Antibiotic Prophylaxis in Dermatologic Surgery: Updated Guidelines

Forehead Flap Practices: A Cross-Sectional Survey of Facial Plastic and Reconstructive Surgeons

Background: The paramedian forehead flap (PMFF) is a well-established technique utilized for reconstruction of complex nasal defects. Objective: To identify the different techniques and management of patients undergoing PMFF reconstruction and compare these with current literature. Methods: Members of the American Academy of Facial Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery were sent a practice survey highlighting various nuances in PMFF reconstruction. The survey included questions about flap design, operative techniques, and perioperative care. Results: In total, 172 responses were received (14% response rate). Mean years of practice after fellowship was 15.8 years with most respondents performing either 1-5 (33.1%) or 6-10 (27.3%) PMFFs per year. Common practices included the use of general anesthesia, elevation of PMFF in the subgaleal plane (59.6%), and pedicle division at 3 weeks (80%) (p < 0.001). Complication rates ranged between 1% and 5%. The nose was the most common site for revision (p < 0.001) and the average number of secondary procedures after forehead flap division was 1.1 (standard deviation 0.81). The most variability in responses was seen for methods of internal lining reconstruction. Conclusion: Reconstructive surgeons frequently divide the PMFF pedicle at 3 weeks or later and have variable approaches to reconstruction of the internal lining with low complication rates overall.

A systematic review and meta-analysis of antibiotic prophylaxis in skin graft surgery: A protocol

Introduction

There is little evidence-based guidance on the use of prophylactic antibiotics in skin surgery; whilst antibiotics may protect against surgical site infections (SSI), they have associated side effects, increase the risk of adverse events, and can propagate antibiotic resistance. We present a protocol for a systematic review to establish whether the benefit of prophylactic antibiotics overrides the risk, for patients undergoing autograft surgery.

Methods

The systematic review will be registered a priori on researchregistry.com and will be conducted in line with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses (PRISMA). A search strategy will be devised to investigate 'skin graft surgery and use of antibiotics'. The following electronic databases will be searched, 1979-2018: PubMed, MEDLINE®, EMBASE, SCOPUS, CINAHL, PsychINFO, SciELO, The Cochrane Library, including the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), Database of Abstracts of Reviews of Effect (DARE), the Cochrane Methodology Register, Health Technology Assessment Database, the NHS Economic Evaluation Databases and Cochrane Groups, ClinicalTrials.gov, Current Controlled Trials Database, the World Health Organisation (WHO) International Clinical Trials Registry Platform, UpToDate.com, NHS Evidence and the York Centre for Reviews and Dissemination. Grey literature will be searched. All comparative study designs reporting on the use of antibiotics in skin graft surgery will be considered for inclusion, namely randomized controlled trials (RCTs). Two trained independent teams will screen all titles and abstracts, followed by relevant full texts, for eligibility. Data will be extracted under standardized extraction fields into a preformatted database. Note will be made of the indication for skin graft surgery (traumatic, congenital, malignant, benign), the graft site (head & neck, trunk, upper extremities, lower extremities), type of skin graft (split thickness, full-thickness). The primary outcome will be occurrence of SSI at the donor and/or recipient sites. Secondary outcomes, if reported, will include: length of hospital stay, revision surgery required, cost of medical care, time to wound healing and cosmetic outcome.

Ethics and dissemination

The systematic review will be published in a peer-reviewed journal and presented at national and international meetings within fields of plastic, reconstructive, and aesthetic surgery. The work will be disseminated electronically and in print. Brief reports of the review and findings will be disseminated to interested parties through email and direct communication. The review aims to guide healthcare practice and policy.

Effect of a Single Preoperative Dose of Oral Antibiotic to Reduce the Incidence of Surgical Site Infection Following Below-Knee Dermatological Flap and Graft Repair

Background

Surgical site infection (SSI) rates for below-knee dermatological surgery are unacceptably high, particularly following complex flap and graft closures. The role of antibiotic prophylaxis for these surgical cases is uncertain.

Objective

To determine whether SSI following complex dermatological closures on the leg could be reduced by antibiotic prophylaxis administered as a single oral preoperative dose.

Methods

A total of 115 participants were randomized to 2 g of oral cephalexin or placebo 40–60 minutes prior to surgical incision in a prospective, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial at a primary care skin cancer clinic in North Queensland, Australia.

Results

Overall 17/55 (30.9%) controls and 14/55 (25.5%) intervention participants developed infection (P = 0.525). There was no difference between the study groups in adverse symptoms that could be attributed to high-dose antibiotic administration (P = 1).

Conclusion

A single oral 2-g dose of cephalexin given before complex below-knee dermatological closure did not reduce SSI.

Effect of a single prophylactic preoperative oral antibiotic dose on surgical site infection following complex dermatological procedures on the nose and ear: a prospective, randomised, controlled, double-blinded trial

OBJECTIVES

There is limited published research studying the effect of antibiotic prophylaxis on surgical site infection (SSI) in dermatological surgery, and there is no consensus for its use in higher-risk cases. The objective of this study was to determine the effectiveness of a single oral preoperative 2 g dose of cephalexin in preventing SSI following flap and graft dermatological closures on the nose and ear.

DESIGN

Prospective double-blinded, randomised, placebo-controlled trial testing for difference in infection rates.

SETTING

Primary care skin cancer clinics in North Queensland, Australia, were randomised to 2 g oral cephalexin or placebo 40-60 min prior to skin incision.

PARTICIPANTS

154 consecutive eligible patients booked for flap or graft closure following skin cancer excision on the ear and nose.

INTERVENTION

2 g dose of cephalexin administered 40-60 min prior to surgery.

RESULTS

Overall 8/69 (11.6%) controls and 1/73 (1.4%) in the intervention group developed SSI (p=0.015; absolute SSI reduction 10.2%; number needed to treat (NNT) for benefit 9.8, 95% CI 5.5 to 45.5). In males, 7/44 controls and 0/33 in the intervention group developed SSI (p=0.018; absolute SSI reduction 15.9%; NNT for benefit 6.3, 95% CI 3.8 to 19.2). SSI was much lower in female controls (1/25) and antibiotic prophylaxis did not further reduce this (p=1.0). There was no difference between the study groups in adverse symptoms attributable to high-dose antibiotic administration (p=0.871).

CONCLUSION

A single oral 2 g dose of cephalexin given before complex skin closure on the nose and ear reduced SSI.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

ANZCTR 365115; Post-results.

Topical antibiotics for preventing surgical site infection in wounds healing by primary intention

BACKGROUND

Surgical site infections (SSI) can delay wound healing, impair cosmetic outcome and increase healthcare costs. Topical antibiotics are sometimes used to reduce microbial contaminant exposure following surgical procedures, with the aim of reducing SSIs.

OBJECTIVES

The primary objective of this review was to determine whether the application of topical antibiotics to surgical wounds that are healing by primary intention reduces the incidence of SSI and whether it increases the incidence of adverse outcomes (allergic contact dermatitis, infections with patterns of antibiotic resistance and anaphylaxis).

SEARCH METHODS

In May 2015 we searched: the Cochrane Wounds Specialised Register; the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL; the Cochrane Library); Ovid MEDLINE; Ovid MEDLINE (In-Process & Other Non-Indexed Citations); Ovid Embase and EBSCO CINAHL. We also searched clinical trial registries for ongoing studies, and bibliographies of relevant publications to identify further eligible trials. There was no restriction of language, date of study or setting. The search was repeated in May 2016 to ensure currency of included studies.

SELECTION CRITERIA

All randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and quasi-randomised trials that assessed the effects of topical antibiotics (any formulation, including impregnated dressings) in people with surgical wounds healing by primary intention were eligible for inclusion.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently selected studies and independently extracted data. Two authors then assessed the studies for risk of bias. Risk ratios were calculated for dichotomous variables, and when a sufficient number of comparable trials were available, trials were pooled in a meta-analysis.

MAIN RESULTS

A total of 10 RCTs and four quasi-randomised trials with 6466 participants met the inclusion criteria. Six studies involved minor procedures conducted in an outpatient or emergency department setting; eight studies involved major surgery conducted in theatre. Nine different topical antibiotics were included. We included two three-arm trials, two four-arm trials and 10 two-arm trials. The control groups comprised; an alternative topical antibiotic (two studies), topical antiseptic (six studies) and no topical antibiotic (10 studies), which comprised inert ointment (five studies) no treatment (four studies) and one study with one arm of each.The risk of bias of the 14 studies varied. Seven studies were at high risk of bias, five at unclear risk of bias and two at low risk of bias. Most risk of bias concerned risk of selection bias.Twelve of the studies (6259 participants) reported infection rates, although we could not extract the data for this outcome from one study. Four studies (3334 participants) measured allergic contact dermatitis as an outcome. Four studies measured positive wound swabs for patterns of antimicrobial resistance, for which there were no outcomes reported. No episodes of anaphylaxis were reported. Topical antibiotic versus no topical antibioticWe pooled the results of eight trials (5427 participants) for the outcome of SSI. Topical antibiotics probably reduce the risk of SSI in people with surgical wounds healing by primary intention compared with no topical antibiotic (RR 0.61, 95% CI 0.42 to 0.87; moderate-quality evidence downgraded once for risk of bias). This equates to 20 fewer SSIs per 1000 patients treated with topical antibiotics (95% CI 7 to 29) and a number needed to treat for one additional beneficial outcome (NNTB) (i.e. prevention of one SSI) of 50.We pooled the results of three trials (3012 participants) for the outcome of allergic contact dermatitis, however this comparison was underpowered, and it is unclear whether topical antibiotics affect the risk of allergic contact dermatitis (RR 3.94, 95% CI 0.46 to 34.00; very low-quality evidence, downgraded twice for risk of bias, once for imprecision). Topical antibiotic versus antiseptic We pooled the results of five trials (1299 participants) for the outcome of SSI. Topical antibiotics probably reduce the risk of SSI in people with surgical wounds healing by primary intention compared with using topical antiseptics (RR 0.49, 95% CI 0.30 to 0.80; moderate-quality evidence downgraded once for risk of bias). This equates to 43 fewer SSIs per 1000 patients treated with topical antibiotics instead of antiseptics (95% CI 17 to 59) and an NNTB of 24.We pooled the results of two trials (541 participants) for the outcome of allergic contact dermatitis; there was no clear difference in the risk of dermatitis between topical antibiotics and antiseptics, however this comparison was underpowered and a difference cannot be ruled out (RR 0.97, 95% CI 0.52 to 1.82; very low-quality evidence, downgraded twice for risk of bias and once for imprecision). Topical antibiotic versus topical antibioticOne study (99 participants) compared mupirocin ointment with a combination ointment of neomycin/polymyxin B/bacitracin zinc for the outcome of SSI. There was no clear difference in the risk of SSI, however this comparison was underpowered (very low-quality evidence downgraded twice for risk of bias, once for imprecision).A four-arm trial involved two antibiotic arms (neomycin sulfate/bacitracin zinc/polymyxin B sulphate combination ointment versus bacitracin zinc, 219 participants). There was no clear difference in risk of SSI between the combination ointment and the bacitracin zinc ointment. The quality of evidence for this outcome was low, downgraded once for risk of bias, and once for imprecision.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Topical antibiotics applied to surgical wounds healing by primary intention probably reduce the risk of SSI relative to no antibiotic, and relative to topical antiseptics (moderate quality evidence). We are unable to draw conclusions regarding the effects of topical antibiotics on adverse outcomes such as allergic contact dermatitis due to lack of statistical power (small sample sizes). We are also unable to draw conclusions regarding the impact of increasing topical antibiotic use on antibiotic resistance. The relative effects of different topical antibiotics are unclear.

Use of topical antibiotics as prophylaxis in clean dermatologic procedures

BACKGROUND

Topical antibiotics are not indicated for routine postoperative care in clean dermatologic procedures, but may be widely used.

OBJECTIVE

We sought to describe topical antibiotic use in clean dermatologic surgical procedures in the United States.

METHODS

The 1993 to 2007 National Ambulatory Medical Care Survey database was queried for visits in which clean dermatologic surgery was performed. We analyzed provider specialty, use of topical antibiotics, and associated diagnoses. Use of topical antibiotic over time was analyzed by linear regression.

RESULTS

An estimated 212 million clean dermatologic procedures were performed between 1993 and 2007; topical antibiotics were reported in approximately 10.6 million (5.0%) procedures. Dermatologists were responsible for 63.3% of dermatologic surgery procedures and reported use of topical antibiotic prophylaxis in 8.0 million (6.0%). Dermatologists were more likely to use topical antibiotic prophylaxis than nondermatologists (6.0% vs 3.5%). Use of topical antibiotic prophylaxis decreased over time.

LIMITATIONS

Data were limited to outpatient procedures. The assumption was made that when topical antibiotics were documented at procedure visits they were being used as prophylaxis.

CONCLUSIONS

Topical antibiotics continue to be used as prophylaxis in clean dermatologic procedures, despite being ineffective for this purpose and posing a risk to patients. Although topical antibiotic use is decreasing, prophylactic use should be eliminated.

The fusiform skin excision: one recipe for success

The fusiform skin excision is commonly performed by dermatologists. This brief review presents a stepwise approach to this procedure and discusses recent evidence related to dermatologic minor surgery.

Mohs surgery for squamous cell carcinoma

Cutaneous squamous cell carcinoma (SCC) is the second most common human cancer and can behave aggressively. Mohs micrographic surgery offers the highest cure rates for high-risk SCCs and is particularly useful for SCCs on challenging anatomic sites.

Prospective study of wound infections in Mohs micrographic surgery using clean surgical technique in the absence of prophylactic antibiotics

BACKGROUND

Mohs micrographic surgery (MMS) has a low rate of surgical site infection (SSI) without the use of prophylactic antibiotics. In the studies to date, there has been variation in the steps taken by each surgeon to prevent SSIs but in all cases sterile technique was used during wound reconstruction.

OBJECTIVE

We sought to evaluate the rate of SSIs among patients undergoing MMS with the use of clean surgical technique for all steps of MMS including wound reconstruction in the absence of prophylactic antibiotics.

METHODS

We prospectively evaluated 1000 patients undergoing MMS using clean surgical technique for SSIs. Clean surgical technique includes the use of clean surgical gloves and towels and a single pack of sterile instruments for all steps including wound reconstruction.

RESULTS

There were 11 SSIs among 1000 patients with 1204 tumors, with an overall rate of infection of 0.91% (95% confidence interval 0.38%-1.45%). Three of the 11 infections were complications of hematomas. Four of the 11 infections occurred in flap closures, which had the highest rate of SSIs of 2.67% (4/150).

LIMITATIONS

The study was a prospective, single-institution uncontrolled study.

CONCLUSION

To our knowledge, this is the first study to examine the rate of SSIs with the use of clean surgical technique, in the absence of antibiotic prophylaxis, for all steps of MMS including wound reconstruction. Our rate of SSIs of 0.91% is exceedingly low, underscoring the overall safety of MMS and its performance in the outpatient setting without the use of antibiotic prophylaxis or sterile technique.

Prospective evaluation of surgical site infection rate among patients with Mohs micrographic surgery without the use of prophylactic antibiotics

BACKGROUND

Antibiotics may be indiscriminately given to patients undergoing Mohs micrographic surgery (MMS) for the prevention of surgical site infections, despite a low risk of infection in these patients.

OBJECTIVE

We sought to evaluate the rate of wound infections among patients undergoing MMS without the use of prophylactic antibiotics.

METHODS

We prospectively evaluated 1000 consecutive patients undergoing MMS for nonmelanoma skin cancer or modified MMS/"slow Mohs" for lentigo maligna melanoma in situ.

RESULTS

The overall wound infection rate among 1000 patients with 1115 tumors was 0.7% (8/1115 tumors). Five (62.5%) of 8 infections occurred on the nose with an overall 1.7% (5/302) nose infection rate. Seven (87.5%) of 8 infections occurred after flap reconstruction with an overall 2.4% (7/296) flap closure infection rate. Four (50%) of 8 infections occurred in patients requiring more than one Mohs stage for tumor clearance with a 0.8% (4/487) overall infection rate in cases requiring multiple Mohs stages. Two (25%) of 8 infections had cultures positive for oxacillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus. No wound infections occurred in cases involving the lips or ears, skin-graft closures, or below-knee or modified MMS procedures.

LIMITATIONS

This was a prospective single institution uncontrolled study.

CONCLUSION

Rates of infections among patients undergoing MMS or modified MMS are exceedingly low. Indiscriminate use of antibiotics increases patient risk to adverse drug reactions and antibiotic resistance. Administration of antibiotics to patients undergoing MMS should be on a case-by-case basis according to the known risk factors combined with clinical judgment.

Infectious Complications and Antibiotic Use in Dermatologic Surgery

Infection rates in dermatologic surgery are low, ranging on average from 1 to 3%. Studies have shown that many practitioners likely overuse antibiotics, both for prevention of wound infection and in endocarditis prophylaxis. This article discusses patient and environmental risk factors in would infection. Data on wound infection prophylaxis are reviewed, and specific guidelines set forth with regards to appropriate antibiotic usage, drug selection, dosage, and timing. In addition, recommendations surrounding endocarditis and prosthetic joint infection prophylaxis are presented as they apply to dermatologic surgery.

Perioperative evaluation and management in dermatologic surgery

Thorough and efficient perioperative evaluation is mandatory for all patients undergoing dermatologic operation. Patients may present with concise or extensive medical histories, and an organized approach will focus attention on issues relevant to the patient's dermatologic disease and the planned surgical procedure. Management of common perioperative issues in a proactive and standardized manner, with opportunity to individualize decisions when clinical conditions indicate, is an efficient and optimal approach. This review highlights the efficient and thorough evaluation of perioperative issues and suggests guidelines for the optimal management of common perioperative issues, including cardiac devices, antibiotic prophylaxis, and anticoagulation.