Routine Use of Prophylactic Antibiotics during Laparoscopic Cholecystectomy Does Not Reduce the Risk of Surgical Site Infections

Antibiotic prophylaxis for surgical wound infections in clean and clean-contaminated surgery: an updated systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

The efficacy and necessity of prophylactic antibiotics in clean and clean-contaminated surgery remains controversial.

METHODS

The studies were screened and extracted using databases including PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, Web of Science, and Clinical Trials.gov according to predefined eligibility criteria. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing the effect of preoperative and postoperative prophylactic antibiotic use on the incidence of surgical site infections (SSIs) in patients undergoing any clean or clean-contaminated surgery.

RESULTS

A total of 16 189 participants in 48 RCTs were included in the primary meta-analysis following the eligibility criteria. The pooled odds ratio (OR) for SSI with antibiotic prophylaxis versus placebo was 0.60 (95% CI: 0.53-0.68). The pooled OR among gastrointestinal, oncology, orthopedics, neurosurgery, oral, and urology surgery was 3.06 (95% CI: 1.05-8.91), 1.16 (95% CI: 0.89-1.50), 2.04 (95% CI: 1.09-3.81), 3.05 (95% CI: 1.25-7.47), 3.55 (95% CI: 1.78-7.06), and 2.26 (95% CI: 1.12-4.55), respectively. Furthermore, the summary mean difference (MD) for patients' length of hospitalization was -0.91 (95% CI: -1.61, -0.16). The results of sensitivity analyses for all combined effect sizes showed good stability.

CONCLUSION

Antibiotics are both effective, safe, and necessary in preventing surgical wound infections in clean and clean-contaminated procedures, attributed to their reduction in the incidence of surgical site infections as well as the length of patient hospitalization.

A Comparative Analysis of Prophylactic Antibiotic Administration in Emergency Surgery Versus Elective Surgery: A Comprehensive Review

Surgical site infections (SSIs) contribute to increased patient morbidity, prolonged hospital stays, and substantial healthcare costs. Prophylactic antibiotics play a pivotal role in mitigating the risk of SSIs, with their administration being a standard practice before both emergency and elective surgeries. This paper provides a comprehensive review and comparative analysis of the benefits of prophylactic antibiotic administration in emergency surgery versus elective surgery. Through a systematic literature review and analysis of relevant studies identified through PubMed searches, this paper highlights the specific benefits of prophylactic antibiotics between emergency and elective surgeries. The findings underscore the importance of tailored antibiotic regimens and administration protocols to optimize patient care and promote successful surgical outcomes in diverse clinical settings. Further research is warranted to refine guidelines and enhance understanding of the relationship between prophylactic antibiotics and surgical outcomes across different surgical contexts.

Surgical Antibiotic Prophylaxis: A Proposal for a Global Evidence-Based Bundle

In the multimodal strategy context, to implement healthcare-associated infection prevention, bundles are one of the most commonly used methods to adapt guidelines in the local context and transfer best practices into routine clinical care. One of the most important measures to prevent surgical site infections is surgical antibiotic prophylaxis (SAP). This narrative review aims to present a bundle for the correct SAP administration and evaluate the evidence supporting it. Surgical site infection (SSI) prevention guidelines published by the WHO, CDC, NICE, and SHEA/IDSA/APIC/AHA, and the clinical practice guidelines for SAP by ASHP/IDSA/SIS/SHEA, were reviewed. Subsequently, comprehensive searches were also conducted using the PubMed®/MEDLINE and Google Scholar databases, in order to identify further supporting evidence-based documentation. The bundle includes five different measures that may affect proper SAP administration. The measures included may be easily implemented in all hospitals worldwide and are based on minimal drug pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics knowledge, which all surgeons should know. Antibiotics for SAP should be prescribed for surgical procedures at high risk for SSIs, such as clean-contaminated and contaminated surgical procedures or for clean surgical procedures where SSIs, even if unlikely, may have devastating consequences, such as in procedures with prosthetic implants. SAP should generally be administered within 60 min before the surgical incision for most antibiotics (including cefazolin). SAP redosing is indicated for surgical procedures exceeding two antibiotic half-lives or for procedures significantly associated with blood loss. In principle, SAP should be discontinued after the surgical procedure. Hospital-based antimicrobial stewardship programmes can optimise the treatment of infections and reduce adverse events associated with antibiotics. In the context of a collaborative and interdisciplinary approach, it is essential to encourage an institutional safety culture in which surgeons are persuaded, rather than compelled, to respect antibiotic prescribing practices. In that context, the proposed bundle contains a set of evidence-based interventions for SAP administration. It is easy to apply, promotes collaboration, and includes measures that can be adequately followed and evaluated in all hospitals worldwide.

Incidence of Bacteriobilia and the Correlation with Antibioticoprophylaxis in Low-Risk Patients Submitted to Elective Videolaparoscopic Cholecystectomy: A Randomized Clinical Trial

Cholelithiasis has a major impact on global health and affects an average of 20% of the Western population. The main risk factors are females, age over 40 years, obesity and pregnancy. Most of the time it is asymptomatic, but when there are symptoms, they are generally nonspecific. Bile was considered sterile, but today it is known that it contains a complex bacterial flora, which causes biofilm in the gallbladder and gallstones. Among the main bacteria associated with cholelithiasis are Pseudomonas aeruginosa, Escherichia coli, Klebsiella pneumoniae, species of Enterococcus spp. and Acinetobacter spp. Antibiotic prophylaxis is used in an attempt to reduce postoperative infections, especially at the surgical site. However, some authors found no relationship between the use of antibiotic prophylaxis and a lower risk of surgical site infection. Thus, the aim of this double-blind randomized clinical trial was to compare the existence or not of bacteriobilia in patients at low anesthetic risk who underwent videolaparoscopic cholecystectomy, and its correlation with the use of prophylactic antibiotics. This study included 40 patients between 18 and 65 years old, diagnosed with cholelithiasis, symptomatic or not, with low anesthetic risk classified by the American Society of Anesthesiology in ASA I or ASA II, without complications or previous manipulation of the bile duct, who underwent elective video cholecystectomy, divided into two groups: Experimental Group A (n = 20), which received 2 g of Cephalotin (first-generation Cephalosporin, Keflin®, ABL antibiotics, Cosmópolis, Brazil) during anesthetic induction, and Control Group B (n = 20), where no antibiotics were administered until bile collection. After the procedure, a bile sample was collected and culture and antibiogram were performed. In the sample, 22 (55%) were classified as ASA I and 18 (45%) as ASA II. It was observed that 81.8% of the patients who had a positive culture did not use antibiotics, against 18.2% of those who used prophylaxis. When comparing patients regarding anesthetic risk, ASA I patients had a positive culture in 9.1% of cases, against 90.9% in patients classified as ASA II. It was concluded that patients with higher anesthetic risk (ASA II) have a higher chance of bacteriobilia and benefit from antibiotic prophylaxis when compared to patients with lower anesthetic risk (ASA I).

Antibiotic Prophylaxis for Hepato-Biliopancreatic Surgery—A Systematic Review

Background: Surgical site infections (SSIs) are among the most important determinants of morbidity after HBP surgery. Their frequency after HPB surgery is variable, from 1–2% after elective cholecystectomy to 25% after PD. Methods: A systematic review was performed to assess the role of antimicrobial prophylaxis (AP) in HPB elective surgery. Articles published between 2015 and 2021 were obtained; those before 2015 were not included because they antedate the WHO guidelines on SSI prevention. We conducted three different research methods for liver resection, elective cholecystectomy and pancreatic and biliary surgery regarding patients requiring preoperative biliary drainage. Results: Hepatic surgery, improvement in surgical technique and perioperative management lead to a very low SSI. One preoperative 2 g cefazolin dose may be adequate for surgical prophylaxis. From preoperative biliary drainage, we can derive that patients’ homeostasis rather than AP plays a paramount role in reducing postoperative morbidity. The time from biliary drainage could be an essential element in decision making for surgical prophylaxis. In the case of low-risk cholecystectomy, it is not easy to draw definitive conclusions about the effect of AP. Data from the literature are inconsistent, and some risk factors cannot be predicted before surgery. Conclusion: in our opinion, a strict preoperative cefazolin dose strategy can be reasonable in HBP surgery until a large-scale, multicentric RCT brings definitive conclusions.

RISK FACTORS FOR SURGICAL WOUND INFECTION AFTER ELECTIVE LAPAROSCOPIC CHOLECYSTECTOMY

One of the ways to avoid infection after surgical procedures is through antibiotic prophylaxis. This occurs in cholecystectomies with certain risk factors for infection. However, some guidelines suggest the use of antibiotic prophylaxis for all cholecystectomies, although current evidence does not indicate any advantage of this practice in the absence of risk factors.

RISK FACTORS FOR SURGICAL WOUND INFECTION AFTER ELECTIVE LAPAROSCOPIC CHOLECYSTECTOMY

BACKGROUND:

One of the ways to avoid infection after surgical procedures is through antibiotic prophylaxis. This occurs in cholecystectomies with certain risk factors for infection. However, some guidelines suggest the use of antibiotic prophylaxis for all cholecystectomies, although current evidence does not indicate any advantage of this practice in the absence of risk factors.

AIMS:

This study aims to evaluate the incidence of wound infection after elective laparoscopic cholecystectomies and the use of antibiotic prophylaxis in these procedures.

METHODS:

This is a retrospective study of 439 patients with chronic cholecystitis and cholelithiasis, accounting for different risk factors for wound infection.

RESULTS:

There were seven cases of wound infection (1.59%). No antibiotic prophylaxis regimen significantly altered infection rates. There was a statistically significant correlation between wound infection and male patients (p=0.013). No other analyzed risk factor showed a statistical correlation with wound infection.

CONCLUSIONS:

The nonuse of antibiotic prophylaxis and other analyzed factors did not present a significant correlation for the increase in the occurrence of wound infection. Studies with a larger sample and a control group without antibiotic prophylaxis are necessary.

Reduction of risk of infection during elective laparoscopic cholecystectomy using prophylactic antibiotics: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Whether perioperative administration is required in elective laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LC) in patients with low risk of infection remains controversial.

OBJECTIVE

To investigate whether perioperative use of prophylactic antibiotics during elective LC can reduce the incidence of postoperative infection using a meta-analysis.

METHODS

Pubmed, Cochrane Library, Embase, and reference lists were searched up to October 26, 2020, for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of the perioperative use of antibiotics during LC. A systematic review with meta-analysis, meta-regression, and GRADE (Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation) of the evidence was conducted. The Cochrane (RoB 2.0) tool was used to assess the risk of bias.

RESULT

A total of 14 RCTs were ultimately included in the meta-analysis, involving a total of 4360 patients. The incidence of surgical site infections, distant infections, and overall infections was investigated and the relationship with the perioperative use of prophylactic antibiotics during LC analyzed. The results indicated that in low-risk patients undergoing elective LC, prophylactic antibiotics reduce the incidence of surgical site infections (RR 0.66; 95% CI 0.45-0.98), with a moderate GRADE of evidence, distant infections (RR 0.34; 95% CI 0.16-0.73), with a low GRADE of evidence and overall infections (RR 0.57; 95% CI 0.40-0.80), with a moderate GRADE of evidence.

CONCLUSIONS

The present meta-analysis demonstrates that the perioperative use of antibiotics in LC is effective in low-risk patients, possibly reducing the incidence of surgical site infections, distant infections, and overall infections. However, in view of the limitations of the study, it is recommended that studies with a more rigorous design (for downgraded factors) and larger sample size should be conducted in the future so that the conclusions above can be further verified through key result indicators.

Popularity of endocrine endometriosis drugs and limited alternatives in the present and foreseeable future: A survey among 1420 affected women

OBJECTIVES

Endocrine drugs represent an important cornerstone of endometriosis therapy. Pharmaceutical alternatives with similar efficacy remain out of sight in the near future. Aim of this study is to investigate attitudes and perceptions concerning endocrine therapies among affected women.

STUDY DESIGN

An online survey was distributed via social media in Austria, Germany, and Switzerland. Primary endpoints were satisfaction, attitudes and perceptions towards endocrine endometriosis drugs and secondary outcomes differences regarding demographic variables.

RESULTS

Of 1420 respondents, 63.5 % (n = 901) described their own attitude towards these drugs as rather negative. The most frequently reported unfavorable associations and experiences were sideeffects in general (85.5 %, n = 1181), change in libido (67.5 %, n = 932), hormone cycle disruptions (65.9 %, n = 910), and inefficiency at alleviating symptoms (38.2 %, n = 527). In total, 66.1 % (n = 935) were not satisfied with endocrine drugs for endometriosis. Age ≤ 30 years, living in a large city, and having an academic degree were significantly correlated to a more negative perception of these drugs and greater dissatisfaction with current endocrine endometriosis drugs.

CONCLUSIONS

Among women with endometriosis - and particularly among those aged ≤30 years, being large-city residents, or holding an academic degree - there appears to be a relevant degree of rejection and wariness towards endocrine endometriosis drugs. Given the prevalence of endometriosis and the few pharmaceutical alternatives on the horizon, these data point a growing need for further research and development of non-hormonal drugs for the treatment of endometriosis.

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.

Antibiotic prophylaxis in acute cholecystectomy revisited: results of a double-blind randomised controlled trial

Purpose

Evidence supporting the value of preoperative antibiotic prophylaxis (PAP) in surgery for acute cholecystitis is lacking. This study aimed to shed light on whether PAP in acute cholecystectomy for cholecystitis reduces the postoperative infectious complication (PIC) rate. Secondary outcomes were the prevalence of bacteriobilia, CRP values and leucocyte counts.

Methods

The study was performed as a single-centre, double-blinded, placebo-controlled, randomised study. Patients with acute cholecystitis amenable for acute laparoscopic cholecystectomy were randomly assigned to either PAP (piperacillin/ tazobactam) or placebo, and the subsequent clinical course was followed.

Results

A total of 106 patients were enrolled, 16 of whom were excluded due to protocol violation. PIC developed in 22 of the 90 patients included with no significant difference between the PAP and placebo groups (8 patients in the PAP group and 14 in the placebo arm, p = 0.193). The PIC rate was significantly higher in patients with a raised CRP at randomisation and on the day of surgery and in cases of conversion to an open procedure (p = 0.008, 0.004 and 0.017, respectively) but with no differences between the study groups.

Conclusion

PAP does not affect the risk for PIC in patients with acute cholecystitis. The major risk factors determining PIC in these patients need defining, in particular, the impact of bacteriobilia.

Trial registration

The study was registered at clinicaltrials.gov (NCT02619149) December 2, 2015.

The effect of antibiotic prophylaxis on wound infections after laparoscopic cholecystectomy: A randomised clinical trial

The aim of this study was to determine whether the use of prophylactic antibiotics had any effects on the development of postoperative surgical wound infections between laparoscopic cholecystectomy patients. Patients who received a single dose of prophylactic antibiotics prior to surgery were included in the prophylaxis group, and those who did not receive preoperative and postoperative intravenous and/or oral antibiotics were included in the no prophylaxis group. A total of 206 patients who underwent laparoscopic cholecystectomy were examined; the infection rate in patients who received prophylaxis was 4.5%, while it was 4.2% in the non-prophylactic group. There was no statistically significant difference between the groups in terms of infection development rates (P > .05). We suggest that antibiotics should not be given for prophylaxis before low-risk laparoscopic cholecystectomy as there is no statistically significant difference in the rate of postoperative wound infection among patients who were either given or not given prophylaxis.

Role of prophylactic antibiotics in elective laparoscopic cholecystectomy: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Backgrounds/Aims

The role of prophylactic antibiotics for laparoscopic cholecystectomy in low-risk patients is still unclear. This study aimed to verify the conclusion of previous meta-analyses concerning the effectiveness of antibiotic prophylaxis for elective laparoscopic cholecystectomy in low-risk patients.

Methods

Comprehensive literature searches were performed on electric databases and manual searches. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs), prospective studies, and retrospective studies comparing antibiotic prophylaxis to placebo or no antibiotics in low-risk elective laparoscopic cholecystectomy were included.

Results

This study included 28 RCTs, three prospective studies, and three retrospective studies. In RCTs, prophylactic antibiotics did not prevent deep surgical site infections (SSI) (RR 1.10, 95% confidence interval [CI] [0.45–2.69], p=0.84) but reduced SSI (RR 0.70, 95% CI [0.53–0.94], p=0.02), and superficial SSI (RR 0.58, 95% CI [0.42–0.82], p=0.01). Prospective studies showed prophylactic antibiotics did not reduce superficial SSI (RR 0.35, 95% CI [0.01–8.40], p=0.52) but reduced SSI (RR 0.12, 95% CI [0.04–0.35], p=0.0001). In retrospective studies, antibiotic prophylaxis did not reduce SSI (RR 1.59, 95% CI [0.30–8.32], p=0.58). The pooled data (12121 patients) including RCTs and prospective and retrospective studies showed that prophylactic antibiotics were not effective in preventing deep SSI (RR 1.01 95% CI [0.46–2.21], p=0.98) but effective in reducing SSI (RR 0.67, 95% CI [0.51–0.88], p=0.003) and superficial SSI (RR 0.61, 95% CI [0.45–0.83], p=0.002).

Conclusions

The use of prophylactic antibiotics is effective for reducing the incidence of SSI and superficial SSI but is not effective for preventing deep SSI in low-risk patients who underwent elective laparoscopic cholecystectomy.