Prophylactic antibiotics in surgical treatment of axillary hyperhidrosis

Evidence-Based Medicine: Systemic Perioperative Antibiotic Prophylaxis for Prevention of Surgical-Site Infections in Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery

BACKGROUND

After nearly a decade of new data, the Evidence-Based Consensus Conference Statement from the American Association of Plastic Surgeons was updated for prophylactic systemic antibiotics to prevent surgical-site infections (SSI). Pharmacotherapeutic concepts using antimicrobial stewardship were applied for clinical interpretation and management to optimize patient outcomes and minimize resistance.

METHODS

PRISMA, Cochrane, and GRADE certainty of evidence guidelines were implemented for the structure and synthesis of the review. PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, Web of Science, and Scopus databases were systematically and independently searched for randomized controlled trials (RCTs). The authors included patients who had plastic and reconstructive surgery and were treated with prophylactic systemic antibiotics administered perioperatively (preoperatively, intraoperatively, or postoperatively). Comparisons were made between active interventions and nonactive interventions (placebo) at different prespecified durations to determine the development of an SSI. Meta-analyses were performed.

RESULTS

The authors included 138 RCTs that met eligibility criteria. RCTs consisted of 18 breast, 10 cosmetic, 21 hand/peripheral nerve, 61 pediatric/craniofacial, and 41 reconstructive studies. The authors examined bacterial data extracted from studies for patients who did or did not take prophylactic systemic antibiotics for prevention of SSI. Clinical recommendations were provided using level I evidence.

CONCLUSIONS

Surgeons have long been overprescribing systemic antibiotic prophylaxis in plastic and reconstructive surgery. Evidence supports antibiotic prophylaxis to prevent SSI for specific indications and durations. Prolonged antibiotic use has not been linked to reductions in SSIs, and misuse may increase the bacterial diversity of infections. Greater efforts should focus on transitioning from practice-based to pharmacotherapeutic evidence-based medicine.

CLINICAL QUESTION/LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Therapeutic, II.

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

Evidence-based review of the surgical management of hyperhidrosis

The great majority of the currently available evidence supporting sympathectomy for primary hyperhidrosis is observational, coming from a variety of prospective and restrospective clinical series as well as comparative studies. A cumulative experience in over 6000 patients suggests that ETS is a safe, reproducible, and effective procedure, and most patients are satisfied with the results of the surgery. The currently available experimental data comes from clinical trials that compared alternative levels of sympathetic chain disruption; these trials speak only to the relative merits of one surgical technique over another and do not provide an assessment of the overall impact of surgery in the general population of patients with primary hyperhidrosis. Furthermore, it is difficult to compare series and generalizability is compromised by a lack of uniform definitions and measures at both the exposure and outcome levels. There is marked heterogeneity with respect to study population and entry criteria, with significant variability of site and severity of excess sweating as well as the degree of preoperative conservative management of hyperhidrosis before surgical referral. Also the operative approach varies widely among studies, and the optimal procedure remains elusive: unilateral versus staged nonsimultaneous bilateral versus concomitant bilateral sympathectomy; ganglionic resection versus ablation using electrocoagulation or harmonic scalpel; clipping of the chain to maintain reversibility in the event of intolerable symptoms versus permanent disruption. In addition, the lack of uniform outcome measures makes these data difficult to interpret, and standardized metrics of surgical results are necessary, such as objective quantification of sweating by gravimetry or use of the SF-36 Health Survey Questionnaire as an estimate of patient quality of life. A multicenter, adequately powered, randomized controlled trial comparing surgical to medical management of hyperhidrosis is unlikely given the current enthusiasm for same-day thoracoscopic sympathectomy among surgeons, a largely positive literature replete with encouraging results, and well-informed hyperhidrosis patients who want to be cured of a socially debilitating illness. Future clinical trials in this area will likely compare surgical techniques. For such comparisons, procedures must be standardized and outcome measures validated for both symptoms of the disease and surgical complications. Finally, the studies must have large numbers of patients and adequate long-term follow-up if they are to detect differences in results among procedures with very high technical success rates.

Axillary Hyperhidrosis Treatment by Simple Skin Excision and Undermining

The current literature of axillary hyperhidrosis is reviewed. Excision of the gland-containing skin of the axilla has been a mainstay in the treatment of axillary hyperhidrosis for many years. A retrospective study was performed using data accumulated from 56 consecutive patients who underwent a surgical procedure modified from that originally described by Hurley and Shelley. Excision of the hair-bearing portion of the axilla with undermining of the adjacent skin and simple closure was performed under local or general anesthesia. Ninety-two per cent of patients were satisfied with the results. Five patients wished to undergo a second procedure, either because they still had excessive perspiration or because they were unhappy with their scars. Complication rates were low and were compared with other series. Thus, the described procedure provides a simple, safe and effective modality for the treatment of axillary hyperhidrosis.