Modeling open surgery in mice to explore peritoneal damage, carbon dioxide humidification and desmoidogenesis

Does intra-operative humidification with warmed CO2 reduce surgical site infection in open colorectal surgery? A randomized control trial

BACKGROUNDS

Surgical site infections (SSI) are a significant cause of postoperative morbidity and mortality, contributing to a considerable financial burden on the healthcare system. Insufflation of the open surgical wound with warm, humidified carbon dioxide (CO₂ ) is a novel measure aimed to reduce SSI. The local atmosphere of warm, humidified CO₂ within the open surgical wound is proposed to decrease airborne contamination, bacterial growth, desiccation, and heat loss while improving tissue oxygenation and perfusion. This randomized controlled trial evaluates the impact of the HumiGard™ surgical humidification system on the incidence of SSI in patients undergoing open colorectal surgery.

METHODS

We conducted a multi-site single-blinded randomized control trial on patients undergoing elective or emergency laparotomy at a single tertiary Colorectal Surgery service. The primary outcome measure was the incidence of SSI, with secondary outcomes including ICU length of stay (LOS), total LOS and mean core temperature.

RESULTS

Patients who received HumiGard™ had a lower incidence of SSI, although this did not reach statistical significance (4.5% for treatment group versus 13.0% for control group; P = 0.092). There was no significant difference in ICU LOS or total LOS between cohorts. The HumiGard™ group had a higher mean core temperature than the control at the end of surgery (P < 0.001).

CONCLUSION

The present study could not confirm that utilization of warm, humidified CO2 with HumiGard™ reduces SSI in open colorectal surgery. Further research is indicated to validate and extend these findings.

Effect of Surgical Humidification on Inflammation and Peritoneal Trauma in Colorectal Cancer Surgery: A Randomized Controlled Trial

BACKGROUND

Pre-clinical studies indicate that dry-cold-carbon-dioxide (DC-CO2) insufflation leads to more peritoneal damage, inflammation and hypothermia compared with humidified-warm-CO₂ (HW-CO2). Peritoneum and core temperature in patients undergoing colorectal cancer (CRC) surgery were compared.

METHODS

Sixty-six patients were randomized into laparoscopic groups; those insufflated with DC-CO2 or HW-CO2. A separate group of nineteen patients undergoing laparotomy were randomised to conventional surgery or with the insertion of a device delivering HW-CO2. Temperatures were monitored and peritoneal biopsies and bloods were taken at the start of surgery, at 1 and 3 h. Further bloods were taken depending upon hospital length-of-stay (LOS). Peritoneal samples were subjected to scanning electron microscopy to evaluate mesothelial damage.

RESULTS

Laparoscopic cases experienced a temperature drop despite Bair-Hugger^TM use. HW-CO2 restored normothermia (≥ 36.5 °C) by 3 h, DC-CO2 did not. LOS was shorter for colon compared with rectal cancer cases and if insufflated with HW-CO2 compared with DC-CO2; 5.0 vs 7.2 days, colon and 11.6 vs 15.4 days rectum, respectively. Unexpectedly, one third of patients had pre-existing damage. Damage increased at 1 and 3 h to a greater extent in the DC-CO2 compared with the HW-CO2 laparoscopic cohort. C-reactive protein levels were higher in open than laparoscopic cases and lower in both matched HW-CO2 groups.

CONCLUSIONS

This prospective RCT is in accord with animal studies while highlighting pre-existing damage in some patients. Peritoneal mesothelium protection, reduced inflammation and restoration of core-body temperature data suggest benefit with the use of HW-CO2 in patients undergoing CRC surgery.