted for additional information.

MAIN RESULTS

This review includes five studies involving 3,082 participants comparing adhesive drapes with no drape and two studies involving 1,113 participants comparing iodine-impregnated adhesive drapes with no drape. A significantly higher proportion of patients in the adhesive drape group developed a surgical site infection when compared with no drape. (Relative Risk (RR) 1.23, 95% Confidence Intervals (CI) 1.02 to 1.48, p=0.03). Iodine-impregnated adhesive drapes had no effect on the surgical site infection rate (RR 1.03, 95% CI 0.064 to 1.66, p=0.89). Length of hospital stay was similar in adhesive drape and non-adhesive drape groups.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

There was no evidence from the seven trials that plastic adhesive drapes reduces surgical site infection rate and some evidence that they increase infection rates. Further trials may be justified using blinded outcome assessment to examine the effect of adhesive drapes on surgical site infection based on different wound classifications.

Plastic within renal pelvis on nephroscopy: a potential hazard during percutaneous nephrolithotomy

The use of adhesive plastic drapes is common throughout laparoscopic and percutaneous surgery. We report a case in which a significant portion of the plastic drape was translocated into the renal pelvis during tract dilation for percutaneous nephrolithotomy. The complication was recognized only on endoscopy and the plastic successfully removed. The potential for morbidity in other patients in the future remains, and we recommend operators be aware of this unusual, but entirely preventable, complication. We highlight some measures to help avoid and check for this complication before the end of the procedure.

Influence of Skin Flora and Preventive Measures on Surgical Site Infection during Cardiac Surgery

BACKGROUND

The skin flora responsible for most surgical site infections (SSIs) include Staphylococcus aureus, coagulase-negative staphylococci, Propionibacterium acnes, gram-negative bacilli, micrococci, and diphtheroids. The two major methods of reducing local concentrations of bacteria are administration of an antibiotic and cleansing of the skin. Resistance to antibiotics is a major concern. Mortality rates in patients infected by methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus or comparably virulent bacteria may be as high as 74%.

METHODS

Review of current practice and guidelines.

RESULTS

There is no standard regimen for antimicrobial prophylaxis. No added benefit is conferred by prophylaxis exceeding 48 h. A number of preoperative skin care techniques have been used to limit concentrations of bacteria at the surgical site, including antiseptic preparations, adhesive barrier drapes, topical antibiotics, hair removal, and hand hygiene.

CONCLUSIONS

Antibiotic prophylaxis minimizes the risk of SSI in patients having cardiac surgery. The emergence of antibiotic-resistant bacteria makes it necessary to avoid the use of antimicrobials when they are not necessary. Preoperative skin care does reduce contamination at the incisional site and may reduce the risk of SSI.

Preoperative skin antiseptics for preventing surgical wound infections after clean surgery

BACKGROUND

Approximately 15% of elective surgery patients and 30% of patients receiving contaminated or dirty surgery are estimated to develop post-operative wound infections. The costs of surgical wound infection can be considerable in financial as well as social terms. Preoperative skin antisepsis is performed to reduce the risk of post-operative wound infections by removing soil and transient organisms from the skin. Antiseptics are thought to be both toxic to bacteria and aid their mechanical removal. The effectiveness of preoperative skin preparation is thought to be dependent on both the antiseptic used and the method of application, however it is unclear whether preoperative skin antisepsis actually reduces post-operative wound infection and if so which antiseptic is most effective.

OBJECTIVES

To determine whether preoperative skin antisepsis reduces post-operative surgical wound infection.

SEARCH STRATEGY

We searched the Cochrane Wounds Group Specialised Trials Register and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials in April 2004. In addition we handsearched journals, conference proceedings and bibliographies.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised controlled trials evaluating the use of preoperative skin antiseptics applied immediately prior to incision in clean surgery. There were no restrictions based on language, date or publication status.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Three reviewers independently undertook data extraction and assessment of study quality. Pooling was inappropriate and trials are discussed in a narrative review.

MAIN RESULTS

We identified six eligible RCTs evaluating preoperative antiseptics. There was significant heterogeneity in the comparisons and the results could not be pooled. In one study, infection rates were significantly lower when skin was prepared using chlorhexidine compared with iodine. There was no evidence of a benefit in four trials associated with the use of iodophor impregnated drapes.

REVIEWERS' CONCLUSIONS

There is insufficient research examining the effects of preoperative skin antiseptics to allow conclusions to be drawn regarding their effects on post-operative surgical wound infections. Further research is needed.