Surgical Infection Society Guidelines for Antibiotic Use in Patients Undergoing Cholecystectomy for Gallbladder Disease

Background: Manifestations of gallbladder disease range from intermittent abdominal pain (symptomatic cholelithiasis) to potentially life-threatening illness (gangrenous cholecystitis). Although surgical intervention to treat acute cholecystitis is well defined, the role of antibiotic administration before or after cholecystectomy to decrease morbidity or mortality is less clear. Methods: The Surgical Infection Society's Therapeutics and Guidelines Committee convened to develop guidelines for antibiotic use in patients undergoing cholecystectomy for gallbladder disease to prevent surgical site infection, other infection, hospital length of stay, or mortality. PubMed, Embase, and the Cochrane Database were searched for relevant studies. Evaluation of the published evidence was performed using the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluations (GRADE) system. Using a process of iterative consensus, all authors voted to accept or reject each recommendation. Results: We recommend against routine use of peri-operative antibiotic agents in low-risk patients undergoing elective laparoscopic cholecystectomy. We recommend use of peri-operative antibiotic agents for patients undergoing laparoscopic cholecystectomy for acute cholecystitis. We recommend against use of post-operative antibiotic agents after elective laparoscopic cholecystectomy for symptomatic cholelithiasis. We recommend against use of post-operative antibiotic agents in patients undergoing laparoscopic cholecystectomy for mild or moderate acute cholecystitis. We recommend a maximum of four days of antibiotic agents, and perhaps a shorter duration in patients undergoing cholecystectomy for severe (Tokyo Guidelines grade III) cholecystitis. Conclusions: This guideline summarizes the current Surgical Infection Society recommendations for antibiotic use in patients undergoing cholecystectomy for gallbladder disease.

Empirical antibiotics for acute cholecystitis-what generation of antibiotics is an appropriate choice? A prospective, randomized controlled study

BACKGROUND

In cases of acute cholecystitis (AC), empirical antibiotics are used to prevent infectious morbidities following cholecystectomy. However, there are still no exact guidelines on which antibiotics to use.

METHODS

We enrolled 300 patients who had been admitted for cholecystectomy because of grade I or II AC. We randomly allocated them to one of two groups empirically: the first group was to be given first-generation cephalosporins (group I, 150 patients) and the second group was to be given second-generation cephalosporins (group II, 150 patients). We analyzed the clinical outcomes and the incidence of postoperative infectious morbidities.

RESULTS

The incidence rate of overall infectious morbidities (18 cases, 12% in group I; 17 cases, 11.3% in group II; P = .859) showed no difference between the two groups. The incidence rate of sepsis (only one case, 0.7% in group II, P = 1.000) or surgical site infection (nine cases, 6% in group I and eight cases, 5.3% in group II, P = 1.000) were also similar in both groups.

CONCLUSIONS

The empirical use of first-generation cephalosporins for mild-to-moderate AC without gallbladder perforation was not inferior to using second-generation cephalosporin for prophylaxis against postoperative infection. Our results could allow for a tailored treatment strategy of empirical antibiotics according to the severity of the cholecystitis.

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.

Extended antibiotic therapy versus placebo after laparoscopic cholecystectomy for mild and moderate acute calculous cholecystitis: A randomized double-blind clinical trial

BACKGROUND

Acute calculous cholecystitis (ACC) is the most common complication of cholelithiasis. Laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LC) is the gold standard treatment in mild and moderate forms. Currently there is consensus for the use of antibiotics in the preoperative phase of ACC. However, the need for antibiotic therapy after surgery remains undefined with a low level of scientific evidence.

METHODS

The CHART (Cholecystectomy Antibiotic Randomised Trial) study is a single-center, prospective, double blind, and randomized trial. Patients with mild to moderate ACC operated by LC were randomly assigned to receive antibiotic (amoxicillin/clavulanic acid) or placebo treatment for 5 consecutive days. The primary endpoint was postoperative infectious complications. Secondary endpoints were as follows: (1) duration of hospital stay, (2) readmissions, (3) reintervention, and (4) overall mortality.

RESULTS

In the per-protocol analysis, 6 of 104 patients (5.8%) in the placebo arm and 6 of 91 patients (6.6%) in the antibiotic arm developed postoperative infectious complications (absolute difference 0.82 (95% confidence interval, -5.96 to 7.61, P = .81). The median hospital stay was 3 days. There was no mortality. There were no differences regarding readmissions and reoperations between the 2 groups.

CONCLUSION

Although this trial failed to show noninferiority of postoperative placebo compared to antibiotic treatment after LC for mild and moderate ACC within a noninferiority margin of 5%, the use of antibiotics in the postoperative period does not seem justified, because it was not associated with a decrease in the incidence of infectious and other types of morbidity in the present study.

Can post-operative antibiotic prophylaxis following elective laparoscopic cholecystectomy be completely done away with in the Indian setting? A prospective randomised study

Premise and Objective:

Elective laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LC) has low risk for post-operative infectious complications; still most clinicians use persistent post-operative prophylactic antibiotics out of habit, tradition, or simply as defensive practice due to evolving medicolegal implications of a large number of surgeries being showcased as daycare or next day discharge procedures. This randomised prospective trial was done to test the need for such prophylaxis in cases of elective LC in a rural/semi-urban setting.

Materials and Methods:

Two hundred and ten successive patients undergoing elective LC were randomised into groups receiving single dose of injection ceftriaxone at the time of induction of anaesthesia, (Group A = 112 cases) and those who in addition to above received injection ceftriaxone twice daily for 2 days postoperatively (Group B = 98 cases). Post-operative infectious complications between two groups were compared for variables such as age, sex, body mass index and bile/stone spillage.

Results:

There was no significant difference in surgical site infection rates between the groups for variables such as age, sex, body mass index, duration of symptoms, American Society of Anesthesiologists grade, duration of surgery and hospital stay. Intraoperative spillage of stones (9.8% [A]: 5.1% [B]) did not increase infectious complications even in the presence of positive bile culture (Group A, N = 7 vs. Group B, N = 3). An operative time of greater than 60 min was found to be associated with increased surgical site infection (P = 0. 0006).

Conclusion:

Single dose of ceftriaxone at the time of induction is adequate prophylaxis following elective LC even in the rural/semi-urban Indian setting and routine continued administration of antibiotic should be abandoned as it contributes to adverse reactions, drug resistance and unnecessary financial burden.

Effectiveness of Antibiotic Prophylaxis in Non-emergency Cholecystectomy Using Data from a Population-Based Cohort Study

BACKGROUND

There is a variation in the administration of antibiotics prophylaxis to reduce the perceived risk of SSI in patients undergoing non-emergency cholecystectomy. The aim of this study was to determine the effectiveness of antibiotic prophylaxis following non-emergency cholecystectomy to prevent 30-day superficial surgical site infections (SSIs) using non-selected, nationally collected, prospective data.

METHODS

Data were extracted from the CholeS study, which examined and independently validated the outcomes on consecutive patients following non-emergency cholecystectomy across 166 hospitals in the UK and Ireland. Patients who received antibiotic prophylaxis were exact matched to those who did not on variables associated with antibiotic prophylaxis. The primary outcome of interest was superficial SSI, and secondary outcomes included deep SSI, readmissions, complications and re-interventions within 30 days.

RESULTS

Out of a total of 7327 patients included in the study, 4468 (61%) received antibiotic prophylaxis. These were matched to patients who did not receive antibiotic prophylaxis on a range of demographic and surgical factors, leaving 1269 pairs of patients for analysis. Within this cohort, patients receiving antibiotic prophylaxis had significantly lower rates of superficial SSI (0.7% vs. 2.3%, p = 0.001) and all-cause complications (5.8 vs. 8.0%, p = 0.031), but similar rates of deep SSI (1.0 vs. 1.4%, p = 0.473), readmissions (5.2 vs. 6.2%, p = 0.302) and re-interventions (2.6 vs. 3.7%, p = 0.093). The number needed to treat to prevent one superficial SSI was 45 (95% confidence interval 24-662).

CONCLUSIONS

Antibiotics appear effective at reducing SSI after non-emergency cholecystectomy. However, due to the high number needed to treat it is unclear whether they provide a worthwhile clinical benefit to patients.

ANTIBIOTIC PROPHYLAXIS IN LAPAROSCOPIC CHOLECISTECTOMY: IS IT WORTH DOING?

Background:

Elective laparoscopic cholecystectomy has very low risk for infectious complications, ranging the infection rate from 0.4% to 1.1%. Many surgeons still use routine antibiotic prophylaxis

Aim:

Evaluate the real impact of antibiotic prophylaxis in elective laparoscopic cholecystectomies in low risk patients.

Method:

Prospective, randomized and double-blind study. Were evaluated 100 patients that underwent elective laparoscopic cholecystectomy divided in two groups: group A (n=50), patients that received prophylaxis using intravenous Cephazolin (2 g) during anesthetic induction and group B (n=50), patients that didn't receive any antibiotic prophylaxis. The outcome evaluated were infeccious complications at surgical site. The patients were reviewed seven and 30 days after surgery.

Results:

There was incidence of 2% in infection complications in group A and 2% in group B. There was no statistical significant difference of infectious complications (p=0,05) between the groups. The groups were homogeneous and comparable.

Conclusion:

The use of the antibiotic prophylaxis in laparoscopic cholecystectomy in low risk patients doesn't provide any significant benefit in the decrease of surgical wound infection.

Current practice of antibiotic prophylaxis during elective laparoscopic cholecystectomy

INTRODUCTION Current guidelines do not recommend antibiotic prophylaxis in elective laparoscopic cholecystectomy. Despite this, there is wide variation in antibiotic prophylaxis during cholecystectomy in population-based studies. The aim of this survey was to establish the current rationale for antibiotic prophylaxis in elective laparoscopic cholecystectomy. METHODS A short questionnaire was designed and disseminated across collaborators for a population-based study investigating outcomes following cholecystectomy and via the Association of Upper Gastrointestinal Surgeons, Researchgate and Surginet membership. RESULTS Responses were received from 234 people; 50.9% had no written policy for the use of prophylactic antibiotics in elective cholecystectomy; 5.6% never used antibiotics, while 30.8% always did and 63.7% selectively used antibiotics. Contamination with bile, stones and pus were scenarios in which antibiotics were most commonly used in selective practices to reduce infective complications. Interestingly, 87% of respondents would be happy to participate in a trial investigating the effectiveness of antibiotics in elective laparoscopic cholecystectomy where contamination has occurred. CONCLUSIONS The disparity between current practice and guidelines appears to arise because of a lack of evidence to show that antibiotics reduce surgical site infection following elective laparoscopic cholecystectomy where contamination has occurred. This question needs to addressed before practice will change.

Antibiotic prophylaxis in elective cholecystectomy: Protocol adequacy and related outcomes in a retrospective single-centre analysis

BACKGROUND

Antibiotic prophylaxis is an effective tool to reduce surgical infection rates. However, antibiotic prophylaxis in cholecystectomy is controversial when non-high risk patients are considered. This research aims to evaluate the adherence with antibiotic prophylaxis protocol in patients undergoing cholecystectomy, and its impact in the outcomes of surgical infection.

METHODS

This single-center observational and retrospective study analyzed all elective cholecystectomy procedures carried out at the Fundación Alcorcón University Hospital in the period 2007-2014. Data were recovered from hospital records; rates of adherence to the available hospital protocols were evaluated for choice, initiation, duration, administration route and dosages of antibiotics, and the starting and duration of the prophylaxis.

RESULTS

The overall adequacy rate to protocol was 72%. The adherence rates in both the administration route and dose were 100%. The most common violations of the protocol included the choice of antibiotic agent (19%), followed by the moment of initiating its administration (8.9%). The overall wound infection rate was lower in case of laparoscopy than in laparotomy cholecystectomy (1.4% vs. 4.3%, p < 0.05; odds rate [OR] 0.29, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.1-0.6). No relationship between adequacy of antibiotic prophylaxis and surgical infection rate was documented, neither considering overall gallbladder surgeries (crude OR 0.26, 95% CI 0.1-2.0), nor laparoscopy vs. open surgery (MH adjusted OR 0.24, 95% CI 0.2-2.1).

CONCLUSIONS

The overall adequacy rate to antibiotic prophylaxis protocol recommended for elective cholecystectomy in our hospital was high (72%). No significant association between the adequacy or antibiotic prophylaxis and surgical infection was found.

Randomized clinical trial of extended versus single-dose perioperative antibiotic prophylaxis for acute calculous cholecystitis

Background

Many patients who have surgery for acute cholecystitis receive postoperative antibiotic prophylaxis, with the intent to reduce infectious complications. There is, however, no evidence that extending antibiotics beyond a single perioperative dose is advantageous. This study aimed to determine the effect of extended antibiotic prophylaxis on infectious complications in patients with mild acute cholecystitis undergoing cholecystectomy.

Methods

For this randomized controlled non-inferiority trial, adult patients with mild acute calculous cholecystitis undergoing cholecystectomy at six major teaching hospitals in the Netherlands, between April 2012 and September 2014, were assessed for eligibility. Patients were randomized to either a single preoperative dose of cefazolin (2000 mg), or antibiotic prophylaxis for 3 days after surgery (intravenous cefuroxime 750 mg plus metronidazole 500 mg, three times daily), in addition to the single dose. The primary endpoint was rate of infectious complications within 30 days after operation.

Results

In the intention-to-treat analysis, three of 77 patients (4 per cent) in the extended antibiotic group and three of 73 (4 per cent) in the standard prophylaxis group developed postoperative infectious complications (absolute difference 0·2 (95 per cent c.i. –8·2 to 8·9) per cent). Based on a margin of 5 per cent, non-inferiority of standard prophylaxis compared with extended prophylaxis was not proven. Median length of hospital stay was 3 days in the extended antibiotic group and 1 day in the standard prophylaxis group.

Conclusion

Standard single-dose antibiotic prophylaxis did not lead to an increase in postoperative infectious complications in patients with mild acute cholecystitis undergoing cholecystectomy. Registration number: NTR3089 (www.trialregister.nl).

Meta-analysis of perioperative antibiotics in patients undergoing laparoscopic cholecystectomy

Background

The effectiveness of perioperative antibiotics in reducing surgical-site infection (SSI) and overall nosocomial infections in patients undergoing laparoscopic cholecystectomy for biliary colic and low- and moderate-risk cholecystitis (Tokyo classification) is unclear. A systematic review and meta-analysis was performed to assess this.

Methods

Searches were conducted of the MEDLINE, Embase and Cochrane databases. Only randomized clinical trials (RCTs) were included. The analysis was performed using the random-effects method, and the risk ratio (RR) with 95 per cent c.i. was employed.

Results

Nineteen RCTs, published between 1997 and 2015, with a total of 5259 participants, of whom 2709 (51·5 per cent) were treated with antibiotics, were included. SSI and overall nosocomial infections were detected in 2·4 and 4·2 per cent respectively of patients given perioperative antibiotics, and in 3·2 and 7·2 per cent of those who received no antibiotics. Antibiotics did not significantly reduce the risk of SSI (RR 0·81, 95 per cent c.i. 0·58 to 1·13; P = 0·21) or overall nosocomial infections (RR 0·64, 0·36 to 1·14; P = 0·13). There was no significant between-study heterogeneity for SSI, but significant between-study heterogeneity in the eight studies that reported nosocomial infections. Analysis of studies considered to be high quality, grouped according to the timing of antibiotics (preoperative only or perioperative) and reporting intention-to-treat analyses, again failed to show a significant reduction in SSI.

Conclusion

Antibiotics should not be administered before laparoscopic cholecystectomy in patients with biliary colic and/or low- and moderate-risk cholecystitis.