Reducing prophylactic antibiotics use in laparoscopic cholecystectomy and liver resections

Does the Surgical Approach Affect the Incidence of Post-Hepatectomy Liver Failure in Cirrhotic Patients? An Analysis of the NSQIP Database

Background: The association between surgical approach and post-hepatectomy liver failure (PHLF) in cirrhotic patients is poorly understood. We hypothesize that patients will have similar rates of liver failure regardless of whether they undergo minimally invasive liver resection (MILR) or open liver resection (OLR) in major liver resections. In contrast, there will be lower rates of PHLF in patients undergoing minor hepatectomy via the MILR approach.Methods: Propensity score matching was used to analyze regression by matching the MILR to the OLR cohort. Patient demographics from the American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program, including race, age, gender, and ethnicity, were matched. Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, congestive heart failure, smoking, hypertension, diabetes, renal failure, dyspnea, dialysis dependence, body mass index, and American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) classification (>ASA III) were among the preoperative patient characteristics subject to matching. PHLF (Grade A vs B. vs C) was our primary outcome measure.Results: A total of 2129 cirrhotic patients were included in the study. In the minor hepatectomy group, patients undergoing an OLR were more likely to get discharged to a facility (7.0% vs 4.4%; P = .03), had greater hospital length of stay (5 vs 3 days; P = .02), and had a greater need for invasive postoperative interventions (10.7% vs 4.6%; P < .01). They were also noted to have higher rates of organ space superficial surgical infections (SSIs) (7.3% vs 3.7%; P = .003), Clostridium difficile infection (.9% vs .1%; P = .05), renal insufficiency (2.1% vs .1%; P < .01), unplanned intubations (3.1% vs 1.4%; P = .03), and Grade C liver failure (2.3% vs .9%; P = .03).Conclusion: A higher incidence of PHLF grade C was found in patients undergoing OLR in the minor hepatectomy group. Therefore, in cirrhotic patients who can tolerate minimally invasive approaches, MILR should be offered to prevent postoperative complications as part of their optimization plan.

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.