Does single application of topical chloramphenicol to high risk sutured wounds reduce incidence of wound infection after minor surgery? Prospective randomised placebo controlled double blind trial

Topical Antibiotic Prophylaxis for Preventing Surgical Site Infections of Clean Wounds: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Background: Topical antibiotic agents are not generally indicated for preventing of surgical site infections (SSIs) in clean incisions, and the drug concentrations that should be delivered to local incision sites remain uncertain. The aim of this study was to critically assess the efficacy of topical antibiotic agents in comparison with non-antibiotic agents for preventing SSIs in clean incisions by performing a systematic review and meta-analysis. Methods: We conducted a search of literature in PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Databases and included randomized controlled trials (RCTs) on topical antibiotic use for patients with clean post-surgical incisions. The primary outcome was the incidence of SSI, presented as the event rate. Eleven RCTs were included. Results: Using random-effects modeling, the pooled risk ratio (RR) of developing a post-surgical incisions infection was 0.83 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.61-1.16; I2, 0%). In subgroup analyses, no reductions in SSI were observed when topical antibiotic agents were used to treat incisions due to spinal (RR, 0.75; 95% CI, 0.40-1.38; I2, 0%), orthopedic (RR, 0.69; 95% CI, 0.37-1.29; I2, 0%), dermatologic (RR, 0.77; 95% CI, 0.39-1.55; I2, 65%), or cardiothoracic surgeries (RR, 1.31; 95% CI, 0.83-2.06; I2: 0%). The incidence of SSI across different operative phases did not differ for the application of topical antibiotic agents compared with non-antibiotic agents (RR, 0.80; 95% CI, 0.56-1.14; I2, 0%). Conclusions: The results of this meta-analysis show that topical antibiotic agents provide no clinical benefit for preventing SSI in clean incisions.

Antibiotic prophylaxis in clean and clean-contaminated plastic surgery: A critical review

Antibiotic prophylaxis is frequently used in plastic surgery procedures, despite the generally low rates of infection and few guidelines on the practice. The increasing prevalence of bacterial resistance to antibiotics calls for a reduction in unnecessary antibiotic use. The aim of this review was to create an updated summary of the available data on the effectiveness of antibiotic prophylaxis in reducing the postoperative infection in clean and clean-contaminated plastic surgery. A systematic literature search was performed on the databases Medline, Web of Science, and Scopus, limited to articles published January 2000 onward. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) were included in the primary review, whereas older RCTs and other studies were sought if 2 or fewer relevant RCTs were identified. Overall, 28 relevant RCTs, 2 nonrandomized trials, and 15 cohort studies were identified. Although the number of studies for each type of surgery is limited, the data suggest that prophylactic systemic antibiotic may be unnecessary in noncontaminated facial plastic surgery, reduction mammaplasty, and breast augmentation. In addition, no benefit is apparent from extending the antibiotic prophylaxis over 24 h in rhinoplasty, aerodigestive tract reconstruction, and breast reconstruction. No studies assessing the necessity of antibiotic prophylaxis in abdominoplasty, lipotransfer, soft tissue tumor surgery, or gender affirmation surgery were identified. In conclusion, limited data are available on the effectiveness of antibiotic prophylaxis in clean and clean-contaminated plastic surgery. More studies on this topic are needed before strong recommendations can be made on the use of antibiotics in this setting.

Oral flora of domestic cats in Hong Kong: Identification of antibiotic-resistant strains

BACKGROUND

As the clinical outcome of bite-associated infection is related to the oral commensals, evaluating their composition and antibiotic susceptibility pattern can provide more information for the antibiotic treatment of wound infections and increase the awareness of the multidrug-resistant bacteria in cat oral flora.

AIMS

This study was conducted to identify the various bacterial species in the oral cavity of cats. It aimed to identify the composition of cat oral flora and antibiotic resistant bacterial stains.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Twenty-two cats were sampled for bacterial evaluation. Matrix-assisted laser desorption/ionization time of flight mass spectrometry was used to provide rapid and reliable detection and identification of the bacterial species. Antibiotic susceptibility tests were performed in the identified isolates to determine the antibiotic susceptibility pattern and to detect the multidrug-resistant bacteria in the cat oral cavities.

RESULTS

A total of 54 isolates were identified, Pasteurella was the genus most commonly isolated from the oral cavity of cats (19/54, 35.19%), followed by Neisseria spp. (8/54, 14.81%) and Staphylococcus spp. (7/54, 12.96%). Uncommon oral flora were isolated from the samples, including Pasteurella canis, Inquilinus limosus and the Enterobacteriaceae family of Escherichia coli, Klebsiella pneumoniae and Serratia marcescens. Fourteen different multidrug-resistant bacteria were detected, including Pasteurella species (4/14), Bacillus species (2/14), Neisseria species (3/14), Escherichia species (1/14) and Staphylococcus species (4/14).

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS

This study's findings will increase the understanding of the composition of cat oral flora in Hong Kong, which can provide more evidence-based information for the prophylactic treatment of patients with cat bite infections. Moreover, the study identified and detected the antibiotic resistance pattern and multidrug-resistant bacteria in the cat oral cavity, which can help cat owners increase their awareness of maintaining regular oral hygiene for their cats to prevent the spread of pathogens from cats to humans.

Topical antibiotic prophylaxis for surgical wound infections in clean and clean-contaminated surgery: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Background

Topical antibiotics are widely prescribed as prophylaxis for surgical site infection (SSI). Despite giving high drug concentrations at local wound sites, their efficacy remains controversial. This study is a systematic review and meta-analysis designed to compare the efficacy and safety of topical antibiotics with non-antibiotic agents in preventing SSI.

Methods

Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing topical antibiotics in patients with clean and clean-contaminated postsurgical wounds were included. Relevant trials published before 30 September 2020, were searched in the PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane databases, without language restrictions. The primary outcome was the incidence of SSIs, presented as the event rate. The secondary outcome was the incidence of contact dermatitis (safety outcome). Data were synthesized using the random-effects model, with the results expressed as risk ratio (RR) with 95 per cent confidence intervals (c.i.).

Results

Thirteen RCTs were included. The incidence of SSIs and contact dermatitis showed no significant difference between topical antibiotics and non-antibiotic agents (RR 0.89, 95 per cent c.i. 0.59 to 1.32 (P = 0.56, I² = 48 per cent); and RR 2.79, 95 per cent c.i. 0.51 to 15.19 (P = 0.24, I² = 0 per cent), respectively). In the subgroup analyses, a reduction in SSIs was also not observed in dermatological (RR 0.77, 95 per cent c.i. 0.39 to 1.55; P = 0.46, I² = 65 per cent), ocular (RR 0.08, 95 per cent c.i. 0.00 to 1.52; P = 0.09), spinal (RR 1.34, 95 per cent c.i. 0.65 to 2.77; P = 0.43, I² = 0 per cent), orthopaedic (RR 0.69, 95 per cent c.i. 0.37 to 1.29; P = 0.25, I² = 0 per cent), or cardiothoracic surgeries (RR 1.60, 95 per cent c.i. 0.79 to 3.25; P = 0.19).

Conclusion

Given the current evidence, the routine application of topical antibiotics to surgical wounds did not reduce the incidence of SSI. Further trials are needed to assess their effectiveness in high-risk surgeries or in selected patient groups.

Feasibility Study for a Randomised Controlled Trial for the Topical Treatment of Impetigo in Australian General Practice

Impetigo affects millions of children worldwide. Most guidelines recommend antibiotics as first-line treatment; however, topical antiseptics present a potentially valuable, understudied, antibiotic-sparing treatment for mild impetigo. We aimed to determine the feasibility of a randomised controlled trial (RCT) comparing efficacy of soft white paraffin (SWP), hydrogen peroxide (H₂O₂) and mupirocin for mild impetigo. Participants were recruited from general practices and randomly assigned one of three treatments. Size and number of lesions were measured at the initial consultation and day six. Post-recruitment, interviews with general practitioners were transcribed and themes identified to determine protocol acceptability, recruitment barriers and avenues to improve delivery. Two participants received SWP (n = 1) and mupirocin (n = 1). Both commenced oral antibiotics following failure of assigned topical treatment in which lesions increased in size or number. Recruitment barriers included reduced presentation of impetigo due to COVID-19, pre-treatment with existing at-home medications and moderate/severe infection. Childcare centers and pharmacies were identified as alternative venues to improve the recruitment rate. Valuable insight was gained into the practicality of conducting a RCT of impetigo treatments in general practice. Future trials should consider recruiting outside of general practice clinics to capture patients at earlier, more mild stages of infection. Further investigation into the prevalence and impact of use of at-home expired antibiotics may be beneficial.

Risk Factors for Surgical Site Infection after Minor Dermatologic Surgery

BACKGROUND

Surgical site infection (SSI) after dermatologic surgery is associated with poor outcomes including increased recovery time, poor cosmesis, and repeat visits to doctors. Prophylactic antibiotics are prescribed to reduce these adverse outcomes. Identifying risk factors for SSI will facilitate judicious antibiotic prophylaxis.

OBJECTIVE

To identify risk factors for SSI after minor dermatologic surgery.

METHODS

Individual patient data from four large randomized controlled trials were combined to increase statistical power. A total of 3,819 adult patients requiring minor skin procedures at a single facility were recruited over a 10-year period. The main outcome measure was SSI.

MAIN RESULTS

A total of 298 infections occurred, resulting in an overall incidence of 7.8% (95% confidence interval [CI], 5.8-9.6), although the incidence varied across the four studies (P = .042). Significant risk factors identified were age (relative risk [RR], 1.01; 95% CI, 1.001-1.020; P = .008), excisions from the upper limbs (RR, 3.03; 95% CI, 1.76-5.22; P = .007) or lower limbs (RR, 3.99; 95% CI, 1.93-8.23; P = .009), and flap/two-layer procedures (RR, 3.23; 95% CI, 1.79-5.85; P = .008). Histology of the excised lesion was not a significant independent risk factor for infection.

CONCLUSIONS

This study demonstrated that patients who were older, underwent complex excisions, or had excisions on an extremity were at higher risk of developing an SSI. An awareness of such risk factors will guide evidence-based and targeted antibiotic prophylaxis.

Variations in the aftercare of facial wounds: a survey of maxillofacial clinicians

Good aftercare of traumatic wounds reduces the risk of infection and improves functional and aesthetic outcomes. Inconsistencies in the instructions given by oral and maxillofacial (OMF) surgeons to patients with facial lacerations have previously been noted. We therefore sent anonymous online surveys to OMF clinicians in the United Kingdom to investigate the extent of the variation in aftercare advice given to patients who have had traumatic lacerations of the skin of the head and neck. Respondents were asked about their current practice, including instructions on how to clean wounds, the provision of cleaning materials, use of topical dressings, and advice regarding dry time; also the number of days before the removal of sutures, and specialist review of facial wounds. A total of 63 responded. There was considerable variation within and between grades regarding the advice given. Advice varied and there was no consensus in any of the areas questioned. Robust evidence on the aftercare of traumatic lacerations is lacking. To develop practical guidelines for advice there is a need for further research in the area and further discussion about the aftercare of lacerations.

Effect of a Single Preoperative Dose of Oral Antibiotic to Reduce the Incidence of Surgical Site Infection Following Below-Knee Dermatological Flap and Graft Repair

Background

Surgical site infection (SSI) rates for below-knee dermatological surgery are unacceptably high, particularly following complex flap and graft closures. The role of antibiotic prophylaxis for these surgical cases is uncertain.

Objective

To determine whether SSI following complex dermatological closures on the leg could be reduced by antibiotic prophylaxis administered as a single oral preoperative dose.

Methods

A total of 115 participants were randomized to 2 g of oral cephalexin or placebo 40–60 minutes prior to surgical incision in a prospective, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial at a primary care skin cancer clinic in North Queensland, Australia.

Results

Overall 17/55 (30.9%) controls and 14/55 (25.5%) intervention participants developed infection (P = 0.525). There was no difference between the study groups in adverse symptoms that could be attributed to high-dose antibiotic administration (P = 1).

Conclusion

A single oral 2-g dose of cephalexin given before complex below-knee dermatological closure did not reduce SSI.

Efficacy and adverse effects of topical chloramphenicol ointment use for surgical wounds: a systematic review

BACKGROUND

Chloramphenicol ointment is often used in plastic and dermatologic surgery as a topical antibiotic for surgical wounds, but evidence regarding its efficacy and side effects is lacking. In addition, anecdotal fear of aplastic anaemia exists from the oral use of this drug. We performed a systematic review of the literature to assess the efficacy and side effect profile of topical chloramphenicol ointment on non-ocular surgical wounds.

METHODS

A systematic search of MEDLINE, EMBASE and the Cochrane Library from inception until 4 September 2017 was undertaken. Clinical studies of topical chloramphenicol ointment use on surgical wounds were included. Studies looking only at ocular use or those not available in full text or English were excluded. The review was conducted adhering to PRISMA guidelines.

RESULTS

After full-text review, five articles were included. Two were randomized controlled trials, one was retrospective case control and two were case studies. There was evidence that chloramphenicol ointment use on surgical wounds produced a non-statistically significant reduction in infection rates. Delayed hypersensitivity and acute oesophagitis were noted as potential side effects of non-ocular topical use. Aplastic anaemia was not reported.

CONCLUSION

There is a paucity of clinical data regarding the use of topical chloramphenicol ointment on surgical wounds. Further randomized controlled trials may be beneficial in order to support or refute its use in this setting.

A systematic review and meta-analysis on the use of prophylactic topical antibiotics for the prevention of uncomplicated wound infections

Background

The prescription of topical antibiotics for the prevention of infections in uncomplicated wounds is common. However, the efficacy is not well reported. Therefore, the objective of the study was to conduct a systematic review and meta-analysis of the available evidence on prevention of uncomplicated wound infections by prophylactic topical antibiotics.

Materials and methods

The search included Pubmed, Google Scholar, SCOPUS, Embase, Cochrane, ClinicalTrials.gov, International Clinical Trials Registry Platform, National Technical Information Service, and the National Guidelines Clearinghouse.

Results

We identified eight randomized controlled trials and four quasi-randomized trials that met the criteria for the systematic review. Of these trials, 11 studies were pooled for meta-analysis to compare the effects of topical antibiotics versus placebo and 4 studies were pooled for comparison of effects of topical antibiotics versus topical antiseptics on uncomplicated wounds. Fewer wound infections occurred in the topical antibiotic arms compared to placebo (pooled risk ratio: 0.57 [95% CI: 0.37 to 0.86]; p=0.01 and pooled risk difference: −3.1% [95% CI: −5.8% to −0.34%]; p=0.03). Compared to antiseptics, topical antibiotics demonstrated statistically significant relative risk reduction (pooled risk ratio: 0.56 [95% CI: 0.23 to 0.91]; p=0.02), while there was no significant absolute risk reduction (pooled risk difference: −3.7% [95% CI: −7.9% to +0.6%]; p=0.09).

Conclusion

Topical antibiotics are effective in reducing wound infections after surgical procedures, but the absolute benefit is small. Given the global emergence of antimicrobial resistance, judicious use of antibiotics is encouraged and use of antiseptics should be considered as a reasonable alternative to topical antibiotics.

Do perioperative antibiotics reduce the risk of surgical-site infections following excision of ulcerated skin cancers? A Critically Appraised Topic

AIM

To review the efficacy of perioperative antibiotics in reducing the risk of surgical-site infections (SSIs) following excision of ulcerated skin cancers.

SETTING AND DESIGN

Study selection, data extraction and analysis were carried out independently by four authors. Only randomized controlled trials (RCTs) reported in the English language were included.

INCLUDED STUDIES

RCTs in the English language in which patients received perioperative topical, intralesional or oral antibiotics for dermatological surgery, including Mohs micrographic surgery in general practice, dermatology or plastic surgery departments, were included.

OUTCOME

The proportion of participants developing SSI following excision of skin lesions.

RESULTS

Thirteen RCTs were identified from our literature search of PubMed and Embase, which evaluated SSI following use of topical (n = 5), oral (n = 3), intramuscular (n = 2), intravenous (n = 1) and intralesional antibiotics (n = 2) in dermatological surgery. Two RCTs specifically investigated SSIs in ulcerated skin cancer excisions; one RCT investigated the SSI rate following surgical treatment specifically for ulcerated skin cancers in individuals randomized to topical antibiotics vs. oral cephalexin; and one RCT compared intravenous cefazolin with no antibiotic, demonstrating significant reduction in SSI rates for ulcerated tumours (P = 0·04).

CONCLUSIONS

The heterogeneity of the RCTs included in this study makes it difficult to make a direct comparison of the outcomes measured. High-quality evidence demonstrating a beneficial effect of the use of perioperative antibiotics to prevent SSI following excision of ulcerated skin cancers is lacking. In the absence of an evidence base, we propose that a well-designed multicentre RCT could evaluate the effect of perioperative antibiotics following excision of ulcerated tumours, and potentially reduce inappropriate antibiotic prescription.

Topical antibiotics to prevent surgical site infection after minor surgery in primary care

Background

Surgical site infection (SSI) after minor surgery in primary care can compromise cosmetic outcomes, delay wound healing and increase costs. In addition to efficacy, adverse effects must be considered when considering antibiotic prophylaxis. There is no prior published literature regarding the proportion of general practitioners (GPs) who use topical antibiotics as SSI prophylaxis following minor surgery.

Objectives

To identify the proportion of GPs in a regional center in Queensland, Australia who apply topical antibiotics to wounds prevent SSIs after minor surgery.

Method

A database of 90 GPs was established, and they were invited to complete a questionnaire.

Results

The response rate was 62% (56/90). Topical antibiotics prophylaxis was reported as being used always or sometimes in routine practice by 18% (10/56) of participants after both skin lesion excision and repair of lacerations. In the context of high-risk situations, on the other hand, use was higher. They were more likely to be used in high-risk situations, most frequently in diabetic patients (41.0% [23/56]) and immunocompromised patients (46.5% [26/56]).

Conclusions

Evidence-based prescribing of antibiotics is vital. Topical antibiotic prophylaxis is often prescribed excessively after clean dermatological surgery, however, in our sample of GPs, only 18% used topical antibiotics always or sometimes in their practice.

Alcoholic versus aqueous chlorhexidine for skin antisepsis: the AVALANCHE trial

BACKGROUND

Preoperative skin antisepsis is routine practice. We compared alcoholic chlorhexidine with aqueous chlorhexidine for skin antisepsis to prevent surgical site infection after minor skin excisions in general practice.

METHODS

We conducted this prospective, multicentre, randomized controlled trial in 4 private general practices in North Queensland, Australia, from October 2015 to August 2016. Consecutive adult patients presenting for minor skin excisions were randomly assigned to undergo preoperative skin antisepsis with 0.5% chlorhexidine in 70% ethanol (intervention) or 0.5% chlorhexidine aqueous solution (control). Our primary outcome was surgical site infection within 30 days of excision. We also measured the incidence of adverse reactions.

RESULTS

A total of 916 patients were included in the study: 454 underwent antisepsis with alcoholic chlorhexidine and 462 with aqueous chlorhexidine. Of these, 909 completed follow-up. In the intention-to-treat analysis of cases available at follow-up, there was no significant difference in the incidence of surgical site infection between the alcoholic chlorhexidine arm (5.8%, 95% confidence interval [CI] 3.6% to 7.9%) and the aqueous chlorhexidine arm (6.8%, 95% CI 4.5% to 9.1%). The attributable risk reduction was 0.010 (95% CI -0.021 to 0.042), the relative risk was 0.85 (95% CI 0.51 to 1.41), and the number needed to treat to benefit was 100. Per protocol and sensitivity analyses produced similar results. The incidence of adverse reactions was low, with no difference between groups (p = 0.6).

INTERPRETATION

There was no significant difference in efficacy between alcoholic and aqueous chlorhexidine for the prevention of surgical site infection after minor skin excisions in general practice. Trial registration: https://www.anzctr.org.au, no. ACTRN12615001045505.

Application of Materials as Medical Devices with Localized Drug Delivery Capabilities for Enhanced Wound Repair

The plentiful assortment of natural and synthetic materials can be leveraged to accommodate diverse wound types, as well as different stages of the healing process. An ideal material is envisioned to promote tissue repair with minimal inconvenience for patients. Traditional materials employed in the clinical setting often invoke secondary complications, such as infection, pain, foreign body reaction, and chronic inflammation. This review surveys the repertoire of surgical sutures, wound dressings, surgical glues, orthopedic fixation devices and bone fillers with drug eluting capabilities. It highlights the various techniques developed to effectively incorporate drugs into the selected material or blend of materials for both soft and hard tissue repair. The mechanical and chemical attributes of the resultant materials are also discussed, along with their biological outcomes in vitro and/or in vivo. Perspectives and challenges regarding future research endeavors are also delineated for next-generation wound repair materials.

Novel in situ gel-forming solid dosage form (gfSDF) prepared by the simple syringe-based moulding: A screening study

The aim of this study was to prepare and optimize a novel type of in situ gel-forming solid dosage form (gfSDF) to be used in the treatment of mucosal/skin ulcerations. For this purpose, a simple but reliable syringe-based hot melt/moulding method was employed. Chloramphenicol (antibiotic) and ibuprofen (anti-inflammatory) were chosen as model active pharmaceutical ingredients (APIs) to be loaded into the gfSDFs. To optimize the formulations, the gfSDFs of different compositions were studied in terms of APIs release from the matrix, solid-state characteristics, gellification properties and gfSDFs resistance to mechanical stress. Release studies showed that both APIs were released at a constant rate at different pH (pH5 and 7.4, respectively) and the changes in the formulation composition affected the release behaviour. Differential scanning calorimetry (DSC) results evidenced the complete solubilization of both API in the solid matrix. Texture analysis showed that the gfSDFs were capable of swelling once in a contact with aqueous environment and that the textural properties changed extemporaneously from the solid to gel form. The gel formed after hydration exhibited high cohesiveness and adhesiveness, an indication of good mucoadhesion properties. Friability testing confirmed satisfactory physical strength for a solid dosage form.

Silver-containing dressing for surgical site infection in clean and clean-contaminated operations: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

BACKGROUND

Silver-containing dressings for the prevention of surgical site infections (SSIs) remained controversial, and accumulating evidence was lacking, so a meta-analysis was conducted to systematically assess the effectiveness and safety of silver-containing dressings for clean and clean-contaminated surgical incisions.

METHODS

Pubmed, Embase, and the Cochrane Library were searched from the inception to February 2016 for randomized controlled trials (RCTs), which explored silver-containing dressings for the prevention of SSIs in clean and clean-contaminated operations. Relative risk (RR) with 95% confidence interval (CI) was pooled using random effects model. Predefined subgroup analyses, sensitivity analyses, and influence analyses were further undertaken.

RESULTS

Nine RCTs totaling 2196 patients (1141 in silver-containing group and 1055 in control group) were included. Silver-containing dressings did not effectively prevent the incidence of SSIs (9 RCTs; RR: 0.92; 95% CI: 0.66-1.29; I2 = 40%), superficial SSIs (5 RCTs; RR: 0.67; 95% CI: 0.36-1.24; I2 = 36%), and deep SSIs (5 RCTs; RR: 0.78; 95% CI: 0.41-1.49; I2 = 0). Subgroup analyses, sensitivity analyses, and influence analyses confirmed the robustness of the pooled estimate.

CONCLUSIONS

The current available evidence indicated that silver-containing dressing as compared with silver-free dressing was not associated with lower incidence of SSIs. Considering the quality of evidence ranking very low, further studies with higher quality should be warranted.

Meta-analysis of randomized and quasi-randomized clinical trials of topical antibiotics after primary closure for the prevention of surgical-site infection

BACKGROUND

Surgical-site infections (SSIs) increase patient morbidity and costs. The aim was to identify and synthesize all RCTs evaluating the effect of topical antibiotics on SSI in wounds healing by primary intention.

METHODS

The search included Ovid MEDLINE, Ovid Embase, the Cochrane Wounds Specialized Register, Central Register of Controlled Trials and EBSCO CINAHL from inception to May 2016. There was no restriction of language, date or setting. Two authors independently selected studies, extracted data and assessed risk of bias. When sufficient numbers of comparable trials were available, data were pooled in meta-analysis.

RESULTS

Fourteen RCTs with 6466 participants met the inclusion criteria. Pooling of eight trials (5427 participants) showed that topical antibiotics probably reduced the risk of SSI compared with no topical antibiotic (risk ratio (RR) 0·61, 95 per cent c.i. 0·42 to 0·87; moderate-quality evidence), equating to 20 fewer SSIs per 1000 patients treated. Pooling of three trials (3012 participants) for risk of allergic contact dermatitis found no clear difference between antibiotics and no antibiotic (RR 3·94, 0·46 to 34·00; very low-quality evidence). Pooling of five trials (1299 participants) indicated that topical antibiotics probably reduce the risk of SSI compared with topical antiseptics (RR 0·49, 0·30 to 0·80; moderate-quality evidence); 43 fewer SSIs per 1000 patients treated. Pooling of two trials (541 participants) showed no clear difference in the risk of allergic contact dermatitis with antibiotics or antiseptic agents (RR 0·97, 0·52 to 1·82; very low-quality evidence).

CONCLUSION

Topical antibiotics probably prevent SSI compared with no topical antibiotic or antiseptic. No conclusion can be drawn regarding whether they cause allergic contact dermatitis.

Addressing Practice Gaps in Cutaneous Surgery: Advances in Diagnosis and Treatment

Importance

Cutaneous surgery is performed by otolaryngologists, plastic surgeons, oculoplastic surgeons, dermatologic surgeons, and some primary care physicians. Practice gaps exist among cutaneous surgeons, as do differences in how different physicians approach preoperative, intraoperative, and postoperative decision-making.

Objective

To present the newest and best evidence to close common practice gaps in cutaneous surgery.

Evidence Review

We performed a detailed search of peer-reviewed publications that were identified through a search of PubMed/MEDLINE (January 1, 2000, through June 30, 2016) using the literature search terms "cutaneous surgery," "Mohs micrographic surgery," "plastic surgery," in combination with "safety," "cost," "anesthesia," "anti-coagulation," "bleeding," "pain," "analgesia," "anxiety," or "infection," among others. Bibliographies from these references, as well as meta-analyses, were also reviewed.

Findings

A total of 73 peer-reviewed studies, including randomized clinical trials, were selected to support the conclusions of the article. Levels of evidence were analyzed for selected studies using recommendations from the American Association of Plastic Surgeons based on guidelines from the Oxford Centre for Evidence-Based Medicine. Large cutaneous surgical resections can be done effectively and safely, taking steps to assure patient comfort under local anesthesia. Medically necessary anticoagulant and antiplatelet medication should be continued during cutaneous surgery. In preparation for surgery, patient anxiety and pain must be addressed. Music and anxiolytics limit anxiety, prevent cardiovascular compromise, and improve patient satisfaction. Cutaneous surgeons and support staff should carefully consider the dose and injection angle of local anesthetic. Postoperative opioids and topical antibiotics might cause harm to patients and should be avoided. Acetaminophen and ibuprofen provide adequate pain control with fewer adverse effects than opioid medications.

Conclusions and Relevance

Clinicians performing cutaneous surgery should understand the importance of patient safety and comfort, as guided by recent evidence.

Dressings for the prevention of surgical site infection

BACKGROUND

Surgical wounds (incisions) heal by primary intention when the wound edges are brought together and secured, often with sutures, staples, or clips. Wound dressings applied after wound closure may provide physical support, protection and absorb exudate. There are many different types of wound dressings available and wounds can also be left uncovered (exposed). Surgical site infection (SSI) is a common complication of wounds and this may be associated with using (or not using) dressings, or different types of dressing.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effects of wound dressings compared with no wound dressings, and the effects of alternative wound dressings, in preventing SSIs in surgical wounds healing by primary intention.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the following databases: the Cochrane Wounds Specialised Register (searched 19 September 2016); the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL; the Cochrane Library 2016, Issue 8); Ovid MEDLINE (including In-Process & Other Non-Indexed Citations, MEDLINE Daily and Epub Ahead of Print; 1946 to 19 September 2016); Ovid Embase (1974 to 19 September 2016); EBSCO CINAHL Plus (1937 to 19 September 2016).There were no restrictions based on language, date of publication or study setting.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing wound dressings with wound exposure (no dressing) or alternative wound dressings for the postoperative management of surgical wounds healing by primary intention.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors performed study selection, 'Risk of bias' assessment and data extraction independently.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 29 trials (5718 participants). All studies except one were at an unclear or high risk of bias. Studies were small, reported low numbers of SSI events and were often not clearly reported. There were 16 trials that included people with wounds resulting from surgical procedures with a 'clean' classification, five trials that included people undergoing what was considered 'clean/contaminated' surgery, with the remaining studies including people undergoing a variety of surgical procedures with different contamination classifications. Four trials compared wound dressings with no wound dressing (wound exposure); the remaining 25 studies compared alternative dressing types, with the majority comparing a basic wound contact dressing with film dressings, silver dressings or hydrocolloid dressings. The review contains 11 comparisons in total.

PRIMARY OUTCOME

SSIIt is uncertain whether wound exposure or any dressing reduces or increases the risk of SSI compared with alternative options investigated: we assessed the certainty of evidence as very low for most comparisons (and low for others), with downgrading (according to GRADE criteria) largely due to risk of bias and imprecision. We summarise the results of comparisons with meta-analysed data below:- film dressings compared with basic wound contact dressings following clean surgery (RR 1.34, 95% CI 0.70 to 2.55), very low certainty evidence downgraded once for risk of bias and twice for imprecision.- hydrocolloid dressings compared with basic wound contact dressings following clean surgery (RR 0.91, 95% CI 0.30 to 2.78), very low certainty evidence downgraded once for risk of bias and twice for imprecision.- hydrocolloid dressings compared with basic wound contact dressings following potentially contaminated surgery (RR 0.57, 95% CI 0.22 to 1.51), very low certainty evidence downgraded twice for risk of bias and twice for imprecision.- silver-containing dressings compared with basic wound contact dressings following clean surgery (RR 1.11, 95% CI 0.47 to 2.62), very low certainty evidence downgraded once for risk of bias and twice for imprecision.- silver-containing dressings compared with basic wound contact dressings following potentially contaminated surgery (RR 0.83, 95% CI 0.51 to 1.37), very low certainty evidence downgraded twice for risk of bias and twice for imprecision. Secondary outcomesThere was limited and low or very low certainty evidence on secondary outcomes such as scarring, acceptability of dressing and ease of removal, and uncertainty whether wound dressings influenced these outcomes.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

It is uncertain whether covering surgical wounds healing by primary intention with wound dressings reduces the risk of SSI, or whether any particular wound dressing is more effective than others in reducing the risk of SSI, improving scarring, reducing pain, improving acceptability to patients, or is easier to remove. Most studies in this review were small and at a high or unclear risk of bias. Based on the current evidence, decision makers may wish to base decisions about how to dress a wound following surgery on dressing costs as well as patient preference.

Topical antibiotics for preventing surgical site infection in wounds healing by primary intention

BACKGROUND

Surgical site infections (SSI) can delay wound healing, impair cosmetic outcome and increase healthcare costs. Topical antibiotics are sometimes used to reduce microbial contaminant exposure following surgical procedures, with the aim of reducing SSIs.

OBJECTIVES

The primary objective of this review was to determine whether the application of topical antibiotics to surgical wounds that are healing by primary intention reduces the incidence of SSI and whether it increases the incidence of adverse outcomes (allergic contact dermatitis, infections with patterns of antibiotic resistance and anaphylaxis).

SEARCH METHODS

In May 2015 we searched: the Cochrane Wounds Specialised Register; the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL; the Cochrane Library); Ovid MEDLINE; Ovid MEDLINE (In-Process & Other Non-Indexed Citations); Ovid Embase and EBSCO CINAHL. We also searched clinical trial registries for ongoing studies, and bibliographies of relevant publications to identify further eligible trials. There was no restriction of language, date of study or setting. The search was repeated in May 2016 to ensure currency of included studies.

SELECTION CRITERIA

All randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and quasi-randomised trials that assessed the effects of topical antibiotics (any formulation, including impregnated dressings) in people with surgical wounds healing by primary intention were eligible for inclusion.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently selected studies and independently extracted data. Two authors then assessed the studies for risk of bias. Risk ratios were calculated for dichotomous variables, and when a sufficient number of comparable trials were available, trials were pooled in a meta-analysis.

MAIN RESULTS

A total of 10 RCTs and four quasi-randomised trials with 6466 participants met the inclusion criteria. Six studies involved minor procedures conducted in an outpatient or emergency department setting; eight studies involved major surgery conducted in theatre. Nine different topical antibiotics were included. We included two three-arm trials, two four-arm trials and 10 two-arm trials. The control groups comprised; an alternative topical antibiotic (two studies), topical antiseptic (six studies) and no topical antibiotic (10 studies), which comprised inert ointment (five studies) no treatment (four studies) and one study with one arm of each.The risk of bias of the 14 studies varied. Seven studies were at high risk of bias, five at unclear risk of bias and two at low risk of bias. Most risk of bias concerned risk of selection bias.Twelve of the studies (6259 participants) reported infection rates, although we could not extract the data for this outcome from one study. Four studies (3334 participants) measured allergic contact dermatitis as an outcome. Four studies measured positive wound swabs for patterns of antimicrobial resistance, for which there were no outcomes reported. No episodes of anaphylaxis were reported. Topical antibiotic versus no topical antibioticWe pooled the results of eight trials (5427 participants) for the outcome of SSI. Topical antibiotics probably reduce the risk of SSI in people with surgical wounds healing by primary intention compared with no topical antibiotic (RR 0.61, 95% CI 0.42 to 0.87; moderate-quality evidence downgraded once for risk of bias). This equates to 20 fewer SSIs per 1000 patients treated with topical antibiotics (95% CI 7 to 29) and a number needed to treat for one additional beneficial outcome (NNTB) (i.e. prevention of one SSI) of 50.We pooled the results of three trials (3012 participants) for the outcome of allergic contact dermatitis, however this comparison was underpowered, and it is unclear whether topical antibiotics affect the risk of allergic contact dermatitis (RR 3.94, 95% CI 0.46 to 34.00; very low-quality evidence, downgraded twice for risk of bias, once for imprecision). Topical antibiotic versus antiseptic We pooled the results of five trials (1299 participants) for the outcome of SSI. Topical antibiotics probably reduce the risk of SSI in people with surgical wounds healing by primary intention compared with using topical antiseptics (RR 0.49, 95% CI 0.30 to 0.80; moderate-quality evidence downgraded once for risk of bias). This equates to 43 fewer SSIs per 1000 patients treated with topical antibiotics instead of antiseptics (95% CI 17 to 59) and an NNTB of 24.We pooled the results of two trials (541 participants) for the outcome of allergic contact dermatitis; there was no clear difference in the risk of dermatitis between topical antibiotics and antiseptics, however this comparison was underpowered and a difference cannot be ruled out (RR 0.97, 95% CI 0.52 to 1.82; very low-quality evidence, downgraded twice for risk of bias and once for imprecision). Topical antibiotic versus topical antibioticOne study (99 participants) compared mupirocin ointment with a combination ointment of neomycin/polymyxin B/bacitracin zinc for the outcome of SSI. There was no clear difference in the risk of SSI, however this comparison was underpowered (very low-quality evidence downgraded twice for risk of bias, once for imprecision).A four-arm trial involved two antibiotic arms (neomycin sulfate/bacitracin zinc/polymyxin B sulphate combination ointment versus bacitracin zinc, 219 participants). There was no clear difference in risk of SSI between the combination ointment and the bacitracin zinc ointment. The quality of evidence for this outcome was low, downgraded once for risk of bias, and once for imprecision.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Topical antibiotics applied to surgical wounds healing by primary intention probably reduce the risk of SSI relative to no antibiotic, and relative to topical antiseptics (moderate quality evidence). We are unable to draw conclusions regarding the effects of topical antibiotics on adverse outcomes such as allergic contact dermatitis due to lack of statistical power (small sample sizes). We are also unable to draw conclusions regarding the impact of increasing topical antibiotic use on antibiotic resistance. The relative effects of different topical antibiotics are unclear.

Protocol for a randomised controlled trial comparing aqueous with alcoholic chlorhexidine antisepsis for the prevention of superficial surgical site infection after minor surgery in general practice: the AVALANCHE trial

INTRODUCTION

Surgical site infection (SSI) after minor skin excisions has a significant impact on patient morbidity and healthcare resources. Skin antisepsis prior to surgical incision is used to prevent SSI, and is performed routinely worldwide. However, in spite of the routine use of skin antisepsis, there is no consensus regarding which antiseptic agents are most effective. The AVALANCHE trial will compare Aqueous Versus Alcoholic Antisepsis with Chlorhexidine for Skin Excisions.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

The study design is a prospective, randomised controlled trial (RCT) with the aim of investigating the impact of two different antiseptic preparations on the incidence of superficial SSI in patients undergoing minor skin excisions. The intervention of 0.5% chlorhexidine gluconate (CHG) in 70% alcohol will be compared with that of 0.5% CHG in aqueous solution. The trial will be conducted in four Australian general practices over a 9-month period, with 920 participants to be recruited. Consecutive patients presenting for minor skin excisions will be eligible to participate. Randomisation will be on the level of the patient. The primary outcome is superficial SSI in the first 30 days following the excision. Secondary outcomes will be adverse effects, including anaphylaxis, skin irritation, contact dermatitis and rash and patterns of antibiotic resistance.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

The study has been approved by the James Cook University Human Research Ethics Committee (HREC). Findings will be disseminated in conference presentations and journals and through online electronic media.

DISCUSSION

RCTs conducted in general practice differ from hospital-based projects in terms of feasibility, pragmatism and funding. The success of this trial will be cemented in the fact that the research question was established by a group of general practitioners who identified an interesting question which is relevant to their clinical practice and not answered by current evidence.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

ACTRN12615001045505; Pre-results.

Surgical site infections in dermatologic surgery: etiology, pathogenesis, and current preventative measures

BACKGROUND

Surgical site infections (SSIs) after dermatologic surgery continue to represent undesirable complications that affect patients in several aspects. The etiology and pathogenesis of SSIs are not completely understood, and as a result, current preventative measures are debatable.

OBJECTIVE

To review and summarize the current available literature specific to SSIs in dermatologic surgery. The pathogenesis of SSIs, factors contributing to SSIs, current preventative guidelines, and evidence supporting their use are explored.

METHODS

A review of the medical literature.

RESULTS AND CONCLUSIONS

Most measures used to prevent SSIs in dermatologic surgery are based on studies of wounds in general surgery. Evidence specific to dermatologic surgery is scarce. More research related to the pathogenesis of SSIs is needed to establish effective preventative measures that are key to reducing incidences of SSIs.

Retrospective Clinical Trial of Fusidic Acid versus Petrolatum in the Postprocedure Care of Clean Dermatologic Procedures

BACKGROUND

Clean dermatologic procedures create wounds with a low risk of infection (usually up to 5%). Whether the use of topical antibiotics is advocated, with regard to its efficacy and safety issues such as antibiotic resistance and sensitizing potential, is controversial. Fusidic acid, a topical antibiotic against gram-positive bacteria, is a rare sensitizer and commonly used in postprocedure care in Korea.

OBJECTIVE

This is a retrospective study aimed at comparing the efficacy and safety between fusidic acid and petrolatum for the postprocedure care of clean dermatologic procedures.

METHODS

Patients were treated with either fusidic acid or petrolatum ointment, applied on the wound created during clean dermatologic procedures such as biopsy of the punch, incisional, excisional, and shave types. The efficacy, adverse events, and subjective level of satisfaction were retrieved from medical records.

RESULTS

A total of 414 patients with a total of 429 wounds were enrolled. The overall rate of adverse events was 0.9%, and the rates of adverse events in the fusidic acid group and the petrolatum group were 1.4% and 0.5%, respectively (p=0.370). There was no wound discharge, pain, tenderness, swelling, induration, or dehiscence in both groups. The patients' self-assessment of the wound was not significantly different between the two treatment groups.

CONCLUSION

Our findings support the hypothesis that the routine prophylactic use of topical antibiotics is not indicated for clean dermatologic procedures. We recommend the use of petrolatum in the postoperative care of clean dermatologic procedures because of its equivalent efficacy and superior safety profiles.

IPNs from Cyclodextrin:Chitosan Antioxidants: Bonding, Bio-Adhesion, Antioxidant Capacity and Drug Release

IPNs are unique “alloys” of cross-linked polymers in which at least one network is synthesized and/or cross-linked in the presence of the other. IPNs are also known as entanglements of polymer networks that are ideally held together only by permanent topological interactions. The objectives of this study are to evaluate novel chitosan-based functional drug delivery systems that can be successfully incorporated into “dual action bioactive tooth restorative materials”. These materials should be capable of inducing an improved wound healing prototype. The novel hydrogels will be investigated with respect to the antioxidant capacity of conventional antioxidants, such as resveratrol, β-carotene and propolis, as a designer drug delivery system, with the use of SEM imaging for the characterization of the surfaces, bio-adhesive property, antioxidant capacity, free radical defence, antioxidant, active ingredient stability and reactive features of novel materials. The additional benefit of the site-specific “functional restorative material” for use in dressings to deliver antibiotics to wound sites can provide tissue compatibility and reduced interference with wound healing. The materials were tested using an effective in vitro free radical generation model as functional additive prototypes for further development of “dual function restorative wound healing materials”. We quantified the effects of functional designer biomaterials on the dentin bond strength of a composite and evaluated the bio-adhesive capacity of the materials in the two separate “in vitro” systems. The added benefits of the chitosan/vitamin C/cyclodextrin (CD) host:guest complex-treated hydrogels involved a positive influence on the tetracycline release, increased dentin bond strength, as well as a demonstrated in vitro “built-in” free radical defence mechanism and, therefore, acting as a “proof of concept” for functional multi-dimensional restorative wound healing materials with a built-in free radical defence mechanism. Based on our results, we can conclude that the CD:chitosan-antioxidant-containing hydrogels are a suitable carrier for tetracycline to be slow-released. Within the limitations of the study design, chitosan-based hydrogels are suitable materials for functional restorative and wound healing applications in vitro. Cytotoxicity data are currently being evaluated in our laboratory.

Dressings for the prevention of surgical site infection

BACKGROUND

Surgical wounds (incisions) heal by primary intention when the wound edges are brought together and secured - often with sutures, staples, clips or glue. Wound dressings, usually applied after wound closure, provide physical support, protection from bacterial contamination and absorb exudate. Surgical site infection (SSI) is a common complication of surgical wounds that may delay healing.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effects of wound dressings for preventing SSI in people with surgical wounds healing by primary intention.

SEARCH METHODS

In February 2014 we searched: The Cochrane Wounds Group Specialised Register; The Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) (The Cochrane Library); The Database of Abstracts of Reviews of Effects (DARE) (The Cochrane Library); The Health Technology Assessment Database (HTA) (The Cochrane Library); NHS Economic Evaluation Database (NHSEED) (The Cochrane Library); Ovid MEDLINE; Ovid MEDLINE (In-Process & Other Non-Indexed Citations); Ovid EMBASE and EBSCO CINAHL. There were no restrictions based on language or date of publication or study setting.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing alternative wound dressings or wound dressing with no dressing (wound exposure) for the postoperative management of surgical wounds healing by primary intention.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors performed study selection, risk of bias assessment and data extraction independently.

MAIN RESULTS

Twenty RCTs were included (3623 participants). All trials were at unclear or high risk of bias. Twelve trials included people with wounds resulting from surgical procedures with a contamination classification of 'clean', two trials included people with wounds resulting from surgical procedures with a 'clean/contaminated' contamination classification and the remaining trials evaluated people with wounds resulting from various surgical procedures with different contamination classifications. Two trials compared wound dressings with leaving wounds exposed. The remaining 18 trials compared two alternative dressing types. No evidence was identified to suggest that any dressing significantly reduced the risk of developing an SSI compared with leaving wounds exposed or compared with alternative dressings in people who had surgical wounds healing by primary intention.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

At present, there is insufficient evidence as to whether covering surgical wounds healing by primary intention with wound dressings reduces the risk of SSI or whether any particular wound dressing is more effective than others in reducing the rates of SSI, improving scarring, pain control, patient acceptability or ease of dressing removal. Most trials in this review were small and at high or unclear risk of bias. However, based on the current evidence, we conclude that decisions on wound dressing should be based on dressing costs and the symptom management properties offered by each dressing type e.g. exudate management.

Potentials of chitosan-based delivery systems in wound therapy: bioadhesion study

Chitosan is currently proposed to be one of the most promising polymers in wound dressing development. Our research focuses on its potential as a vehicle for nano-delivery systems destined for burn therapy. One of the most important features of wound dressing is its bioadhesion to the wounded site. We compared the bioadhesive properties of chitosan with those of Carbopol, a synthetic origin polymer. Chitosan-based hydrogels of different molecular weights were first analyzed by texture analysis for gel cohesiveness, adhesiveness and hardness. In vitro release studies showed no difference in release of model antimicrobial drug from the different hydrogel formulations. Bioadhesion tests were performed on pig ear skin and the detachment force, necessary to remove the die from the skin, and the amount of remaining formulation on the skin were determined. Although no significant difference regarding detachment force could be seen between Carbopol-based and chitosan-based formulations, almost double the amount of chitosan formulation remained on the skin as compared to Carbopol formulations. The findings confirmed the great potential of chitosan-based delivery systems in advanced wound therapy. Moreover, results suggest that formulation retention on the ex vivo skin samples could provide deeper insight on formulation bioadhesiveness than the determination of detachment force.

Molecular diagnostics and personalised medicine in wound care: assessment of outcomes

OBJECTIVE

This large, level A, retrospective cohort study set out to compare healing outcomes in three large cohorts of wound patients managed universally for bioburden: standard of care group, who were prescribed systemic antibiotics on the basis of empiric and traditional culture-based methodologies; treatment group 1, who were prescribed an improved selection of systemic antibiotics based on the results of molecular diagnostics; treatment group 2 who received personalised topical therapeutics (including antibiotics) based on the results of molecular diagnostics.

METHOD

Apart from the differences in diagnostic methods and antibiotic treatments described above, all three cohorts were subjected to the same biofilm-based wound care protocol, which included evaluation of the host and bioburden, frequent sharp debridement, use of wound dressings and comprehensive standard care (reperfusion therapy, nutritional support, offloading, compression and management of comorbidities).

RESULTS

In all, 1378 patients were recruited into the study. In the standard of care group 48.5% of patients (244/503) healed completely during the 7-month study period. This increased to 62.4% (298/479) in treatment group 1 and 90.4% (358/396) in treatment group 2. Cox proportional hazards analysis revealed the time to complete closure decreased by 26% in treatment group 1 (p<0.001) and 45.9% in treatment group 2 (p<0.001) compared with the standard of care group. Patients in treatment group 2 had >200% better odds of healing at any given time point compared with the other cohorts.

CONCLUSION

Implementation of personalised topical therapeutics guided by molecular diagnosis resulted in statistically and clinically significant improvements in outcome. The integration of molecular diagnostics and personalised medicine provides a directed and targeted approach to wound care.

CONFLICT OF INTEREST

SED and RDW are owners of PathoGenius Laboratories, a clinical diagnostic laboratory. SED and RDW are owners of Research and Testing Laboratory, which develops molecular diagnostics. CJ and JK are clinical advisors for PathoGenius. CJ and JK are owners of Southeastern Medical Compounding, Savannah, GA and Southeastern Medical Technologies, Savannah, GA.

Dressings for the prevention of surgical site infection

BACKGROUND

Surgical wounds (incisions) heal by primary intention when the wound edges are brought together and secured - often with sutures, staples, clips or glue. Wound dressings, usually applied after wound closure, provide physical support, protection from bacterial contamination and absorb exudate. Surgical site infection (SSI) is a common complication of surgical wounds that may delay healing.

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the effects of wound dressings for preventing SSI in people with surgical wounds healing by primary intention.

SEARCH STRATEGY

We searched the Cochrane Wounds Group Specialised Register (searched 10 May 2011); The Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) (The Cochrane Library 2011 Issue 2); Ovid MEDLINE (1950 to April Week 4 2011); Ovid MEDLINE (In-Process & Other Non-Indexed Citations, May 9, 2011); Ovid EMBASE (1980 to 2011 Week 18); EBSCO CINAHL (1982 to 6 May 2011). There were no restrictions based on language or date of publication.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing alternative wound dressings or wound dressings with leaving wounds exposed for postoperative management of surgical wounds healing by primary intention.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors performed study selection, risk of bias assessment and data extraction independently.

MAIN RESULTS

Sixteen RCTs were included (2578 participants). All trials were at unclear or high risk of bias. Nine trials included people with wounds resulting from surgical procedures with a contamination classification of 'clean', two trials included people with wounds resulting from surgical procedures with a 'clean/contaminated' contamination classification and the remaining trials evaluated people with wounds resulting from various surgical procedures with different contamination classifications. Two trials compared wound dressings with leaving wounds exposed. The remaining 14 trials compared two alternative dressing types. No evidence was identified to suggest that any dressing significantly reduced the risk of developing an SSI compared with leaving wounds exposed or compared with alternative dressings in people who had surgical wounds healing by secondary intention.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

At present, there is no evidence to suggest that covering surgical wounds healing by primary intention with wound dressings reduces the risk of SSI or that any particular wound dressing is more effective than others in reducing the rates of SSI, improving scarring, pain control, patient acceptability or ease of dressing removal. Most trials in this review were small and of poor quality at high or unclear risk of bias. However, based on the current evidence, we conclude that decisions on wound dressing should be based on dressing costs and the symptom management properties offered by each dressing type e.g. exudate management.

The role of topical antibiotics used as prophylaxis in surgical site infection prevention

Compared with systemic antibiotic therapy, the topical or local delivery of an antibiotic has many potential advantages. However, local antibiotics at the surgical site have received very limited approval in any of the surgical prophylaxis consensus guidelines that we are aware of. A review of the literature was carried out through searches of peer-reviewed publications in PubMed in the English language over a 30 year period between January 1980 and May 2010. Both retrospective and prospective studies were included, as well as meta-analyses. With regard to defining 'topical' or 'local' antibiotic application, the application of an antibiotic solution to the surgical site intraoperatively or immediately post-operatively was included. A number of surgical procedures have been shown to significantly benefit from perioperative topical prophylaxis, e.g. joint arthroplasty, cataract surgery and, possibly, breast augmentation. In obese patients undergoing abdominal surgery, topical surgical prophylaxis is also proven to be beneficial. The selective use of topical antibiotics as surgical prophylaxis is justified for specific procedures, such as joint arthroplasty, cataract surgery and, possibly, breast augmentation. In selective cases, such as obese patients undergoing abdominal surgery, topical surgical prophylaxis is also proven to be beneficial. Apart from these specific indications, the evidence for use of topical antibiotics in surgery is lacking in conclusive randomized controlled trials.

Minor surgery activity in primary care

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study was to describe the activity in our Outpatient Minor Surgery unit during its first five-year period.

DESIGN

Retrospective descriptive study.

METHODS

It was carried out in two centres of a Basic Health Area with a catchment area of 73,000 inhabitants.

PARTICIPANTS

Patients who underwent surgery from January 2002 to December 2007 were included in the research.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Information on the sociodemographic data of the patients, characteristics of the lesions, risk factors, treatment and its complications was gathered.

RESULTS

A total of 2317 surgical procedures was performed on 1520 patients. The mean was 46 years old and 52% were men. The concordance between clinical and anatomopathological diagnosis was 81%. There were complications in 5% of them. The main pathologies were: epidermoid cysts (22%), nevus (20%) and fibromas (18%). They were mainly located in the back (24%), superior extremities (14%) and head (11%). In 73% mepivicaine was used as anaesthetic. The most current techniques used were: incision (36%), curettage (33%) and fusiform excision (28%). Less than 1% had malignant lesions, 50% of which were not diagnosed clinically. The mean waiting time was 30 days. Ninety-two percent had the informed consent.

CONCLUSIONS

Minor surgery in primary care is feasible and has a good clinicopathological concordance and minimum complications, but some malignant lesions are overlooked in the diagnosis based exclusively on clinical criteria.

Antibacterial prophylaxis in dermatologic surgery: an evidence-based review

Clean, non-contaminated skin surgery is associated with low rates of surgical site infection (SSI), bacterial endocarditis, and joint prosthesis infection. Hence, antibacterial prophylaxis, which may be associated with adverse effects, the emergence of multidrug-resistant pathogens, and anaphylaxis, is generally not recommended in dermatologic surgery. Some body sites and surgical reconstructive procedures are associated with higher infection rates, and guidelines for SSI antibacterial prophylaxis have been proposed for these cases. Large prospective, controlled trials are needed to ascertain the role of oral SSI prophylaxis for these surgical sites and procedures especially in patients with diabetes mellitus who are intrinsically at greater risk of SSI. Topical antibacterial ointment and sterile paraffin appear to make no difference to healing or the incidence of SSIs in clean wounds. Although further research is needed, preliminary studies have shown that intraincisional antibacterials, which may be associated with fewer adverse effects and a lower risk of multidrug-resistant bacteria, could potentially be helpful for SSI prophylaxis. Trials using honey- and silver-impregnated dressings have found no advantage in the healing of chronic wounds. However, several case studies, which need corroboration in larger studies, suggest that these dressings may be helpful in preventing and treating SSIs. Bacterial endocarditis and joint prosthesis infection prophylaxis are not routinely recommended in cutaneous surgery. The updated 2007 American Heart Association guidelines now advocate bacterial endocarditis prophylaxis for high-risk cardiac patients having surgery involving the oral mucosa or infected skin. The latest American Dental Association/American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgery guidelines recommend considering antibacterial prophylaxis for oral procedures where bleeding is anticipated and for surgery involving acute orofacial skin infections if the patient has had a total joint replacement within 2 years or is in a high-risk group and has had a joint replacement at any time.