Multicenter phase II study of antimicrobial prophylaxis in low-risk patients undergoing distal gastrectomy for gastric cancer

Efficacy of the Short-Term versus Long-Term Administration of Antimicrobial Prophylaxis in Gastric Cancer Surgery: A Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials

Background: We performed a meta-analysis to confirm the efficacy of short-term compared with long-term administration of antimicrobial prophylaxis in gastric cancer surgery. Methods: Randomized controlled trials of the efficacy of short-term versus long-term administration of antimicrobial prophylaxis in gastric cancer surgery were searched using the MEDLINE, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Controlled Trials Register databases. The data were evaluated and statistically analyzed using RevMan version 5.3.0. Five studies including 2,053 participants who received short-term versus long-term administration of antimicrobial prophylaxis in gastric cancer surgery were considered. Results: There was no significant difference in the surgical site infection (SSI) rate between the short-term group and the long-term group (8.1% vs. 9.2%; odds ratio [OR], 0.87; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.64-1.09; p = 0.39). Hierarchical analysis also showed no significant differences in incisional-site incisions, organ/space incisions, or leakage. Multivariable analysis showed no significant differences in gender, age (>65 years), body mass index (>25 kg/m²), D2, operation time (>3 hours), pathologic stage 3, blood loss, combined resection, diabetes mellitus, total gastrectomy, or blood transfusion between the two groups. Conclusions: Short-term administration of antimicrobial prophylaxis did not increase the incidence of SSIs after gastrectomy.

Feasibility of No Prophylactic Antibiotics Use in Patients Undergoing Total Laparoscopic Distal Gastrectomy for Gastric Carcinoma: a Propensity Score-Matched Case-Control Study

Purpose

Laparoscopic surgery is associated with lower surgical site infection (SSI) rates due to minimal skin incision and non-exposure of visceral organs. Most previous studies have analyzed the efficacy of prophylactic antibiotic use in open surgery. Here, we investigated the feasibility of total laparoscopic distal gastrectomy (TLDG) for gastric carcinoma without prophylactic antibiotic use.

Materials and Methods

Seventy-one patients who underwent TLDG without prophylactic antibiotic use were 1:1 propensity score matched with 393 patients who underwent TLDG with antibiotic prophylaxis. The short-term surgical outcomes, including SSI rates, were compared between the groups.

Results

After matching, 65 patients were selected in each group. The baseline clinicopathological characteristics were well balanced in the matched sample. In the matched group, there was no significant increase in postoperative morbidity in the non-prophylactic group compared with the prophylactic group (18.5% vs. 15.4%, P=0.640), and there were no grade 3≤ complications (1.4% vs. 0%, respectively; P=1.000). The SSI rates in the non-prophylactic and prophylactic groups were 3.1% and 1.5%, respectively (P=0.559). The time to gas passage, diet initiation, and mean hospital stay were not significantly different between the 2 groups. The SSI rate did not increase in the non-prophylactic group in the different subgroups based on different clinicopathological characteristics.

Conclusions

Postoperative morbidity, including SSI rates, did not significantly increase in patients undergoing TLDG without prophylactic antibiotic use. A large prospective randomized trial is warranted to reappraise the efficacy of prophylactic antibiotic use in patients undergoing TLDG.

Prolonged antibiotic prophylaxis after thoracoabdominal esophagectomy does not reduce the risk of pneumonia in the first 30 days: a retrospective before-and-after analysis

PURPOSE

Thoracoabdominal esophageal resection for malignant disease is frequently associated with pulmonary infection. Whether prolonged antibiotic prophylaxis beyond a single perioperative dose is advantageous in preventing pulmonary infection after thoracoabdominal esophagectomy remains unclear.

METHODS

In this retrospective before-and-after analysis, 173 patients between January 2009 and December 2014 from a prospectively maintained database were included. We evaluated the effect of a 5-day postoperative course of moxifloxacin, which is a frequently used antimicrobial agent for pneumonia, on the incidence of pulmonary infection and mortality after thoracoabdominal esophagectomy.

RESULTS

104 patients received only perioperative antimicrobial prophylaxis (control group) and 69 additionally received a 5-day postoperative antibiotic therapy with moxifloxacin (prolonged-course). 22 (12.7%) of all patients developed pneumonia within the first 30 days after surgery. No statistically significant differences were seen between the prolonged group and control group in terms of pneumonia after 7 (p = 0.169) or 30 days (p = 0.133), detected bacterial species (all p > 0.291) and 30-day mortality (5.8 vs 10.6%, p = 0.274).

CONCLUSION

A preemptive 5-day postoperative course of moxifloxacin does not reduce the incidence of pulmonary infection and does not improve mortality after thoracoabdominal esophagectomy.

Efficacy of single-dose antimicrobial prophylaxis for preventing surgical site infection in radical gastrectomy for gastric carcinoma

Purpose

Information regarding antimicrobial prophylaxis (AMP) for gastric cancer surgery is limited. The present study investigated the efficacy of single-dose AMP for the prevention of surgical site infection (SSI) in patients undergoing gastrectomy for gastric carcinoma.

Materials and Methods

Between 2011 and 2013, 1,330 gastric carcinoma surgery patients were divided into two AMP administration groups depending on the duration of treatment. Postoperative outcomes including morbidity and SSI were compared between the two groups overall and in matched patients. Risk factors for SSI were analyzed.

Results

The extended group (n=1,129) received AMP until postoperative day 1 and the single-dose group (n=201) received singledose AMP only during an operation. Postoperatively, there were no significant differences between the two groups with respect to overall morbidity, mortality, or length of hospital stay. The SSI rate of the single-dose group was not significantly different from that of the extended group overall (4.5% vs. 5.5%, respectively, P=0.556) or in matched patients (4.5% vs. 4.0%, respectively, P=0.801). There was no increase in the SSI rate of the single-dose group compared to the extended group in subgroups based on different clinicopathological and operative factors. Univariate and multivariate analyses revealed male gender, open surgery, and operating time (≥180 minutes) as independent risk factors for SSI.

Conclusions

Single-dose AMP showed no increase in the postoperative SSI rate compared to postoperative extended use in patients undergoing gastrectomy for gastric carcinoma. The efficacy of single-dose AMP requires further investigation in randomized clinical trials specific to gastric cancer surgery.

A prospective randomized study to assess the optimal duration of intravenous antimicrobial prophylaxis in elective gastric cancer surgery

The duration of antimicrobial prophylaxis in gastric cancer surgery is not yet established. This prospective randomized study was performed to confirm the noninferiority of single-dose versus multiple-dose antimicrobial prophylaxis in terms of the incidence of surgical-site infection in gastric cancer surgery. Three hundred twenty-five patients undergoing elective resection for gastric cancer were randomized to receive only single-dose cefazolin (1 g) during surgery (single-dose group) or an additional 5 doses every 12 hours postoperatively (multiple-dose group). The overall incidence of surgical-site infections was 9.1% in the single-dose group and 6.2% in the multiple-dose group [difference (95% confidence interval): -2.9% (-5.9%-0.0%)]. Multivariate logistic regression analysis identified blood loss, being overweight, and advanced age as significant independent risk factors for surgical-site infection. Single-dose antimicrobial prophylaxis seemed to be acceptable, and choosing multiple-dose prophylaxis may have little impact on the prevention of surgical-site infections in elective gastric cancer surgery.

Extended antimicrobial prophylaxis after gastric cancer surgery: A systematic review and meta-analysis

AIM: To investigate the efficacy of extended antimicrobial prophylaxis (EAP) after gastrectomy by systematic review of literature and meta-analysis.

METHODS: Electronic databases of PubMed, Embase, CINAHL, the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, the Cochrane Controlled Trials Register and the China National Knowledge Infrastructure were searched systematically from January 1980 to October 2012. Strict literature retrieval and data extraction were carried out independently by two reviewers and meta-analyses were conducted using RevMan 5.0.2 with statistics tools risk ratios (RRs) and intention-to-treat analyses to evaluate the items of total complications, surgical site infection, incision infection, organ (or space) infection, remote site infection, anastomotic leakage (or dehiscence) and mortality. Fixed model or random model was selected accordingly and forest plot was conducted to display RR. Likewise, Cochrane Risk of Bias Tool was applied to evaluate the quality of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) included in this meta-analysis.

RESULTS: A total of 1095 patients with gastric cancer were enrolled in four RCTs. No statistically significant differences were detected between EAP and intraoperative antimicrobial prophylaxis (IAP) in total complications (RR of 0.86, 95%CI: 0.63-1.16, P = 0.32), surgical site infection (RR of 1.97, 95%CI: 0.86-4.48, P = 0.11), incision infection (RR of 4.92, 95%CI: 0.58-41.66, P = 0.14), organ or space infection (RR of 1.55, 95%CI: 0.61-3.89, P = 0.36), anastomotic leakage or dehiscence (RR of 3.85, 95%CI: 0.64-23.17, P = 0.14) and mortality (RR of 1.14, 95%CI: 0.10-13.12; P = 0.92). Likewise, multiple-dose antimicrobial prophylaxis showed no difference compared with single-dose antimicrobial prophylaxis in surgical site infection (RR of 1.10, 95%CI: 0.62-1.93, P = 0.75). Nevertheless, EAP showed a decreased remote site infection rate compared with IAP alone (RR of 0.54, 95%CI: 0.34-0.86, P = 0.01), which is the only significant finding. Unfortunately, EAP did not decrease the incidence of surgical site infections after gastrectomy; likewise, multiple-dose antimicrobial prophylaxis failed to decrease the incidence of surgical site infection compared with single-dose antimicrobial prophylaxis.

CONCLUSION: We recommend that EAP should not be used routinely after gastrectomy until more high-quality RCTs are available.

Intraoperative versus extended antimicrobial prophylaxis after gastric cancer surgery: a phase 3, open-label, randomised controlled, non-inferiority trial

BACKGROUND

Although evidence for the efficacy of postoperative antimicrobial prophylaxis is scarce, many patients routinely receive such treatment after major surgeries. We aimed to compare the incidence of surgical-site infections with intraoperative antimicrobial prophylaxis alone versus intraoperative plus postoperative administration.

METHODS

We did a prospective, open-label, phase 3, randomised study at seven hospitals in Japan. Patients with gastric cancer that was potentially curable with a distal gastrectomy were randomly assigned (1:1) to receive either intraoperative antimicrobial prophylaxis alone (cefazolin 1 g before the surgical incision and every 3 h as intraoperative supplements) or extended antimicrobial prophylaxis (intraoperative administration plus cefazolin 1 g once after closure and twice daily for 2 postoperative days). Randomisation was stratified using Pocock and Simon's minimisation method for institution and American Society of Anesthesiologists scores, and Mersenne twister was used for random number generation. The primary endpoint was the incidence of surgical-site infections. We assessed non-inferiority of intraoperative therapy with a margin of 5%. Analysis was by intention-to-treat. During hospital stay, infection-control personnel assessed patients for infection, and the principal surgeons were required to check for surgical-site infections at outpatient clinics until 30 days after surgery. This study is registered with UMIN-CTR, UMIN000000631.

FINDINGS

Between June 2, 2005, and Dec 6, 2007, 355 patients were randomly assigned to receive either intraoperative antimicrobial prophylaxis alone (n=176) or extended antimicrobial prophylaxis (n=179). Eight patients (5%, 95% CI 2-9%) had surgical-site infections in the intraoperative group compared with 16 (9%, 5-14) in the extended group. The relative risk of surgical-site infections with intraoperative antimicrobial prophylaxis was 0·51 (0·22-1·16), which revealed statistically significant non-inferiority (p<0·0001).

INTERPRETATION

Elimination of postoperative antimicrobial prophylaxis did not increase the incidence of surgical-site infections after a gastrectomy. Therefore, this treatment is not recommended after gastric cancer surgery.