Thyroid Surgery without Antibiotic Prophylaxis: Experiences with 1,030 Patients from a Teaching Hospital in China

Primary Hyperparathyroidism: Part Two: Surgical Management

Primary hyperparathyroidism (PHPT) is caused by the overproduction of parathyroid hormone by 1 or more parathyroid glands resulting in hypercalcemia and its downstream clinical consequences. The definitive management of PHPT is surgery. Approaches to successful surgery include bilateral exploration or focused parathyroidectomy with intraoperative parathyroid hormone monitoring, which in experienced hands are both associated with a low risk of complications.

Is Prophylactic Antibiotic Therapy Needed in Thyroidectomy?

Antibiotics have been traditionally prescribed for any open head and neck surgery. With classification of wound and wound contamination and various published guidelines the practice is still widely prevalent. Thyroidectomy being a clean surgery does not warrant the use of antibiotics at all. We performed an interventional prospective study to see the occurrence of wound infection in patients who received antibiotic prophylaxis as compared to those who did not. A total of 71 patients were recruited in the study who were randomly divided into two groups, one received antibiotic prophylaxis and other did not. Both the groups did not show any marked change in the incidence of wound infection hence highlighting the unnecessary use of prophylactic antibiotics in thyroid surgeries.

Effect of Antibiotic Prophylaxis on Surgical Site Infection in Thyroid and Parathyroid Surgery: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Thyroid and parathyroid surgery are considered clean procedures, with an incidence of surgical site infection (SSI) after thyroidectomy ranging from 0.09% to 2.9%. International guidelines do not recommend routine antibiotic prophylaxis (AP), while AP seems to be employed commonly in clinical practice. The purpose of this systematic review is analyzing whether the postoperative SSI rate in thyroid and parathyroid surgery is altered by the practice of AP. We searched Pubmed, Scopus, the Cochrane Library, and Web of Science (WOS) for studies comparing AP to no preoperative antibiotics up to October 2021. Data on the SSI rate was evaluated and summarized as relative risks (RR) with 95% confidence intervals (95% CI). Risk of bias of studies were assessed with standard methods. Nine studies (4 RCTs and 5 nRCTs), including 8710 participants, were eligible for quantitative analysis. A meta-analysis showed that the SSI rate was not significantly different between AP and no preoperative antibiotics (SSI rate: 0.6% in AP vs. 2.4% in control group; RR 0.69, 0.43-1.10 95% CI, p = 0.13, I2 = 0%). A sensitivity analysis and subgroup analysis on RCTs were consistent with the main findings. Evidence of low quality supports that AP in thyroid and parathyroid surgery produce similar SSI rates as to the absence of perioperative antibiotics.

Antibiotic Prophylaxis for Thyroid and Parathyroid Surgery: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

Objective

Although thyroid and parathyroid surgery is considered a clean procedure with a low incidence of surgical site infections (SSIs), a great number of endocrine surgeons use antibiotic prophylaxis (AP). The aim of this study was to assess whether AP is significantly effective in reducing the incidence of SSIs in this kind of surgery.

Data Sources

A systematic literature search was performed with PubMed, Scopus, and ISI–Web of Science. Studies addressing the efficacy of AP in reducing the incidence of SSIs in thyroid and parathyroid surgery were included in the systematic review and meta-analysis.

Review Methods

The random effects model was assumed to account for different sources of variation among studies. The overall effect size was computed through the inverse variance method. Heterogeneity across studies, possible outlier studies, and publication bias were evaluated.

Results

A total of 6 studies with 4428 patients were included in the quantitative analysis. The incidence of SSI was 0.6% in the case group and 0.4% in the control group (odds ratio, 1.07; 95% CI, 0.3-3.81; P = .915). There was no evidence of heterogeneity among the studies ( Q = 8.36, P = .138; I2 = 40.17). The analysis of several continuous moderators, including age, use of drain, and duration of surgery, did not generate any significant result.

Conclusion

AP is not effective in reducing the incidence of SSI in thyroid and parathyroid surgery and should be avoided, notwithstanding the negative impact on social costs and the risk of development of antibiotic resistance.

Systematic review of international guidelines for perioperative antibiotic prophylaxis in Head & Neck Surgery. A YO-IFOS Head & Neck Study Group Position Paper

BACKGROUND

Surgical site infection (SSI) is defined as an infection that occurs after a surgical incision or organ manipulation during surgery. The frequency reported for clean head and neck surgical procedures without antimicrobial prophylaxis is <1%. In contrast, infection rates in patients undergoing complicated cancer surgery are high, ranging from 24% to 87% of patients without antimicrobial prophylaxis.

METHODS

Guidelines and recommendations about the use of antibiotics in head and neck surgery from 2004 to 2019 were reviewed.

RESULTS

Four guidelines from Oceania, 5 from South America, 5 from North America, 2 from the United Kingdom, 11 from Europe, 1 from Africa, 1 from the Middle East, and 3 from Asia were included. A total of 118 papers were included for analysis and recommendation.

CONCLUSION

Antibiotic prophylaxis can decrease the incidence of SSI. However, the risks associated with antibiotic exposure and the risk of antibiotic resistance need to be taken into consideration.

Antibiotic Prophylaxis in Clean Head and Neck Surgery: An Observational Retrospective Single-Centre Study

INTRODUCTION

Surgical site infection (SSI) is a common complication in surgery. In head and neck surgeries, different rates are reported in the indexed literature. Nowadays, this indiscriminate use of antibiotics is associated with increased cost and risks for patients. Antimicrobial misuse has also contributed to the development of antibiotic-resistant bacteria.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

A total of 204 patients were included in this observational retrospective cohort study. The primary outcome of this study was to describe the rate of SSI. Wound infection was considered as SSI and was defined as any cellulitis or pus drainage requiring treatment with antibiotics.

RESULTS

Of all, 127 were included in group A (not antibiotic) and 77 in group B (antibiotic prophylaxis); 109 (53.5%) patients were male, and 97 (47.5%) were female. Four (3.14%) patients developed SSI in group A and 3 (3,89%) developed SSI in group B, being not statistically significant (P = .592). In group A, 2 patients suffered SSI after a submandibular gland resection (SGR), 1 patient after a parotid gland resection (PGR), and another one after a branchial cleft cyst resection. In group B, 1 patient suffered SSI after an SGR and 2 after a PGR. On univariate and multivariate analyses, we did not find any variable associated with the development of SSI.

CONCLUSION

According to our results, the prophylactic antibiotic in clean, benign head and neck surgery is not necessary. Nevertheless, physicians and surgeons should be aware that severe or even fatal SSIs might be developed, and it needs to be explained to our patient before any surgery.

Surgical site infection in elective clean and clean-contaminated surgeries in developing countries

BACKGROUND

Surgical site infection (SSI) is both the most frequently studied healthcare-associated infection and the most common healthcare-associated infection in the developing world. A systematic review and meta-analysis was conducted to evaluate the relative size of this burden and to estimate the prevalence of SSI in clean and clean-contaminated surgeries in a large sample of countries in the developing world.

METHODS

A systematic search of the MEDLINE/PubMed, Scopus, and LILACS databases was conducted to identify studies providing the prevalence of SSI in elective clean and clean-contaminated surgeries in 39 countries or regions around the world. Data of interest were limited to publications from January 2000 to December 2017. Studies with information on the number of cases of SSI and number of total elective clean and clean-contaminated surgeries during the same period were included in this evaluation. Studies lacking clear definition of the total number of exposed patients were excluded.

RESULTS

Based on the combined data from the 99 articles evaluated in this analysis, the overall prevalence of SSI in elective clean and clean-contaminated surgeries was estimated to be 6% (95% confidence interval (CI) 5-7%). This increased to 15% (95% CI 6-27%) when considering only those reports with post-discharge surveillance data. The overall prevalence of SSI in Africa/Middle East, Latin America, Asia, and China was 10% (95% CI 6-15%), 7% (95% CI 5-10%), 4% (95% CI 4-5%), and 4% (95% CI 2-6%), respectively. Significant variability in the data was confirmed by both the funnel plot and the Egger test (p=0.008).

CONCLUSIONS

Although the data are variable, it is clear that the incidence of SSI in the developing world is higher than that in the developed world.

A Nested Case-Control Study on the Risk of Surgical Site Infection After Thyroid Surgery

Introduction

It is unclear if antibiotic prophylaxis reduces the risk of surgical site infection (SSI) in thyroid surgery. This study assessed risk factors for SSI and antibiotic prophylaxis in subgroups of patients.

Method and design

A nested case–control study on patients registered in the Swedish National Register for Endocrine Surgery was performed. Patients with SSI were matched 1:1 by age and gender to controls. Additional information on patients with SSI and controls was queried from attending surgeons using a questionnaire. Risk factors for SSI were evaluated by logistic regression analysis and presented as odds ratio (OR) with 95% confidence interval (CI).

Results

There were 9494 operations; 109 (1.2%) patients had SSI. Patients with SSI were older (median 53 vs. 49 years) than patients without SSI p = 0.01 and more often had a cancer diagnosis 23 (21.1%) versus 1137 (12.1%) p = 0.01. In the analysis of patients with SSI versus controls, patients with SSI more often had post-operative drainage 68 (62.4%) versus 46 (42.2%) p = 0.01 and lymph node surgery 40 (36.7%) versus 14 (13.0%) p < 0.01, and both were independent risk factors for SSI, drain OR 1.82 (CI 1.04–3.18) and lymph node dissection, OR 3.22 (95% CI 1.32–7.82). A higher number of 26(62%) patients with independent risk factors for SSI and diagnosed with SSI did not receive antibiotic prophylaxis. Data were missing for 8 (31%) patients.

Conclusion

Lymph node dissection and drain are independent risk factors for SSI after thyroidectomy. Antibiotic prophylaxis might be considered in patients with these risk factors.

Incidence of Surgical Site Infections after Thyroid and Parathyroid Surgery: No Role for Antimicrobial Prophylaxis

To better define the value of antimicrobial prophylaxis (AMP) and antiseptic skin preparation (ASP) in thyroid and parathyroid surgery, we examined the rate of surgical site infections (SSIs) with and without AMP. Retrospective analysis was performed using the National Surgical Quality Improvement Program database at a single institution. Patients undergoing thyroid or parathyroid surgery with data entered into the National Surgical Quality Improvement Program database at our institution between November 2007 and June 2015 were studied, including patient demographics, wound classification, other risk factors for SSI, and wound outcome. Charts were retrospectively reviewed for AMP, ASP, and use of drains. Of the 534 patients who underwent thyroid (n = 358) or parathyroid (n = 176) surgery, 58 (10.9%) were diabetic, 54 (10.1%) used tobacco, and 14 (2.6%) were on steroids. Most wounds were classified as “clean” (99.6%). Betadine was used for ASP in 96 per cent. AMP was given to 141 patients (26%) using cefazolin, vancomycin, or clindamycin. The remaining 393 patients (74%) received no AMP. Zero infections occurred in the group who did not receive AMP. One (0.7%) superficial, nonpurulent SSI occurred in the group that received AMP which was not statistically significantly different (P = 0.319). The rates of SSI after thyroid and parathyroid surgery are extremely low, around two per 1000 cases, and do not decrease with AMP. Therefore, AMP is not necessary in thyroid and parathyroid surgery and should be avoided to reduce costs, adverse reactions, and antibiotic resistance.

Antibiotic prophylaxis in thyroid surgery

Use of antibiotic prophylactic (AP) in clean surgery is still controversial. We reviewed the literature of the last 10 years to identify the best way to approach the use of prophylactic antibiotic in thyroid surgery. In thyroid surgery, it is a highly controversial topic primarily due to the lack of evidence in "support" of or "against" antibiotic use. In this review, the authors analyze the literature on the use of AP in thyroid surgery in order to evaluate if the available data support or contradict this use routinely.

Antimicrobial use in critically ill horses

OBJECTIVE

To discuss controversies surrounding antimicrobial use in critically ill horses.

DATA SOURCES

PubMed searches from 1970-present for terms including, but not limited to: "horse," "foal," "antimicrobial," "prophylaxis," "infection," "surgery," "sepsis," and "antimicrobial resistance."

HUMAN DATA SYNTHESIS

Increasing bacterial antimicrobial resistance has changed first-line antimicrobial choices and prompted shortening of the duration of prophylactic and therapeutic treatment. The need to decrease bacterial resistance development to critically important antimicrobials has been highlighted.

VETERINARY DATA SYNTHESIS

Veterinary medicine has followed a similar trend but often without a high-level evidence. Common dilemmas include diseases in which the theoretically most effective drug is a reserved antimicrobial, the inability to differentiate infectious from noninfectious disease, the duration and necessity of prophylactic antimicrobials and use of antimicrobials in primary gastrointestinal disease. These problems are illustrated using examples of purulent infections, neonatal sepsis, colic surgery, and treatment of colitis. Although enrofloxacin, cephalosporins, and doxycycline, in contrast to gentamicin, reach therapeutic concentrations within the lungs of healthy horses, the first two should not be used as first line treatment due to their reserved status. Due to the high risk of bacterial sepsis, antimicrobial treatment remains indispensable in compromised neonatal foals but shortening the length of antimicrobial treatment might be prudent. One prospective randomized study demonstrated no difference between 3 and 5 days of perioperative antimicrobial treatment in colic surgery but shorter durations were not evaluated. High-level evidence to recommend antimicrobial treatment of adult horses with undifferentiated diarrhea does not exist.

CONCLUSIONS

Few evidence-based recommendations can be made. Commonly used antimicrobial combinations remain the mainstay for treating purulent infections. Antimicrobial treatment for compromised foals should not extend beyond recovery. Continuation of prophylactic antimicrobials >3 days is likely unnecessary after colic surgery; shorter durations might be equally effective. Antimicrobial prophylaxis in adult horses with diarrhea is unlikely to be beneficial.