Preoperative hair removal on the male genitalia: clippers vs. razors

[Recommendations for perioperative skin care in total joint arthroplasty: antimicrobial wash lotion, precleaning and hair removal]

INTRODUCTION

Periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) is a serious complication in arthroplasty surgery. The preoperative preparation of the skin plays an important role in infection prevention.

METHODOLOGY

A systematic literature review was conducted on the topic of antimicrobial wash lotion, precleaning, and shaving. Existing evidence was summarized by the committee of the German Arthroplasty Society and recommendations were formulated.

RESULTS

By applying a local antiseptic before the operation, the risk of wound infection and PJI can be significantly reduced. This causes a reduction in revision surgery and leads to a shorter average hospital stay. If hair removal is necessary, it is ideally performed shortly before the procedure using an electric clipper. The use of a razor is not recommended.

Effect of preoperative hair removal vs. no removal on surgical site infections: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Background

The practice of preoperative hair removal has been debated regarding its role in Surgical Site Infection (SSI) prevention. This study aimed to compare the different hair removing modalities and investigate the effect of preoperative hair removal on SSI rates.

Methods

A systematic review and meta-analysis were conducted according to PRISMA guidelines. Three databases-PubMed, Web of Science, and Cochrane Library-were searched for relevant studies comparing preoperative hair removal to no hair removal. Studies eligible for inclusion were randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and cohort studies reporting SSI rates. Odds ratios, mean differences, and p-values were analyzed using a random effect model.

Results

Seventeen studies involving 5,407 patients were included. No statistically significant difference in SSI rates was found between the hair removal and no removal groups (OR = 1.066, 95% CI 0.646-1.758, p = 0.803). When comparing clipping to no hair removal, there was no significant difference (OR = 0.967, 95% CI 0.642-1.455, p = 0.870). Razor shaving was associated with higher skin damage and slightly increased SSI risk compared to clipping but not statistically significant (OR = 0.749, 95% CI 0.346-1.623, p = 0.464). Depilatory creams, however, were favored over razor shaving (OR = 3.235, 95% CI 1.543-6.785, p = 0.002), as they were linked to less skin damage and easier application.

Conclusion

Preoperative hair removal does not significantly impact SSI rates. Clipping appears to be a safer alternative to shaving, while depilatory creams show promise as an effective, less damaging option.

C. M, Thapa S, Bista S. Postoperative surgical site infection after preoperative use of razor versus clipper for hair removal in inguinal hernia surgery: A quasi-randomized clinical trial

Trail Design

Quasi-randomized clinical trial.

Methods

Participants: This study includes adult patients (≥18 years) who gave written consent for preoperative site preparation using razors or clippers. Exclusions comprised individuals <18 years, bilateral hernias, prior laparoscopic hernia repair, steroid/chemotherapy use, diagnosed chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, and incomplete medical documentation. Intervention: Patients who underwent hernia surgery during the initial week of the study underwent site preparation using a razor, while in subsequent weeks underwent site preparation using a clipper. This randomization was maintained throughout the study. Uniform site preparation was done by consistent staff. Postpreparation interviews, follow-up interviews of the patients, and unbiased evaluation of digital photographs were conducted by nonoperating surgeon panels. Outcome: Preoperative, patient response, degree of skin trauma, quality of hair removal, and association between site preparation-like parameters were compared and analyzed between two groups using Statistical Package for Social Sciences-25. Blinding: In this study, blinding was not done and the primary investigator was aware of the two groups.

Results

The total number of participants was 320. The mean age of the Razor group was 45.36 ± 14.68 years and that of Clipper was 44.42 ± 13.77 (p < 0.98). The incidence of surgical site infection (SSI) was 23 (14.4%) in the razor group and 8(5%) in the clipper group, (p = 0.01). Skin trauma was found more in the razor group as compared to the clipper group. Also, the analysis of the provided data revealed that 65% of participants who experienced sustained cuts developed SSI.

Conclusion

In summary, the practice of preoperative hair removal on-site preparation using a razor is associated with the incidence of skin trauma but overall shave quality at the operative site was better in the razor group with an apparent increased risk of SSI. Based on these findings, it would be better for surgeons to decide on an operation for either razors or clippers for preoperative preparation.

Maximizing outcomes in penile prosthetic surgery: exploring strategies to prevent and manage infectious and non-infectious complications

Inflatable Penile Prostheses (IPP) implantation is a surgical treatment for patients desiring definitive treatment for erectile dysfunction. While this procedure has proven to be effective, it also carries its own set of unique risks that need to be carefully considered. The article reviews the current understanding of complications associated with penile prosthetic surgery and provides strategies to mitigate these adverse events. This article covers various aspects of IPP implantation, including the risks of infection, bleeding, injury to nearby structures, glans ischemia, and device malfunction. It also discusses the importance of careful preoperative screening to identify risk factors and the implementation of infection reduction strategies such as antimicrobial prophylaxis, skin prep, and operative techniques. In addition, it emphasizes the need for postoperative vigilance and prompt management of any complications that may arise. Overall, the article provides a comprehensive overview of the risks and strategies for mitigating complications associated with IPP implantation. Our recommendations are given based on the current consensus in the field and highlight the importance of careful planning, attention to detail, and effective communication between healthcare providers and patients. Despite the potential risks, this review underscores the fact that complications following penile prosthesis implantation are relatively rare.

Efficacy of Body Wash and Povidone-Iodine in Skin Preparation in Reducing Surgical Site Infections After Hypospadias Repair Among Adolescents: A Prospective Cohort Study With Retrospective Controls

Background: Surgical site infections (SSIs) that occur after hypospadias repair frequently result in incision healing complications, especially during puberty. This study aimed to evaluate the efficacy of twice-daily pre-operative skin preparation using body wash and povidone-iodine within 48 hours before hypospadias repair with regard to infection rates in adolescents. Patients and Methods: Prospective recruitment included patients in Tanner stages 3 to 5 undergoing hypospadias repair from January 2015 to January 2021. The experimental group comprised patients who performed twice-daily skin preparation with body wash and povidone-iodine within 48 hours before surgery. Surgeons selected either 0.5% or 5% povidone-iodine for skin preparation. The control group comprised a retrospective cohort of hypospadias repair conducted in the preceding five years, where patients performed pre-surgery evening showers using a body wash. Complications were collected over a six-month follow-up period. Results: The study included 90 patients in the 0.5% povidone-iodine group, 92 patients in the 5% povidone-iodine group, and 84 patients in the control group. Differences were observed among the groups in terms of SSI (p = 0.030) and urethral fistula (p = 0.019). In post hoc tests, only the 5% povidone-iodine group demonstrated a diminished incidence of SSI (p = 0.009) and urethral fistula (p = 0.005) in comparison to the control group. Conclusions: Using body wash and 5% povidone-iodine for skin preparation was associated with a reduction in the incidence of SSI and urethral fistula following hypospadias repair in adolescents and may be considered to improve outcomes.

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.

Surgical Site Infection Prevention: A Review

IMPORTANCE

Approximately 0.5% to 3% of patients undergoing surgery will experience infection at or adjacent to the surgical incision site. Compared with patients undergoing surgery who do not have a surgical site infection, those with a surgical site infection are hospitalized approximately 7 to 11 days longer.

OBSERVATIONS

Most surgical site infections can be prevented if appropriate strategies are implemented. These infections are typically caused when bacteria from the patient's endogenous flora are inoculated into the surgical site at the time of surgery. Development of an infection depends on various factors such as the health of the patient's immune system, presence of foreign material, degree of bacterial wound contamination, and use of antibiotic prophylaxis. Although numerous strategies are recommended by international organizations to decrease surgical site infection, only 6 general strategies are supported by randomized trials. Interventions that are associated with lower rates of infection include avoiding razors for hair removal (4.4% with razors vs 2.5% with clippers); decolonization with intranasal antistaphylococcal agents and antistaphylococcal skin antiseptics for high-risk procedures (0.8% with decolonization vs 2% without); use of chlorhexidine gluconate and alcohol-based skin preparation (4.0% with chlorhexidine gluconate plus alcohol vs 6.5% with povidone iodine plus alcohol); maintaining normothermia with active warming such as warmed intravenous fluids, skin warming, and warm forced air to keep the body temperature warmer than 36 °C (4.7% with active warming vs 13% without); perioperative glycemic control (9.4% with glucose <150 mg/dL vs 16% with glucose >150 mg/dL); and use of negative pressure wound therapy (9.7% with vs 15% without). Guidelines recommend appropriate dosing, timing, and choice of preoperative parenteral antimicrobial prophylaxis.

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

Surgical site infections affect approximately 0.5% to 3% of patients undergoing surgery and are associated with longer hospital stays than patients with no surgical site infections. Avoiding razors for hair removal, maintaining normothermia, use of chlorhexidine gluconate plus alcohol-based skin preparation agents, decolonization with intranasal antistaphylococcal agents and antistaphylococcal skin antiseptics for high-risk procedures, controlling for perioperative glucose concentrations, and using negative pressure wound therapy can reduce the rate of surgical site infections.

How to Prevent Surgical Site Infection in Vascular Surgery: A Review of the Evidence

BACKGROUND

This review aims to identify and review the current evidence for preventing postoperative surgical site infections in abdominal aortic aneurysm surgery or infrainguinal arterial surgery.

METHODS

Extended literature review of clinical trials that examined the prevention of postoperative surgical site infections in abdominal aortic aneurysm or infrainguinal arterial surgery. Searches were conducted on Ovid MEDLINE (1950 - 13 March 2020) using key terms for vascular surgery, surgical site infections and specific preventative techniques. Articles were included if they discussed a relationship between a preventative technique and surgical site infections in abdominal aortic aneurysm or infrainguinal arterial surgery. The GRADE guidelines were used to assess the quality of evidence.

RESULTS

21 techniques and 81 studies were included. Prophylactic antibiotics and negative pressure wound therapy have a high quality of evidence for the prevention of surgical site infections in abdominal aortic aneurysm or infrainguinal arterial surgery. A moderate quality evidence base was identified for gentamicin containing collagen implant (confined to high surgical site infection risk centers). Currently, there is a low or very low quality of evidence to suggest a reduction in the surgical site infection rate for combination therapy, glycaemic control, Methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus screening and absorbable suture. Evidence suggests no beneficial effect for nutritional supplementation, chlorhexidine bath, hair removal therapy, Staphylococcus aureus nasal eradication, cyanoacrylate microsealant, silver grafts, rifampicin bonded grafts, triclosan coated suture and postoperative wound drains. Endoscopic saphenous vein harvest may reduce surgical site infection rate (very low quality of evidence) but may lower long-term patency. Autologous vein grafts may increase surgical site infections (very low quality of evidence) but may provide better long-term patency rates in above-knee infrainguinal bypass surgery. There was no identified evidence for perioperative normothermia, electrosurgical bipolar vessel sealer or Dermabond and Tegaderm for surgical site infection prevention in vascular surgery.

CONCLUSIONS

Prophylactic antibiotics and postoperative negative pressure wound therapy are effective in the prevention of postoperative surgical site infection in abdominal aortic aneurysm or infrainguinal arterial surgery. There exists a significant risk of bias in the literature for many preventative techniques and further studies are required to investigate the efficacy of gentamicin containing collagen implant, and specific combination therapies.

Preoperative hair removal to reduce surgical site infection

BACKGROUND

Hair has traditionally been removed from the surgical site before surgery; however, some studies claim that this increases surgical site infections (SSIs) and should be avoided. This is the second update of a review published in 2006 and first updated in 2011.

OBJECTIVES

To determine whether routine preoperative hair removal (compared with no removal) and the method, timing, or setting of hair removal effect SSI rates.

SEARCH METHODS

In November 2019, for this second update we searched the Cochrane Wounds Specialised Register; the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) (the Cochrane Library); Ovid MEDLINE (including In-Process & Other Non-Indexed Citations); Ovid Embase; and EBSCO CINAHL Plus. We also searched clinical trial registries for ongoing and unpublished studies, and scanned the reference lists of included studies plus reviews to identify additional studies. We applied no date or language restrictions.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised controlled trials or quasi-randomised trials that compared: · hair removal with no hair removal; · different methods of hair removal; and · hair removal at different times before surgery.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently assessed the relevance of each study. Data were extracted independently by both review authors and cross-checked. We carried out 'Risk of bias' assessment using the Cochrane 'Risk of bias' tool and assessed the certainty of evidence according to GRADE. Sensitivity analyses excluding studies at high risk of bias were conducted.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 11 new studies in this update resulting in a total of 19 randomised and 6 quasi-randomised trials (8919 participants). Clipping compared with no hair removal Low certainty evidence suggests there may be little difference in risk of SSI when no hair removal is compared with hair removal using clippers (risk ratio (RR) 0.95, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.65 to 1.39; three studies with 1733 participants). Shaving with a razor compared with no hair removal Moderate certainty evidence suggests the risk of SSI is probably increased in participants who have hair removal with a razor compared with no removal (RR 1.82, 95% CI 1.05 to 3.14; seven studies with 1706 participants). In terms of absolute risk this represents 17 more SSIs per 1000 in the razor group compared with the no hair removal group (95% CI 1 more to 45 more SSI in the razor group). Based on low-certainty evidence, it is unclear whether there is a difference in stitch abscesses between hair removal with a razor and no hair removal (1 trial with 80 participants; RR 1.00, 95% CI 0.21 to 4.66). Based on narrative data from one trial with 136 participants, there may be little difference in length of hospital stay between participants having hair removed with a razor compared with those having no hair removal (low-certainty evidence). Based on narrative data from one trial with 278 participants, it is uncertain whether there is a difference in cost between participants having hair removed by shaving with a razor compared with no hair removal (very low certainty evidence). Depilatory cream compared with no hair removal Low certainty evidence suggests there may be little difference in SSI risk between depilatory cream or no hair removal, although there are were wide confidence intervals around the point estimate that included benefit and harm (RR 1.02, 95% CI 0.45 to 2.31; low-certainty evidence; 1 trial with 267 participants). Based on narrative data from one trial with 267 participants, it is uncertain whether there is a difference in cost between participants having hair removed with depilatory cream compared with no hair removal (very low certainty evidence). Shaving with a razor compared with clipping Moderate-certainty evidence from 7 studies with 3723 participants suggests the risk of SSI is probably increased by shaving with a razor compared with clipping (RR 1.64, 95% CI 1.16 to 2.33). Moderate-certainty evidence suggests the risk of skin injury is probably increased in people who have hair removal with a razor rather than clipping (3 trials with 1333 participants; RR 1.74, CI 95% 1.12 to 2.71). Shaving with a razor compared with depilatory cream Moderate-certainty evidence from 9 studies with 1593 participants suggests there is probably more SSI risk when razors are used compared with depilatory cream (RR 2.28, 95% CI 1.12 to 4.65). Low-certainty evidence suggests the risk of skin injury may be increased when using a razor rather than depilatory cream for hair removal (RR 6.95, CI 95% 3.45 to 13.98; 5 trials with 937 participants). Based on narrative data from three trials with 402 participants, it is uncertain whether depilatory cream is more expensive than shaving (very low certainty evidence). Hair removal on the day of surgery compared with one-day preoperatively Low-certainty evidence suggests that there may be a small reduction in SSI risk when hair is removed on the day of surgery compared with the day before surgery although there are were wide confidence intervals around the point estimate that included benefit and harm (one trial, 977 participants; RR 0.83, 95% CI 0.54 to 1.30).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Compared with no hair removal, there may be little difference in risk of SSI when clippers or depilatory cream are used (low-certainty evidence). However, there are probably fewer SSIs when hair is not removed compared with shaving with a razor (moderate-certainty evidence). If hair has to be removed, moderate-certainty evidence suggests using clippers or depilatory cream probably results in fewer SSIs and other complications compared with shaving using a razor. There may be a small reduction in SSIs when hair is removed on the day of, rather than the day before, surgery.

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.

The modern testicular prosthesis: patient selection and counseling, surgical technique, and outcomes

The testicular prosthesis can be an afterthought for providers when performing an orchiectomy for testicular cancer, torsion, atrophic testis, or trauma. However, data suggest that patients find the offer of a testicular prosthesis and counseling regarding placement to be extremely important from both a pragmatic and a psychosocial perspective. Only two-thirds of men undergoing orchiectomy are offered an implant at the time of orchiectomy and of those offered about one-third move forward with prosthesis placement. The relatively low acceptance rate is in stark contrast with high patient satisfaction and low complication rates for those who undergo the procedure. The most common postoperative patient concerns are minor and involve implant positioning, size, and weight. Herein, we provide an up-to-date review of modern preoperative evaluation, patient selection, expectation management, surgical technique, and expected outcomes for testicular prostheses.

Updates in penile prosthesis infections

Inflatable penile prostheses are an important tool in the treatment of medically refractory erectile dysfunction. One of the major complications associated with these prostheses is infections, which ultimately require device explanation and placement of a new device. Over the past several decades, significant work has been done to reduce infection rates and optimize treatment strategies to reduce patient morbidity. This article reviews the current state of knowledge surrounding penile prosthesis infections, with attention to the evidence for methods to prevent infection and best practices for device reimplantation.

Risk profiling in patients undergoing penile prosthesis implantation

Penile prosthesis implantation is the gold standard of surgical therapy for patients with medication-refractory erectile dysfunction. However, this umbrella definition includes significant heterogeneity and associated risk profiles that should be candidly discussed and addressed perioperatively. Factors associated with operative success and patient satisfaction are often surgery specific; however, risk profiling via patient selection, preoperative optimization, proper device selection, and intraoperative consideration are highly correlated. Some examples of common risk profiles include comorbidity(ies) such as cardiovascular disease, diabetes mellitus, prior abdominal surgery, Peyronie's disease, and psychological risk factors. Similarly, integration of surgeon- and patient-amenable characteristics is key to decreasing risk of infection, complication, and need for revision. Finally, patient risk profiling provides a unique context for proper device selection and evidence-based intraoperative considerations.

Questionnaire Survey Regarding Prevention of Surgical Site Infection after Neurosurgery in Japan: Focus on Perioperative Management and Administration of Surgical Antibiotic Prophylaxis

Various guidelines regarding surgical site infection (SSI) have recently been established. However, perioperative management of the wound and use of antibiotics have never been standardized completely in departments of neurosurgery in Japan. This survey investigated current perioperative management and administration of surgical antibiotic prophylaxis (SAP) and compared with guidelines intended to reduce SSI associated with neurosurgery in Japan. Questionnaires were distributed to members of the conference on Neurosurgical Techniques and Tools and the Japan Society of Aesthetic Neurosurgery via internet. The questionnaires asked about methods of perioperative management. A total of 255 members returned answers to the questionnaires. The questionnaires revealed that partial or no removal of the hair and hair shampooing at the day before surgery were performed in 96.1% and 88.1% of each institute following the World Health Organization (WHO) guidelines. Use of SAP at just before, during, and after surgery were 65.0%, 86.2%, and 63.0%, respectively. The postoperative period of use of intravenous SAP prolonged beyond 24 h in 80.0% against the recommendation of WHO. Perioperative management of wounds and use of SAP varies in institutes in Japan and some procedures were far different from the WHO guidelines. Japanese neurosurgeons should notice the prolonged SAP and comply with the WHO guidelines.

Medical pre-operative considerations for patients undergoing penile implantation

Penile prosthesis surgery has become the standard treatment for patients with erectile dysfunction refractory to medical management. Refinements in the both the surgical technique and device manufacturing have made this a safe and reliable treatment with excellent patient satisfaction. In this review, we will overview the basic medical and pre-operative considerations for patients undergoing penile prosthesis implantation. We intend to provide a simple and practical checklist for the implanter to reference when considering implantation of a penile prosthesis.

Artificial Urinary Sphincter: Report of the 2015 Consensus Conference

PURPOSE

The AMS800™ device, by far the most frequently implanted artificial urinary sphincter (AUS) worldwide, is considered to be the "gold-standard" when male incontinence surgical treatment is contemplated. Despite 40 years of experience, it is still a specialized procedure with a number of challenges. Here, we present the recommendations issued from the AUS Consensus Group, regarding indications, management, and follow-up AMS800™ implantation or revision.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Under ICS auspices, an expert panel met on July 10, 2015 in Chicago, IL, USA in an attempt to reach a consensus on diverse issues related to the AMS800™ device. Participants were selected by the two co-chairs on the basis of their practice in a University hospital and their experience: number of implanted AUSs according to AMS (American Medical System Holdings Inc., Minnetonka, MN) records and/or major published articles. Topics listed were the result of a pre-meeting email brainstorming by all participants. The co-chairs distributed topics randomly to all participants, who then had to propose a statement on each topic for approval by the conference after a short evidence-based presentation, when possible.

RESULTS

A total of 25 urologists were invited to participate, 19 able to attend the conference. The present recommendations, based on the most recent and relevant data available in literature as well as expert opinions, successively address multiple specific and problematic issues associated with the AMS800™ trough a eight-chapter structure: pre-operative assessment, pre operative challenges, implantation technique, post-operative care, trouble-shooting, outcomes, special populations, and the future of AUSs.

CONCLUSION

These guidelines undoubtedly constitute a reference document, which will help urologists to carefully select patients and apply the most adapted management to implantation, follow-up and trouble-shooting of the AMS800™.

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.