Outcomes Associated With a Five-Point Surgical Site Infection Prevention Bundle in Women Undergoing Surgery for Ovarian Cancer

Reduction in deep organ-space infection in gynecologic oncology surgery with use of oral antibiotic bowel preparation: a retrospective cohort analysis

CONTEXT

Deep organ-space infection (OSI) following gynecologic surgery is a source of patient morbidity and mortality. There is currently conflicting evidence regarding the use of bowel preparation prior to gynecologic surgery to reduce the rates of infection. For the additional purpose of improving patient recovery at our own institution, a retrospective cohort study compared the rate of deep OSI in patients who received oral antibiotic bowel preparation per Nichols-Condon bowel preparation with metronidazole and neomycin.

OBJECTIVES

The primary aim of this study was to compare the rate of deep organ-space surgical site infection in gynecologic surgery before and after institution of an oral antibiotic bowel preparation, thus assessing whether the preparation is associated with decreased infection rate. The secondary objective was to identify other factors associated with deep organ-space site infection.

METHODS

A retrospective cohort study was performed. Demographic and surgical data were collected via chart review of 1,017 intra-abdominal surgeries performed by gynecologic oncologists at a single institution from April 1, 2019 to December 1, 2021. Of these, 778 met the inclusion criteria; 444 did not receive preoperative oral antibiotic bowel preparation, and 334 did receive preoperative bowel preparation. Odds ratios (ORs) were calculated, and a logistic regression model was utilized for categorical variables. Multivariable regression analysis was performed.

RESULTS

A total of 778 patients were included. Deep OSI rate in patients who did not receive oral antibiotic bowel preparation was 2.3 % compared to 0.3 % (OR 0.13, confidence interval [CI] 0.06-1.03, p=0.02) in patients who did. Receiving oral antibiotic bowel preparation predicted absence of deep OSI (OR 0.04, CI 0.00-0.87, p=0.04). Laparotomy (OR 20.1, CI 1.6-250.2, p=0.02) and Asian race (OR 60.8, CI 2.6-1,380.5, p=0.01) were related to increased rates of deep OSI.

CONCLUSIONS

Oral antibiotic bowel preparation predicts a reduced risk of deep OSI. This preparation is inexpensive and low-risk, and thus these clinically significant results support a promising regimen to improve surgical outcomes, and provide guidance for prospective larger studies.

Surgical site infection prevention bundle in gynecology oncology surgery: a key element in the implementation of an enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) program

Surgical site infection rates are among 5-35% in all gynecologic oncology procedures. Such infections lead to increased patient morbidity, reduction in quality of life, higher likelihood of readmissions, and reinterventions, which contribute directly to mortality and increase in health-related costs. Some of these are potentially preventable by applying evidence-based strategies in the peri-operative patient setting. The objective of this review is to provide recommendations for the individual components that most commonly comprise the surgical site infection prevention bundles that could be implemented in gynecologic oncology procedures. We searched articles from relevant publications with specific topics related to each surgical site infection intervention chosen to be reviewed. Studies on each topic were selected with an emphasis on meta-analyses, systematic reviews, randomized control studies, non-randomized controlled studies, reviews, clinical practice guidelines, and case series. Data synthesis was done through content and thematic analysis to identify key themes in the included studies. This review intends to serve as the most up-to-date frame of evidence-based peri-operative care in our specialty and could serve as the first initiative to introduce an enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) program.

Extended-duration antibiotics are not associated with a reduction in surgical site infection in patients with ovarian cancer undergoing cytoreductive surgery with large bowel resection

OBJECTIVE(S)

To evaluate whether extended dosing of antibiotics (ABX) after cytoreductive surgery (CRS) with large bowel resection for advanced ovarian cancer is associated with reduced incidence of surgical site infection (SSI) compared to standard intra-operative dosing and evaluate predictors of SSI.

METHODS

A retrospective single-institution cohort study was performed in patients with stage III/IV ovarian cancer who underwent CRS from 2009 to 2017. Patients were divided into two cohorts: 1) standard intra-operative dosing ABX and 2) extended post-operative ABX. All ABX dosing was at the surgeon's discretion. The impact of antibiotic duration on SSI and other postoperative outcomes was assessed using univariate and multivariable Cox regression models.

RESULTS

In total, 277 patients underwent cytoreductive surgery (CRS) with large bowel resection between 2009 and 2017. Forty-nine percent (n = 137) received standard intra-operative ABX and 50.5% (n = 140) received extended post-operative ABX. Rectosigmoid resection was the most common large bowel resection in the standard ABX (89.9%, n = 124) and extended ABX groups (90.0%, n = 126), respectively. No significant differences existed between age, BMI, hereditary predisposition, or medical comorbidities (p > 0.05). No difference was appreciated in the development of superficial incisional SSI between the standard ABX and extended ABX cohorts (10.9% vs. 12.9%, p = 0.62). Of patients who underwent a transverse colectomy, a larger percentage of patients developed a superficial SSI versus no SSI (21% vs. 6%, p = 0.004).

CONCLUSION(S)

In this retrospective study of patients with advanced ovarian cancer undergoing CRS with LBR, extended post-operative ABX was not associated with reduced SSI, and prolonged administration of antibiotics should be avoided unless clinically indicated.

Implementation of a surgical site infection prevention bundle in gynecologic oncology patients: An enhanced recovery after surgery initiative

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the clinical outcomes pre- and post-implementation of an evidence-informed surgical site infection prevention bundle (SSIPB) in gynecologic oncology patients within an Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS) care pathway.

METHODS

Patients undergoing laparotomy for a gynecologic oncology surgery between January-June 2017 (pre-SSIPB) and between January 2018-December 2020 (post-SSIPB) were compared using t-tests and chi-square. Patient characteristics, surgical factors, and ERAS process measures and outcomes were abstracted from the ERAS® Interactive Audit System (EIAS). The primary outcomes were incidence of surgical site infections (SSI) during post-operative hospital admission and at 30-days post-surgery. Secondary outcomes included total postoperative infections, length of stay, and any surgical complications. Multivariate models were used to adjust for potential confounding factors.

RESULTS

Patient and surgical characteristics were similar in the pre- and post-implementation periods. Evaluation of implementation suggested that preoperative and intraoperative components of the intervention were most consistently used. Infectious complications within 30 days of surgery decreased from 42.1% to 24.4% after implementation of the SSIPB (p < 0.001), including reductions in wound infections (17.0% to 10.8%, p = 0.02), urinary tract infections (UTI) (12.7% to 4.5%, p < 0.001), and intra-abdominal abscesses (5.4% to 2.5%, p = 0.05). These reductions were associated with a decrease in median length of stay from 3 to 2 days (p = 0.001). In multivariate analysis, these SSI reductions remained statistically significant after adjustment for potential confounders.

CONCLUSION

Implementation of SSIPB was associated with a reduction in SSIs and infectious complications, as well as a shorter length of stay in gynecologic oncology patients.

Impact of converting from povidone iodine to chlorhexidine gluconate for vaginal preparation prior to hysterectomy

BACKGROUND

While vaginal preparation prior to hysterectomies to reduce the risk of contamination by vaginal flora is standard, there is no consensus on the appropriate choice of antisepsis agent. The aim of this study was to evaluate whether the conversion from povidone-iodine (PI) to chlorhexidine gluconate (CHG) would reduce surgical site infection (SSI) rates and improve standardized infection ratios (SIR).

METHODS

A quality improvement process was implemented to educate all providers, trainees, and staff followed by wide-spread conversion to CHG vaginal preparation prior to all hysterectomies starting on June 1, 2021. The SSI rates and SIRs were compared between the preintervention and postintervention periods.

RESULTS

There was no significant change in SSI rate or SIR from the preintervention to the postintervention period, indicating that CHG is noninferior to PI. The SSI rate was 1.53% preintervention compared to 1.57% post, and the SIR was 1.976 and 2.049, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

While our data suggests that the conversion from PI to CHG for vaginal prep alone is insufficient to reduce SSI rates and SIRs, it is noninferior and should be considered as part of a larger preventative bundle.

Strategies to prevent surgical site infections in acute-care hospitals: 2022 Update

The intent of this document is to highlight practical recommendations in a concise format designed to assist acute-care hospitals in implementing and prioritizing their surgical-site infection (SSI) prevention efforts. This document updates the Strategies to Prevent Surgical Site Infections in Acute Care Hospitals published in 2014. This expert guidance document is sponsored by the Society for Healthcare Epidemiology of America (SHEA). It is the product of a collaborative effort led by SHEA, the Infectious Diseases Society of America (IDSA), the Association for Professionals in Infection Control and Epidemiology (APIC), the American Hospital Association (AHA), and The Joint Commission, with major contributions from representatives of a number of organizations and societies with content expertise.

Calculating surgical readmission rates in gynecologic oncology: The impact of patient factors

OBJECTIVE

To determine the 30-day surgical readmission rate after major gynecologic oncology surgeries at a high-volume academic institution and correlated risk factors.

METHODS

Retrospective cohort study was conducted of surgical admissions from January 2016 - December 2019 at a single institution. Data were extracted from patient charts, including reason for readmission and length of stay. A readmission rate was calculated. Nested case control design was used to identify correlations between readmission and patient specific risk-factors. Multivariable logistic regression models were used to determine risk factors with readmission.

RESULTS

A total of 2152 patients were included. The readmission rate was 3.5%, most commonly due to GI disturbance and surgical site infection. Average readmission length was 5 days. Prior to adjusting for covariates, insurance status, primary diagnosis, index admission length, and disposition at discharge differed between patients who were and were not readmitted. After adjusting for co-variates, younger patients, index admission >2 days, and higher Charlson co-morbidity index were associated with readmission.

CONCLUSIONS

Our surgical readmission rate was lower than previously reported rates in gynecologic oncology patients. Patient factors associated with readmission included younger age, longer index hospital admission, and higher medical co-morbidity index scores. Provider factors and institutional practice patterns could contribute to the decreased readmission rate. These findings underscore the importance of standardizing how we calculate readmission rate and interpret these data. Varying readmission rates and institutional practice patterns deserve closer scrutiny to inform best practice and future policies.

Association of bowel preparation with surgical-site infection in gynecologic oncology surgery: Post-hoc analysis of a randomized controlled trial

OBJECTIVE

To determine the relationship between bowel preparation and surgical-site infection (SSI) incidence following colorectal resection during gynecologic oncology surgery.

METHODS

This post-hoc analysis used data from a randomized controlled trial of patients enrolled from 03/01/2016-08/20/2019 with presumed gynecologic malignancy investigating negative-pressure wound therapy among those requiring laparotomy. Patients were treated preoperatively without bowel preparation, oral antibiotic bowel preparation (OABP), or OABP plus mechanical bowel preparation (MBP) per surgeon preference. Univariate and multivariable analyses with stepwise model selection for SSI were performed for confirmed gynecologic malignancies requiring colorectal resection.

RESULTS

Of 161 cases, 15 (9%) had no preparation, 39 (24%) OABP only, and 107 (66%) OABP+MBP. The overall SSI rate was 19% (n = 31)-53% (n = 8/15) in the no preparation, 21% (n = 8/39) in the OABP alone, and 14% (n = 15/107) in the OABP+MBP groups (P = 0.003). The difference between OABP and OABP+MBP was non-significant (P = 0.44). The median length of stay was 9 (range, 6-12), 6 (range, 5-8), and 7 days (range, 6-10), respectively (P = 0.045). The overall complication rate (34%; n = 54) did not significantly vary by preparation type (P = 0.23). On univariate logistic regression analysis, OABP (OR, 0.23; 95% CI: 0.06-0.80) and OABP+MBP (OR, 0.14; 95% CI: 0.04-0.45) were associated with decreased SSI risk compared to no preparation (P = 0.004). On multivariate analysis, both methods of preparation retained a significant impact on SSI rates (P = 0.004).

CONCLUSION

Bowel preparation is associated with reduced SSI incidence and is beneficial for patients undergoing gynecologic oncology surgery with anticipated colorectal resection. Further investigation is needed to determine whether OABP alone is sufficient.

The Impact of Care Bundles on the Incidence of Surgical Site Infections: A Systematic Review

OBJECTIVE

This systematic review assesses the effects of care bundles on the incidence of surgical site infections (SSIs).

DATA SOURCES

The search was conducted between February and May 2021, using PubMed, CINAHL, SCOPUS, Cochrane, and EMBASE databases.

STUDY SELECTION

Studies were included if they used systematic review methodology, were in English, used a quantitative design, and explored the use of care bundles for SSI prevention. A total of 35 studies met the inclusion criteria, and 26 provided data conducive to meta-analysis.

DATA EXTRACTION

Data were extracted using a predesigned extraction tool, and analysis was undertaken using RevMan (Cochrane, London, UK). Quality appraisal was undertaken using evidence-based librarianship.

DATA SYNTHESIS

The mean sample size was 7,982 (median, 840) participants. There was a statistically significant difference in SSI incidence in favor of using a care bundle (SSI incidence 4%, 703/17,549 in the care bundle group vs 7%, 1,157/17,162 in the usual care group). The odds ratio was 0.55 (95% confidence interval, 0.41-0.73; P < .00001), suggesting that there is a 45% reduction in the odds of SSI development for the care bundle group. The mean validity score for all studies was 84% (SD, 0.04%).

CONCLUSIONS

The results indicate that implementing care bundles reduced SSI incidence. However, because there was clinically important variation in the composition of and compliance with care bundles, additional research with standardized care bundles is needed to confirm this finding.

Mechanical and oral antibiotic bowel preparation in ovarian cancer debulking: Are we lowering or just trading surgical complications?

OBJECTIVES

To examine postoperative complications associated with preoperative mechanical and oral antibiotic bowel preparation (MOABP) for patients with ovarian cancer who underwent bowel resection at cytoreductive surgery (CRS).

METHODS

This was a single-institution retrospective study of patients with ovarian cancer undergoing CRS from 01/2011-12/2020 using ICD-10 diagnoses and procedure codes. Patients were stratified by those who underwent bowel resection versus no resection. Bowel resection patients were further stratified by those who underwent MOABP versus no bowel preparation. Patient demographics, tumor data, and perioperative metrics were collected. Unadjusted and adjusted logistic regression evaluated odds of 30-day postoperative complications in patients with bowel resection versus no resection and those with MOABP versus no bowel preparation.

RESULTS

Of 919 patients identified, 215 (23.3%) required bowel resection, which included 81 (37.7%) who received MOABP. Patient characteristics, co-morbidities, and cancer data were similar between MOABP versus no bowel preparation patients. MOABP patients underwent more interval CRS (34.6% versus 9.0%), more optimal surgical resections (96.3% versus 83.8%), fewer diverting ostomies (13.5% versus 33.5%), and shorter hospital stays (7.1 versus 9.4 days) than no bowel preparation patients. On adjusted analyses, MOABP patients experienced significantly lower odds of deep/organ-space surgical infections and 30-day readmissions but higher odds of unplanned intensive care unit (ICU) admissions and grade 3 or higher cardiac and gastrointestinal complications.

CONCLUSIONS

Patients who underwent preoperative MOABP prior to ovarian cancer CRS with bowel resection had lower odds or deep/organ-space infections and readmissions, shorter hospital stays, fewer diverting ostomies, and more optimal resections. However, these patients also experienced higher odds of ICU admissions and grade 3 or higher cardiac and gastrointestinal complications. The positive and negative postoperative outcomes in this population should be considered in clinical practice.

Less is more: Abdominal closure protocol does not reduce surgical site infection after hysterectomy

OBJECTIVES

To determine rates of surgical site infection (SSI) with and without an abdominal closure protocol for gynecologic oncology patients undergoing abdominal hysterectomy.

METHODS

Consecutive patients were identified using CPT codes who underwent total abdominal hysterectomy by gynecologic oncologists at a tertiary care center from January 1, 2015 to December 31, 2019, and stratified by use of the abdominal closure protocol. Demographic, perioperative, and pathologic variables were collected. Fisher's exact and Chi squared tests were used for categorical variables, logistic regression and student t-tests for continuous variables. Multiple logistic regression was used to analyze the relationships between these variables, use of the closure protocol, and development of SSI.

RESULTS

739 patients were included over the study period (n = 393 pre-implementation, n = 346 post-implementation of the abdominal closure protocol,). Baseline demographics including ASA score, BMI, diabetes, and smoking were similar between these groups (P = 0.14-0.94). The rate of SSI within 30 days was 5.9% (23/393) in the pre-protocol group and 8.1% (28/346) under the abdominal closure protocol (P = 0.25). On univariate analysis, factors associated with SSI were BMI >40, diabetes, bowel resection, ASA score 3 or 4, hypertension, and contaminated wound class (uOR 2.31-4.09). On multivariate analysis BMI >40, diabetes, and bowel resection remained independent risk factors (aOR 2.27-2.99), with the closure protocol not achieving significance (aOR 1.43, 95% CI 0.79-2.59). There were no potentially high-risk sub-groups in whom the closing protocol showed benefit.

CONCLUSION

The abdominal closure protocol in isolation did not decrease SSI in those undergoing TAH by a gynecologic oncologist.

Surgical site infections in gynecology: the latest evidence for prevention and management

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Surgical site infection (SSI) remains one of the most common postoperative surgical complications. Prevention and appropriate treatment remain paramount.

RECENT FINDINGS

Evidence-based recommendations include recognition and reduction of preoperative risks including hyperglycemia and smoking, treatment of preexisting infections, skin preparation with chlorhexidine gluconate, proper use of preoperative antibiotics, and implementation of prevention bundles. Consideration should be given to the use of dual antibiotic preoperative treatment with cephazolin and metronidazole for all hysterectomies.

SUMMARY

Despite advancements, SSI in gynecologic surgery remains a major cause of perioperative morbidity and healthcare cost. Modifiable risk factors should be evaluated and patients optimized to the best extent possible prior to surgery. Preoperative risks include obesity, hyperglycemia, smoking, and untreated preexisting infections. Intraoperative risk-reducing strategies include appropriate perioperative antibiotics, correct topical preparation, maintaining normothermia, and minimizing blood loss. Additionally, early recognition and prompt treatment of SSI remain crucial.

Chlorhexidine Versus Iodine for Vaginal Preparation Before Hysterectomy: A Randomized Clinical Trial

OBJECTIVE

The American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists does not provide a recommendation regarding the preferred vaginal preparation solution. We intended to compare the effectiveness of chlorhexidine versus iodine in decreasing vaginal bacterial counts.

METHODS

In this institutional review board-approved study, participants undergoing total hysterectomy via vaginal or laparoscopic approach were randomized to 4% chlorhexidine or 10% iodine for presurgical vaginal preparation. Swabs were collected from the vaginal mucosa before, then 30, 60, and 90 minutes after preparation. Our primary outcome was the number of positive cultures (≥5,000 bacteria) at 90 minutes. The secondary outcomes included the presence of selected pathogens, postoperative complications, and infections. The sample size of 71 per arm was calculated using P = 0.05, 80% power, and anticipating a 22% difference in positive cultures.

RESULTS

Between May 2018 and August 2019, 85 participants were randomized. The average age was 59.8 years (SD, 11.4), and the median Charlson Comorbidity Index score was 2 (minimum, 0; maximum, 6). Baseline bacterial counts were similar in both groups. Chlorhexidine demonstrated a lower percentage of positive cultures at 90 minutes (47.6% vs 85.4%; odds ratio, 10.6; P = 0.001). In addition, the median bacterial count in the chlorhexidine group was significantly lower than the iodine group (3,000 vs 24,000 colony-forming units, P < 0.001) at 90 minutes. No surgical site infections were identified in either group during the 30-day postoperative period, and there were no reported adverse reactions to either solution.

CONCLUSIONS

Chlorhexidine resulted in substantially lower bacterial counts after preparation compared with iodine. Gynecologic surgeons may consider switching to 4% chlorhexidine for vaginal preparation before hysterectomy.

Enhanced recovery pathways and patient-reported outcome measures in gynaecological oncology

Comprehensive peri-operative care for women with gynaecological malignancy is essential to ensure optimal clinical outcomes and maximise patient experience through the continuum of care. Implementation of peri-operative enhanced recovery pathways in gynaecological oncology have been repeatedly shown to improve postoperative recovery, decrease complications and reduce healthcare costs. With increasing emphasis being placed on patient-centred care in the current healthcare environment, incorporation of patient-reported outcome data collection and analysis within the enhanced recovery pathway as part of quality measurement is not only useful, but necessary. Inclusion of patient-reported outcome enhanced recovery pathway evaluation enables clinicians to capture authentic patient-reported parameters such as subtle symptoms, changes in function and multiple dimensions of well-being, directly from the source. These data guide the treatment course by encouraging shared decision-making between the patient and clinicians and provide the necessary foundation for ongoing peri-operative quality improvement efforts. Elements of the gynaecological oncology enhanced recovery pathway are divided into five phases of care: pre-admission; pre-operative; intra-operative; postoperative; and post-discharge. The development process starts with detailing each step of the patient's journey in all five phases, then identifying stakeholder groups responsible for care at each of these phases and assembling a multidisciplinary team including: gynaecologists; anaesthetists; nurses; nutritionists; physical therapists; and others, to provide input into the institutional pathway. To practically integrate patient-reported outcomes into an enhanced recovery pathway, a validated measurement tool should be incorporated into the peri-operative workflow. The ideal tool should be concise to facilitate longitudinal assessments by the clinical staff.

Intraoperative subcutaneous culture as a predictor of surgical site infection in open gynecological surgery

Purpose

To analyze the relationship between intraoperative cultures and the development of surgical site infection (SSI) in women undergoing laparotomy for gynecological surgery.

Methods

Prospective observational cohort study. Over a six-year period, women who underwent elective laparotomy at our hospital were included. Patients’ demographics, underlying co-morbidities, surgical variables, type and etiology of postoperative surgical site infections were collected. Skin and subcutaneous samples were taken just prior to skin closure and processed for microbiological analysis. Univariate and multivariate analyses (logistic regression model) were conducted to explore the association of the studied variables with SSIs.

Results

284 patients were included in our study, of which 20 (7%) developed surgical site infection, including 11 (55%) superficial and nine (45%) organ-space. At univariate analysis, length of surgery, colon resection, transfusion and positive intraoperative culture were associated with surgical site infection occurrence. Skin and subcutaneous cultures were positive in 25 (8.8%) and 20 (7%) patients, respectively. SSI occurred in 35% of women with positive subcutaneous culture and in 20% of those with positive skin cultures. Using multivariate analysis, the only independent factor associated with surgical site infection was a positive subcutaneous culture (OR 10.4; 95% CI 3.5–30.4; P<0.001).

Conclusion

Intraoperative subcutaneous cultures before skin closure may help early prediction of surgical site infection in open gynecological procedures.

Implementation of colon surgical site infection prevention bundle-The successes and challenges

BACKGROUND

Surgical site infection (SSI) prevention bundles have proven successful in decreasing infections. Surgeon and nurse engagement and endorsement are essential for success. The objective of this quality improvement project was to develop, implement and sustain a colon SSI prevention bundle and determine which bundle components are most strongly associated with prevention of SSI.

METHODS

The bundle was developed and implemented in a 525 bed Level I trauma hospital and included pre-, intra- and postoperative components. Bundle adherence and SSI rate were continually tracked and communicated to surgeons and nursing staff throughout project. Univariate and multivariate analyses were performed to determine the components associated with lowest SSI rates.

RESULTS

There were 280 elective and urgent/emergent colon surgeries between October 2015 and March 2018. Over 60% had preoperative components, 76.5% had intraoperative components and 55.6% had postoperative bundle components with a nonsignificant decreasing trend in SSI rate of -0.5 SSI/100 procedures per quarter. The multivariate analysis suggested that use of 2% chlorhexidine gluconate/70% alcohol skin prep, use of wound protector and change of gloves for fascial closure were associated with fewer SSI.

DISCUSSION

The implementation of a colon SSI prevention bundle in a Level I trauma hospital with pre-, intra- and postoperative components was described. Future directions include focusing implementation efforts on bundle components that significantly prevent SSI to improve adherence.

Dual antibiotic prevention bundle is associated with decreased surgical site infections

BACKGROUND

Gynecologic oncology surgery is associated with a wide variation in surgical site infection risk. The optimal method for infection prevention in this heterogeneous population remains uncertain.

STUDY DESIGN

A retrospective cohort study was performed to compare surgical site infection rates for patients undergoing hysterectomy over a 1-year period surrounding the implementation of an institutional infection prevention bundle. The bundle comprised pre-operative, intra-operative, and post-operative interventions including a dual-agent antibiotic surgical prophylaxis with cefazolin and metronidazole. Cohorts consisted of patients undergoing surgery during the 6 months prior to this intervention (pre-bundle) versus those undergoing surgery during the 6 months following the intervention (post-bundle). Secondary outcomes included length of stay, readmission rates, compliance measures, and infection microbiology. Data were compared with pre-specified one-sided exact test, Chi-square test, Fisher's exact test, or Kruskal-Wallis test as appropriate.

RESULTS

A total of 358 patients were included (178 PRE, 180 POST). Median age was 58 (range 23-90) years. The post-bundle cohort had a 58% reduction in surgical site infection rate, 3.3% POST vs 7.9% PRE (-4.5%, 95% CI -9.3% to -0.2%, p=0.049) as well as reductions in organ space infection, 0.6% POST vs 4.5% PRE (-3.9%, 95% CI -7.2% to -0.7%, p=0.019), and readmission rates, 2.2% POST vs 6.7% PRE (-4.5%, 95% CI -8.7% to -0.2%, p=0.04). Gram-positive, Gram-negative, and anaerobic bacteria were all prevalent in surgical site infection cultures. There were no monomicrobial infections in post-cohort cultures (0% POST vs 58% PRE, p=0.04). No infections contained methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus.

CONCLUSION

Implementation of a dual antibiotic infection prevention bundle was associated with a 58% reduction in surgical site infection rate after hysterectomy in a surgically diverse gynecologic oncology practice.

Controversies in preoperative bowel preparation in gynecologic and gynecologic oncology surgery: a review of the literature

PURPOSE

The purpose of this review is to assess the impact of mechanical and oral antibiotics bowel preparation on surgical performance and to investigate their role before gynecologic surgical procedures regarding the infection rates. We also aim to study the updated evidence regarding the use of these different types of bowel preparation, as well as the current preoperative practice applied.

METHODS

An extensive search of the literature was conducted with Medline/PubMed, and the Cochrane Library Database of Systematic Reviews being used for our primary search.

RESULTS

To date, due to the conflicting guidelines by the scientific societies, surgeons do not use a specific pattern of bowel preparation regimen. There are no strong evidence supporting mechanical bowel preparation, but instead, in many cases, patients' adverse effects, both physiological and psychological have been noted. On the other hand, the combined use of oral antibiotic and mechanical bowel preparation has been proven beneficial in colorectal surgery in reducing postoperative morbidities.

CONCLUSION

Based on current literature, in gynecologic surgeries with minimal probability of intraluminal entry, a regimen without any bowel preparation should be applied. The combined administration of both mechanical and oral antibiotic bowel preparation, or even the use of the oral antibiotics alone, should be preserved for cases of increased complexity, where bowel involvement is highly anticipated, such as in gynecologic oncology, as stated in the ERAS protocols. Nonetheless, further research specific to gynecologic surgery is required.

Use of bowel preparation does not reduce postoperative infectious morbidity following minimally invasive or open hysterectomies

BACKGROUND

Literature on the use of bowel preparation in gynecologic surgery is scarce and limited to minimally invasive gynecologic surgery. The decision on the use of bowel preparation before benign or malignant hysterectomies is mostly driven by extrapolating data from the colorectal literature.

OBJECTIVE

Bowel preparation is a controversial element within enhanced recovery protocols, and literature investigating its efficacy in gynecologic surgery is scarce. Our aim was to determine if mechanical bowel preparation alone, oral antibiotics alone, or a combination are associated with decreased rates of surgical site infections or anastomotic leaks compared to no bowel preparation following benign or malignant hysterectomy.

STUDY DESIGN

We identified women who underwent hysterectomy between January 2006 and July 2017 using OptumLabs, a large US commercial health plan database. Inverse propensity score weighting was used separately for benign and malignant groups to balance baseline characteristics. Primary outcomes of 30-day surgical site infection, anastomotic leaks, and major morbidity were assessed using multivariate logistic regression that adjusted for race, census region, household income, diabetes, and other unbalanced variables following propensity score weighting.

RESULTS

A total of 224,687 hysterectomies (benign, 186,148; malignant, 38,539) were identified. Median age was 45 years for the benign and 54 years for the malignant cohort. Surgical approach was as follows: benign: laparoscopic/robotic, 27.2%; laparotomy, 32.6%; vaginal, 40.2%; malignant: laparoscopic/robotic, 28.8%; laparotomy, 47.7%; vaginal, 23.5%. Bowel resection was performed in 0.4% of the benign and 2.8% of the malignant cohort. Type of bowel preparation was as follows: benign: none, 93.8%; mechanical bowel preparation only, 4.6%; oral antibiotics only, 1.1%; mechanical bowel preparation with oral antibiotics, 0.5%; malignant: none, 87.2%; mechanical bowel preparation only, 9.6%; oral antibiotics only, 1.8%; mechanical bowel preparation with oral antibiotics, 1.4%. Use of bowel preparation did not decrease rates of surgical site infections, anastomotic leaks, or major morbidity following benign or malignant hysterectomy. Among malignant abdominal hysterectomies, there was no difference in the rates of infectious morbidity between mechanical bowel preparation alone, oral antibiotics alone, or mechanical bowel preparation with oral antibiotics, compared to no preparation.

CONCLUSION

Bowel preparation does not protect against surgical site infections or major morbidity following benign or malignant hysterectomy, regardless of surgical approach, and may be safely omitted.

Bowel resection or repair at the time of cytoreductive surgery for ovarian malignancy is associated with increased complication rate: An ACS-NSQIP study

OBJECTIVES

Bowel procedures are commonly performed as part of ovarian cancer cytoreduction. The aim of this study was to assess the postoperative complication rates among women with an ovarian malignancy undergoing bowel resection/repair at the time of cytoreductive surgery compared with a control group (cytoreductive surgery without bowel resection or repair).

METHODS

Analysis of 4965 cytoreductive surgeries for suspected ovarian malignancies recorded in the American College of Surgeons' National Surgical Quality Improvement Program (NSQIP) datasets (2006-2017) was performed. One-way ANOVA, Kruskal-Wallis H and Chi-squared tests were used to evaluate and compare baseline characteristics between the groups and controls. Postoperative surgical site infection rates and other 30-day post-operative outcomes were assessed with multivariable logistic and linear regressions.

RESULTS

8.3% (413/4965) of cytoreductive procedures had an associated repair of enterotomy (small or large bowel), 10.9% (541/4947) had an associated colectomy with primary anastomosis, and 2.1% (104/4965) had an associated colectomy with colostomy. Surgical site infections (SSI, either superficial incisional, deep incisional, organ space or wound dehiscence) were significantly more prevalent in the bowel resection/repair group (16.9% vs 5.7%, p < 0.0001). The odds of surgical infections were 2.67 times higher in patients who underwent a bowel resection or repair after controlling for age, BMI, ASA status, pre-operative weight loss, hypoalbuminemia, NSQIP morbidity score, length and complexity of surgical procedure.

CONCLUSION

Patients undergoing bowel resection/repair at the time of cytoreductive surgery are at increased risk of surgical site infections, without increased risk of 30-day mortality. Interventions to mitigate the risk of infectious complications in these patients should be evaluated in a prospective fashion.

When to Operate, Hesitate and Reintegrate: Society of Gynecologic Oncology Surgical Considerations during the COVID-19 Pandemic

The COVID-19 pandemic has challenged our ability to provide timely surgical care for our patients. In response, the U.S. Surgeon General, the American College of Srugeons, and other surgical professional societies recommended postponing elective surgical procedures and proceeding cautiously with cancer procedures that may require significant hospital resources and expose vulnerable patients to the virus. These challenges have particularly distressing for women with a gynecologic cancer diagnosis and their providers. Currently, circumstances vary greatly by region and by hospital, depending on COVID-19 prevalence, case mix, hospital type, and available resources. Therefore, COVID-19-related modifications to surgical practice guidelines must be individualized. Special consideration is necessary to evaluate the appropriateness of procedural interventions, recognizing the significant resources and personnel they require. Additionally, the pandemic may occur in waves, with patient demand for surgery ebbing and flowing accordingly. Hospitals, cancer centers and providers must prepare themselves to meet this demand. The purpose of this white paper is to highlight all phases of gynecologic cancer surgical care during the COVID-19 pandemic and to illustrate when it is best to operate, to hestitate, and reintegrate surgery. Triage and prioritization of surgical cases, preoperative COVID-19 testing, peri-operative safety principles, and preparations for the post-COVID-19 peak and surgical reintegration are reviewed.

Trends in bacterial resistance among perioperative infections in patients with primary ovarian cancer: A retrospective 20-year study at an affiliated hospital in South China

Background

We aimed to analyze the epidemiological and drug-resistance trends among bacterial cultures from perioperative infections in patients with primary ovarian cancer.

Methods

Medical and bacteriological records for patients with ovarian cancer patients who developed perioperative infections after primary cytoreductive surgery from 1999 to 2018 were reviewed retrospectively.

Results

The incidence of perioperative infections and the culture-positive percentage among patients in the first 10 years were 20.2% and 29.3%, respectively, and the equivalent rates in the second 10 years were 18.0% and 33.5%. The most commonly isolated pathogens in both year-groups were Escherichia coli and Enterococcus spp., but the respective percentages differed between the groups. Some strains of Staphylococcus aureus and Enterococcus spp. in the second 10-year group were resistant to linezolid and vancomycin, and ciprofloxacin resistance among Gram-negative bacteria isolates also increased in this group. However, resistance of Gram-negative bacteria to imipenem and meropenem was low among in both groups.

Conclusion

The pathogen distribution in perioperative infections in patients with primary ovarian cancer undergoing cytoreductive changed slightly from 1999 to 2018, and the antibiotic resistance of the main isolated pathogens increased. These results indicate the importance of periodic bacterial surveillance of surgical infections in these patients.

Povidone-iodine vs chlorhexidine alcohol for skin preparation in malignant and premalignant gynaecologic diseases: A randomized controlled study

OBJECTIVES

To compare povidone-iodine with chlorhexidine alcohol solutions for the prevention of surgical site infection (SSI) in malignant and premalignant gynaecologic diseases, and to evaluate the effects of temperature on SSI at 25 °C and 37 °C.

STUDY DESIGN

This was a randomized controlled trial of a cohort of 220 patients undergoing surgery for malignant or premalignant conditions. Preoperative skin preparations were performed with 10% povidone-iodine at 25 °C (PI), 10% povidone-iodine at 37 °C (warm PI), 4% chlorhexidine gluconate with alcohol at 25 °C (CH) and 4% chlorhexidine gluconate with alcohol at 37 °C (warm CH) for each group. All women included in the study received 1 g intravenous cefazolin antibioprophylaxis 30 min before skin incision. The primary outcome was SSI within 30 days of surgery, and secondary outcomes were identification of the causative organism and clinical factors that may be associated with SSI.

RESULTS

SSIs were detected in 24 (10.9%) patients. Except for two organ/space-specific SSIs, all were superficial SSIs. The frequency of SSI was significantly lower in the warm PI group than in the PI group (p = 0.032). There were no significant differences in the frequency of SSI between the groups in other binary comparisons. In addition, there was no significant difference between both povidone-iodine groups compared with both chlorhexidine alcohol groups in terms of the development of SSI (10.9% vs 11%, p = 1.00). SSI caused by micro-organisms was found in 18 patients, and Enterococcus faecalis was the most common reproducing organism in wound culture. Patients with SSI were significantly older (58.9 ± 11.4 vs 52.8 ± 12.3 years) and more likely to be readmitted to hospital [15 (62.5%) vs 9 (37.5%)] than patients without SSI.

CONCLUSIONS

SSI rates can be reduced by warming povidone-iodine, but this effect could not be demonstrated with chlorhexidine solutions. When both groups of povidone-iodine were compared with both groups of chlorhexidine alcohol, no significant difference was found in the prevention of SSI in malignant and premalignant gynaecologic operations.

Guidelines for perioperative care in gynecologic/oncology: Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS) Society recommendations-2019 update

BACKGROUND

This is the first updated Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS) Society guideline presenting a consensus for optimal perioperative care in gynecologic/oncology surgery.

METHODS

A database search of publications using Embase and PubMed was performed. Studies on each item within the ERAS gynecologic/oncology protocol were selected with emphasis on meta-analyses, randomized controlled trials, and large prospective cohort studies. These studies were then reviewed and graded according to the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) system.

RESULTS

All recommendations on ERAS protocol items are based on best available evidence. The level of evidence for each item is presented accordingly.

CONCLUSIONS

The updated evidence base and recommendation for items within the ERAS gynecologic/oncology perioperative care pathway are presented by the ERAS® Society in this consensus review.

Surgical technical evidence review for gynecologic surgery conducted for the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality Safety Program for Improving Surgical Care and Recovery

BACKGROUND

The Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality, in partnership with the American College of Surgeons and the Armstrong Institute at Johns Hopkins, developed the Safety Program for Improving Surgical Care and Recovery, which integrates principles of implementation science into adoption of enhanced recovery pathways and promotes evidence-based perioperative care.

OBJECTIVE

The objective of this study is to review the enhanced recovery pathways literature in gynecologic surgery and provide the framework for an Improving Surgical Care and Recovery pathway for gynecologic surgery.

STUDY DESIGN

We searched PubMed and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials databases from 1990 through October 2017. Studies were included in hierarchical and chronological order: meta-analyses, systematic reviews, randomized controlled trials, and interventional and observational studies. Enhanced recovery pathways components relevant to gynecologic surgery were identified through review of existing pathways. A PubMed search for each component was performed in gynecologic surgery and expanded to include colorectal surgery as needed to have sufficient evidence to support or deter a process. This review focuses on surgical components; anesthesiology components are reported separately in a companion article in the anesthesiology literature.

RESULTS

Fifteen surgical components were identified: patient education, bowel preparation, elimination of nasogastric tubes, minimization of surgical drains, early postoperative mobilization, early postoperative feeding, early intravenous fluid discontinuation, early removal of urinary catheters, use of laxatives, chewing gum, peripheral mu antagonists, surgical site infection reduction bundle, glucose management, and preoperative and postoperative venous thromboembolism prophylaxis. In addition, 14 components previously identified in the colorectal Improving Surgical Care and Recovery pathway review were included in the final pathway.

CONCLUSION

Evidence and existing guidelines support 29 protocol elements for the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality Safety Program for Improving Surgical Care and Recovery in gynecologic surgery.

Narcotics reduction, quality and safety in gynecologic oncology surgery in the first year of enhanced recovery after surgery protocol implementation

OBJECTIVES

Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS) programs are mechanisms for achieving value-based improvements in surgery. This report provides a detailed analysis of the impact of an ERAS program on patient outcomes as well as quality and safety measures during implementation on a gynecologic oncology service at a major academic medical center.

METHODS

A retrospective review of gynecologic oncology patients undergoing elective laparotomy during the implementation phase of an ERAS program (January 2016 through December 2016) was performed. Patient demographics, surgical variables, postoperative outcomes, and adherence to core safety measures, including antimicrobial and venous thromboembolism (VTE) prophylaxis, were compared to a historical patient cohort (January 2015 through December 2015). Statistical analyses were performed using t-tests, Wilcoxon rank sum tests, and Chi squared tests.

RESULTS

The inaugural 109 ERAS program participants were compared to a historical patient cohort (n=158). There was no difference in BMI, race, malignancy, or complexity of procedure between cohorts. ERAS patients required less narcotics (70.7 vs 127.4, p=0.007, oral morphine equivalents) and PCA use (32.1% vs. 50.6%, p=0.002). Despite this substantial reduction in narcotics, ERAS patients did not report more pain and in fact reported significantly less pain by postoperative day 3. There were no differences in length of stay (5days), complication rates (13.8% vs. 20.3%, p=0.17) or 30-day readmission rates (9.5 vs 11.9%, p=0.54) between ERAS and historical patients, respectively. Compliance with antimicrobial prophylaxis was 97.2%. However, 33.9% of ERAS patients received substandard preoperative VTE prophylaxis.

CONCLUSIONS

ERAS program implementation resulted in reductions in narcotic requirements and PCA use without changes in length of stay or readmission rates. Compliance should be diligently audited during the implementation phase of ERAS programs, with special attention to adherence to pre-existing core safety measures.

Implementation of an abdominal closure bundle to reduce surgical site infection in patients on a gynecologic oncology service undergoing exploratory laparotomy

OBJECTIVE

Surgical site infections (SSI) are associated with increased morbidity, mortality, and healthcare costs. This study investigated whether implementation of an abdominal closure bundle reduces surgical site infection rates. We aimed to identify sub-populations that would benefit the most from this intervention.

METHODS

We conducted a retrospective cohort study of all patients that underwent exploratory laparotomy by a Gynecologic Oncologist from January 1, 2011 to April 1, 2017. The abdominal closure bundle was implemented on May 6, 2014. SSI rates were assessed overall and within subgroups.

RESULTS

875 patients were included in the analysis. Overall, SSI rate was reduced, albeit not significantly, from 48/471 (10.2%) to 32/404 (7.9%) (p=0.148) with implementation of the closing bundle. In patients that underwent a tumor debulking procedure, SSI was noted in 36/277 (13.0%) in the pre-bundle group and 14/208 (6.7%) in the post-bundle cohort (p=0.017). In patients with malignant pathology, the pre-bundle cohort had an SSI rate of 38/282 (13.5%), which reduced to 18/215 (8.4%) in the post-bundle group (p=0.049). In patients with FIGO stage III or IV disease, the SSI rate was reduced from 21/114 (18.4%) to 8/87 (8.4%) with implantation of the closure bundle (p=0.028). In patients with intra-operative ascites, SSI rate decreased from 19/119 (15.9%) pre-bundle to 4/104 (3.8%) in the post-bundle group (p=0.002).

CONCLUSIONS

Implementation of an abdominal closure bundle was not associated with a significant reduction in overall SSI rate. However, multiple subpopulations associated with advanced gynecologic cancer benefited from this intervention.