Guideline for Prevention of Surgical Site Infection, 1999 ☆ ☆☆ ★ ★★

The “Guideline for Prevention of Surgical Site Infection, 1999” presents the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC)'s recommendations for the prevention of surgical site infections (SSIs), formerly called surgical wound infections. This two-part guideline updates and replaces previous guidelines.Part I, “Surgical Site Infection: An Overview,” describes the epidemiology, definitions, microbiology, pathogenesis, and surveillance of SSIs. Included is a detailed discussion of the pre-, intra-, and postoperative issues relevant to SSI genesis.

/pdf/guideline-for-prevention-of-surgical-site-infection-1999-2k3en33kqw.pdf

Guideline for Prevention of Surgical Site Infection, 1999

Major surgery is still associated with undesirable sequelae such as pain, cardiopulmonary, infective and thromboembolic complications, cerebral dysfunction, nausea and gastrointestinal paralysis, fatigue and prolonged convalescence. The key pathogenic factor in postoperative morbidity, excluding failures of surgical and anaesthetic technique, is the surgical stress response with subsequent increased demands on organ function. These changes in organ function are thought to be mediated by trauma-induced endocrine metabolic changes and activation of several biological cascade systems (cytokines, complement, arachidonic acid metabolites, nitric oxide, free oxygen radicals, etc). To understand postoperative morbidity it is therefore necessary to understand the pathophysiological role of the various components of the surgical stress response and to determine if modification of such responses may improve surgical outcome. While no single technique or drug regimen has been shown to eliminate postoperative morbidity and mortality, multimodal interventions may lead to a major reduction in the undesirable sequelae of surgical injury with improved recovery and reduction in postoperative morbidity and overall costs.

Multimodal approach to control postoperative pathophysiology and rehabilitation.

This is the fourth updated Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS®) Society guideline presenting a consensus for optimal perioperative care in colorectal surgery and providing graded recommendations for each ERAS item within the ERAS® protocol. A wide database search on English literature publications was performed. Studies on each item within the protocol were selected with particular attention paid to meta-analyses, randomised controlled trials and large prospective cohorts and examined, reviewed and graded according to Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) system. All recommendations on ERAS® protocol items are based on best available evidence; good-quality trials; meta-analyses of good-quality trials; or large cohort studies. The level of evidence for the use of each item is presented accordingly. The evidence base and recommendation for items within the multimodal perioperative care pathway are presented by the ERAS® Society in this comprehensive consensus review.

/pdf/guidelines-for-perioperative-care-in-elective-colonic-1wl593eui2.pdf

Guidelines for perioperative care in elective colonic surgery: Enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS®) society recommendations

Background Uncontrolled studies suggest that a combination of chemotherapy and radiotherapy improves the survival of patients with esophageal adenocarcinoma. We conducted a prospective, randomized trial comparing surgery alone with combined chemotherapy, radiotherapy, and surgery. Methods Patients assigned to multimodal therapy received two courses of chemotherapy in weeks 1 and 6 (fluorouracil, 15 mg per kilogram of body weight daily for five days, and cisplatin, 75 mg per square meter of body-surface area on day 7) and a course of radiotherapy (40 Gy, administered in 15 fractions over a three-week period, beginning concurrently with the first course of chemotherapy), followed by surgery. The patients assigned to surgery had no preoperative therapy. Results Of the 58 patients assigned to multimodal therapy and the 55 assigned to surgery, 10 and 1, respectively, were withdrawn for protocol violations. At the time of surgery, 23 of 55 patients (42 percent) treated with preoperative multimodal therapy who c...

/pdf/a-comparison-of-multimodal-therapy-and-surgery-for-3cbymnzr3y.pdf

A comparison of multimodal therapy and surgery for esophageal adenocarcinoma.

OBJECTIVE: A meta-analysis of all published clinical trials comparing selective versus routine nasogastric decompression was performed in an attempt to evaluate the need for nasogastric decompression after elective laparotomy. BACKGROUND: Many studies have suggested that routine nasogastric decompression is unnecessary after elective laparotomy and may be associated with an increased incidence of complications. Despite these reports, many surgeons continue to practice routine nasogastric decompression, believing that its use significantly decreases the risk of postoperative nausea, vomiting, aspiration, wound dehiscence, and anastomotic leak. METHODS: A comprehensive search of the English language medical literature was performed to identify all published clinical trials evaluating nasogastric decompression. Twenty-six trials (3964 patients) met inclusion criteria. The outcome data extracted from each trial were subsequently "pooled" and analyzed for significant differences using the Mantel-Haenszel estimation of combined relative risk. RESULTS: Fever, atelectasis, and pneumonia were significantly less common and days to first oral intake were significantly fewer in patients managed without nasogastric tubes. Meta-analysis based on study quality revealed significantly fewer pulmonary complications, but significantly greater abdominal distension and vomiting in patients managed without nasogastric tubes. Routine nasogastric decompression did not decrease the incidence of any other complication. CONCLUSIONS: Although patients may develop abdominal distension or vomiting without a nasogastric tube, this is not associated with an increase in complications or length of stay. For every patient requiring insertion of a nasogastric tube in the postoperative period, at least 20 patients will not require nasogastric decompression. Routine nasogastric decompression is not supported by meta-analysis of the literature.

A meta-analysis of selective versus routine nasogastric decompression after elective laparotomy

The Rapunzel syndrome. An unusual complication of intestinal bezoar

This study is a double "blind" prospective evaluation of the efficacy of antibiotics (Ampicillin) in the treatment of acute alcohol-induced and idiopathic pancreatitis. Fifty-eight patients with acute pancreatitis were randomly divided into antibiotic and non-antibiotic treatment groups. The two groups were comparable clinically at the onset of the study and other than for antibiotics received identical therapy. The patients without antibiotics had a clinical course equal or slightly more favorable than the antibiotic treatment group in all parameters examined. These data indicate that prophylactic use of Ampicillin is not indicated in patients with routine acute alcohol-induced or idiopathic pancreatitis. The role of prophylactic antibiotics in patients with pancreatitis related to biliary calculi and those with more severe varieties of acute hemorrhagic or necrotizing pancreatitis remains to be more clearly defined.

A prospective study to determine the efficacy of antibiotics in acute pancreatitis.

Perioperative parenteral cefoxitin was compared with oral erythromycin, neomycin and parenteral cefazolin in a prospective, double-blind, randomized evaluation of 119 patients undergoing colorectal operations. Patients receiving cefoxitin had a higher wound infection rate than patients receiving erythromycin-neomycin-cefazolin (12.5% v 3.2%, respectively, p = .06). A direct correlation existed between the duration of the operation and the infection rate. Cefoxitin prophylaxis was as effective as erythromycin-neomycin-cefazolin in patients undergoing surgical procedures of 4 hours or less (infection rates of 4.8% and 4.0%, respectively). However, for surgical procedures lasting more than 4 hours, 5 of 14 patients (37.5%) receiving cefoxitin developed a wound infection v 0 of 13 patients receiving erythromycin-neomycin-cefazolin (p less than .05). It is speculative as to whether frequent two-gram doses of cefoxitin given during the operation would provide prophylaxis equivalent to erythromycin-neomycin-cefazolin.

Cefoxitin versus erythromycin, neomycin, and cefazolin in colorectal operations. Importance of the duration of the surgical procedure.

• During a ten-year period, endoscopy demonstrated acid-peptic esophagitis in 439 patients. Forty of these patients (9.1%) had Barrett's esophagus. Adenocarcinoma was present in the columnar epithelium in 15 (37.5%) of the patients with Barrett's esophagus. Hiatal hernias, with symptoms of heartburn, dysphagia, stricture, and ulceration, were found in more than 75% of the patients with Barrett's esophagus. We developed a treatment algorithm. Patients with symptomatic reflux esophagitis should undergo endoscopy with biopsy. If Barrett's esophagus is diagnosed, an antireflux procedure should be performed, preferably a proximal gastric vagotomy with Nissen's fundoplication. Follow-up examination by endoscopy with biopsy and cytology should be performed every six months. Indications for early esophagectomy include progression of cellular dysplasia, carcinoma in situ, and a nonhealing Barrett's ulcer following an antireflux procedure. Our data support an aggressive surgical treatment of patients with Barrett's esophagus. ( Arch Surg 1984;119:563-567)

John L. Sawyers

Papers

A meta-analysis of selective versus routine nasogastric decompression after elective laparotomy

The Rapunzel syndrome. An unusual complication of intestinal bezoar

A prospective study to determine the efficacy of antibiotics in acute pancreatitis.

Cefoxitin versus erythromycin, neomycin, and cefazolin in colorectal operations. Importance of the duration of the surgical procedure.

Barrett's Esophagus: A Surgical Entity