Practice Patterns for the Use of Antibiotic Agents in Damage Control Laparotomy and Its Impact on Outcomes

Surgical and procedural antibiotic prophylaxis in the surgical ICU: an American Association for the Surgery of Trauma Critical Care Committee clinical consensus document

The use of prophylactic measures, including perioperative antibiotics, for the prevention of surgical site infections is a standard of care across surgical specialties. Unfortunately, the routine guidelines used for routine procedures do not always account for many of the factors encountered with urgent/emergent operations and critically ill or high-risk patients. This clinical consensus document created by the American Association for the Surgery of Trauma Critical Care Committee is one of a three-part series and reviews surgical and procedural antibiotic prophylaxis in the surgical intensive care unit. The purpose of this clinical consensus document is to provide practical recommendations, based on expert opinion, to assist intensive care providers with decision-making for surgical prophylaxis. We specifically evaluate the current state of periprocedural antibiotic management of external ventricular drains, orthopedic operations (closed and open fractures, silver dressings, local, antimicrobial adjuncts, spine surgery, subfascial drains), abdominal operations (bowel injury and open abdomen), and bedside procedures (thoracostomy tube, gastrostomy tube, tracheostomy).

Calculation and Feedback of Risk-Adjusted Antibiotic Days as a Process Measure in a Statewide Trauma Collaborative

BACKGROUND

Optimization of antibiotic stewardship requires determining appropriate antibiotic treatment and duration of use. Our current method of identifying infectious complications alone does not attempt to measure the resources actually utilized to treat infections in patients. We sought to develop a method accounting for treatment of infections and length of antibiotic administration to allow benchmarking of trauma hospitals with regard to days of antibiotic use.

METHODS

Using trauma quality collaborative data from 35 American College of Surgeons (ACS)-verified level I and level II trauma centers between November 1, 2020, and January 31, 2023, a two-part model was created to account for (1) the odds of any antibiotic use, using logistic regression; and (2) the duration of usage, using negative binomial distribution. We adjusted for injury severity, presence/type of infection (eg, ventilator-acquired pneumonia), infectious complications, and comorbid conditions. We performed observed-to-expected adjustments to calculate each center's risk-adjusted antibiotic days, bootstrapped Observed/Expected (O/E) ratios to create confidence intervals, and flagged potential high or low outliers as hospitals whose confidence intervals lay above or below the overall mean.

RESULTS

The mean antibiotic treatment days was 1.98°days with a total of 88,403 treatment days. A wide variation existed in risk-adjusted antibiotic treatment days (.76°days to 2.69°days). Several hospitals were identified as low (9 centers) or high (6 centers) outliers.

CONCLUSION

There exists a wide variation in the duration of risk-adjusted antibiotic use amongst trauma centers. Further study is needed to address the underlying cause of variation and for improved antibiotic stewardship.

Contemporary management and outcomes of penetrating colon injuries: Validation of the 2020 AAST Colon Organ Injury Scale

INTRODUCTION

The American Association for the Surgery of Trauma Colon Organ Injury Scale (OIS) was updated in 2020 to include a separate OIS for penetrating colon injuries and included imaging criteria. In this multicenter study, we describe the contemporary management and outcomes of penetrating colon injuries and hypothesize that the 2020 OIS system correlates with operative management, complications, and outcomes.

METHODS

This was a retrospective study of patients presenting to 12 Level 1 trauma centers between 2016 and 2020 with penetrating colon injuries and Abbreviated Injury Scale score of <3 in other body regions. We assessed the association of the new OIS with surgical management and clinical outcomes and the association of OIS imaging criteria with operative criteria. Bivariate analysis was done with χ 2 , analysis of variance, and Kruskal-Wallis, where appropriate. Multivariable models were constructed in a stepwise selection fashion.

RESULTS

We identified 573 patients with penetrating colon injuries. Patients were young and predominantly male; 79% suffered a gunshot injury, 11% had a grade V destructive injury, 19% required ≥6 U of transfusion, 24% had an Injury Severity Score of >15, and 42% had moderate-to-large contamination. Higher OIS was independently associated with a lower likelihood of primary repair, higher likelihood of resection with anastomosis and/or diversion, need for damage-control laparotomy, and higher incidence of abscess, wound infection, extra-abdominal infections, acute kidney injury, and lung injury. Damage control was independently associated with diversion and intra-abdominal and extra-abdominal infections. Preoperative imaging in 152 (27%) cases had a low correlation with operative findings ( κ coefficient, 0.13).

CONCLUSION

This is the largest study to date of penetrating colon injuries and the first multicenter validation of the new OIS specific to these injuries. While imaging criteria alone lacked strong predictive value, operative American Association for the Surgery of Trauma OIS colon grade strongly predicted type of interventions and outcomes, supporting use of this grading scale for research and clinical practice.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Prognostic and Epidemiological; Level III.

Antibiotic Prophylaxis in Torso, Maxillofacial, and Skin Traumatic Lesions: A Systematic Review of Recent Evidence

Use of antibiotic prophylaxis (AP) in trauma patients is a common practice. However, considering the increasing rates of antibiotic resistance, AP use should be questioned and limited only to specific cases. We performed a systematic review of recent literature (from year 2000), aiming to summarize the state of the art on efficacy and appropriateness of AP in patients with traumatic injuries of torso, maxillofacial complex and skin (including burns). Twenty-six articles were selected. In thoracic trauma, AP could be useful in reducing infective complications in tube thoracostomy for penetrating trauma. In maxillo-facial trauma, AP could find a role in the peri-operative trauma setting in the case of a graft or prosthetic implant. In abdominal trauma, there is a lack of consensus on the definition of contamination, infection, antibiotic therapy, and prophylaxis. In burned patients, routine AP is not suggested. In the case of human bites to the extremities, AP could find an indication. Future studies should focus on the subcategories of patients at higher risk of infection, identifying those who would benefit from AP. Attention to antimicrobial stewardship and guidelines focused on AP in trauma are required, to reduce antibiotic abuse, and increase quality research.

Management of the patient with the open abdomen

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

The aim of this study was to outline the management of the patient with the open abdomen.

RECENT FINDINGS

An open abdomen approach is used after damage control laparotomy, to decrease risk for postsurgery intra-abdominal hypertension, if reoperation is likely and after primary abdominal decompression.Temporary abdominal wall closure without negative pressure is associated with higher rates of intra-abdominal infection and evisceration. Negative pressure systems improve fascial closure rates but increase fistula formation. Definitive abdominal wall closure should be considered once oedema has subsided and the patient has stabilized. Delayed abdominal closure after trauma (>24-48 h) is associated with less achievement of fascial closure and more complications. Protective lung ventilation should be employed early, particularly if respiratory compromise is evident. Conservative fluid management and less sedation may decrease delirium and increase definitive abdominal closure rates. Extubation may be performed before definitive abdominal closure in selected patients. Antibiotic therapy should be brief, targeted and guideline concordant. Survival depends on the underlying disease, the closure method and the course of hospitalization.

SUMMARY

Changes in the treatment of patients with the open abdomen include negative temporary closure, conservative fluid management, early protective lung ventilation, decreased sedation and extubation before abdominal closure in selected patients.

Outcomes of Exploratory Laparotomy and Abdominal Infections Among Combat Casualties

BACKGROUND

Abdominal injuries historically account for 13% of battlefield surgical procedures. We examined the occurrence of exploratory laparotomies and subsequent abdominal surgical site infections (SSIs) among combat casualties.

METHODS

Military personnel injured during deployment (2009-2014) were included if they required a laparotomy for combat-related trauma and were evacuated to Landstuhl Regional Medical Center, Germany, before being transferred to participating US military hospitals.

RESULTS

Of 4304 combat casualties, 341 (7.9%) underwent laparotomy. Including re-explorations, 1053 laparotomies (median, 2; interquartile range, 1-3; range, 1-28) were performed with 58% occurring within the combat zone. Forty-nine (14.4%) patients had abdominal SSIs (four with multiple SSIs): 27 (7.9%) with deep space SSIs, 14 (4.1%) with a deep incisional SSI, and 12 (3.5%) a superficial incisional SSI. Patients with abdominal SSIs had larger volume of blood transfusions (median, 24 versus 14 units), more laparotomies (median, 4 versus 2), and more hollow viscus injuries (74% versus 45%) than patients without abdominal SSIs. Abdominal closure occurred after 10 d for 12% of the patients with SSI versus 2% of patients without SSI. Mesh adjuncts were used to achieve fascial closure in 20.4% and 2.1% of patients with and without SSI, respectively. Survival was 98% and 96% in patients with and without SSIs, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

Less than 10% of combat casualties in the modern era required abdominal exploration and most were severely injured with hollow viscus injuries and required massive transfusions. Despite the extensive contamination from battlefield injuries, the SSI proportion is consistent with civilian rates and survival was high.

Accurate risk stratification for development of organ/space surgical site infections after emergent trauma laparotomy

BACKGROUND

Organ/space surgical site infection (OS-SSI) develops frequently after trauma laparotomies and is associated with significant morbidity. No valid model exists to accurately risk-stratify the probability of OS-SSI development after emergent laparotomy. Risk stratification for OS-SSI in these patients could guide promising, but unproven, interventions for OS-SSI prevention, such as more frequent dosing of intraoperative antibiotics or direct peritoneal resuscitation. We hypothesize that in trauma patients who undergo emergent laparotomy, probability of OS-SSI can be accurately estimated using patient data available during the index operation.

METHODS

Retrospective review was performed on a prospectively maintained database of emergent trauma laparotomies from 2011 to 2016. Patient demographics and risk factors for OS-SSI were collected. We performed Bayesian multilevel logistic regression to develop the model based on a 70% training sample. Evaluation of model fit using area under the curve was performed on a 30% test sample. The Bayesian approach allowed the model to address clustering of patients within physician while implementing regularization to improve predictive performance on test data.

RESULTS

One hundred seventy-two (15%) of 1,171 patients who underwent laparotomy developed OS-SSI. Variables thought to affect development of surgical site infections and were available to the surgeon near the conclusion of the trauma laparotomy were included in the model. Two variables that contributed most to OS-SSIs were damage-control laparotomy and colon resection. The area under the curve of the predictive model validated on the test sample was 0.78 (95% confidence interval, 0.71-0.85).

CONCLUSION

Using a combination of factors available to surgeons before the end of an emergent laparotomy, the probability of OS-SSI could be accurately estimated using this retrospective cohort. A Web-based calculator is under design to allow the real-time estimation of probability of OS-SSI intraoperatively. Prospective validation of its generalizability to other trauma cohorts and of its utility at the point of care is required.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Prognostic study, level IV.

Open Abdomen Management and Candida Infections: A Very Likely Link

OBJECTIVE

Laparostomy can be applied in trauma, abdominal sepsis, intra-abdominal hypertension, or compartment syndrome. Systemic infections, especially if complicated by Candida, are associated with a high risk of mortality.

METHODS

This is a single-centre retrospective case series of 47 cases admitted to our Department, which required laparostomy procedure; we analyzed the type of surgery, temporary abdominal closure, duration of open abdomen, complications, SOFA score, mortality with Candida infections, and empirical or targeted antifungal therapy.

RESULTS

We found that patients with Candida infection were related with a statistically significant difference (p < 0.05) with a complication after OA closure, total complications, time elapsed after OA application, time spent on the first surgical OA application, type of temporary abdominal closure that is used, and duration of the open abdomen. The use of empirical and targeted antifungal therapy is related to the duration of open abdomen too.

CONCLUSIONS

Management of the OA is often burdened by sepsis or septic shock, especially when complicated by Candida infection. Candida score is a validated tool to identify patients who can be treated empirically, but every situation must be considered on an individual basis.