Antibiotic prophylaxis in acute nonperforated appendicitis. The Danish Multicenter Study Group III

Scientific evidence of the duration of antibiotic treatment in intra-abdominal infections with surgical focus control

A non-systematic review of the published scientific evidence has been carried out on the duration of empirical antibiotic treatment in surgical intra-abdominal infections (IIA) with effective focus control. Given the progressive increase in antibiotic resistance, it is urgent to have strategies to reduce the pressure on the microbiota. The American guidelines made by Mazuski et al. of 2017¹, as the central axis in the recommendations of the duration of empirical antibiotic treatment in intra-abdominal infections with control of the focus and a bibliographic search of all the articles that contained the keywords in Pubmed and Google Scholar is added. 21 articles referring to the duration of empirical antibiotic treatment in intra-abdominal infection with control of the focus are collected. With the American guidelines and these articles, a proposal is prepared for the duration of empirical antibiotic treatment in patients without risk factors between 24 and 72 h. And in those who present risk factors, it should be individualized with active monitoring every 24 h of fever, paralytic ileus and leukocytosis (FIL), before an early detection of complications or the need for changes in antibiotic treatment. Short treatments are just as effective as those of longer durations and are associated with fewer adverse effects, therefore, daily adjusting and reassessing the duration of empirical antibiotic treatment is essential for better practice.

Recovery of aerobic and anaerobic bacteria from patients with acute appendicitis using blood culture bottles

Introducción.

La apendicitis aguda es la primera causa de abdomen agudo; sin embargo, poco se conoce sobre las bacterias asociadas y su perfil de sensibilidad.

Objetivo.

Identificar y determinar el patrón de resistencia de las bacterias aerobias y anaerobias aisladas en cultivo de líquido periapendicular tomado de los pacientes con apendicitis aguda, y establecer la proporción de bacterias según la fase clínica.

Materiales y métodos.

Se llevó a cabo un estudio descriptivo y prospectivo en el Hospital Universitario de San José de Bogotá (Colombia), en pacientes mayores de 16 años sometidos a apendicectomía abierta. Se tomaron muestras de líquido periapendicular, las cuales se sembraron directamente en botellas de hemocultivos para aerobios y anaerobios.

Resultados.

Se incluyeron 154 pacientes. Del total de cultivos, el 87 % (n=134) fueron positivos: 77 % (n=118) para aerobios y 51 % (n=79) para anaerobios. La proporción de cultivos positivos fue inferior en los casos de apendicitis no complicada, en comparación con aquellos de apendicitis complicada (80 % (66/83) Vs. 95 % (67/71); p=0,003). Los microorganismos aislados con mayor frecuencia fueron: Escherichia coli (53 %) (n=84), Bacteroides sp. (25 %) (n=25), Propionibacterium acnes (21 %) (n=21), Staphylococci coagulasa negativo (17 %) (n=27), Enterococcus sp. (10 %) (n=15) y Fusobacterium sp. (11 %) (n=11). La sensibilidad de E. coli a la amplicilina sulbactam fue de 30 %. La sensibilidad de Bacteroides spp. a la clindamicina y la ampicilina sulbactam fue de 91 %. El 100 % de los anaerobios fueron sensibles a piperacilina tazobactam, ertapenem, meropenem y metronidazol.

Conclusiones.

Los cultivos intraoperatorios son pertinentes en la apendicitis para determinar el patrón epidemiológico local, y establecer los antibióticos profilácticos y terapéuticos para esta enfermedad. Su siembra directa en botellas de hemocultivo permite una gran recuperación de microorganismos.

Is the efficacy of antibiotic prophylaxis for surgical procedures decreasing? Systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized control trials

OBJECTIVE

Rising antibiotic resistance could reduce the effectiveness of antibiotics in preventing postoperative infections. We investigated trends in the efficacy of antibiotic prophylaxis regimens for 3 commonly performed surgical procedures-appendectomy, cesarean section, and colorectal surgery-and 1 invasive diagnostic procedure, transrectal prostate biopsy (TRPB).

DESIGN

Systematic review and meta-analysis.

METHODS

We searched PubMed and Cochrane databases (through October 31, 2017) for randomized control trials (RCTs) that measured the efficacy of antibiotic prophylaxis for 4 index procedures in preventing postoperative infections (surgical site infections [SSIs] following the 3 surgical procedures and a combination of urinary tract infections [UTIs] and sepsis following TRPB).

RESULTS

Of 399 RCTs, 74 studies (9 appendectomy, 11 cesarean section, 39 colorectal surgery, and 15 TRPB) were included. Multilevel logistic regression models with random intercepts for each study showed no statistically significant increase in SSIs over time for appendectomy (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] per year, 1.03; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.92-1.16; P=.57), cesarean section (aOR per year, 1.01; 95% CI, 0.96-1.05; P=.80), and TRPB (aOR per year, 0.95; 95% CI, 0.77-1.18; P=.67). However, there was a significant increase in SSIs proportion following colorectal surgery (aOR per year, 1.049; 95% CI, 1.03-1.07; P<.001).

CONCLUSION

The efficacy of antibiotic prophylaxis agents in preventing SSIs following colorectal surgery has declined. Small number of RCTs and low infections rates limited our ability to assess true effect for simple appendectomy, cesarean section, or TRPB.

Postoperative antibiotic therapy after appendectomy in patients with non-perforated appendicitis

BACKGROUND

Appendectomy intra-abdominal is the most frequently performed emergency surgery. This study was conducted to determine the role of postoperative antibiotics in reducing surgical site infections (SSIs) and abscess formation after open appendectomy.

METHODS

In the Department of Surgery, Shahid Beheshti Hospital, Babol, Iran, from October 2013 to October 2014 one hundred and fifty two patients, who underwent appendectomy for nonperforated appendicitis (NPA) and fulfilled the selection criteria, were randomized into two groups. Group A patients received a single dose of preoperative antibiotics (ceftriaxone and metronidazole) and group B patients received the same regimen, in addition, antibiotics were administered 24 hours postoperatively. Patients of both groups were followed-up for 30 days to assess the postoperative infectious complications.

RESULTS

Both groups comprised 76 patients, as well both groups were compared in baseline characteristics. Statistically, there was no significant difference in rates of SSIs between both groups. None of the patients developed intra-abdominal collection.

CONCLUSION

Single dose of preoperative antibiotics (ceftriaxone and metronidazole) was sufficient in reducing SSIs after appendectomy for NPA. Postoperative antibiotics did not add an appreciable clinical benefit in these patients.

Orally Administered Trimethoprim-Sulfamethoxazole and Metronidazole as Infection Prophylaxis in Elective Colorectal Surgery

BACKGROUND

This randomized clinical trial evaluated orally administered trimethoprim-sulfamethoxazole and metronidazole (TSM) in elective colorectal surgery as prophylactic for post-operative surgical site infections (SSI).

METHODS

Patients undergoing elective colorectal resection were evaluated for inclusion. Randomized subjects received either orally administered TSM or intravenously administered cefuroxime and metronidazole (control group, CXM). The primary endpoint was the rate of SSI.

RESULTS

A total of 1073 subjects were randomized to either control (540) or TSM (533). 486 patients in the TSM group and 499 in the control group were followed-up with after 4 weeks. Thirty-seven (3.8%) patients were afflicted by SSI at discharge from hospital and 69 (7.0%) at follow-up four weeks after surgery. After four weeks, the rate of incisional SSI was 7.0% in the TSM group and 3.6% in the control group (p=0.022). For organ/space SSI and the other complications monitored in the study, no differences were observed between the groups.

CONCLUSION

Orally administered TSM as prophylaxis before elective colorectal surgery results in a low rate of organ/space SSI but an increased rate of incisional SSI compared with intravenously administered cefuroxime and metronidazole. Thus, when considering orally administered TSM, because of environmental concerns or for economic reasons, the slightly increased infection rate has to be kept in mind.

Simple acute appendicitis versus non-perforated gangrenous appendicitis: is there a difference in the rate of post-operative infectious complications?

BACKGROUND

According to the 2002 Surgical Infection Society Guidelines on Antimicrobial Therapy for Intra-abdominal Infections, antimicrobial therapy is not recommended beyond 24 hours for the treatment of postoperative acute or gangrenous appendicitis without perforation. However, clinicians commonly consider gangrenous appendicitis to pose a greater risk of post-operative infectious complications, such as surgical site infections and intra-abdominal abscesses. This study examines the relative risk of post-operative infection between patients with simple and gangrenous appendicitis.

METHODS

A retrospective review of patients with either non-perforated gangrenous or simple appendicitis from 2010 to 2012 was performed at a large urban teaching hospital.

RESULTS

The rate of post-operative intra-abdominal abscess formation, which was diagnosed on patient readmission to the hospital, was significantly greater in patients with non-perforated gangrenous appendicitis in comparison to those with simple non-perforated appendicitis. Also, patients with non-perforated gangrenous appendicitis received extended courses of post-operative antibiotics, despite SIS recommendations.

CONCLUSIONS

The role of peri-operative antibiotics for non-perforated gangrenous appendicitis merits further study.

Oral metronidazole as antibiotic prophylaxis for patients with nonperforated appendicitis

Background

The rate of wound infection after appendectomy without antibiotic prophylaxis is 10%–30%. The role of prophylactic antibiotic therapy in nonperforated appendicitis is still controversial. Metronidazole is against anaerobic organisms and its bioavailability after oral and parenteral administration has been shown to be similar. The objective of the present study is to compare the infective complications rate after open appendectomy for nonperforated appendicitis receiving either oral or intravenous metronidazole as prophylaxis.

Methods and Materials

From June 2007 to July 2009 in a randomized controlled trial, 204 patients with nonperforated appendicitis underwent an open appendectomy; 122 male and 82 female with mean age of 25 years. Among these, 102 (case group) received oral metronidazole and in 102 (control group) metronidazole was administered intravenously before surgery. The rate of wound infection and duration of the postoperative hospital stay was studied in the two groups.

Results

The rate of wound infection was not significantly different in the two groups. (6% and 4% in study and control group, respectively, P = 0.861). Also the hospital stay was equal in two groups (2.3 days and 2.7 days in study and control group, respectively, P = 0.293).

Conclusion

Single dose of oral metronidazole prior to operation can provide a sufficient prophylaxis for nonperforated appendicitis; so, it can be substitute the parental route of antibiotic administration.

Postoperative antibiotics correlate with worse outcomes after appendectomy for nonperforated appendicitis

BACKGROUND

Acute appendicitis remains the most common cause of acute abdominal pain necessitating operative intervention. Although postoperative antibiotics are universally used for perforated appendicitis, no consensus exists on whether postoperative antibiotics are beneficial for preventing surgical site infections (SSIs) in nonperforated cases. We set out to determine how postoperative antibiotic therapy affects outcomes after appendectomy for nonperforated appendicitis.

STUDY DESIGN

The medical records of 1,000 patients undergoing appendectomy for nonperforated appendicitis at The Mount Sinai Medical Center from January 2005 through July 2010 were retrospectively reviewed.

RESULTS

In total, 728 cases contained sufficient follow-up data for analysis; 334 of these patients received postoperative antibiotics and 394 did not. There were no significant differences in patient demographics, medical comorbidities, American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) class, admission temperature, preoperative antibiotic treatment, operating room time, estimated blood loss, appendiceal diameter, or intraoperative transfusion between the two groups, although WBC was higher for patients receiving postoperative antibiotics (12.3 vs 14 cells/mm(3), p = 0.001). Postoperative antibiotics did not alter the incidence of superficial SSIs, deep SSIs, or organ space SSIs (all p = 0.1), but did correlate with higher rates of Clostridium difficile infection (p = 0.02), urinary tract infection (p = 0.05), postoperative diarrhea (p < 0.001), and longer length of stay (LOS) (1.1 vs 2.4 days, p < 0.001). Patients receiving postoperative antibiotics also showed trends toward higher readmission and reoperation rates (both p = 0.06).

CONCLUSIONS

Postoperative antibiotic treatment for nonperforated appendicitis did not reduce infectious complications and prolonged LOS while increasing postoperative morbidity. Therefore, postoperative antibiotics likely increase the treatment cost for nonperforated appendicitis while not adding an appreciable clinical benefit and, in some cases, actually worsening outcomes.

Antibiotic therapy versus appendectomy for acute appendicitis: a meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Antibiotic treatment has been shown to be effective in treating selected patients with acute appendicitis, and three randomized controlled trials (RCTs) have compared the efficacy of antibiotic therapy alone with that of surgery for acute appendicitis. The purpose of this meta-analysis of RCTs was to assess the outcomes with these two therapeutic modalities.

METHODS

All RCTs comparing antibiotic therapy alone with surgery in patients over 18 years of age with suspected acute appendicitis were included. Patients with suspected perforated appendix or peritonitis, and those with an allergy to antibiotics had been excluded in the RCTs. The outcome measures studied were complications, length of hospital stay, and readmissions.

RESULTS

Meta-analysis of RCTs of antibiotic therapy versus surgery showed a trend toward a reduced risk of complications in the antibiotic-treated group [RR (95%CI): 0.43 (0.16, 1.18) p = 0.10], without prolonging the length of hospital stay [mean difference (inverse variance, random, 95% CI): 0.11 (-0.22, 0.43) p = 0.53]. Of the 350 patients randomized to the antibiotic group, 238 (68%) were treated successfully with antibiotics alone and 38 (15%) were readmitted. The remaining 112 (32%) patients randomized to antibiotic therapy crossed over to surgery for a variety of reasons. At 1 year, 200 patients in the antibiotic group remained asymptomatic.

CONCLUSIONS

This meta-analysis suggests that although antibiotics may be used as primary treatment for selected patients with suspected uncomplicated appendicitis, this is unlikely to supersede appendectomy at present. Selection bias and crossover to surgery in the RCTs suggest that appendectomy is still the gold standard therapy for acute appendicitis.

Intra-operative culture swabs in acute appendicitis: a waste of resources

INTRODUCTION

Antibiotics gained a place in the management of acute appendicitis when the bacterial aetiology was demonstrated. Culture swabs were obtained routinely during appendicectomies to guide antibiotic use. Although current antimicrobial therapy use has become prophylactic, empirical and broad spectrum, this age-old practice still remains. Our study questions the value of this traditional practice.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

All adult and paediatric patients undergoing emergency appendicectomy over three years were retrospectively reviewed. Microbiology and appendix histology reports were retrieved. Occurrence of infective post-operative morbidity was recorded via hospital notes.

RESULTS

A total of 652 appendectomies (age 1 month to 81 years, median 20 years) were performed in a 36 month period. Four hundred and thirty-five/six hundred and fifty-two (66.7%) had intra-operative swabs taken. One hundred and forty/four hundred and thirty-five (32%) revealed presence ofa pathogens. One hundred and twenty-two/four hundred and thirty-five (28%) were sensitive to broad spectrum empirical antibiotics and only 18/435 (4.1%) cultured resistant strains. Forty-two/six-hundred and fifty-two (6.4%) patients had postoperative infective complications. Twenty-nine/forty-two (68%) had a different organism responsible for this complication. The highest proportion of positive cultures and post-operative infective complications was observed in the extremes of ages (< 10 and > 50 years) and in gangrenous appendicitis.

CONCLUSION

A majority of intra-operative swabs were negative or isolated commensal flora. Pathogens causing postoperative morbidity were frequently different from those isolated intra-operatively. None of the patients had a change of management based on the swab results. Hence routine intra-peritoneal swabs remains of little clinical value.

Optimum duration of prophylactic antibiotics in acute non-perforated appendicitis

BACKGROUND

The effect of extended prophylactic antibiotic therapy on postoperative infective complications such as wound infection and intra-abdominal abscess for non-perforated appendicitis is poorly defined.

METHODS

In a randomized controlled trial of 269 patients aged 15-70 years with non-perforated appendicitis undergoing open appendicectomy; 92 received single dose preoperative (group A), 94 received three-dose (group B) and 83 received 5-day perioperative (group C) regimens of cefuroxime and metronidazole. Postoperative infective complication was the primary endpoint. Secondary outcomes included length of hospital stay and complications related to antibiotic therapy.

RESULTS

The rate of postoperative infective complication was not significantly different among the groups (6.5% group A, 6.4% group B, 3.6% group C). The duration of antibiotic therapy had no significant effect on the length of hospital stay. Complications related to antibiotic treatment were significantly more common for 5-day perioperative antibiotic group (C) compared with single dose preoperative antibiotic group (A) (P = 0.048).

CONCLUSION

Single dose of preoperative antibiotics is adequate for prevention of postoperative infective complications in patients with non-perforated appendicitis undergoing open appendicectomy. Prolonging the use of antibiotics can lead to unnecessary antibiotic related complications.

Antibiotics versus placebo for prevention of postoperative infection after appendicectomy

BACKGROUND

Appendicitis is the most common cause of acute abdominal pain requiring surgical intervention. The cause of appendicitis is unclear and the mechanism of pathogenesis continues to be debated. Despite improved asepsis and surgical techniques, postoperative complications, such as wound infection and intraabdominal abscess, still account for a significant morbidity. Several studies implicate that postoperative infections are reduced by administration of antimicrobial regimes.

OBJECTIVES

This review evaluated the use of antibiotics compared to placebo or no treatment in patients undergoing appendectomy. Will these patients benefit from antimicrobial prophylaxis? The outcomes were described according to the nature of the appendix, as either simple appendicitis (including the non-infectious stage) and complicated appendicitis. The efficacy of different antibiotic regimens were not evaluated.

SEARCH STRATEGY

We searched The Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (Cochrane Library 2005 issue 1); Pubmed ; EMBASE; and the Cochrane Colorectal Cancer Group Specialised Register (April 2005). In addition, we manually searched the reference lists of the primary identified trials.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We evaluated Randomised Controlled Trials (RCTs) and Controlled Clinical Trials (CCTs) in which any antibiotic regime were compared to placebo in patients suspected of having appendicitis, and undergoing appendectomy. Both studies on children and adults were reviewed. The outcome measures of the studies were: Wound infection, intra abdominal abscess, length of stay in hospital, and mortality.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Eligibility and trial quality were assessed, recorded and cross-checked by two reviewers.

MAIN RESULTS

Forty-five studies including 9576 patients were included in this review. The overall result is that the use of antibiotics is superior to placebo for preventing wound infection and intraabdominal abscess, with no apparent difference in the nature of the removed appendix. Studies exclusively on children and studies examining topical application reported results in favour to the above, although the results were not significant.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Antibiotic prophylaxis is effective in the prevention of postoperative complications in appendectomised patients, whether the administration is given pre-, peri- or post-operatively, and could be considered for routine in emergency appendectomies.

Antibiotics versus placebo for prevention of postoperative infection after appendicectomy

BACKGROUND

Appendicitis is the most common cause of acute abdominal pain requiring surgical intervention. The cause of appendicitis is unclear and the mechanism of pathogenesis continues to be debated. Despite improved asepsis and surgical techniques, postoperative complications, such as wound infection and intraabdominal abscess, still account for a significant morbidity. Several studies implicate that postoperative infections are reduced by administration of antimicrobial regimes.

OBJECTIVES

The objective of this review is to evaluate the use of antibiotics with placebo or no treatment in patients undergoing appendectomy. Will these patients benefit from antimicrobial prophylaxis? The outcomes are described according to the nature of the appendix, as either simple appendicitis (including the non-infectious stage) and complicated appendicitis. This review do not attempt to compare the effect of different regimens. That clinical question is addressed in another review undertaken by Bleuer 1999.

SEARCH STRATEGY

We searched The Cochrane Controlled Trials Register (Cochrane Library 2002 issue 4); Pubmed, Embase and the Cochrane Colorectal Cancer Group Specialised Register (Up to October 2002). In addition we manually searched the reference lists of the primary identified trials.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We evaluated Randomised Controlled Trials (RCTs) and Controlled Clinical Trials (CCTs) in which any antibiotic regime were compared to placebo in patients suspected of having appendicitis, and undergoing appendectomy. Both studies on children and adults were reviewed. The outcome measures of the studies were: Wound infection, intra abdominal abscess, length of stay in hospital, and mortality.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Eligibility and trial quality were assessed, recorded and cross-checked by two reviewers.

MAIN RESULTS

Forty-five studies including 9576 patients were included in this review. The overall result is that the use of antibiotics is superior to placebo for preventing wound infection and intraabdominal abscess, with no apparent difference in the nature of the removed appendix. Studies exclusively on children and studies examining topical application reported results in favour to the above although the results were not significant.

REVIEWER'S CONCLUSIONS

Antibiotic prophylaxis is effective in the prevention of postoperative complications in appendectomised patients, whether the administration is given pre-, peri- or post-operatively, and could be considered for routine in emergency appendectomies.

Surgical antibiotic prophylaxis: effect in postoperative infections

OBJECTIVE

to assess the risk of surgical wound infection and hospital acquired infections among patients with and without adequate antibiotic prophylaxis. Also, to provide models to predict the contributing factors of hospital infection and surgical wound infection.

DESIGN

survey study. Prospective cohort study over 14 months, with data collected by a nurse and a epidemiologist through visits to the surgical areas, a review of the medical record and consultation with the medical doctor and nurses attending the patients.

SETTING

Two hundred and fifty bed, general hospital serving Puertollano (Ciudad Real), population--50,000.

RESULTS

between February 1998 and April 1999, 754 patients underwent surgery, 263 (34.88%) received appropriate perioperative prophylaxis while 491 (65.12%) received inadequate prophylaxis. For those who received adequate antibiotic prophylaxis, the percentage of nosocomial infection was 10.65% compared with the group who received inadequate prophylaxis in which the percentage of nosocomial infection was 33.40%. The relative risk of nosocomial infection was, therefore, 4.21 times higher in the latter group (confidence intervals 95%: 2.71-6.51). A patient in the inadequate prophylaxis group had a 14.87% chance of wound infection while a patient in the adequate prophylaxis group had a 4.56% chance of wound infection. The relative risk of wound infection was 3.65 times higher in the group that received inadequate prophylaxis (confidence intervals 95%: 1.95-6.86). The final regression logistic model to assess nosocomial infection incorporated seven prognostic factors: age, length of venous periferic route, vesicle catheter, duration of operation, obesity, metabolic or neoplasm diseases and adequate or inadequate prophylaxis. When we incorporated these variables in the multi-factorial analysis we found that the relative risk of developing nosocomial infection was 2.33 times higher in the group which received inadequate prophylaxis. When we applied the second logistic multiple regression model (wound infection), we discovered that the probability of developing surgical wound infection was 2.32 times higher in the group which received inadequate prophylaxis as opposed to the group, which received adequate prophylaxis. The goodness of fit (Hosmer-Lemeshow test) showed a correct significance in all models.

CONCLUSIONS

a multi-factorial analysis was applied to identify the high-risk patients and the risk factors for postoperative infections. Through the application of these multiple regression logistic models, we conclude that the correct antibiotic prophylaxis is effective and will subsequently reduce postoperative infection rates, especially in high-risk patients. Therefore, the choice of antimicrobial agent should be made on the basis of the criteria of hospital committee.

Impact of hospital-wide surveillance on hospital-acquired infections in an acute-care hospital in the Netherlands

The goal of surveillance is to identify hospital-acquired infections (HAI) and risk factors, to apply targeted interventions and to evaluate their effect in an ongoing system. Continuing active surveillance in a 270-bed acute-care hospital is being performed on clinical patients, excluding day-care. The period 1984-1997 is described here. Specific surveillance-based interventions included the introduction of antimicrobial prophylaxis in gynaecology patients with postoperative urinary tract catheters and inpatients scheduled for appendicectomy and hysterectomy. General measures included education, implementation of protocols, feedback of surgeon-specific infection rates. In total, 3545 HAI were found in 13 years of surveillance. The incidence was 4.7/100 admissions and 4. 5/1000 patient days. Age-specific incidences ranged from 1.3 in the age-category 1-14 years, to 10.2 in patients aged 75 years and above. If age-specific incidences had remained at their 1984 level, over 3000 additional infections would have occurred, affecting all age groups except those up to 14 years. The distribution of types of infections differed between services. Following the targeted interventions, the rate of infections in gynaecology decreased from 19.4 per 1000 patient days in 1984 to 2.4 per 1000 patient days in 1996. The rates of wound infection following appendicectomy and hysterectomy decreased by 69% and 82%, respectively, in the period following the institution of antimicrobial prophylaxis. Over 4000 micro-organisms were isolated from the HAI; multi-resistant strains were isolated sporadically. We conclude that hospital-wide surveillance of hospital-acquired infections provides appropriate targets for interventions tailored to the specific needs of the hospital. The impact of such interventions can readily be documented from the surveillance data.

Guideline for Prevention of Surgical Site Infection, 1999. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) Hospital Infection Control Practices Advisory Committee

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The "Guideline for Prevention of Surgical Site Infection, 1999" presents the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC)'s recommendations for the prevention of surgical site infections (SSIs), formerly called surgical wound infections. This two-part guideline updates and replaces previous guidelines.1,2 Part I, "Surgical Site Infection: An Overview," describes the epidemiology, definitions, microbiology, pathogenesis, and surveillance of SSIs. Included is a detailed discussion of the pre-, intra-, and postoperative issues relevant to SSI genesis. Part II, "Recommendations for Prevention of Surgical Site Infection," represents the consensus of the Hospital Infection Control Practices Advisory Committee (HICPAC) regarding strategies for the prevention of SSIs.3 Whenever possible, the recommendations in Part II are based on data from well-designed scientific studies. However, there are a limited number of studies that clearly validate risk factors and prevention measures for SSI. By necessity, available studies have often been conducted in narrowly defined patient populations or for specific kinds of operations, making generalization of their findings to all specialties and types of operations potentially problematic. This is especially true regarding the implementation of SSI prevention measures. Finally, some of the infection control practices routinely used by surgical teams cannot be rigorously studied for ethical or logistical reasons (e.g., wearing vs not wearing gloves). Thus, some of the recommendations in Part II are based on a strong theoretical rationale and suggestive evidence in the absence of confirmatory scientific knowledge.It has been estimated that approximately 75% of all operations in the United States will be performed in "ambulatory," "same-day," or "outpatient" operating rooms by the turn of the century.4 In recommending various SSI prevention methods, this document makes no distinction between surgical care delivered in such settings and that provided in conventional inpatient operating rooms. This document is primarily intended for use by surgeons, operating room nurses, postoperative inpatient and clinic nurses, infection control professionals, anesthesiologists, healthcare epidemiologists, and other personnel directly responsible for the prevention of nosocomial infections. This document does not: Specifically address issues unique to burns, trauma, transplant procedures, or transmission of bloodborne pathogens from healthcare worker to patient, nor does it specifically address details of SSI prevention in pediatric surgical practice. It has been recently shown in a multicenter study of pediatric surgical patients that characteristics related to the operations are more important than those related to the physiologic status of the patients.5 In general, all SSI prevention measures effective in adult surgical care are indicated in pediatric surgical care. Specifically address procedures performed outside of the operating room (e.g., endoscopic procedures), nor does it provide guidance for infection prevention for invasive procedures such as cardiac catheterization or interventional radiology. Nonetheless, it is likely that many SSI prevention strategies also could be applied or adapted to reduce infectious complications associated with these procedures. Specifically recommend SSI prevention methods unique to minimally invasive operations (i.e., laparoscopic surgery). Available SSI surveillance data indicate that laparoscopic operations generally have a lower or comparable SSI risk when contrasted to open operations.6-11 SSI prevention measures applicable in open operations (e.g., open cholecystectomy) are indicated for their laparoscopic counterparts (e.g., laparoscopic cholecystectomy). Recommend specific antiseptic agents for patient preoperative skin preparations or for healthcare worker hand/forearm antisepsis. Hospitals should choose from products recommended for these activitie

Guideline for prevention of surgical site infection, 1999. Hospital Infection Control Practices Advisory Committee

The “Guideline for Prevention of Surgical Site Infection, 1999” presents the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC)'s recommendations for the prevention of surgical site infections (SSIs), formerly called surgical wound infections. This two-part guideline updates and replaces previous guidelines.

Part I, “Surgical Site Infection: An Overview,” describes the epidemiology, definitions, microbiology, pathogenesis, and surveillance of SSIs. Included is a detailed discussion of the pre-, intra-, and postoperative issues relevant to SSI genesis.

Is abdominal cavity culture of any value in appendicitis?

BACKGROUND

Intraperitoneal culturing during appendectomy is a routine procedure. Significant decrease in the mortality and dramatic improvement in the morbidity were achieved by using antibiotics perioperatively. The value of intraoperative abdominal cavity culture was assessed in our study.

METHODS

A total of 499 patients formed two groups, those with acute nonperforated appendicitis (group A) and those with perforated appendicitis (group B). Intraoperative abdominal cavity culture were taken randomly in both groups. The perioperative morbidity, the validity, and the impact of positive culture on the antibiotic treatment were examined in both groups.

RESULTS

Clinical diagnosed perforation was confirmed histologically in 176 patients (98.3% accuracy). Intraperitoneal cultures were obtained in 30.1% of the patients in group A and in 67.1% of group B. The majority of the patients in group A were treated preoperatively and postoperatively by a single antibiotic agent whereas 58.0% of the patients in group B were started on triple-agent antibiotics for significantly longer periods (22.4 +/- 9.4 versus 5.7 +/- 7.4 doses, respectively; P < 0.0001). No significant difference was found in both groups in the postoperative complication rate (wound infection, intra-abdominal abscess and small bowel obstruction) whether intra-abdominal culture was obtained or not (5.9% versus 4.7% in group A and 21.2% versus 21.9% in group B; P > 0.05).

CONCLUSION

Traditional intraoperative abdominal cavity culture can be abandoned. In perforated appendicitis, colonic flora can be predicted, and antibiotic therapy should begun without any abdominal cavity culture results. This practical approach will save money and reduce laboratory work without affecting the patient's morbidity.

Appendicitis

A complete understanding of the anatomy, pathophysiology, and presenting signs and symptoms of appendicitis, combined with a thorough history and physical examination, will be the most important factors in allowing the practicing emergency physician to make the correct diagnosis of acute appendicitis. For patients in which the diagnosis is less clear or for patients in high-risk groups (extremes of age, pregnant women, and immunocompromised patients) additional diagnostic testing, usually US or CT, and early surgical consultation are recommended.

Preoperative administration of antibiotics in patients with suspected acute appendicitis

The effectiveness of administering antibiotics preoperatively to patients with suspected appendicitis was evaluated over a 2-year period in 105 consecutive patients who presented with right lower quadrant (RLQ) tenderness and a white blood cell (WBC) count of over 10,000/mm3 or a temperature of over 37 degrees C. All the patients were preoperatively administered cefazolin (CEZ), cefotiam (CTM), or fosfomycin (FOM) except those with apparent peritonitis, which resulted in the recovery of 41 patients (39%). Of the remaining 64 patients, 14 (13%) had catarrhal appendicitis, 34 (32%), phlegmonous appendicitis, and 16 (15%), gangrenous appendicitis. Preoperatively, there were no significant differences among these groups in the WBC count or temperature. Following the administration of antibiotics, both these parameters decreased significantly in the patients with catarrhal appendicitis, although a slight RLQ tenderness persisted; in those with phlegmonous appendicitis, the WBC count decreased significantly, but the temperature remained elevated, with slight rebound tenderness in the RLQ; and in those with gangrenous appendicitis, there were no significant differences between the pre- and postoperative data in WBC count or temperature, and the abdominal symptoms did not change. These results show the value of administering antibiotics within 24h of the onset of symptoms indicative of acute appendicitis to allow time to evaluate the patients' condition, decide the operative indications, and prevent unnecessary laparotomy.

The randomized controlled clinical trial in gastroenterology: the Danish contributions from 1970 to 1994

More than 200 Danish randomized controlled clinical trials in gastroenterology published from 1970 to 1994 were retrieved by electronic media, by hand-searching relevant journals, and by direct requests to Danish gastroenterologists. With the historical perspective through a quarter of a century, these papers are outlined to provide a survey of the pieces of information that Danish gastroenterologists have contributed to the present knowledge of therapeutics. The presented randomized controlled clinical trials constitute an impressive sum of knowledge within a diversity of topics. A cautious analysis of the time pattern for the publications in addition to the contents of the reports discloses that the discipline of planning and executing relevant controlled clinical trials is now in blossom in Danish gastroenterology.

Surgical antibiotic prophylaxis

Improvements in antibiotic prophylaxis, including the timing of initial administration, appropriate choice of antibiotic agents, and the limiting of the duration of administration, have more clearly defined the value of this technique in many clinical surgical settings. Studies of antibiotic prophylaxis designed during the next decade should strongly consider individual patient risk factors when new antibiotic agents are tested or administration techniques are refined. A concentrated effort should be made in areas of clinical surgery in which the value of antibiotic prophylaxis has not been proven. When in doubt, it appears that a one-dose systemic regimen of an appropriately chosen cephalosporin given during the immediate preoperative period is safe and the indicated practice.

Piperacillin/tazobactam in the treatment of polymicrobial infections

Polymicrobial infections are characterized by the presence of micro-organisms from more than one group of bacteria. Empirical treatment of polymicrobial infections requires an agent active against both anaerobic and aerobic/facultative bacteria. An aminoglycoside used in combination with an anti-anaerobe agent is commonly used to treat polymicrobial infections. However, aminoglycoside nephrotoxicity and treatment failures raise questions about the use of such regimens. Among non-aminoglycoside treatment regimens such as penicillin and cephalosporins, effectiveness has been compromised by bacteria producing extended spectrum beta-lactamases. Cefoxitin shows satisfactory results for treatment of intra-abdominal infections. Other studies have shown good results with imipenem, cefotetan and piperacillin used as single agents. Piperacillin/tazobactam, a new combination broad-spectrum antibiotic and potent beta-lactamase inhibitor, can be used for the treatment of infections caused by piperacillin-sensitive micro-organisms as well as beta-lactamase-producing, piperacillin-resistant organisms. This broad-spectrum activity is appropriate for infections traditionally treated empirically by double or triple antibiotic therapy.

[Antibiotic prophylaxis in colorectal surgery]

In elective colorectal surgery, the benefit of preoperative antibiotic prophylaxis is well established, with a reduction in wound infection rate to less than 10%. The antimicrobial agent used has to be active against aerobic and anaerobic pathogens such as Escheria coli and Bacteriodes fragilis. The efficacy of three schemes of administration: oral and/or parenteral prophylaxis associated with a mechanical preparation, has been demonstrated. Oral antibiotic administration is current practice in USA; the most widely used oral regimen is the combination of erythromycin and neomycin given the day before surgery. Parenteral prophylaxis with a cephalosporin active against Bacteriodes fragilis such as cefoxitin and cefotetan, is preferred in Europe. The issue of whether a systemic prophylaxis should be added to the oral regimen or not has not yet been resolved. However it seems that the association should be proposed in various situations: patients with a high risk factors score (rectal resection and operations lasting more than three hours), patients with incomplete mechanical preparation, delay of the onset of surgery after the last oral dose.

Laparoscopic versus open appendicectomy: a prospective evaluation

A prospective evaluation of laparoscopic surgery for acute appendicitis over a 6-month period is reported. Sixty-five patients with signs and symptoms of appendicitis necessitating surgery were assigned to open (n = 36) or laparoscopic (n = 29) appendicectomy. Thirty-seven patients were female (22 open) and 28 were male (14 open). The median age was 24 (range 14-64) years for open appendicectomy and 18 (range 14-60) years for the laparoscopic procedure. The mean postoperative stay for open operation was 4.8 (range 1-21) days and for the laparoscopic route 2.2 (range 1-11) days (P < 0.05). Inflammation was confirmed histologically in 72 per cent of the open cases and in 74 per cent of the laparoscopic cases (P not significant). The wound infection rate was 11 per cent (n = 4) for open and 4 per cent (n = 1) for laparoscopic appendicectomy (P < 0.05). The median anaesthesia time was 52 (range 15-90) min for open appendicectomy and 48 (range 20-120) min for laparoscopic surgery (P not significant). After open appendicectomy patients had a median of 5 (range 2-12) intramuscular injections of analgesia compared with a median of 1 (range 0-5) in the laparoscopic group (P < 0.05). Two laparoscopic operations were converted to an open procedure. The results suggest that emergency laparoscopic appendicectomy should be explored further as an alternative to open surgery for acute appendicitis.