Abdominal Surgical Site Infection Research Articles

Outcomes of Exploratory Laparotomy and Abdominal Infections Among Combat Casualties

BackgroundAbdominal injuries historically account for 13% of battlefield surgical procedures. We examined the occurrence of exploratory laparotomies and subsequent abdominal surgical site infections (SSIs) among combat casualties. MethodsMilitary personnel injured during deployment (2009-2014) were included if they required a laparotomy for combat-related trauma and were evacuated to Landstuhl Regional Medical Center, Germany, before being transferred to participating US military hospitals. ResultsOf 4304 combat casualties, 341 (7.9%) underwent laparotomy. Including re-explorations, 1053 laparotomies (median, 2; interquartile range, 1-3; range, 1-28) were performed with 58% occurring within the combat zone. Forty-nine (14.4%) patients had abdominal SSIs (four with multiple SSIs): 27 (7.9%) with deep space SSIs, 14 (4.1%) with a deep incisional SSI, and 12 (3.5%) a superficial incisional SSI. Patients with abdominal SSIs had larger volume of blood transfusions (median, 24 versus 14 units), more laparotomies (median, 4 versus 2), and more hollow viscus injuries (74% versus 45%) than patients without abdominal SSIs. Abdominal closure occurred after 10 d for 12% of the patients with SSI versus 2% of patients without SSI. Mesh adjuncts were used to achieve fascial closure in 20.4% and 2.1% of patients with and without SSI, respectively. Survival was 98% and 96% in patients with and without SSIs, respectively. ConclusionsLess than 10% of combat casualties in the modern era required abdominal exploration and most were severely injured with hollow viscus injuries and required massive transfusions. Despite the extensive contamination from battlefield injuries, the SSI proportion is consistent with civilian rates and survival was high.

Reduction in abdominal hysterectomy surgical site infection rates after the addition of anaerobic antimicrobial prophylaxis.

Reduction in abdominal hysterectomy surgical site infection rates after the addition of anaerobic antimicrobial prophylaxis.

D-PLEX100 in an Abdominal Surgery Incision Model in Miniature Swine: Safety Study.

Surgical site infections (SSIs) are a common surgical-related complication. To avoid these complications, a new biodegradable polymer-lipid encapsulation matrix that provides controlled release of doxycycline (doxycycline/polymer-lipid encapsulation matrix [D-PLEX]) has been developed. The aim of this comprehensive study was to evaluate the potential safety of D-PLEX100 in abdominal surgical site. D-PLEX100 was administered into incisions of abdominal surgical site in Yucatan miniature swine, which were followed for up to 6 months and compared to sham-control swine. The D-PLEX100 mass did not migrate from the incisional site, and there was no evidence for systemic toxicity or other safety concerns. Surgical incision sites, including the peritoneal surface, were fully healed at 6 months in all animals. Most of the D-PLEX100 mass was absorbed during the first 3 months, and by 6 months, D-PLEX100 was fully absorbed. Toxicokinetic evaluation revealed that doxycycline concentrations were evident at 30 minutes and persisted to 8 days (71 mg/kg) or at least 15 days (284 mg/kg) and were no longer present in plasma by day 29. This study supports the safety of D-PLEX100 and its favorable degradability profile. A clinical study is being performed to assess the safety and the efficacy of D-PLEX100 to prevent human abdominal SSIs.

Reducing abdominal hysterectomy surgical site infections: A multidisciplinary quality initiative

To investigate abdominal hysterectomy surgical site infection (SSI) rates before and after implementation of an SSI care bundle. An SSI bundle for abdominal hysterectomies was introduced in our hospital in April 2014 to reduce the SSI rate. The practices were divided into bundle elements around preoperative, intraoperative, and postoperative care. We conducted a retrospective cohort study around implementation of the SSI care bundle. Women were included if they underwent abdominal hysterectomy between 2012 and 2015. They were then divided into 2 study groups: prebundle and postbundle. The primary study outcome was SSI rate. The superficial SSI rate was the secondary outcome. The overall SSI rate was 6.18% in the prebundle group, with a median monthly SSI rate of 7.03%. After bundle implementation, the overall SSI rate declined to 2.51% (P = .02). The reduction remained significant after multivariate analysis (adjusted odds ratio 0.38; 95% confidence interval 0.15-0.88; P = .03) indicating a 62% reduction in SSI postbundle as compared to prebundle.When comparing rates based on infection classification, superficial SSIs declined significantly from 3.73% in the prebundle group to 0.90% in the postbundle group (P = 0.02). Patient demographics and pre-existing medical conditions were similar pre- and postbundle. Compliance with bundle elements was high. A significant reduction in SSI rate in abdominal hysterectomies was seen following implementation of an infection prevention bundle.

Re-operation surgery following IPAA: is there a role for laparoscopy?

Restorative proctocolectomy with ileal J pouch anal anastomosis (IPAA) has become the standard of care for mucosal ulcerative colitis and Familial Adenomatous Polyposis. Some patients require re-operation, including pouch revision, advancement, or excision. Re-operative procedures are technically demanding and usually performed only by experienced colorectal surgeons in a small number of referral centers. There is a paucity of data regarding feasibility, safety, and outcomes of laparoscopic re-operative IPAA surgery. This study aimed to determine the safety and feasibility of laparoscopic approach for re-operative IPAA, trans-abdominal surgery. Retrospective analysis of IRB-approved prospective database for patients who underwent trans-abdominal re-operative IPAA from 2011 to 2018. Patient demographics and operative reports were reviewed to classify type of re-operationinto pouch excision, revision, or advancement and further classify as laparoscopic, laparoscopic converted to open, or open surgery. Main outcome measures were post-operative morbidity and mortality. Seventy-six patients met the inclusion criteria: 19 underwent attempted laparoscopic re-operative IPAA surgery, 12 of whom underwent successful laparoscopic surgery while 7 were converted to laparotomy, for an overall laparoscopic intent to treat 63% success rate. The remaining operations (n = 57) were performed through midline laparotomy. Length of stay (LOS) for patients who underwent laparoscopic surgery was significantlyshorter (5.5 vs 9.7days, p < 0.001) as were abdominal superficial surgical site infections (SSI) (0% vs 18%, p < 0.001) and deep SSI (0% vs 17%, p < 0.001). Laparotomy was performed by 6 colorectal surgeons at our institution while laparoscopy was successfully performed only by the senior author. There was no significant difference in overall complications, re-admission, re-operation, or mortality. Re-operative, trans-abdominal, laparoscopic IPAA is both feasible and safe and has clear benefits compared to laparotomy in terms of LOS and superficial and deep SSI. However, this approach needs to be undertaken only by very experienced, high-volume laparoscopic IPAA surgeons.

Surgical site infection in gynecology

Objective. The morbidity and mortality caused by sur­gi­cal site infections (SSIs) worldwide have become a major pu­blic health issue. Furthermore, the prevention of SSI re­mains a focus for healthcare systems and hospitals due to its healthcare cost reducibility. The objective of this review is to assess the guidelines recommendations re­la­ted to the prevention, diagnosis and management of SSIs. Materials and method. This paper is a review based on information found in literature. The analysis was limited to English language articles and guidelines pu­blished between January 1st, 2015 and April 30th, 2020, on PubMed, using the following keywords: surgical site in­fec­tion, wound infection in gynecology, prophylactic anti­biotics, economic impact of SSIs. In this review we dis­cuss the current trends in the management of SSIs in gy­ne­co­logy. Results. The microorganisms in gynecologic sur­ge­ry are unique as the site of infection may be from the va­gi­nal/genitourinary tract, the abdomen or the skin. The most frequent bacteria in abdominal SSI in gynecologic sur­gery are aerobic Gram-positive cocci (Staphylococcus aureus, Staphylococcus epidermidis). Also, incisions made around the perineum and the groin can become in­fected with Enterococcus species and Escherichia coli. In­ci­sio­nal cellulitis and vaginal cuff cellulitis represent the most com­mon superficial SSI. Deep tissue abscess represents the most common deep infection, whilst tubo-ovarian ab­scesses and pelvic abscesses constitute the most com­mon space and organ infections. The most serious form of SSI is necrotizing fasciitis, a life-threatening com­pli­ca­tion. Conclusions. By rigorously following the clinical re­com­men­dations and evidence, the prevention, diagnosis and treat­ment of SSI can be managed correctly. As a result, health outcomes and healthcare-re­la­ted costs will be greatly improved, thereby the quality of health­care that we deliver to patients will be furthermore increased.

Prophylactic antibiotics for penetrating abdominal trauma: duration of use and antibiotic choice.

Penetrating abdominal trauma (PAT) is a common type of trauma leading to admission to hospital, which often progresses to septic complications. Antibiotics are commonly administered as prophylaxis prior to laparotomy for PAT. However, an earlier Cochrane Review intending to compare antibiotics with placebo identified no relevant randomised controlled trials (RCTs). Despite this, many RCTs have been carried out that compare different agents and durations of antibiotic therapy. To date, no systematic review of these trials has been performed. To assess the effects of antibiotics in penetrating abdominal trauma, with respect to the type of agent administered and the duration of therapy. We searched the following electronic databases for relevant randomised controlled trials, from database inception to 23 July 2019; Cochrane Injuries Group's Specialised Register, CENTRAL, MEDLINE Ovid, MEDLINE Ovid In-Process & Other Non-Indexed Citations, MEDLINE Ovid Daily and Ovid OLDMEDLINE, Embase Classic + Embase Ovid, ISI Web of Science (SCI-EXPANDED, SSCI, CPCI-S & CPSI-SSH), and two clinical trials registers. We also searched reference lists from included studies. We applied no restrictions on language or date of publication. We included RCTs only. We included studies involving participants of all ages, which were conducted in secondary care hospitals only. We included studies of participants who had an isolated penetrating abdominal wound that breached the peritoneum, who were not already taking antibiotics. Two study authors independently extracted data and assessed risk of bias. We used standard Cochrane methods. We aggregated study results using a random-effects model. We also conducted trial sequential analysis (TSA) to help reduce type I and II errors in our analyses. We included 29 RCTs, involving a total of 4458 participants. We deemed 23 trials to be at high risk of bias in at least one domain. We are uncertain of the effect of a long course of antibiotic prophylaxis (> 24 hours) compared to a short course (≤ 24 hours) on abdominal surgical site infection (RR 1.00, 95% CI 0.81 to 1.23; I² = 0%; 7 studies, 1261 participants; very low-quality evidence), mortality (Peto OR 1.67, 95% CI 0.73 to 3.82; I² = 8%; 7 studies, 1261 participants; very low-quality evidence), or intra-abdominal infection (RR 1.23, 95% CI 0.84 to 1.80; I² = 0%; 6 studies, 111 participants; very-low quality evidence). Based on very low-quality evidence from fifteen studies, involving 2020 participants, which compared different drug regimens with activity against three classes of gastrointestinal flora (gram positive, gram negative, anaerobic), we are uncertain whether there is a benefit of one regimen over another. TSA showed the majority of comparisons did not cross the alpha adjusted boundary for benefit or harm, or reached the required information size, indicating that further studies are required for these analyses. However, in the three analyses which crossed the boundary for futility, further studies are unlikely to show benefit or harm. Very low-quality evidence means that we are uncertain about the effect of either the duration of antibiotic prophylaxis, or the superiority of one drug regimen over another for penetrating abdominal trauma on abdominal surgical site infection rates, mortality, or intra-abdominal infections. Future RCTs should be adequately powered, test currently used antibiotics, known to be effective against gut flora, use methodology to minimise the risk of bias, and adequately report the level of peritoneal contamination encountered at laparotomy.

What are the results of laparoscopic re-operative rectal surgery?

IntroductionReoperative rectal surgery is challenging, performed selectively by experienced colorectal surgeons. The minimally invasive approach has not been well defined. This study reviewed the results of laparoscopy in this challenging setting. MethodsRetrospective analysis of patients who underwent trans-abdominal re-operative rectal surgery from 2010 to 2019 was performed. ResultsSeventy-eight patients [35 females (45%); BMI 25kg/m2) were included. Reasons for reoperation were recurrent cancer in 18 (43%) patients and anastomotic failure in 57 (73%). Twenty-two (28%) had laparoscopic surgery and 4 had attempted laparoscopy converted to laparotomy. A higher success rate was noted for laparoscopy with prior laparoscopic surgery. Benefits of laparoscopy included significant reduction in length of stay (6.7 vs 9.7 days, p = 0.012) and abdominal superficial surgical site infection (0% vs 25%, p < 0.001) and higher rate of achieving bowel continuity compared to laparotomy (77% vs 50%, p = 0.021) ConclusionsReoperative laparoscopic rectal surgery is safe and feasible in the context of a high-volume laparoscopic surgeon with substantial experience in redo proctectomies. It offers clear benefits including decreased surgical site infection rates and length of stay.

Antimicrobial-resistant pathogens associated with pediatric healthcare-associated infections: Summary of data reported to the National Healthcare Safety Network, 2015-2017.

To describe common pathogens and antimicrobial resistance patterns for healthcare-associated infections (HAIs) among pediatric patients that occurred in 2015-2017 and were reported to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention's National Healthcare Safety Network (NHSN). Antimicrobial resistance data were analyzed for pathogens implicated in central line-associated bloodstream infections (CLABSIs), catheter-associated urinary tract infections (CAUTIs), ventilator-associated pneumonias (VAPs), and surgical site infections (SSIs). This analysis was restricted to device-associated HAIs reported from pediatric patient care locations and SSIs among patients <18years old. Percentages of pathogens with nonsusceptibility (%NS) to selected antimicrobials were calculated by HAI type, location type, and surgical category. Overall, 2,545 facilities performed surveillance of pediatric HAIs in the NHSN during this period. Staphylococcus aureus (15%), Escherichia coli (12%), and coagulase-negative staphylococci (12%) were the 3 most commonly reported pathogens associated with pediatric HAIs. Pathogens and the %NS varied by HAI type, location type, and/or surgical category. Among CLABSIs, the %NS was generally lowest in neonatal intensive care units and highest in pediatric oncology units. Staphylococcus spp were particularly common among orthopedic, neurosurgical, and cardiac SSIs; however, E. coli was more common in abdominal SSIs. Overall, antimicrobial nonsusceptibility was less prevalent in pediatric HAIs than in adult HAIs. This report provides an updated national summary of pathogen distributions and antimicrobial resistance patterns among pediatric HAIs. These data highlight the need for continued antimicrobial resistance tracking among pediatric patients and should encourage the pediatric healthcare community to use such data when establishing policies for infection prevention and antimicrobial stewardship.

Early Outcome of Laparoscopic Abdomino-perineal Resection (APR) in Low Rectal and Anal Cancer- Our Initial Experience in Bangabandhu Sheikh Mujib Medical University

Background: Colorectal cancer is the second most common malignancy in the western countries and the rectum is the most frequent site involved. Carcinoma of the lower part of the rectum involving the anal canal and carcinoma of the anal canal are now successfully managed by laparoscopic abdomino-perineal resection (APR) and postoperative morbidities are less and recovery is uneventful. In the current age of minimally invasive surgery, laparoscopic surgery for colon cancer has been established as equivalent to conventional open surgery in terms of oncological clearance. The purpose of the study is to compare the early outcomes of laparoscopic abdomino-perineal resection (LAPR) surgery in low rectal and anal cancer patients in terms of surgical site infections, postoperative pain, recovery, hospital stay and margin clearance of tumor with that of open abdomino-perineal resection (OAPR) surgery.&#x0D; Methods: This randomized controlled trial was carried out in the Colorectal Surgery Unit of Bangabandhu Sheikh Mujib Medical University, Dhaka from May, 2012 to April, 2013. 50 patients in low rectal and anal canal cancers were randomized into two groups with 25 patients in conventional open abdomino-perineal resection (OAPR) and rest 25 patients in laparoscopic abdomino-perineal resection (LAPR). Early outcome variables after surgery were evaluated.&#x0D; Results: Demographic data and baseline characteristics are equivalent in both groups of population. Tumors were more common in rectum (80% and 76%), most of the tumors were adenocarcinomas (80% and 72%) and most of the tumors were present in stage-II (40% and 48%) with grade-2 (64% and 52%) in LAPR and OAPR groups respectively. During early post-operative follow up, abdominal surgical site infection was found more in conventional open abdomino-perineal resection (OAPR) patients than that of laparoscopic abdomino-perineal resection (LAPR) patients (p =0.001). Other morbidity and colostomy related complications were not significant in early post-operative period in both groups of population. Degree of pain was also less after laparoscopic abdomino-perineal resection (p=0.001 ). Stoma function occurred earlier after Laparoscopic abdomino-perineal resection (p =0.017) and ambulation, feeding liquid and feeding solid all had no difference for both groups. Shorter mean length of postoperative hospital stay and early hospital discharge was possible after Laparoscopic abdomino-perineal resection (p =0.001 ). Oncologic parameters were equivalent to those with open procedures.&#x0D; Conclusion: The patients undergoing laparoscopic APR for low rectal and anal canal carcinoma have overall superior outcomes in terms of surgical site infection, postoperative pain, postoperative hospital stay and has equivalent oncological clearance as with those with open procedures.&#x0D; Journal of Surgical Sciences (2014) Vol. 18 (2) : 57-61

Abdominal Surgical Site Infection Incidence and Risk Factors in a Mexican Population.

To investigate possible predictors and prevalence of surgical site infections (SSIs) in a group of Mexican patients who underwent open abdominal surgery. This retrospective study included all patients (N = 755) who underwent elective or emergency open abdominal surgeries from October 2011 to March 2012. Sociodemographic and clinical characteristics were collected through preoperative and postoperative examinations by the infection surveillance team. The relationship among variables (age, gender, body mass index, comorbidities, smoking habit, antimicrobial prophylaxis, hair removal, American Society of Anesthesiologists classification, type of operation, duration of operation, and SSI classification) was analyzed by odds ratio and χ tests. Of the 755 patients, 91 (12%) suffered from SSI. Several variables were associated with SSI: American Society of Anesthesiologists classification (P = .001) and receiving preoperative prophylactic antimicrobials (P < .0001), among other factors. Isolated pathogens were mostly enterobacteria (60%). Surveillance plays an important role in the control and prevention of SSI. Providers must implement appropriate procedures to reduce SSI after abdominal surgery.

Methodology to Reduce Healthcare Associated Infections at a Large Multi-Hospital Health System

BACKGROUND In this changing landscape of healthcare, Infection Prevention (IP) programs need to demonstrate their value to their institutions. One way to do this is through the reduction of healthcare associated infections (HAI). This improves patient outcomes and can also provide value through the avoidance of hospital acquired condition (HAC) penalties. METHODS The reduction of HAIs at the system level of a 151-hospital health system became a top priority necessitating a structured approach. Beginning in January 2017, clear expectations of what is submitted to the National Healthcare Safety Network (NHSN) and reporting deadlines were defined. Next, HAI targets were established. Data is accessed from NHSN by the analytics department via Group Administrator rights. Analysis of standardized infection ratios (SIR), standardized utilization ratios (SUR) and Cumulative Attributable Differences (CADS) relative to system targets is conducted. Follow-up with hospitals having the highest CADS begins with a discussion with the IP team. Then, collaboration and feedback with the local team continues and efforts are escalated up to and including the C-suite and may culminate in a site visit if needed. The role and engagement of the Chief Quality Officer (CQO) is critical throughout the process. RESULTS Since establishing this methodology, the HAI outcomes have approved in six of the eight categories. In the past year (October?2017-September 2018) Clostridium difficile reduced 12%, central line associated bloodstream infection (CLABSI) 16%, catheter?associated urinary tract infection (CAUTI) 11%, abdominal hysterectomy surgical site infections (SSI) 46%, colon surgery SSI?19% and hip arthroplasty SSI 15%. In addition, HAC penalties were reduced. CONCLUSIONS This methodology has been very effective in reducing the HAIs across the health system. Also, the feedback from the stakeholders is positive because it results in collaboration and often brings needed attention to an area they have been struggling with.

Reassessing the dosing of cefoxitin prophylaxis during major abdominal surgery: insights from microdialysis and population pharmacokinetic modelling.

Cefoxitin is frequently used for surgical antibiotic prophylaxis (SAP). Using microdialysis, we evaluated whether the currently recommended dosing regimen is appropriate to maintain cefoxitin subcutaneous tissue concentrations above the MIC for pathogens involved in abdominal surgical site infection. Data from eight patients undergoing major abdominal surgery were analysed using population pharmacokinetic modelling, and Monte Carlo simulations were conducted to determine the PTA for aerobic and anaerobic pathogens. ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT02703857. Only 2.3% and 47.4% of the simulated patients maintained cefoxitin subcutaneous concentrations above the MIC breakpoint for anaerobic (MIC = 16 mg/L) and aerobic (MIC = 8 mg/L) pathogens, respectively. New simulations with administration of a loading dose followed by a constant infusion of cefoxitin were conducted and demonstrate that, notwithstanding using the same total dose per unit of time, continuous infusion of cefoxitin can cover aerobes in 96.6% of the simulated patients, but remains insufficient for anaerobic bacteria. The recommended dosing regimen of cefoxitin is insufficient for covering the usual bacteria during abdominal surgery. Administration of a loading dose followed by a constant infusion should be considered for aerobic bacteria and cefoxitin should be avoided as SAP for anaerobic bacteria.

History of surgical site infection increases the odds for a new infection after open incisional hernia repair

BackgroundIt is unclear whether a history of surgical site infection is associated with developing a new infection after subsequent operations. We aim to investigate the impact of an earlier abdominal wall surgical site infection on future 30-day infectious wound complications after open incisional hernia repair with mesh. MethodsPatients undergoing elective, clean open incisional hernia repair were identified within the Americas Hernia Society Quality Collaborative and were divided into those with and without a history of a surgical site infection. Predictors of a surgical site infection and a surgical site infection requiring a procedural intervention were investigated using logistic regression and propensity-matched analysis. A subgroup analysis was done to investigate whether an earlier methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus surgical site infection specifically increases odds for infectious complications. ResultsOf 3,168 identified patients, 589 had a history of a surgical site infection and experienced higher rates of postoperative surgical site infection (6.5% vs 2.9%, P < .001) and surgical site infections requiring procedural intervention (5.3% vs 1.9%, P < .001). After adjusting for identified confounders, a previous surgical site infection was independently associated with developing another surgical site infection (odds ratio 2.04, 95% confidence interval 1.32–3.10, P < .001) and a surgical site infection requiring procedural intervention (odds ratio 2.2, 95% confidence interval 1.35–3.55, P = .001). Propensity-matched analysis controlling for additional confounders confirmed the association of an earlier surgical site infection with the outcomes of interest (odds ratio 2.1 and 2.8, respectively). A subgroup analysis found that an earlier methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus infection specifically did not incur higher rates of surgical site infection when compared with non–methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus pathogens. ConclusionHistory of a surgical site infection increases the odds for new infectious complications after open incisional hernia repair in a clean wound. Investigations on perioperative interventions to ameliorate the negative impact of such association are necessary.

Early Closure of Infected Laparotomy Wound with Negative-Pressure Wound Therapy: Safety and Efficacy in 42 Consecutive Cases

Postoperative surgical site infections (SSIs) are one of the most common complications. SSIs after laparotomy have a high incidence and are complicated and expensive to heal. The aim of this study was to evaluate the safety and efficacy of a novel therapy of early closure of open abdominal SSIs wound combining wound irrigation with negative pressure wound therapy (NPWT). Open abdominal SSIs wounds were closed with sutures in 42 consecutive patients. Topical NPWT was applied over a closed wound with a deep drain to allow dynamic drainage and wound irrigation. CT scan with contrast medium injected through the deep drain was performed in patients with suspicious tracts detected during debridement surgery three days after surgery to identify a potential fistula. Wound healing and safety of the therapy was evaluated during an average six months follow-up. Closed wounds healed successfully in all the patients without recurrence of wound infection. Fistulas were easily diagnosed in all four fistula patients by using CT scan with contrast medium injection through the wound. Fistula was confirmed in these four patients at re-exploration. All the drain tube wounds healed spontaneously after drain removal. No severe adverse event occurred during therapy in any patients. With the aid of topical NPWT and deep drainage and irrigation, early closure of open SSIs wound can be done safely. We were also able to diagnose gastrointestinal fistulas at an early stage with the use of CT scan imaging after contrast injection into the wound.

Ranking Hospitals Based on Colon Surgery and Abdominal Hysterectomy Surgical Site Infection Outcomes: Impact of Limiting Surveillance to the Operative Hospital.

Hospital-specific surgical site infection (SSI) performance following colon surgery and abdominal hysterectomies can impact hospitals' relative rankings around quality metrics used to determine financial penalties. Current SSI surveillance largely focuses on SSI detected at the operative hospital. We performed a retrospective cohort study to assess the impact on hospitals' relative SSI performance rankings when SSI detected at nonoperative hospitals are included. We used data from a California statewide hospital registry to assess for evidence of SSI following colon surgery or abdominal hysterectomies performed 1 March 2011 through 30 November 2013 using previously validated claims-based SSI surveillance methods. Risk-adjusted hospital-specific rankings based on SSI detected at operative hospitals versus any California hospital were generated. Among 60059 colon surgeries at 285 hospitals and 64918 abdominal hysterectomies at 270 hospitals, 5921 (9.9%) colon surgeries and 1481 (2.3%) abdominal hysterectomies received a diagnosis code for SSI within the 30 days following surgery. Operative hospital surveillance alone would have missed 7.2% of colon surgery and 13.4% of abdominal hysterectomy SSIs. The proportion of an individual hospital's SSIs detected during hospitalizations at other hospitals varied widely. Including nonoperative hospital SSIs resulted in improved relative ranking of 11 (3.9%) colon surgery and 13 (4.8%) hysterectomy hospitals so that they were no longer in the worst performing quartile, mainly among hospitals with relatively high surgical volumes. Standard SSI surveillance that mainly focuses on infections detected at the operative hospital causes varying degrees of SSI underestimation, leading to inaccurate assignment or avoidance of financial penalties for approximately 1 in 11-16 hospitals.

Negative Pressure Therapy in the Surgical Treatment of Diabetic Foot

The study aims to assess the significance of negative pressure therapy in the treatment of diabetic foot.The objectives intend to evaluate the healing time required after applying the method and the functional consequences for the patient. A prospective study was conducted on a sample of 37 patients with diabetic foot were monitored their clinical course between September 2014 - April 2017, following negative pressure therapy. There were used vacuum assisted closure devices (VAC � -Hartman) in order to apply negative pressure to the wound, while complying with specified settings (negative pressure, time of use of a kit) in accordance with patients� outcome.There were monitored changes in wound size (planimetric and volumetric measurement), their bacterial load and duration of treatment. Healing was obtained in all cases, to an average hospital stay of 27.3 days and 8 days of therapy application.The negative result of microbial cultures was obtained after an average of 6.45 days by simultaneous application of negative pressure and antibiotic treatment according to the antibiogram. Skin grafts were necessary to close the defect in 4 cases. After basic treatment of the wound, auxiliary methods such as negative pressure contribute to the healing.In patients with diabetic foot who were required surgical intervention, the use of negative pressure therapy yielded a significant benefit in the preservation of the affected limb, after minimal excision.The results we obtained throughout our experience recommend use of NPTW technique as indication for abdominal wall surgery in closing abdominal wall defects, compartment syndrome and surgical site infection after prosthetic mesh.

Improved Colorectal and Abdominal Hysterectomy Surgical Site Infection Rates/SIR Through Better Surveillance, Reviewing, Reporting and Accurately Assessed Surgical Wounds

BACKGROUND: Surgical site infections (SSI) that are reported to the CDC's National Healthcare and Safety Network (NHSN) are adjusted and reported as a Standardized Infection Ratio (SIR) based on various risk factors documented in the medical record. One important risk factor includes accurate documentation of wound class. A review of our charts identified that inaccurate documentation of wound class as defined by NHSN led to inflated SIR numbers in our colorectal (COLO) and abdominal hysterectomy (HYST) SSIs. At our 2,247-bed hospital system, we instituted a quality improvement initiative in order to reduce and more accurately reflect a true SSI SIR.

Taking advantage of public reporting: An infection composite score to assist evaluating hospital performance for infection prevention efforts.

The standardized infection ratio (SIR) evaluates individual publicly reported health care-associated infections, but it may not assess overall performance. We piloted an infection composite score (ICS) in 82 hospitals of a single health system. The ICS is a combined score for central line-associated bloodstream infections, catheter-associated urinary tract infections, colon and abdominal hysterectomy surgical site infections, and hospital-onset methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus bacteremia and Clostridium difficile infections. Individual facility ICSs were calculated by normalizing each of the 6 SIR events to the system SIR for baseline and performance periods (ICSib and ICSip, respectively). A hospital ICSib reflected its baseline performance compared with system baseline, whereas a ICSip provided information of its outcome changes compared with system baseline. Both the ICSib (baseline 2013) and ICSip (performance 2014) were calculated for 63 hospitals (reporting at least 4 of the 6 event types). The ICSip improved in 36 of 63 (57.1%) hospitals in 2014 when compared with the ICSib in 2013. The ICSib 2013 median was 0.96 (range, 0.13-2.94) versus the 2014 ICSip median of 0.92 (range, 0-6.55). Variation was more evident in hospitals with ≤100 beds. The system performance score (ICSsp) in 2014 was 0.95, a 5% improvement compared with 2013. The proposed ICS may help large health systems and state hospital associations better evaluate key infectious outcomes, comparing them with historic and concurrent performance of peers.

Unlimited-Length Proctocolectomy Utilizing Sequential Intussusception and Pull-Through: Novel Clean Endolumenal NOTE-Assisted Technique With Transanal Natural Orifice Specimen Extraction Without Rectal Stump Opening in a Porcine Model.

Transanal, hybrid natural orifice translumenal endoscopic surgery (NOTES) and NOTES-assisted natural orifice specimen extraction techniques hold promise as leaders in the field of natural orifice surgery. We report the feasibility of a novel NOTES assisted technique for unlimited length, clean, endolumenal proctocolectomy in a porcine model. This technique is a modification of a transanal intussusception and pull-through procedure recently published by our group. Rectal mobilization was achieved laparoscopically; this was followed by a transanal recto-rectal intussusception and pull-through (IPT). IPT was established in a stepwise fashion. First, the proximal margin of resection was attached laparoscopically to the shaft of the anvil of an end-to-end circular stapler with a ligature around the rectum. Second, this complex was pulled transanally to produce IPT. To achieve an unlimited-length proctocolectomy, the IPT step was repeated several times prior to bowel resection. This was facilitated by removing the ligature applied in the first step of this procedure. Once sequential IPT established the desired length of bowel to be resected, a second ligature was placed around the rectum approximating the proximal and distal resection margins. The specimen was resected and extracted by making a full-thickness incision through the 2 bowel walls. The anastomosis was achieved by deploying the stapler. The technique was found to be feasible. Peritoneal samples, collected after transanal specimen extraction, did not demonstrate bacterial growth. The minimally invasive nature of this evolving technique as well as its aseptic bowel manipulation has the potential to limit the complications associated with abdominal wall incision and surgical site infection.