Randomized controlled trial of the effectiveness of chlorhexidine showers before elective plastic surgical procedures

Bathing with 2% chlorhexidine gluconate versus routine care for preventing surgical site infections after pancreatic surgery: a single-centre randomized controlled trial

OBJECTIVES

The study aims to investigate whether bathing with 2% chlorhexidine gluconate (CHG) reduces the incidence of surgical site infection (SSI) in patients undergoing routine pancreatic surgery.

METHODS

A randomized controlled trial was conducted at a large-volume pancreatic centre between 1 January 2021 and 31 December 2022. Patients undergoing clean-contaminated pancreatic surgery were enrolled and randomized into an intervention arm (bathing with a 2% CHG wipe) and a control arm (routine care, soap, and water). The primary outcome was the incidence of SSI after pancreatic surgery within 30 days.

RESULTS

Overall, 614 patients (intervention arm, 311; control arm, 303) were included in intention-to-treat analysis. In total, 8.8% (54/614) patients developed SSI. The incidence of SSI in the intervention arm was 6.8% (21/311) and 10.9% (33/303) in control arm, and the difference did not reach the level of statistical significance (p 0.070). The time to SSI was significantly extended when patients were in the intervention arm (log-rank test, p 0.047). The intervention did not significantly reduce the incidence of healthcare-associated infection, hospital-acquired pneumonia, and bloodstream infection. No adverse events were observed. However, in the per-protocol analysis among 519 patients, the intervention arm showed a significantly lower incidence of overall SSI than that of those in the control arm (21/272, 7.7% vs. 33/242, 13.4%, p 0.036).

DISCUSSION

Bathing with 2% CHG could potentially reduce the incidence of SSI for the patients scheduled to undergo pancreatic surgery for which further well-designed clinical trials are warranted.

The Effect of Preoperative Chlorhexidine Gluconate Cleanse on Lower Extremity Surgical Site Infections: A Retrospective Cohort Study

BACKGROUND

Lower extremity surgical sites are at an increased risk of wound infection following Mohs micrographic surgery.

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the rate of lower extremity surgical site infections following a 14-day regimen of preoperative 4% chlorhexidine gluconate (CHG) rinses and postoperative wound occlusion for 14 days.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Retrospective data were collected from procedures performed by the senior author from January 2022 through June 2023. To meet inclusion, patients must have completed waist-down CHG soak and rinse for 14 days before surgery, including the day before surgery. In addition, the patient must have kept the dressing clean, dry, and intact until the postoperative appointment at 14 days.

RESULTS

A total of 100 Mohs cases met inclusion criteria. Zero patients developed a surgical site infection.

CONCLUSION

Chlorhexidine gluconate preoperative rinsing and postoperative occlusion for 14 days may minimize the risk of wound infection. Although further research is indicated, an opportunity exists for the adoption of CHG into routine clinical practice in the outpatient dermatology setting.

Incidence and risk factors for surgical site infection (SSI) after primary hip hemiarthroplasty: an analysis of the ACS-NSQIP hip fracture procedure targeted database

INTRODUCTION

Primary hip hemiarthroplasty (HHA) is frequently utilized to treat geriatric hip fractures, which are associated with significantly higher morbidity and mortality. While not particularly common, surgical site infection (SSI) is a major complication that frequently requires revision surgery in a frail population. The objective of this study was to determine the incidence of and risk factors for SSI after HHA in hip fracture patients.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

This retrospective cohort study was performed using the American College of Surgeons (ACS) National Surgical Quality Improvement Program (NSQIP) database. Geriatric patients (65+) who underwent HHA for non-pathologic, traumatic hip fractures between 2016-2017 were included. Demographic variables, comorbidities, operative variables, and complications were compared between "SSI" and "non-SSI" groups. Multivariate regression identified independent risk factors for postoperative SSI. Significance was set at P = 0.05.

RESULTS

A total of 6169 patients were included. The overall incidence of SSI was 1.3%. SSI was significantly associated with body mass index (BMI), preoperative functional status, congestive heart failure, chronic corticosteroid use, intraoperative time, sepsis, wound dehiscence, readmission within 30-days, and reoperation. On multivariate analysis, chronic steroid use (OR: 2.30, 95% CI: 1.13-4.70), BMI ≥ 35 kg/m² (OR: 3.59, 95% CI: 1.57-8.18), and intraoperative time ≥120 mins (OR: 2.15, 95% CI: 1.08-4.27) were found to be independent risk factors.

CONCLUSIONS

Postoperative SSI is a serious complication that is responsible for prolonged hospital stays, increased mortality, and greater healthcare costs. Here, we identified multiple risk factors for SSI after primary HHA in the US elderly population.

The Utility of Chlorhexidine Cloth Use for the Prevention of Surgical Site Infections in Total Hip Arthroplasty and Surgical as well as Basic Science Applications: A Meta-Analysis and Systematic Review

Skin antisepsis, such as ready-to-use, no-rinse, 2% chlorhexidine-impregnated cloths, is one of the fundamental cornerstones for reducing periprosthetic infections after primary lower extremity total joint arthroplasties. This systematic review presents background material concerning the problem and methods to deal with and then describes the use of chlorhexidine cloth prophylaxis related to various surgical applications. The authors found an almost universal benefit of the cloths. In the meta-analysis, the total pooled effect showed a reduction in infection rates. The use of chlorhexidine cloths is appropriate for prophylaxis for knee arthroplasty, hip arthroplasty, and a variety of other surgeries.

Evaluation of Chlorhexidine Concentration on the Skin After Preoperative Surgical Site Preparation in Breast Surgery-A Randomized Controlled Trial

BACKGROUND

Although there is a rationale supporting that preoperative showering with 2% or 4% chlorhexidine gluconate (CHG) would decrease skin bacterial colonization, there is no consensus that this practice reduces the risk of surgical site infection (SSI).

OBJECTIVES

Analyze the skin concentration of CHG after preoperative showering associated with the traditional skin preparation with CHG 4% for breast surgery.

METHODS

Randomized controlled trial that included 45 patients, all candidates for augmentation mammaplasty, allocated into three groups (A: no preoperative showering; B: one preoperative showering; C: two preoperative showering with CHG 4%) in a 1:1:1 ratio. Skin swabs collection was performed right before the surgical incision. The samples were, then, sent to spectrophotometry in order to determine the skin concentration of CHG at the beginning of surgery.

RESULTS

The age ranged from 18 to 61 years, with a mean of 37 years old. Group C had the lowest median concentration (0.057) followed by group B (0.060) and group A (0.072), however, with no statistical significance. The areola was the place with the lowest median concentration level (0.045), followed by the axilla (0.061) and the inframammary fold (IMF) (0.069). Still, when comparing the distribution of the sites, a statistically significant difference was found only between the axilla and the areola (p = 0.022).

CONCLUSION

Preoperative showering with CHG 4% did not increase the concentration of this agent on the skin surface right before the surgical incision.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE IV

This journal requires that authors assign a level of evidence to each article. For a full description of these Evidence-Based Medicine ratings, please refer to the Table of Contents or the online Instructions to Authors www.springer.com/00266 .

30-day postoperative sepsis risk factors following laminectomy for intradural extramedullary tumors

BACKGROUND

Posterior laminectomy (LA) for resection of intradural extramedullary tumors (IDEMTs) is associated with postoperative complications, including sepsis. Sepsis is an uncommon but serious complication that can lead to increased morbidity and mortality, prolonged hospital stays, and greater costs. Given the susceptibility of a solid tumor patients to sepsis-related complications, it is important to recognize IDEMT patients as a unique population when assessing the risk factors for sepsis after laminectomy.

METHODS

The study design was a retrospective cohort study. Adult patients undergoing LA for IDEMTs from 2012 to 2018 were identified in the American College of Surgeons (ACS) National Surgical Quality Improvement Program (NSQIP) database. Baseline patient characteristics/comorbidities, operative and hospital variables, and 30-day postoperative complications were collected.

RESULTS

Of 2,027 total patients undergoing LA for IDEMTs, 38 (2%) had postoperative sepsis. On bivariate analysis sepsis was associated with superficial surgical site infection [odds ratio (OR) 11.62, P<0.001], deep surgical site infection (OR 10.67, P<0.001), deep vein thrombosis (OR 10.75, P<0.001), pulmonary embolism (OR 15.27, P<0.001), transfusion (OR 6.18, P<0.001), length of stay greater than five days (OR 5.41, P<0.001), and return to the operating room within thirty days (OR 8.72, P<0.001). Subsequent multivariate analysis identified the following independent risk factors for sepsis and septic shock: operative time ≥50th percentile (OR 2.11, P=0.032), higher anesthesia class (OR 1.76, P=0.046), dependent functional status (OR 2.23, P=0.001), diabetes (OR 2.31, P=0.037), and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (OR 3.56, P=0.037).

CONCLUSIONS

These findings can help spine surgeons identify high-risk patients and proactively deploy measures to avoid this potentially devastating complication in individuals who may be more vulnerable than the general elective spine population.

Preventing Infection in Implant-based Breast Reconstruction: Evaluating the Evidence for Common Practices and Standardized Protocols

Infection following implant-based breast reconstruction (IBBR) results in increased rates of hospital readmission, reoperation, patient and hospital expenses, and reconstructive failure. IBBR is a complex, multistep procedure, and there is a relative lack of high-quality plastic surgery evidence regarding "best practices" in the prevention of implant infections. In the absence of strong data, standardizing procedures based on available evidence can reduce error and improve efficacy and outcomes.

Methods

We performed a focused literature review of the available evidence supporting specific interventions for infection prevention in the preoperative, intraoperative, and postoperative phases of care that are applicable to IBBR. In addition, we examined previously published standardized perioperative protocols for implant reconstruction.

Results

Preoperative, intraoperative, and postoperative planning and organization is crucial in IBBR. Preoperative planning involves skin decolonization in advance of surgery with either chlorhexidine gluconate or mupirocin. Intraoperative methods that have shown potential benefit include double-gloving, breast pocket irrigation, separate closing instruments, and the utilization of "no-touch" techniques. In the postoperative period, the duration of drain removal and postoperative antibiotic administration play an important role in the prevention of surgical site infection.

Conclusions

There is a crucial need to establish an evidence-based set of "best practices" for IBBR, and there exists a paucity of evidence in the breast literature. These data can be utilized to develop a standardized protocol as part of a rigorous quality improvement methodology.

Decreasing Surgical Site Infections in Plastic Surgery: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of Level 1 Evidence

BACKGROUND

Although many interventions are implemented to prevent surgical site infections (SSIs) in plastic surgery, their supporting evidence is inconsistent.

OBJECTIVES

The goal of this study was to assess the efficacy of methods for decreasing SSIs in plastic surgery.

METHODS

A systematic review and meta-analysis were performed to compare the effects of SSI prevention methods. All the studies were assessed for quality of evidence according to the GRADE assessment.

RESULTS

Fifty Level 1 randomized controlled trials were included. The most common interventions for preventing SSIs were antibiotic prophylaxis, showering, prepping, draping, and the use of dressings. Current evidence suggests that antibiotic prophylaxis is largely unnecessary and overused in many plastic surgical procedures, with the exception of head and neck oncologic, oral craniofacial, and traumatic hand surgeries.

CONCLUSIONS

Efficacy of antibiotic prophylaxis in plastic surgery is dependent on surgery type. There is a lack evidence that showering and prepping with chlorohexidine and povidone reduces SSIs.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: 1

The Japan Society for Surgical Infection: guidelines for the prevention, detection, and management of gastroenterological surgical site infection, 2018

BACKGROUND

The guidelines for the prevention, detection, and management of gastroenterological surgical site infections (SSIs) were published in Japanese by the Japan Society for Surgical Infection in 2018. This is a summary of these guidelines for medical professionals worldwide.

METHODS

We conducted a systematic review and comprehensive evaluation of the evidence for diagnosis and treatment of gastroenterological SSIs, based on the concepts of the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) system. The strength of recommendations was graded and voted using the Delphi method and the nominal group technique. Modifications were made to the guidelines in response to feedback from the general public and relevant medical societies.

RESULTS

There were 44 questions prepared in seven subject areas, for which 51 recommendations were made. The seven subject areas were: definition and etiology, diagnosis, preoperative management, prophylactic antibiotics, intraoperative management, perioperative management, and wound management. According to the GRADE system, we evaluated the body of evidence for each clinical question. Based on the results of the meta-analysis, recommendations were graded using the Delphi method to generate useful information. The final version of the recommendations was published in 2018, in Japanese.

CONCLUSIONS

The Japanese Guidelines for the prevention, detection, and management of gastroenterological SSI were published in 2018 to provide useful information for clinicians and improve the clinical outcome of patients.

Antibiotic prophylaxis in breast cancer surgery. A randomized controlled trial

Purpose

To assess the effect of antibiotic prophylaxis on surgical site infection (SSI) rates in women undergoing breast cancer surgery in two tertiary hospitals in Brazil.

Methods

This was a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, parallel-group clinical trial. A total of 124 women without independent risk factors for SSI were randomly assigned to receive either cefazolin (antibiotic group, n = 62) or placebo (control group, n = 62) as preoperative prophylaxis. After surgery, all surgical wounds were examined once a week, for four weeks, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention definitions and classifications for SSI.

Results

Baseline characteristics were homogeneous between the two groups. Only one patient in the antibiotic group developed SSI, which was classified as superficial incisional. The overall SSI rate was low, with no significant difference between groups.

Conclusion

Antibiotic prophylaxis had no significant effect on reducing SSI rates in women without independent risk factors for SSI undergoing breast cancer surgery.

Single dose versus 24 h antibiotic prophylaxis in reduction mammaplasty: study protocol for a randomized controlled trial

Background

Reduction mammaplasty is among the most commonly performed procedures in plastic surgery. Antibiotics are widely prescribed, on an empirical basis, to prevent surgical site infections. However, there is a lack of evidence to support its use. This trial aims to compare the influence of the use of prophylatic antibiotics as a single dose or for 24 h on surgical site infection rates following reduction mammaplasty.

Methods

Randomized trial of non-inferiority, with two parallel groups. A total of 146 breast hypertrophy patients, with reduction mammaplasty already scheduled, will be enrolled. Patients will be randomly allocated to the placebo group that will receive antibiotics only at the anesthesia induction (n = 73) or to the antibiotics group that will receive antibiotics at the anesthesia induction and for 24 h (n = 73). None of the patients will receive antibiotics after hospital discharge. Patients will be followed-up weekly, for 30 days, regarding surgical site infection. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention criteria will be applied. A statistical analysis of the data will be performed.

Discussion

Previous studies have demonstrated a decrease in infection rates after reduction mammaplasty when antibiotic prophylaxis was used, compared to the use of no antibiotics. However, the duration of antibiotic prophylaxis remains a point to be clarified. This study will test the hypothesis that maintaining the use of antibiotics for 24 h does not reduce infection rates compared to the use of a single preoperative dose.

Trial registration

Clinicaltrials.gov NCT04079686. Registered on September 6, 2019.

Pre-operative skin antisepsis with chlorhexidine gluconate baths and wipes does not prevent postoperative surgical site infection in outpatient pediatric urologic inguinal and scrotal surgery

INTRODUCTION

To reduce surgical site infections (SSI), many institutions utilize pre-operative antisepsis with chlorhexidine gluconate (CHG) baths and/or wipes. CHG reduces bacterial colonization of the skin, but it is unclear whether this reduces SSI, and current guidelines from the American College of Surgeons, the Centers for Disease Control, and the World Health Organization do not support this practice. There are several factors that increase the risk of SSI in adults, but there is limited understanding of these factors in pediatric patients.

OBJECTIVES

The primary objectives were to describe the proportion of pediatric patients undergoing hernia/hydrocele repair and/or orchiopexy who develop a postoperative (postop) SSI and to determine whether pre-operative CHG baths/wipes were associated with SSI. The secondary objectives were to identify other factors associated with SSI and to estimate the cost of CHG baths/wipes in this population.

STUDY DESIGN

Pre-operative antisepsis with CHG baths/wipes was implemented at the authors institution in 2006. The authors performed a retrospective cohort study of patients aged 0-18 years undergoing hernia/hydrocele repair and/or orchiopexy by a pediatric urologist at their institution before (2004) and after (2008) the introduction of CHG. The authors compared the proportion of patients with SSI in the no CHG and CHG groups and evaluated for factors associated with SSI. Statistical analysis included Wilcoxon rank-sum test, Chi-squared test, and Fisher's exact test. The cost of CHG baths and wipes was estimated using institutional fees in 2018 US dollars.

RESULTS

A total of 543 patients met inclusion criteria, 203 in the no CHG group and 340 in the CHG group. The overall rate of SSI was 0.92%. There was no association between use of CHG and SSI. No patient or peri-operative factors were associated with development of SSI. There were no CHG-associated adverse events. The cost of materials was estimated at $3.29/patient ($1118.60 for 340 cases in 2008) in 2018 US dollars.

DISCUSSION

SSI is not common in pediatric patients undergoing hernia/hydrocele repair or orchiopexy. In the present study, pre-operative antisepsis with CHG baths/wipes is not associated with a reduction in SSI and carries additional cost.

CONCLUSIONS

To the authors knowledge, this is the first study to evaluate the use of pre-operative antisepsis with CHG baths/wipes in an exclusively pediatric population. In the study, CHG baths/wipes add cost with no clear benefit for reducing SSI in pediatric patients undergoing hernia/hydrocele repair and/or orchiopexy.

Analysis of a ten step protocol to decrease postoperative spinal wound infections

AIM

To define a ten-step protocol that reduced the incidence of surgical site infection in the spine surgery practice of the senior author and evaluate the support for each step based on current literature.

METHODS

In response to unexplained increased infection rates at our institution following spine surgery, a ten-step protocol was implemented: (1) preoperative glycemic management based on hemoglobin A1c (HbA1c); (2) skin site preoperative preparation with 2% chlorhexidine gluconate disposable cloths; (3) limit operating room traffic; (4) cut the number of personnel in the room to the minimum required; (5) absolutely no flash sterilization of equipment; (6) double-gloving with frequent changing of outer gloves; (7) local application of vancomycin powder; (8) re-dosing antibiotic every 4 h for prolonged procedures and extending postoperative coverage to 72 h for high-risk patients; (9) irrigation of subcutaneous tissue with diluted povidone-iodine solution after deep fascial closure; and (10) use of DuraPrep skin preparation at the end of a case before skin closure. Through an extensive literature review, the current data available for each of the ten steps was evaluated.

RESULTS

Use of vancomycin powder in surgical wounds, routine irrigation of surgical site, and frequent changing of surgical gloves are strongly supported by the literature. Preoperative skin preparation with chlorhexidine wipes is similarly supported. The majority of current literature supports control of HbA1c preoperatively to reduce risk of infection. Limiting the use of flash sterilization is supported, but has not been evaluated in spine-specific surgery. Limiting OR traffic and number of personnel in the OR are supported although without level 1 evidence. Prolonged use of antibiotics postoperatively is not supported by the literature. Intraoperative use of DuraPrep prior to skin closure is not yet explored.

CONCLUSION

The ten-step protocol defined herein has significantly helped in decreasing surgical site infection rate. Several of the steps have already been shown in the literature to have significant effect on infection rates. As several measures are required to prevent infection, instituting a standard protocol for all the described steps appears beneficial.

Update to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and the Healthcare Infection Control Practices Advisory Committee Guideline for the Prevention of Surgical Site Infection (2017): A summary, review, and strategies for implementation

Surgical site infections remain a common cause of morbidity, mortality, and increased length of stay and cost amongst hospitalized patients in the United States. This article summarizes the evidence used to inform the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and the Healthcare Infection Control Practices Advisory Committee Guideline for the Prevention of Surgical Site Infection (2017), and highlights key updates and new recommendations. We also present specific suggestions for how infection preventionists can play a central role in guideline implementation by translating these recommendations into evidence-based policies and practices in their facility.

No Clear Benefit of Chlorhexidine Use at Home Before Surgical Preparation

INTRODUCTION

Several studies have evaluated the efficacy of home use of chlorhexidine before surgery to reduce bacterial colonization. However, these studies have provided conflicting evidence about the potential efficacy of this strategy in decreasing bacterial loads and infection rates across surgical populations, and no prior study has analyzed the benefit of this intervention before spine surgery. We prospectively analyzed the effectiveness of chlorhexidine gluconate wipes for decreasing bacterial counts on the posterior neck.

METHODS

Sixteen healthy adults participated in this prospective study. The right side of each participant's neck was wiped twice (the night before and the morning of the experiment) with chlorhexidine gluconate wipes. The left side was used as the control region. Bacterial swabs were obtained as a baseline upon enrollment in the study, then upon arrival at the hospital, and, finally, after both sides of the neck had received standard preoperative scrubbing.

RESULTS

All patients had positive baseline bacterial growth (median >1,000 colonies/mL). When chlorhexidine gluconate wipes were used, decreased bacterial counts were noted before the preoperative scrub, but this finding was not statistically significant (P = 0.059). All patients had zero bacteria identified on either side of their neck after completion of the preoperative scrub.

CONCLUSION

At-home use of chlorhexidine gluconate wipes did not decrease the topical bacterial burden. Therefore, using chlorhexidine gluconate wipes at home before surgery may offer no added benefit.

What Is the Real Rate of Surgical Site Infection?

PURPOSE

Surgical site infections (SSIs) are associated with patient morbidity and increased health care costs. Although several national organizations including the University HealthSystem Consortium (UHC), the National Surgical Quality Improvement Program (NSQIP), and the National Healthcare Safety Network (NHSN) monitor SSI, there is no standard reporting methodology.

METHODS

We queried the UHC, NSQIP, and NHSN databases from July 2012 to June 2014 for SSI after gynecologic surgery at our institution. Each organization uses different definitions and inclusion and exclusion criteria for SSI. The rate of SSI was also obtained from chart review from April 1 to June 30, 2014. SSI was classified as superficial, deep, or organ space infection. The rates reported by the agencies were compared with the rates obtained by chart review using Fisher's exact test.

RESULTS

Overall SSI rates for the databases were as follows: UHC, 1.5%; NSQIP, 8.8%; and NHSN, 2.8% (P < .001). The individual databases had wide variation in the rate of deep infection (UHC, 0.7%; NSQIP, 4.7%; NHSN, 1.3%; P < .001) and organ space infection (UHC, 0.4%; NSQIP, 4.4%; NHSN, 1.4%; P < .001). In agreement with the variation in reporting methodology, only 19 cases (24.4%) were included in more than one database and only one case was included in all three databases (1.3%).

CONCLUSION

There is discordance among national reporting agencies tracking SSI. Adopting standardized metrics across agencies could improve consistency and accuracy in assessing SSI rates.

Patient engagement with surgical site infection prevention: an expert panel perspective

Despite remarkable developments in the use of surgical techniques, ergonomic advancements in the operating room, and implementation of bundles, surgical site infections (SSIs) remain a substantial burden, associated with increased morbidity, mortality and healthcare costs. National and international recommendations to prevent SSIs have been published, including recent guidelines by the World Health Organization, but implementation into clinical practice remains an unresolved issue. SSI improvement programs require an integrative approach with measures taken during the pre-, intra- and postoperative care from the numerous stakeholders involved. The current SSI prevention strategies have focused mainly on the role of healthcare workers (HCWs) and procedure related risk factors. The importance and influence of patient participation is becoming an increasingly important concept and advocated as a means to improve patient safety. Novel interventions supporting an active participative role within SSI prevention programs have not been assessed. Empowering patients with information they require to engage in the process of SSI prevention could play a major role for the implementation of recommendations. Based on available scientific evidence, a panel of experts evaluated options for patient involvement in order to provide pragmatic recommendations for pre-, intra- and postoperative activities for the prevention of SSIs. Recommendations were based on existing guidelines and expert opinion. As a result, 9 recommendations for the surgical patient are presented here, including a practice brief in the form of a patient information leaflet. HCWs can use this information to educate patients and allow patient engagement.

Methicillin-Resistant Staphylococcus aureus Infections: A Comprehensive Review and a Plastic Surgeon's Approach to the Occult Sites

BACKGROUND

Up to 20 percent of the general population is persistently colonized with Staphylococcus aureus, and 1 to 3 percent of the population is colonized with community-acquired methicillin-resistant S. aureus. Currently, the knowledge of methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus carriage sites other than the nose, and their effect on surgical site infections in cosmetic surgery, is lacking.

METHODS

A comprehensive literature review using the PubMed database to analyze prevalence, anatomical carrier sites, current screening and decontamination protocols and guidelines, and methicillin-resistant S. aureus in cosmetic surgery was performed. The senior author's (L.R.) methicillin-resistant S. aureus infection experience and prevention protocols were also reviewed.

RESULTS

Nasal swabs detect only 50.5 percent of methicillin-resistant S. aureus colonization, and broad screening has noted the presence of methicillin-resistant S. aureus in the ear canal and umbilicus. Decolonization protocols within the orthopedic and cardiothoracic surgery literature have reduced rates of methicillin-resistant S. aureus surgical-site infections. There are no decolonization guidelines for plastic surgeons. Since instituting their decolonization protocol, the authors have had no cases of methicillin-resistant S. aureus infection in nearly 1000 cosmetic surgery procedures.

CONCLUSIONS

There are very limited, if any, Level I or II data regarding methicillin-resistant S. aureus screening and decolonization. As the sequelae of a surgical-site infection can be disastrous, expert opinions recommend that plastic surgeons vigorously address methicillin-resistant S. aureus colonization and infection. The authors have developed and recommend a simple decolonization protocol that includes treatment of the umbilicus, ear canal, and nares to limit surgical-site infection and improve surgical outcomes.

Preoperative bathing of the surgical site with chlorhexidine for infection prevention: Systematic review with meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Preoperative bathing with 4% chlorhexidine is recommended as a measure to prevent surgical site infection (SSI) despite uncertainty regarding the effectiveness of the intervention. This review aimed to assess the effect of bathing with 4% chlorhexidine on the prevention of SSIs in clean surgeries compared with bathing with placebo solution or soap.

METHODS

Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines for systematic reviews and the Cochrane manual were followed. Sources were MEDLINE and Latin American and Caribbean Health Sciences Literature databases and manual search of references from evaluated studies. We included randomized studies evaluating clean surgical wounds and reporting SSIs after preoperative bathing with 4% chlorhexidine.

RESULTS

A total of 243 primary studies were identified and 8 were considered methodologically appropriate based on the Jadad Scale. Data were gathered from 10,655 patients. The global SSI rate was 7.2%. The SSI rate for chlorhexidine bathing, placebo, and soap without antiseptic groups was 7.1%, 9.1%, and 5.1%, respectively. A significant reduction in the infection rates was not found in the comparison between patients subjected to preoperative bathing with 4% chlorhexidine versus placebo solution (relative risk, 0.91; 95% confidence interval, 0.76-1.09). The same absence of benefit was observed comparing chlorhexidine bathing with soap (relative risk, 1.06; 95% confidence interval, 0.68-1.66).

CONCLUSIONS

Controlled clinical trials are needed to assess the effect of preoperative chlorhexidine bathing on infection rates following clean surgery before the incorporation of this intervention in health care services.

Preoperative chlorhexidine reduces the incidence of surgical site infections in total knee and hip arthroplasty: A systematic review and meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE

This meta-analysis aims to assess the incidences of surgical site infection of patients who applied preadmission chlorhexidine skin preparation, versus those who applied the traditional skin preparation before undergoing total knee and hip arthroplasty.

METHODS

A systematic search is carried out through Medline (1966-2016.11), PubMed (1966-2016.11), Embase (1980-2016.11), ScienceDirect (1985-2016.11) and the Cochrane Library. Only high quality studies are identified. Meta-analysis is conducted with the use of Stata 11.0 software.

RESULTS

One RCT and five retrospective studies, published between 2010 and 2016, are included in the present meta-analysis. The present meta-analysis indicates that there are significant differences in surgical site infection rate (RD = -0.02, 95% CI: -0.02 to -0.01, P < 0.00001), revision surgery rate (RD = -0.01, 95% CI: -0.01 to -0.01, P < 0.00001) and length of stay (MD = -0.29, 95% CI: -0.48 to -0.11, P = 0.002) between groups.

CONCLUSION

Preoperative chlorhexidine skin preparation appears to reduce the risk of infection, the incidence of revision surgery, and the length of stay for patients undergoing total knee and hip arthroplasty. No adverse effects, such as DVT or PE, appear to be related to chlorhexidine preparation. Due to the limited quality of the evidence currently available, high quality RCTs with better study designs, larger sample sizes and longer follow-ups are needed.

The DISINFECT Initiative: Decreasing the Incidence of Surgical INFECTions in Gynecologic Oncology

BACKGROUND

Surgical site infections (SSIs) lead to increased patient morbidity and healthcare costs. Our objective was to decrease the SSI rate following gynecologic surgery.

METHODS

Adult patients undergoing abdominal surgery for gynecologic malignancy or benign disease received the following: patient education; preoperative antibacterial soap; appropriate antibiotic prophylaxis; change of gloves and use of clean instruments at surgical closure; surgical dressing for 48 h; and a post-discharge phone call. The baseline SSI rate was determined retrospectively (1 April 2014-30 June 2014), while the post-intervention SSI rate was determined prospectively (16 February 2015-15 October 2015). The main outcome was the overall SSI rate with secondary outcomes, including the rate of superficial, deep, incisional and organ space infection, as well as the cost effectiveness of the bundle.

RESULTS

A total of 232 baseline and 555 post-intervention patients were included in the study. No differences were observed between the baseline and post-intervention groups with regard to median body mass index (BMI), surgical approach, receipt of preoperative chemotherapy and/or radiation therapy, and cases including bowel surgery. Overall, the SSI rate decreased significantly from baseline [12.5 %] to post-intervention [7.4 %] (odds ratio [OR] 0.56, 90 % confidence interval [CI] 0.37-0.85; p = 0.01). A 40 % decrease was noted in the rate of superficial and deep infections (9.5 vs. 5.9 %; OR 0.60, 90 % CI 0.38-0.97; p = 0.04) and SSIs after open surgery (21.4 vs. 13.2 %; OR 0.56, 90 % CI 0.34-0.92; p = 0.03). The estimated cost of the intervention was $19.26/case and the net total amount saved during the post-intervention period was $65,625 month.

CONCLUSIONS

This bundled intervention led to a significant decrease in the overall SSI rate and was cost effective. The largest decreases in SSIs were in incisional infections and following open surgery.

Effect of chlorhexidine pretreatment on bacterial contamination at rhinoplasty field

BACKGROUND

This study investigated on bacterial contamination of the rhinoplasty field. The effect of preoperative chlorhexidine treatment on decreasing bacterial contamination in the rhinoplasty field is examined.

METHODS

Thirty patients who underwent rhinoplasty were block randomized into a chlorhexidine, regular-soap, or control group comprising ten participants each. The chlorhexidine group was subjected to chlorhexidine showering, shampooing, and facial-cleansing 12 h prior to the operation. The regular-soap group was subjected to cleansing with regular soap, and the control group did not have any skin pretreatment. Bacterial cultures were done 12 h preoperatively from nasal cavity and perinasal skin, immediately preoperatively from perinasal skin and at 1 and 2 h intraoperatively from operation field. Culture results were compared between the three groups, according to operation time, or whether infection-prone procedure was performed.

RESULTS

The bacterial species and colony-forming unit numbers at preoperative nasal cavity and perinasal skin were similar. In all three groups, Coagulase-negative staphylococcus was the most common bacteria found in the rhinoplasty field. The numbers of Staphylococcus aureus and Corynebacterium decreased rapidly after preoperative chlorhexidine treatment. The infection-prone procedure was associated with increased bacterial numbers over time during the operation. In all three groups, there was no postoperative infection in a follow-up period of 6 months.

CONCLUSION

Rhinoplasty is confirmed as a clean contaminated operation with skin flora consistently found in the operation field. Chlorhexidine pretreatment in rhinoplasty patients has a tendency to decrease the numbers of Staphylococcus aureus and Corynebacterium on the perinasal skin.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Randomized controlled trial, Level I.

Dressing Wear Time after Breast Reconstruction: A Randomized Clinical Trial

Background

The evidence to support dressing standards for breast surgery wounds is empiric and scarce.

Objective

This two-arm randomized clinical trial was designed to assess the effect of dressing wear time on surgical site infection (SSI) rates, skin colonization and patient perceptions.

Methods

A total of 200 breast cancer patients undergoing breast reconstruction were prospectively enrolled. Patients were randomly allocated to group I (dressing removed on the first postoperative day, n = 100) or group II (dressing removed on the sixth postoperative day, n = 100). SSIs were defined and classified according to criteria from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Samples collected before placing the dressing and after 1 day (group I) and 6 days (both groups) were cultured for skin colonization assessments. Patients preferences and perceptions with regard to safety, comfort and convenience were recorded and analyzed.

Results

A total of 186 patients completed the follow-up. The global SSI rate was 4.5%. Six patients in group I and three in group II had SSI (p = 0.497). Before dressing, the groups were similar with regard to skin colonization. At the sixth day, there was a higher colonization by coagulase-negative staphylococci in group I (p<0.0001). Patients preferred to keep dressing for six days (p<0.0001), and considered this a safer choice (p<0.05).

Conclusions

Despite group I had a higher skin colonization by coagulase-negative staphylococci on the sixth postoperative day, there was no difference in SSI rates. Patients preferred keeping dressing for six days and considered it a safer choice.

Trial Registration

ClinicalTrials.gov NCT01148823

Antibiotic prophylaxis in reduction mammaplasty: study protocol for a randomized controlled trial

Background

The role of antibiotics in surgical procedures where the risk of surgical site infection (SSI) is low remains uncertain. There is, to date, no evidence to justify the routine use of antibiotics in postoperative reduction mammaplasty. The aim of this study is to evaluate the effect of postoperative antibiotic treatment on the occurrence of SSI after breast reduction surgery.

Methods

This is a double-blind randomized clinical trial with 124 breast hypertrophy patients allocated to two treatment groups: antibiotic (n = 62) and placebo (n = 62). All patients will undergo reduction mammoplasty, performed by the same surgical team. The surgeons will raise the nipple-areola complex by the superomedial pedicle technique. The patients will receive antibiotics intravenously during anesthetic induction and every 6 hours thereafter during their 24-hour hospital stay. During discharge from the hospital, each patient will receive a numbered package containing either cephalexin or placebo capsules and will be directed to take one capsule every 6 hours for 7 days. Neither the surgery team nor the patients will know the contents of the capsules. Patients will be monitored for the occurrence of SSI once weekly during the first 30 days following hospital discharge by a single surgeon who is blinded to their treatment group. SSI will be evaluated based on the definition adopted by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.

Discussion

Due to the variety of risk factors for SSI and limited case studies, conclusions regarding the effect of antibiotics on the occurrence of SSIs following reduction mammaplasty are potentially biased. In recent studies, perioperative antibiotic prophylaxis was effective in preventing infection and is therefore recommended in clinical practice. However, antibiotic use in the postoperative period still remains controversial.

Trial registration

Clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT02569866. Registered on 4 October 2015.

New WHO recommendations on preoperative measures for surgical site infection prevention: an evidence-based global perspective

Surgical site infections (SSIs) are among the most preventable health-care-associated infections and are a substantial burden to health-care systems and service payers worldwide in terms of patient morbidity, mortality, and additional costs. SSI prevention is complex and requires the integration of a range of measures before, during, and after surgery. No international guidelines are available and inconsistencies in the interpretation of evidence and recommendations of national guidelines have been identified. Given the burden of SSIs worldwide, the numerous gaps in evidence-based guidance, and the need for standardisation and a global approach, WHO decided to prioritise the development of evidence-based recommendations for the prevention of SSIs. The guidelines take into account the balance between benefits and harms, the evidence quality, cost and resource use implications, and patient values and preferences. On the basis of systematic literature reviews and expert consensus, we present 13 recommendations on preoperative preventive measures.

Does Preadmission Cutaneous Chlorhexidine Preparation Reduce Surgical Site Infections After Total Knee Arthroplasty?

BACKGROUND

Many preventive methodologies seek to reduce the risk of surgical site infections after total knee arthroplasty (TKA), including the use of preoperative chlorhexidine baths and cloths. Although we have demonstrated in previous studies that this may be an efficacious method for infection prevention, our study was underpowered and we therefore set out to evaluate this with a larger sample size.

QUESTIONS/PURPOSES

(1) Does a preadmission chlorhexidine cloth skin preparation protocol decrease the risk of surgical site infection in patients undergoing TKA? (2) When stratified using the National Healthcare Safety Network (NHSN) risk categories, which categories are associated with risk reduction from the preadmission chlorhexidine preparation protocol?

METHODS

In our study, all patients (3717 total) who had undergone primary or revision TKA at a single institution between January 1, 2007, and December 31, 2013, were identified, of whom 991 patients used the chlorhexidine cloths before surgery and 2726 patients did not. All patients were provided cloths with instructions before surgery; however, as a result of a lack of compliance, we were able to substratify patients into treatment and control cohorts. Additionally, we substratified patients by NHSN risk category to determine differences in infection between the two cohorts (cloth versus no cloth). Patient medical records and an infection-tracking database were reviewed to determine the development of periprosthetic infection (patients who had superficial infections were excluded from our study) in both groups after 1 year surveillance. We then calculated relative risk reductions with use of chlorhexidine gluconate and stratified results based on NHSN risk category.

RESULTS

Use of a preoperative chlorhexidine cloth skin preparation protocol is associated with reduced relative risk of periprosthetic infection after TKA (infections with protocol: three of 991 [0.3%]; infections in control: 52 of 2726 [1.9%]; relative risk [RR]: 6.3 [95% confidence interval [CI], 1.9-20.1]; p = 0.002). When stratified by NHSN risk category, periprosthetic infection risk reduction was seen in the medium-risk category (protocol: one of 402 [0.3%]; control: 25 of 1218 [2.0%]; RR, 8.3 [CI, 1.1-60.7]; p = 0.038), but no significant difference was detected in the low- and medium-risk groups (RR, 2.1 [CI, 0.5-9.6; p = 0.33] and RR, 11.3 [CI, 0.7-186.7; p = 0.09]).

CONCLUSIONS

A prehospital chlorhexidine gluconate wipe protocol appears to reduce the risk of periprosthetic infections after TKA, primarily in those patients with medium and high risk. Although future multicenter randomized trials will need to confirm these preliminary findings, the intervention is inexpensive and is unlikely to be risky and therefore might be considered on the basis of this retrospective, comparative study.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level III, therapeutic study.

Diversities in perceived knowledge and practice of preoperative skin preparation in Swedish orthopaedic surgery

Preoperative skin preparations may reduce the risk of hospital-acquired infections. This cross sectional questionnaire study aimed to identify the practice and knowledge of preoperative skin preparation in Swedish orthopaedic surgery departments. One hundred and six respondents (response rate 68%) from 13 Swedish orthopaedic departments reported a diversity of current recommendations and evidence, and good knowledge of skin preparations. This study found variations in practice and deviations from recommendations, despite high levels of knowledge.

Infection in face-lift surgery: an evidence-based approach to infection prevention

BACKGROUND

Complications in face-lift surgery are rare but can present a difficult experience for the patient and surgeon. It is the objective of this review to evaluate the clinical efficacy of routine perioperative safety measures in preventing surgical-site infection in face-lift surgery.

METHODS

A review of the literature was performed to assess the correlation of preoperative decolonization, prophylactic antibiotic use, perioperative hypothermia, body mass index, and smoking status with the incidence of surgical-site infection in cosmetic surgery, especially pertaining to face-lift surgery.

RESULTS

Studies supporting safe practice in cosmetic surgery and "clean" procedures are analyzed and discussed.

CONCLUSION

This article provides the current evidence on perioperative safety measures and recommendations regarding the prevention of infection in cosmetic surgery, especially in face-lift surgery.

Preoperative bathing or showering with skin antiseptics to prevent surgical site infection

BACKGROUND

Surgical site infections (SSIs) are wound infections that occur after invasive (surgical) procedures. Preoperative bathing or showering with an antiseptic skin wash product is a well-accepted procedure for reducing skin bacteria (microflora). It is less clear whether reducing skin microflora leads to a lower incidence of surgical site infection.

OBJECTIVES

To review the evidence for preoperative bathing or showering with antiseptics for preventing hospital-acquired (nosocomial) surgical site infections.

SEARCH METHODS

For this fifth update we searched the Cochrane Wounds Group Specialised Register (searched 18 December 2014); the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (The Cochrane Library 2014 Issue 11); Ovid MEDLINE (2012 to December Week 4 2014), Ovid MEDLINE (In-Process & Other Non-Indexed Citations December 18, 2014); Ovid EMBASE (2012 to 2014 Week 51), EBSCO CINAHL (2012 to December 18 2014) and reference lists of articles.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised controlled trials comparing any antiseptic preparation used for preoperative full-body bathing or showering with non-antiseptic preparations in people undergoing surgery.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently assessed studies for selection, risk of bias and extracted data. Study authors were contacted for additional information.

MAIN RESULTS

We did not identify any new trials for inclusion in this fifth update. Seven trials involving a total of 10,157 participants were included. Four of the included trials had three comparison groups. The antiseptic used in all trials was 4% chlorhexidine gluconate (Hibiscrub/Riohex). Three trials involving 7791 participants compared chlorhexidine with a placebo. Bathing with chlorhexidine compared with placebo did not result in a statistically significant reduction in SSIs; the relative risk of SSI (RR) was 0.91 (95% confidence interval (CI) 0.80 to 1.04). When only trials of high quality were included in this comparison, the RR of SSI was 0.95 (95%CI 0.82 to 1.10). Three trials of 1443 participants compared bar soap with chlorhexidine; when combined there was no difference in the risk of SSIs (RR 1.02, 95% CI 0.57 to 1.84). Three trials of 1192 patients compared bathing with chlorhexidine with no washing, one large study found a statistically significant difference in favour of bathing with chlorhexidine (RR 0.36, 95%CI 0.17 to 0.79). The smaller studies found no difference between patients who washed with chlorhexidine and those who did not wash preoperatively.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

This review provides no clear evidence of benefit for preoperative showering or bathing with chlorhexidine over other wash products, to reduce surgical site infection. Efforts to reduce the incidence of nosocomial surgical site infection should focus on interventions where effect has been demonstrated.

Application time for postoperative wound dressing following breast augmentation with implants: study protocol for a randomized controlled trial

Background

Breast augmentation with silicone implants is one of the most frequently performed cosmetic surgeries worldwide. Surgical site infection (SSI) remains an important complication of this procedure. One of the most important risk factors for SSI is the presence of microorganisms on the skin surrounding the wound. Guidelines by the Centers for Disease Control (CDC) recommend that surgical wounds be covered with a sterile dressing for 24 to 48 hours. However, a recent study showed that the application of a dressing for six days after breast reduction reduced wound colonization by coagulase-negative staphylococci.

Methods/Design

A randomized clinical trial was designed to assess two protocols of postoperative wound care to determine how the application duration of the postoperative dressing influences wound colonization in patients undergoing breast augmentation with silicone implants. Women aged between 18 and 60 years who are candidates for breast augmentation with silicone implants will be randomly allocated to group I (n = 48), in which the dressing will be removed on the first postoperative day, or group II (n = 48), in which the dressing will be removed on the sixth postoperative day. Cutaneous colonization will be assessed by cultures of samples of skin flora taken from the wound region. The incidence of SSI, using standardized CDC criteria, and the perceptions of patients towards the dressing will be secondary outcomes.

Discussion

An important component of SSI prevention is to minimize all possible risk factors, and the application of postoperative dressing plays a key role in this endeavor. The results of this clinical trial may help to standardize postoperative wound care after breast augmentation with silicone implants.

Trial registration

This trial was registered on 12 March 2012 with ClinicalTrials.gov (identifier: NCT01553604).

Preoperative Skin Antiseptic Preparations for Preventing Surgical Site Infections: A Systematic Review

Objective.

To evaluate the clinical effectiveness of preoperative skin antiseptic preparations and application techniques for the prevention of surgical site infections (SSIs).

Design.

Systematic review of the literature using Medline, EMBASE, and other databases, for the period January 2001 to June 2011.

Methods.

Comparative studies (including randomized and nonrandomized trials) of preoperative skin antisepsis preparations and application techniques were included. Two researchers reviewed each study and extracted data using standardized tables developed before the study. Studies were reviewed for their methodological quality and clinical findings.

Results.

Twenty studies (n = 9,520 patients) were included in the review. The results indicated that presurgical antiseptic showering is effective for reducing skin flora and may reduce SSI rates. Given the heterogeneity of the studies and the results, conclusions about which antiseptic is more effective at reducing SSIs cannot be drawn.

Conclusions.

The evidence suggests that preoperative antiseptic showers reduce bacterial colonization and may be effective at preventing SSIs. The antiseptic application method is inconsequential, and data are lacking to suggest which antiseptic solution is the most effective. Disinfectant products are often mixed with alcohol or water, which makes it difficult to form overall conclusions regarding an active ingredient. Large, well-conducted randomized controlled trials with consistent protocols comparing agents in the same bases are needed to provide unequivocal evidence on the effectiveness of one antiseptic preparation over another for the prevention of SSIs.

Appraisal of guidelines for pre-operative body wash

The pre-operative body wash is a strategy for reducing post-operative infection. However, there is a lack of knowledge about its importance. The purpose of the present study was to evaluate the quality of guidelines for the pre-operative body wash using the AGREE instrument--35 guidelines containing instructions for the pre-operative body wash or preparation were included. The AGREE instrument was employed to establish a quality assessment framework that facilitated a comparison of the guidelines. The results were based on the six domains of the AGREE instrument, all of which were found to have low adherence. Descriptive statistics were used to present the assessment score. The AGREE instrument is useful for evaluating the quality of clinical guidelines. The development of evidence-based guidelines must include clinical activities. Further research is required to clarify the pre-operative body wash process and how it should be performed to reduce post-operative infection.

An update on modifiable factors to reduce the risk of surgical site infections

BACKGROUND CONTEXT

Despite an increase in physician and public awareness and advances in infection control practices, surgical site infection (SSI) remains to be one of the most common complications after an operation. Surgical site infections have been shown to decrease health-related quality of life, double the risk of readmission, prolong the length of hospital stay, and increase hospital costs.

PURPOSE

To critically evaluate the literature and identify modifiable factors to reduce the risk of SSI.

STUDY DESIGN/SETTING

Systematic review of the literature.

METHODS

A critical review of the literature was performed using OVID, Pubmed, and the Cochrane database and focused on eight identifiable factors: preoperative screening and decolonization of methicillin-sensitive Staphylococcus aureus and methicillin-resistant S. aureus protocols, antiseptic showers, antiseptic cloths, perioperative skin preparation, surgeon hand hygiene, antibiotic irrigation and/or use of vancomycin powder, closed suction drains, and antibiotic suture.

RESULTS

Screening protocols have shown that 18% to 25% of patients undergoing elective orthopedic surgery are nasal carriers of S. aureus and that carriers are more likely to have a nosocomial infection and SSI. The evidence suggests that an institutionalized prescreening program, followed by an appropriate eradication using mupirocin ointment and chlorhexidine soap/shower, will lower the rate of nosocomial S. aureus infections. Based on the current literature, definitive conclusions cannot be made on whether preoperative antiseptic showers effectively reduce the incidence of postoperative infection. The use of a chlorhexidine bathing cloth before surgery may decrease the risk of SSI. There is no definitive clinical evidence that one skin preparation solution effectively lowers the rate of postoperative infection compared with another. The use of dilute betadine irrigation or vancomycin powder in the wound before closure likely decreases the incidence of SSI.

CONCLUSIONS

There is strong evidence in the literature that optimizing specific preoperative, intraoperative, and postoperative variables can significantly lower the risk of developing an SSI.

Economic evaluation of chlorhexidine cloths on healthcare costs due to surgical site infections following total knee arthroplasty

The purpose of this study was to evaluate the overall annual healthcare cost savings of adding a pre-operative chlorhexidine cloth preparation protocol. We used reports from the National Healthcare Safety Network and previously published reports to determine a range of surgical site infection rates following total knee arthroplasty and the cost per revision procedure. The savings listed are potential, but may be less. The cost benefit of using chlorhexidine at our institution per 1,000 total knee arthroplasty patients was a net savings of approximately $2.1 million. The annual healthcare savings ranged from $0.78 to $3.18 billion. This epidemiologic evaluation of using chlorhexidine prior to undergoing total knee arthroplasty has demonstrated the potential to decrease healthcare costs primarily by decreasing the incidence of surgical site infections.

Dressing wear time after breast reconstruction: study protocol for a randomized controlled trial

BACKGROUND

One of the major risk variables for surgical site infection is wound management. Understanding infection risk factors for breast operations is essential in order to develop infection-prevention strategies and improve surgical outcomes. The aim of this trial is to assess the influence of dressing wear time on surgical site infection rates and skin colonization. Patients' perception at self-assessment will also be analyzed.

METHODS/DESIGN

This is a two-arm randomized controlled trial. Two hundred breast cancer patients undergoing immediate or delayed breast reconstruction will be prospectively enrolled. Patients will be randomly allocated to group I (dressing removed on postoperative day one) or group II (dressing removed on postoperative day six). Surgical site infections will be defined by standard criteria from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC). Skin colonization will be assessed by culture of samples collected at predefined time points. Patients will score dressing wear time with regard to safety, comfort and convenience.

DISCUSSION

The evidence to support dressing standards for breast surgery wounds is empiric and scarce. CDC recommends protecting, with a sterile dressing for 24 to 48 hours postoperatively, a primarily closed incision, but there is no recommendation to cover this kind of incision beyond 48 hours, or on the appropriate time to shower or bathe with an uncovered incision. The results of the ongoing trial may support standard recommendations regarding dressing wear time after breast reconstruction.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: http://NCT01148823.

Preoperative chlorhexidine shower or bath for prevention of surgical site infection: a meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Chlorhexidine showering is frequently recommended as an important preoperative measure to prevent surgical site infection (SSI). However, the efficacy of this approach is uncertain.

METHODS

A search of electronic databases was undertaken to identify prospective controlled trials evaluating whole-body preoperative bathing with chlorhexidine versus placebo or no bath for prevention of SSI. Summary risk ratios were calculated using a DerSimonian-Laird random effects model and a Mantel-Haenzel dichotomous effects model.

RESULTS

Sixteen trials met inclusion criteria with a total of 17,932 patients: 7,952 patients received a chlorhexidine bath, and 9,980 patients were allocated to various comparator groups. Overall, 6.8% of patients developed SSI in the chlorhexidine group compared with 7.2% of patients in the comparator groups. Chlorhexidine bathing did not significantly reduce overall incidence of SSI when compared with soap, placebo, or no shower or bath (relative risk, 0.90; 95% confidence interval: 0.77-1.05, P = .19).

CONCLUSIONS

Meta-analysis of available clinical trials suggests no appreciable benefit of preoperative whole-body chlorhexidine bathing for prevention of SSI. However, most studies omitted details of chlorhexidine application. Better designed trials with a specified duration and frequency of exposure to chlorhexidine are needed to determine whether preoperative whole-body chlorhexidine bathing reduces SSI.

Preoperative bathing or showering with skin antiseptics to prevent surgical site infection

BACKGROUND

Surgical site infections (SSIs) are wound infections that occur after invasive (surgical) procedures. Preoperative bathing or showering with an antiseptic skin wash product is a well-accepted procedure for reducing skin bacteria (microflora). It is less clear whether reducing skin microflora leads to a lower incidence of surgical site infection.

OBJECTIVES

To review the evidence for preoperative bathing or showering with antiseptics for preventing hospital-acquired (nosocomial) surgical site infections.

SEARCH METHODS

For this fourth update we searched the Cochrane Wounds Group Specialised Register (searched 29 June 2012); the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (The Cochrane Library 2012 Issue 6); Ovid MEDLINE (2010 to June Week 3 2012), Ovid MEDLINE (In-Process & Other Non-Indexed Citations June 27, 2012); Ovid EMBASE (2010 to 2012 Week 25), EBSCO CINAHL (1882 to 21 June 2012) and reference lists of articles.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised controlled trials comparing any antiseptic preparation used for preoperative full-body bathing or showering with non-antiseptic preparations in people undergoing surgery.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently assessed studies for selection, risk of bias and extracted data. Study authors were contacted for additional information.

MAIN RESULTS

We did not identify any new trials for inclusion in this fourth update. Seven trials involving a total of 10,157 participants were included. Four of the included trials had three comparison groups. The antiseptic used in all trials was 4% chlorhexidine gluconate (Hibiscrub/Riohex). Three trials involving 7791 participants compared chlorhexidine with a placebo. Bathing with chlorhexidine compared with placebo did not result in a statistically significant reduction in SSIs; the relative risk of SSI (RR) was 0.91 (95% confidence interval (CI) 0.80 to 1.04). When only trials of high quality were included in this comparison, the RR of SSI was 0.95 (95%CI 0.82 to 1.10). Three trials of 1443 participants compared bar soap with chlorhexidine; when combined there was no difference in the risk of SSIs (RR 1.02, 95% CI 0.57 to 1.84). Three trials of 1192 patients compared bathing with chlorhexidine with no washing, one large study found a statistically significant difference in favour of bathing with chlorhexidine (RR 0.36, 95%CI 0.17 to 0.79). The smaller studies found no difference between patients who washed with chlorhexidine and those who did not wash preoperatively.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

This review provides no clear evidence of benefit for preoperative showering or bathing with chlorhexidine over other wash products, to reduce surgical site infection. Efforts to reduce the incidence of nosocomial surgical site infection should focus on interventions where effect has been demonstrated.

[Surgical infections as patient safety problems]

Surgical infections are severe complications of surgical interventions and one of the most important patient safety issues. These are associated with increased morbidity, mortality, costs and decreased quality of life. Prevention of infections is essential, while one has to consider pre-, intra- and postoperative factors and procedures in the clinical practice. In this article we summarize the latest recommendations for clinicians based on the relevant published literature.