Single-dose prophylaxis in hysterectomies. An interim analysis

Single-Dose Prophylactic Antibiotic Versus Extended Usage for Four Days in Clean-Contaminated Oncological Surgeries: a Randomized Clinical Trial

The optimal duration of prophylactic antimicrobial usage in clean-contaminated elective oncological surgeries is not clear. This single-center randomized trial evaluated the effectiveness of single-dose antimicrobial prophylaxis in clean-contaminated surgeries for the reduction of surgical site infection (SSI). Between April 2018 and January 2019, 315 patients undergoing major oncological clean-contaminated surgeries where the gastrointestinal or genital tract was opened under controlled conditions were randomized into 2 groups i.e., single dose versus extended dose groups. The single dose group received a 1.5 g dose of cefuroxime immediately before surgery while the extended group received the same dose of cefuroxime thrice daily for 4 days from the day of surgery till postoperative day 3. In addition, patients undergoing esophageal and colorectal surgeries received metronidazole. The overall SSI rate of the single dose group was not significantly different from that of the extended group (11.3% vs. 14.7%, respectively, p 0.40), with absolute difference of 3.4% and relative risk of 0.85 (95% C.I, 0.59 to 1.22). The rate of remote site infection was also not different between the two groups (14.4% vs 10.2%, p 0.31) with absolute difference of 4.2% and relative risk 1.19 (95% C.I, 0.89 to 1.59). In univariate analysis, parameters like nodal dissection, colorectal surgery, smoking, and hospital stay were significantly associated with SSI. In multivariate analysis, age, smoking, nodal dissection, and hospital stay retained significance. Single-dose antimicrobial prophylaxis is as effective as extended usage for 4 days in the prevention of postoperative SSI in patients undergoing clean-contaminated major oncological surgeries. Trial was registered with the clinical trial registry of India (CTRI/2018/06/014344).

Antibiotic prophylaxis for elective hysterectomy

BACKGROUND

Elective hysterectomy is commonly performed for benign gynaecological conditions. Hysterectomy can be performed abdominally, laparoscopically, or vaginally, with or without laparoscopic assistance. Antibiotic prophylaxis consists of administration of antibiotics to reduce the rate of postoperative infection, which otherwise affects 40%-50% of women after vaginal hysterectomy, and more than 20% after abdominal hysterectomy. No Cochrane review has systematically assessed evidence on this topic.

OBJECTIVES

To determine the effectiveness and safety of antibiotic prophylaxis in women undergoing elective hysterectomy.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched electronic databases to November 2016 (including the Cochrane Gynaecology and Fertility Group Specialised Register, the Cochrane Central Register of Studies (CRSO), MEDLINE, Embase, PsycINFO, and the Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL), as well as clinical trials registers, conference abstracts, and reference lists of relevant articles.

SELECTION CRITERIA

All randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing use of antibiotics versus placebo or other antibiotics as prophylaxis in women undergoing elective hysterectomy.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We used Cochrane standard methodological procedures.

MAIN RESULTS

We included in this review 37 RCTs, which performed 20 comparisons of various antibiotics versus placebo and versus one another (6079 women). The quality of the evidence ranged from very low to moderate. The main limitations of study findings were risk of bias due to poor reporting of methods, imprecision due to small samples and low event rates, and inadequate reporting of adverse effects. Any antibiotic versus placebo Vaginal hysterectomyModerate-quality evidence shows that women who received antibiotic prophylaxis had fewer total postoperative infections (risk ratio (RR) 0.28, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.19 to 0.40; five RCTs, N = 610; I2 = 85%), less urinary tract infection (UTI) (RR 0.58, 95% CI 0.43 to 0.77; eight RCTs, N = 1790; I2 = 44%), fewer pelvic infections (RR 0.28, 95% CI 0.20 to 0.39; 11 RCTs, N = 2010; I2 = 57%), and fewer postoperative fevers (RR 0.43, 95% CI 0.34 to 0.54; nine RCTs, N = 1879; I2 = 48%) than women who did not receive such prophylaxis. This suggests that antibiotic prophylaxis reduces the average risk of postoperative infection from about 34% to 7% to 14%. Whether this treatment has led to differences in rates of other serious infection remains unclear (RR 0.20, 95% CI 0.01 to 4.10; one RCT, N = 146; very low-quality evidence).Data were insufficient for comparison of adverse effects. Abdominal hysterectomyWomen who received antibiotic prophylaxis of any class had fewer total postoperative infections (RR 0.16, 95% CI 0.06 to 0.38; one RCT, N = 345; low-quality evidence), abdominal wound infections (RR 0.64, 95% CI 0.45 to 0.92; 11 RCTs, N = 2434; I2 = 0%; moderate-quality evidence), UTIs (RR 0.39, 95% CI 0.29 to 0.51; 11 RCTs, N = 2547; I2 = 26%; moderate-quality evidence), pelvic infections (RR 0.50, 95% CI 0.35 to 0.71; 11 RCTs, N = 1883; I2 = 11%; moderate-quality evidence), and postoperative fevers (RR 0.60, 95% CI 0.51 to 0.70; 11 RCTs, N = 2581; I2 = 51%; moderate-quality evidence) than women who did not receive prophylaxis, suggesting that antibiotic prophylaxis reduces the average risk of postoperative infection from about 16% to 1% to 6%. Whether this treatment has led to differences in rates of other serious infection remains unclear (RR 0.44, 95% CI 0.12 to 1.69; two RCTs, N = 476; I2 = 29%; very low-quality evidence).It is unclear whether rates of adverse effects differed between groups (RR 1.80, 95% CI 0.62 to 5.18; two RCTs, N = 430; I2 = 0%; very low-quality evidence). Head-to-head comparisons between antibiotics Vaginal hysterectomyWe identified four comparisons: cephalosporin versus penicillin (two RCTs, N = 470), cephalosporin versus tetracycline (one RCT, N = 51), antiprotozoal versus lincosamide (one RCT, N = 80), and cephalosporin versus antiprotozoal (one RCT, N = 78). Data show no evidence of differences between groups for any of the primary outcomes, except that fewer cases of total postoperative infection and postoperative fever were reported in women who received cephalosporin than in those who received antiprotozoal.Only one comparison (cephalosporin vs penicillin; two RCTs, N = 451) yielded data on adverse effects and showed no differences between groups. Abdominal hysterectomyWe identified only one comparison: cephalosporin versus penicillin (N = 220). Data show no evidence of differences between groups for any of the primary outcomes. Adverse effects were not reported. Combined antibiotics versus single antibiotics Vaginal hysterectomyWe identified three comparisons: cephalosporin plus antiprotozoal versus cephalosporin (one RCT, N = 78), cephalosporin plus antiprotozoal versus antiprotozoal (one RCT, N = 78), and penicillin plus antiprotozoal versus penicillin (one RCT, N = 230). Data were unavailable for most outcomes, including adverse effects. We found no evidence of differences between groups, except that fewer women receiving cephalosporin with antiprotozoal received a diagnosis of total postoperative infection, UTI, or postoperative fever compared with women receiving antiprotozoal. Abdominal hysterectomyWe identified one comparison (penicillin plus antiprotozoal vs penicillin only; one RCT, N = 230). Whether differences between groups occurred was unclear. Adverse effects were not reported. Comparison of cephalosporins in different regimensSingle small trials addressed dose comparisons and provided no data for most outcomes, including adverse effects. Whether differences between groups occurred was unclear. No trials compared route of administration.The quality of evidence for all head-to-head and dose comparisons was very low owing to very serious imprecision and serious risk of bias related to poor reporting of methods.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Antibiotic prophylaxis appears to be effective in preventing postoperative infection in women undergoing elective vaginal or abdominal hysterectomy, regardless of the dose regimen. However, evidence is insufficient to show whether use of prophylactic antibiotics influences rates of adverse effects. Similarly, evidence is insufficient to show which (if any) individual antibiotic, dose regimen, or route of administration is safest and most effective. The most recent studies included in this review were 14 years old at the time of our search. Thus findings from included studies may not reflect current practice in perioperative and postoperative care and may not show locoregional antimicrobial resistance patterns.

Do prophylactic antibiotics in gynecologic surgery prevent postoperative inflammatory complications? A systematic review

PURPOSE

The aim of this study was to systematically review the literature on antibiotic prophylaxis in gynaecologic surgeries to prevent inflammatory complications after gynaecological operations. The study was carried out as a systematic review.

METHODS

Only randomised controlled trials of women undergoing gynaecological surgery were included. The Medline and the Cochrane library databases were searched from 1966 to 2016. The trials must have investigated an antibiotic intervention to prevent an inflammatory complication after gynaecological surgery. Trials were excluded if they were not randomised, uncontrolled or included obstetrical surgery.

RESULTS

Prophylactic antibiotics prevent inflammatory complications after gynaecological surgery. Prophylactic antibiotics are more effective in surgery requiring access to the peritoneal cavity or the vagina. Cefotetan appears to be more capable in preventing the overall inflammatory complication rate than cefoxitin or cefazolin. No benefit has been shown for the combination of antibiotics as prophylaxis. No difference has been shown between the long-term and short-term use of antibiotics. There is no need for the primary use of an anaerobic antibacterial agent.

CONCLUSION

Antibiotics help to prevent postoperative inflammatory complications after major gynecologic surgeries.

Antimicrobial prophylaxis in hysterectomies: a double-blind, randomized, comparative study of a single dose of piperacillin (2 g) versus a single dose of amoxicillin-clavulanic acid (2.2 g)

A double-blind, randomized comparative study of piperacillin (2 g) versus amoxicillin-clavulanic acid (2.2 g) as a single dose 30 minutes before the initiation of hysterectomy was performed. A total of 595 patients (of which 307 were in the piperacillin group) were evaluable for efficacy. Infectious complications were infrequent in both arms. One case of (mild) sepsis was observed in the piperacillin group and two cases of wound infection were observed in the amoxicillin-clavulanic acid group. Urinary tract infection was observed in 5.5% of the patients in the piperacillin group and in 2.4% of the amoxicillin-clavulanic acid group. A relatively high incidence of asymptomatic bacteriuria was seen in both groups: 11.8% in the piperacillin group and 8.7% with amoxicillin-clavulanic acid. A marked difference was seen between the two different hospital locations: a 15% incidence in the hospital where midstream urine was used for culture (Sittard), versus 5% in the hospital where catheter urine was used (Geleen). It is concluded that both antibiotics are associated with a low rate of infectious complications and that catheter urine must be used for sample collection.

Antibiotic prophylaxis in abdominal hysterectomy, with special reference to the duration of the prophylaxis

Two consecutive open studies were performed of the efficacy of a prophylactic cefuroxime/metronidazole combination in abdominal hysterectomy. The first group received a 24-h regimen, the second group a single pre-operative dose. The incidence of post-operative wound infections and urinary tract infections were similar in both groups [wound infections in 1/75 versus 2/84 patients (NS), urinary tract infections 4/75 versus 3/84 patients (NS), respectively, in the 24-h group and single-dose group]. No significant differences in other parameters, such as pyrexia and duration of post-operative hospitalization, could be detected.

Prophylactic antibiotics and the hospital budget: controversy for patients and hospital financial strategies?

Although total drug costs account for only 2 to 3% of the total hospital budget, the management of these costs is of much interest. Total costs can be subdivided into numerous items; each can be influenced to some extent. Such costs are analysed in this article. The Dutch system of hospital budgeting is also described. The way in which (prophylactic) antibiotics can influence budget parameters is described and quantified by an example in gynaecological surgery. It is concluded that the profits of modern pharmacotherapy in the hospitals are earned outside the hospital. Society should realize that these profits must be re-invested to assure a healthy health-care system in the near future.