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

Plastic Wound Protector vs Surgical Gauze for Surgical Site Infection Reduction in Open GI Surgery: A Randomized Clinical Trial

Importance

Surgical site infections (SSIs) are prevalent hospital-acquired infections with significant patient impacts and global health care burdens. The World Health Organization recommends using wound protector devices in abdominal surgery as a preventive measure to lower the risk of SSIs despite limited evidence.

Objective

To examine the efficacy of a dual-ring, plastic wound protector in lowering the SSI rate in open gastrointestinal (GI) surgery irrespective of intra-abdominal contamination levels.

Design, Setting, and Participants

This multicenter, patient-blinded, parallel-arm randomized clinical trial was conducted from August 2017 to October 2022 at 13 hospitals in an academic setting. Patients undergoing open abdominal bowel surgery (eg, for bowel perforation) were eligible for inclusion.

Intervention

Patients were randomized 1:1 to a dual-ring, plastic wound protector to protect the incision site of the abdominal wall (experimental group) or a conventional surgical gauze (control group).

Main Outcomes and Measures

The primary end point was the rate of SSI within 30 days of open GI surgery.

Results

A total of 458 patients were randomized; after 1 was excluded from the control group, 457 were included in the intention-to-treat analysis (mean [SD] age, 58.4 [12.1] years; 256 [56.0%] male; 341 [74.6%] with a clean-contaminated wound): 229 in the wound protector group and 228 in the surgical gauze group. The overall SSI rate in the intention-to-treat analysis was 15.7% (72 of 458 patients). The SSI rate for the wound protector was 10.9% (25 of 229 patients) compared with 20.5% (47 of 229 patients) with surgical gauze. The wound protector significantly reduced the risk of SSI, with a relative risk reduction (RRR) of 46.81% (95% CI, 16.64%-66.06%). The wound protector significantly decreased the SSI rate for clean-contaminated wounds (RRR, 43.75%; 95% CI, 3.75%-67.13%), particularly for superficial SSIs (RRR, 42.50%; 95% CI, 7.16%-64.39%). Length of hospital stay was similar in both groups (mean [SD], 15.2 [10.5] vs 15.3 [10.2] days), as were the overall postoperative complication rates (20.1% vs 18.8%).

Conclusions and Relevance

This randomized clinical trial found a significant reduction in SSI rates when a plastic wound protector was used during open GI surgery compared with surgical gaze, supporting the World Health Organization recommendation for use of wound protector devices in abdominal surgery.

Trial Registration

ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03170843.

Preventing Pneumonia in High-risk Patients After Esophageal Cancer Surgery: Mini-tracheostomy and Tazobactam/Piperacillin

BACKGROUND/AIM

We evaluated the usefulness of prophylactic mini-tracheostomy (PMT) and perioperative administration of tazobactam/piperacillin (TAZ/PIPC) in high-risk patients after esophagectomy.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

We retrospectively studied 89 consecutive high-risk patients who underwent esophagectomy for esophageal cancer between January 2013 and December 2021. We defined patients with two or more of the following factors as high risk: age ≥70 years, performance status ≥1, respiratory dysfunction, liver dysfunction, cardiac dysfunction, renal dysfunction, diabetes mellitus, albumin <3.5 g/dl, and Brinkman index >600. Standard management was administered to the first 50 patients (standard group). PMT and TAZ/PIPC were administered to the next 39 patients (combination group). Patient characteristics and short-term outcomes were compared before and after propensity-score matching.

RESULTS

Before propensity-score matching, 24-hour urine creatinine clearance, retrosternal route, 3-field lymph node dissection, and open abdominal approach were more common, postoperative pneumonia (13% vs. 36%, p=0.045) and complications of grade ≥3b (2.6% vs. 22%, p=0.01) were less frequent, and the postoperative hospital stay was shorter (median: 23 vs. 28 days, p=0.022) in the combination group than in the standard group. In propensity-score matching, patient characteristics, except for 24-h creatinine clearance and reconstructive route, were matched for 23 paired patients. Postoperative pneumonia (8.7% vs. 39%, p=0.035) and complications of grade ≥3b (0% vs. 26%, p=0.022) were less frequent and postoperative hospital stay was shorter (median: 22 vs. 25 days, p=0.021) in the combination group than in the standard group.

CONCLUSION

PMT with TAZ/PIPC can potentially prevent postoperative pneumonia in high-risk patients after esophagectomy.

Association between skin suture devices and incidence of incisional surgical site infection after gastrointestinal surgery: systematic review and network meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Surgical site infections (SSIs) are common complications after abdominal surgery.

AIM

To compare which suture devices could reduce the incidence of incisional surgical site infections (SSIs) after gastrointestinal surgery using a systematic review and network meta-analysis.

METHODS

The CENTRAL, PubMed, and ICHUSHI-Web databases were searched from January 1st, 2000, to December 31st, 2022, for randomized clinical trials (RCTs) comparing the incidence of incisional SSI after gastrointestinal surgery among patients treated with different surgical suture devices, including non-absorbable sutures, absorbable sutures, skin staplers, and tissue adhesives (last searched in August 23th, 2023). The risk of bias was assessed using the criteria of the Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions. To estimate the pooled odds ratios (ORs) for each comparison, a fixed-effect inverse-variance model based on the Mantel-Haenszel approach was employed.

FINDINGS

A total of 18 RCTs with 5496 patients were included in this study. The overall SSIs in absorbable sutures were significantly lower than those in skin staplers (OR: 0.77; 95% confidence intervals (CI): 0.63-0.95) and non-absorbable sutures (OR: 0.62; 95% CI: 0.39-0.99), whereas SSIs in absorbable sutures were not significantly different from the SSIs in tissue adhesive. The highest P-score was 0.91 for absorbable sutures. A funnel plot for estimating the heterogeneity of the studies revealed that a publication bias would be minimal (Egger test, P = 0.271).

CONCLUSION

This study showed that absorbable sutures reduced incisional SSIs in gastrointestinal surgical operations compared to any other suture devices.

Incisional surgical site infections by subcutaneous soaking of wound with aqueous 0.05% chlorhexidine gluconate in gastroenterological surgery: A randomized controlled trial

BACKGROUND

Chlorhexidine gluconate solution is superior to povidone-iodine for prevention of surgical site infection. However, the overall efficacy of chlorhexidine gluconate for surgical site infection prevention in various types of gastroenterological surgery, as well as the optimal concentration of chlorhexidine gluconate, remain unclear. The aim of the present study was to clarify whether subcutaneous wound soaking with chlorhexidine gluconate would reduce the incidence of surgical site infection associated with gastroenterological surgery in patients with wound classes Ⅱ to Ⅳ.

METHODS

Patients were randomly assigned (1:1) to either wound soaking with chlorhexidine gluconate (chlorhexidine gluconate group) or no chlorhexidine gluconate soaking (control group). After closure of the abdominal fascia, gentle subcutaneous soaking of the wound was performed using gauze fully soaked in aqueous 0.05% chlorhexidine gluconate before skin closure. Incisional surgical site infection was diagnosed using the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention criteria. The primary end point was the occurrence of incisional surgical site infection.

RESULTS

Among 363 patients, 245 (67%) underwent laparoscopic surgery. All 363 patients were included-181 in the chlorhexidine gluconate group (49.9%) and 182 (50.1%) in the control group. There were no significant inter-group differences in patient background, the type of procedure, or wound classification. The incidence proportion of incisional surgical site infection was significantly lower in the chlorhexidine gluconate group than in the control group (9.4% vs 19.2%; P = .008).

CONCLUSION

Subcutaneous wound soaking with chlorhexidine gluconate reduces the incidence of incisional surgical site infection in patients undergoing gastroenterological surgery.

Antimicrobial Prophylaxis With Ampicillin-sulbactam Compared With Cefazolin for Esophagectomy: Nationwide Inpatient Database Study in Japan

OBJECTIVE

To assess the effect of antimicrobial prophylaxis with ampicillin-sulbactam (ABPC/SBT) compared with cefazolin (CEZ) on the short-term outcomes after esophagectomy.

BACKGROUND

CEZ is widely used for antimicrobial prophylaxis in esophagectomy without procedure-specific evidence, whereas ABPC/SBT is preferred in some hospitals to target both aerobic and anaerobic oral bacteria.

METHODS

Data of patients who underwent esophagectomy for cancer between July 2010 and March 2019 were extracted from a nationwide Japanese inpatient database. Overlap propensity score weighting was conducted to compare the short-term outcomes [including surgical site infection (SSI), anastomotic leakage, and respiratory failure] between antimicrobial prophylaxis with CEZ and ABPC/SBT after adjusting for potential confounders. Sensitivity analyses were also performed using propensity score matching and instrumental variable analyses.

RESULTS

Among 17,772 eligible patients, 16,077 (90.5%) and 1695 (9.5%) patients were administered CEZ and ABPC/SBT, respectively. SSI, anastomotic leakage, and respiratory failure occurred in 2971 (16.7%), 2604 (14.7%), and 2754 patients (15.5%), respectively. After overlap weighting, ABPC/SBT was significantly associated with a reduction in SSI [odds ratio 0.51 (95% CI: 0.43-0.60)], anastomotic leakage [0.51 (0.43-0.61)], and respiratory failure [0.66 (0.57-0.77)]. ABPC/SBT was also associated with reduced respiratory complications, postoperative length of stay, and total hospitalization costs. The proportion of Clostridioides difficile colitis and noninfectious complications did not differ between the groups. Propensity score matching and instrumental variable analyses demonstrated equivalent results.

CONCLUSIONS

The administration of ABPC/SBT as antimicrobial prophylaxis for esophagectomy was associated with better short-term postoperative outcomes compared with CEZ.

The effectiveness of fascial closure with antimicrobial-coated sutures in preventing incisional surgical site infections in gastrointestinal surgery: a systematic review and meta-analysis

The aim of this study was to conduct a systematic review and meta-analysis of the efficacy of fascial closure using antimicrobial-sutures specifically for the prevention of surgical site infections (SSIs) in gastrointestinal surgery, as part of the revision of the SSI prevention guidelines of the Japanese Society of Surgical Infectious Diseases (JSSI). We searched CENTRAL, PubMed and ICHUSHI-Web in May 2023, and included randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing antimicrobial-coated and non-coated sutures for fascial closure in gastrointestinal surgery (PROSPERO No. CRD42023430377). Three authors independently screened the RCTs. We assessed the risk of bias and the GRADE criteria for the extracted data. The primary outcome was incisional SSI and the secondary outcomes were abdominal wall dehiscence and the length of postoperative hospital stay. This study was supported partially by the JSSI. A total of 10 RCTs and 5396 patients were included. The use of antimicrobial-coated sutures significantly lowered the risk of incisional SSIs compared with non-coated suture (risk ratio: 0.79, 95% confidence intervals: 0.64-0.98). In subgroup analyses, antimicrobial-coated sutures reduced the risk of SSIs for open surgeries, and when monofilament sutures were used. Antimicrobial-coated sutures did not reduce the incidence of abdominal wall dehiscence and the length of hospital stay compared with non-coated sutures. The certainty of the evidence was rated as moderate according to the GRADE criteria, because of risk of bias. In conclusion, the use of antimicrobial-coated sutures for fascial closure in gastrointestinal surgery is associated with a significantly lower risk of SSI than non-coated sutures.

A low prognostic nutritional index is associated with increased remote infections within 30 days of colorectal surgery: A retrospective cohort study

OBJECTIVE

This study aimed to identify risk factors for remote infection (RI) within 30 days after colorectal surgery.

METHODS

This retrospective study included 660 patients who underwent colorectal surgery at Yamaguchi University Hospital or Ube Kosan Central Hospital between April 2015 and March 2019. Using electronic medical records, we identified the incidence of surgical site infection and RI within 30 days after surgery and obtained information on associated factors. Univariate and multivariable analyses were performed to identify significant risk factors in 607 (median age, 71 years) patients.

RESULTS

Seventy-eight (13%) and 38 (6.3%) patients had surgical site infection and RI, respectively. Of the 38 patients diagnosed with RI, 14 (36.8%) had a bloodstream infection, 13 (34.2%) had a urinary tract infection, 8 (21.1%) had a Clostridioides difficile infection, and 7 (18.4%) had respiratory tract infections. Multivariable analysis showed that a preoperative prognostic nutritional index of ≤40 (OR, 2.30; 95% CI, 1.07-4.92; P = .032), intraoperative blood transfusion (OR (odds ratio), 3.06; 95% CI, 1.25-7.47; P = .014), and concomitant stoma creation (OR, 4.13; 95% CI, 1.93-8.83; P = .0002) were significant RI predictors.

CONCLUSIONS

Nutritional interventions prompted by low preoperative prognostic nutritional index in colorectal surgery may lead to decreases in postoperative RI.

Plus Sutures for preventing surgical site infection: a systematic review of clinical outcomes with economic and environmental models

BACKGROUND

Surgical site infections (SSIs) represent ~ 20% of all hospital-acquired infections in surgical patients and are associated with prolonged hospital stay, admission to intensive care, and mortality. We conducted a systematic review with economic and environmental models to assess whether triclosan-coated sutures (Plus Sutures) provide benefits over non-coated sutures in the reduction of SSI risk.

METHODS

Searches were conducted in fifteen databases. A total of 1,991 records were retrieved. Following deduplication and screening by two independent reviewers, 31 randomized controlled trials in adults and children were included in the review. Similarity of the studies was assessed by narrative review and confirmed by quantitative assessment. A fixed effects meta-analysis of SSI incidence model including all groups of patients estimated a risk ratio of 0.71 (95% confidence interval: 0.64 to 0.79) indicating those in the Plus Sutures group had a 29% reduction in the risk of developing an SSI compared with those in the control group (p < 0.001). Safety outcomes were analysed qualitatively.

RESULTS

The economic model estimated the use of Plus Sutures to result in average cost savings of £13.63 per patient. Plus Sutures remained cost-saving in all subgroup analyses with cost-savings ranging between £11 (clean wounds) and £140 (non-clean wounds). The environmental impact of SSI is substantial, and the model suggests that the introduction of Plus Sutures could result in potential environmental benefits.

CONCLUSIONS

The evidence suggests that Plus Sutures are associated with a reduced incidence of SSI across all surgery types alongside cost savings when compared with standard sutures.

Comparison of olanexidine versus povidone-iodine as a preoperative antiseptic for reducing surgical site infection in both scheduled and emergency gastrointestinal surgeries: A single-center randomized clinical trial

Aim

Surgical site infection (SSI) is one of the most common postoperative complications in gastrointestinal surgery. To clarify the superiority of 1.5% olanexidine, we conducted a randomized prospective clinical trial that enrolled patients undergoing gastrointestinal surgery with operative wound classes II-IV.

Methods

To evaluate the efficacy of 1.5% olanexidine in preventing SSIs relative to 10% povidone-iodine, we enrolled 298 patients in each group. The primary outcome was a 30-day SSI, and the secondary outcomes were incidences of superficial and deep incisional SSI and organ/space SSI. In addition, subgroup analyses were performed.

Results

The primary outcome of the overall 30-day SSI occurred in 38 cases (12.8%) in the 1.5% olanexidine group and in 53 cases (18.0%) in the 10% povidone-iodine group (adjusted risk ratio: 0.716, 95% confidence interval: 0.495-1.057, p = 0.083). Organ/space SSI occurred in 18 cases (6.1%) in the 1.5% olanexidine group and in 31 cases (10.5%) in the 10% povidone-iodine group, with a significant difference (adjusted risk ratio: 0.587, 95% confidence interval: 0.336-0.992, p = 0.049). Subgroup analyses revealed that SSI incidences were comparable in scheduled surgery (relative risk: 0.809, 95% confidence interval: 0.522-1.254) and operative wound class II (relative risk: 0.756, 95% confidence interval: 0.494-1.449) in 1.5% olanexidine group.

Conclusion

Our study revealed that 1.5% olanexidine reduced the 30-day overall SSI; however, the result was not significant. Organ/space SSI significantly decreased in the 1.5% olanexidine group. Our results indicate that 1.5% olanexidine has the potential to prevent SSI on behalf of povidone-iodine.

Antimicrobial stewardship in the intensive care unit

High resistance rates to antimicrobials continue to be a global health threat. The incidence of multidrug-resistant (MDR) microorganisms in intensive care units (ICUs) is quite high compared to in the community and other units in the hospital because ICU patients are generally older, have higher numbers of co-morbidities and immune-suppressed; moreover, the typically high rates of invasive procedures performed in the ICU increase the risk of infection by MDR microorganisms. Antimicrobial stewardship (AMS) refers to the implementation of coordinated interventions to improve and track the appropriate use of antibiotics while offering the best possible antibiotic prescription (according to dose, duration, and route of administration). Broad-spectrum antibiotics are frequently preferred in ICUs because of greater infection severity and colonization and infection by MDR microorganisms. For this reason, a number of studies on AMS in ICUs have increased in recent years. Reducing the use of broad-spectrum antibiotics forms the basis of AMS. For this purpose, parameters such as establishing an AMS team, limiting the use of broad-spectrum antimicrobials, terminating treatments early, using early warning systems, pursuing infection control, and providing education and feedback are used. In this review, current AMS practices in ICUs are discussed.

Evidence-based guideline for the prevention and management of perioperative infection

BACKGROUND

We have updated the guideline for preventing and managing perioperative infection in China, given the global issues with antimicrobial resistance and the need to optimize antimicrobial usage and improve hospital infection control levels.

METHODS

We conducted a comprehensive evaluation of the evidence for prevention and management of perioperative infection, 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. Revisions were made to the guidelines in response to feedback from the experts.

RESULTS

There were 17 questions prepared, for which 37 recommendations were made. According to the GRADE system, we evaluated the body of evidence for each clinical question. Based on the meta-analysis results, recommendations were graded using the Delphi method to generate useful information.

CONCLUSIONS

This guideline provides evidence to perioperative antimicrobial prophylaxis that increased the rational use of prophylactic antimicrobial use, with substantial improvement in the risk-benefit trade-off.

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

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

Pattern of Perioperative Surgical Patient Care, Equipment Handling and Operating Room Management During COVID-19 Pandemic at Jimma Medical Center

BACKGROUND

The nature of COVID-19 transmission creates significant risks in surgical departments owing to the close contact of medical staff with patients, the limited physical environment of the operating room and recovery room, the possibility of shared surgical equipment and challenges in the delivery of surgical care in all surgical departments. Globally, studies have reported that the effects of the pandemic on surgical departments are profound, potentially long-lasting and extensive. To manage these effects, different local guidelines and recommendations have been developed, with potential differences in their effectiveness and implementation. Therefore, harmonized and effective national/international guidelines for specific surgical departments during perioperative periods are pertinent to curtail the infection, and will inevitably need to be adapted for consistent and sustainable implementation by all medical staff. The pattern of surgical patient care during the COVID-19 pandemic at Jimma Medical Center (JMC), Ethiopia, has not been explored yet. The present study aimed to describe the pattern of perioperative surgical patient care, equipment handling and operating room management during the COVID-19 pandemic at JMC.

METHODS

A cross-sectional study was conducted to describe the pattern of perioperative surgical patient care, equipment handling and operating room management during the COVID-19 pandemic at JMC, using five-point Likert scales (0, not at all; 1, rarely; 2, sometimes; 3, most of the time; 4, frequently). A total of 90 respondents [35 patients (five patients from each of seven surgical departments) and 55 healthcare providers (six professionals from each of nine units, including the center of sterility room and anesthesia)] who were available during the study period, selected by a convenience sampling technique with multistage clustering, participated in the study. Data were collected using a structured questionnaire via direct observation and face-to-face interviews with patients undergoing surgery, healthcare providers and hospital administrators, against the standard surgical patient care guidelines. The collected data were manually checked for missing values and outliers, cleared, entered into EpiData (v4.3.1) and exported to SPSS (v22) for analysis. The mean score of practice was compared among different disciplines by applying the unpaired t-test. The findings of the study were reported using tables and narration. A p-value of less than 0.05 was declared as statistically significant.

RESULTS

Despite the surgical care practice having changed during the COVID-19 pandemic in all service domains, it is not implemented consistently among different surgical departments owing to different barriers (lack of training on the updated guidelines and financial constraints). The majority of surgical staff were implementing the use of preventive measures against COVID-19, while they were practiced less among patients. The guidelines for surgical practice during the preoperative phase were well applied, especially screening patients by different methods and the application of telemedicine to reduce physical contacts. But, against guidelines, elective patients were planned and underwent surgery, especially in the general surgery department. The implementation of recommended guidelines in the center of sterility room in handling surgical equipment was not very different before and during the pandemic. The extent of practice for anesthesia care, operating room management and postoperative care in the recovery room also changed, and the guidelines were sometimes applied.

CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS

Although perioperative surgical care practice differed before and during the pandemic, the standard guidelines were inconsistently implemented among surgical departments. The implementation of recommended guidelines in the center of sterility room in handling surgical equipment was not very different before and during the pandemic. Thus, the authors developed safe surgical care guidelines throughout the different domains (infection prevention and PPE use; preoperative care, intraoperative care, operating room management, anesthesia care, equipment handling process and postoperative care) for all disciplines and shared them with all staff. We recommend that all surgical staff should access these guidelines and strictly adhere to them for surgical service during the pandemic.

Do postoperative infectious complications really affect long-term survival in colorectal cancer surgery? A multicenter retrospective cohort study

Aim

To investigate the impact of postoperative infection (PI), surgical site infection, and remote infection (RI), on long-term outcomes in patients with colorectal cancer (CRC).

Methods

The Japan Society for Surgical Infection conducted a multicenter retrospective cohort study involving 1817 curative stage I/II/III CRC patients from April 2013 to March 2015. Patients were divided into the No-PI group and the PI group. We examined the association between PI and oncological outcomes for cancer-specific survival (CSS) and overall survival (OS) using Cox proportional hazards models and propensity score matching.

Results

Two hundred and ninety-nine patients (16.5%) had PIs. The 5-year CSS and OS rates in the No-PI and PI groups were 92.8% and 87.6%, and 87.4% and 83.8%, respectively. Both the Cox proportional hazards models and propensity score matching demonstrated a significantly worse prognosis in the PI group than that in the No-PI group for CSS (hazard ratio: 1.60; 95% confidence interval: 1.10-2.34; P = .015 and P = .031, respectively) but not for OS. RI and the PI severity were not associated with oncological outcomes. The presence of PI abolished the survival benefit of adjuvant chemotherapy.

Conclusions

These results suggest that PI after curative CRC surgery is associated with impaired oncological outcomes. This survival disadvantage of PI was primarily derived from surgical site infection, not RI, and PI induced lower efficacy of adjuvant chemotherapy. Strategies to prevent PI and implement appropriate postoperative treatment may improve the quality of care and oncological outcomes in patients undergoing curative CRC surgery.

Antimicrobial Prophylaxis Reduces the Rate of Surgical Site Infection in Upper Gastrointestinal Surgery: A Systematic Review

Surgical site infection occurs with high frequency in gastrointestinal surgery, contributing to the high incidence of morbidity and mortality. The accepted practice worldwide for the prevention of surgical site infection is providing single- or multiple-dose antimicrobial prophylaxis. However, most suitable antibiotic and optimal duration of prophylaxis are still debated. The aim of the systematic review is to assess the efficacy of antimicrobial prophylaxis in controlling surgical site infection rate following esophagogastric surgery. PubMed and Cochrane databases were systematically searched until 31 October 2021, for randomized controlled trials comparing different antimicrobial regimens in prevention surgical site infections. Risk of bias of studies was assessed with standard methods. Overall, eight studies concerning gastric surgery and one study about esophageal surgery met inclusion criteria. No significant differences were detected between single- and multiple-dose antibiotic prophylaxis. Most trials assessed the performance of cephalosporins or inhibitor of bacterial beta-lactamase. Antimicrobial prophylaxis (AMP) is effective in reducing the incidence of surgical site infection. Multiple-dose antimicrobial prophylaxis is not recommended for patients undergoing gastric surgery. Further randomized controlled trials are needed to determine the efficacy and safety of antimicrobial prophylaxis in esophageal cancer patients.

Protective Effect of Nanoparticles from Platycladi Cacumen Carbonisata on 2,4,6-Trinitrobenzene Sulfonic Acid (TNBS)-Induced Colitis in Rats

Aim: To evaluate the protective effects of Platycladi Cacumen Carbonisata-derived nanoparticles (PCC-NPs) against 2,4,6-trinitrobenzenesulfonic acid (TNBS)-induced ulcerative colitis (UC) in rats. Methods: This study developed and characterized novel PCC-NPs synthesized by a green and simple pyrolysis process using Platycladi Cacumen (PC) as the sole precursor. The UC model prepared with rectal instillation of TNBS was used to evaluate the potential efficacy of PCC-NPs, and the underlying mechanisms were preliminarily explored from the perspective of anti-inflammatory and antioxidative stress for the first time. Results: PCC-NPs exhibited low cytotoxicity, good dispersibility and copious surface functional groups. Nanoparticles with diameters ranging from 40-60 nm mainly manifested a therapeutic effect by downregulating tumour necrosis factor-α (TNF-α), interleukin-6 (IL-6) and upregulating interleukin-10 (IL-10). In addition, PCC-NPs relieved colon injury by inhibiting myeloperoxidase (MPO) activity, limiting the release of malondialdehyde (MDA) and increasing the activity of superoxide dismutase (SOD). Conclusion: Green synthetic PCC-NPs is a potential candidate as a complementary drug for intestinal inflammation of inflammatory bowel disease, and its regulatory mechanisms may be to balance the levels of pro-/anti-inflammatory cytokines and improve resistance to oxidative stress.

Minimally invasive esophagectomy may contribute to low incidence of postoperative surgical site infection in patients with poor glycemic control

PURPOSE

High preoperative hemoglobin A1c (HbA1c) levels have been suggested to increase complications after esophagectomy. Minimally invasive esophagectomy (MIE) is less invasive than open esophagectomy (OE) and may reduce postoperative complications. However, it has not been established whether MIE contributes to low morbidity in patients with high preoperative HbA1c levels. Thus, the current study aimed to elucidate the effect of preoperative HbA1c levels on the incidence of complications each after OE and MIE.

METHODS

A total of 280 patients who underwent OE and 304 patients who underwent MIE for esophageal cancer between April 2005 and April 2020 were retrospectively analyzed. The OE and MIE groups were further divided into two groups according to their preoperative HbA1c levels (< 6.9%, ≥ 6.9%).

RESULTS

Patients with high HbA1c levels had a significantly higher incidence of surgical site infections (SSIs) after OE (P = 0.0048). Multivariate analysis demonstrated that a high HbA1c level was an independent risk factor for frequent SSIs after OE (hazard ratio 2.52; 95% confidence interval, 1.101- 5.739; P = 0.029). On the contrary, a high HbA1c level did not affect the incidence of SSI after MIE (P = 1.00). A high HbA1c level was not associated with the incidence of morbidities other than SSI after OE and MIE.

CONCLUSIONS

A high preoperative HbA1c level significantly increased SSI risk after OE but not after MIE. It was suggested that lower invasiveness of MIE could contribute to a low incidence of SSI, even in patients with poor preoperative glycemic control.