Surgical Site Infection Rates Research Articles

A study on clinico-demographic and microbiological profile of surgical site infection (SSI) in a tertiary care hospital, Kolkata: An alarming trend

The Centres for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) estimates surgical site infections SSI is major contributor of healthcare associated infections (HAI). Multidrug resistant (MDR) Gram-negative bacilli are emerging pathogens. This study aimed to determine the magnitude of SSI and identify predominant pathogens with their antimicrobial susceptibility patterns. It is a hospital-based descriptive cross-sectional study including 2070 suspected SSI specimens from 25809 surgeries between 1July 2021 to 30 June 2023. Organisms’ identification and AST was done by both conventional and automated methods. Data was collected and analysed on MS-Excel sheet with various charts and tables. In our study SSI rate was 6.3%, much higher than previous study (2.83%) from this institution. SSI rate was highest in plastic surgery (8.2%). Major pathogens of SSI were Gram-negative bacilli e.g., (26.34%), (25.59%) and (74.69%) was predominant among Gram-positive cocci. Gram-negative bacilli including enterobacterales and non-fermenter and showed resistance to major classes of broad- spectrum antibiotics. Methicillin resistance (MRSA) was 43.9%, which indicates need to improve infection control practices. Our study showed significant higher proportion of SSI as compared to previous studies from the same institute with alarming number of isolated MDR Gram-negative bacilli. So, this study focusses the need of robust infection control practices and strict implementation of antimicrobial stewardship to overcome challenges of antimicrobial resistance.

IMPLEMENTING “BUNDLED INTERVENTIONS” IN REDUCING SURGICAL SITE INFECTIONS AMONG PATIENTS UNDERGOING SURGERY FOR GYNECOLOGICAL INDICATIONS – A PROSPECTIVE STUDY

Objective: Surgical site infection (SSI) is the most common infection among surgical patients. This study evaluated the impact of bundled interventions in reducing SSI rates in gynecological surgery. Therefore, it is a vital tool to improve patient safety. Methods: One hundred study participants were taken in the tertiary care hospital and divided into Group I and Group II. In Group I, 50 patients were involved in elective OT with bundled interventions, and in Group II, 50 controls operated in identical OT without bundled intervention. Incidence of SSI, type of SSI, antibiotic usage, need for secondary suturing, duration, etc., was noticed. Results: Our findings showed that six out of fifty cases developed the symptoms with a 10% SSI rate. Two had superficial SSI, and three had deep SSI. None of the patients had organ space SSI. In the control group, the SSI rate was 12%. The bundled intervention was associated with a significant reduction in infection rate. Conclusion: The study indicates that SSIs are associated with severe morbidity and mortality. It is a straightforward, feasible approach to the reduction of the SSI rate.

Systematic review and meta-analysis comparing surgical site infection in abdominal surgery between triclosan-coated and uncoated sutures.

Surgical site infection (SSI) is a frequent complication after abdominal surgery and impacts morbidity, mortality and medical costs. This systematic review evaluates whether the use of triclosan-coated sutures for closing the fascia during abdominal surgery reduces the rate of SSI compared to uncoated sutures. A systematic review and meta-analysis were conducted using the PRISMA guidelines. On February 17, 2024, a literature search was performed in Medline ALL, Web of Science Core Collection, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials and Embase. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) on abdominal fascial closure in human adults, comparing triclosan-coated and uncoated sutures, were included. The risk of bias was assessed using the Cochrane RoB 2 tool. Pooled meta-analysis was performed using RevMan. Out of 1523 records, eleven RCTs were included, with a total of 10,234 patients: 5159 in the triclosan-coated group and 5075 in the uncoated group. The incidence of SSI was statistically significantly lower in the triclosan-coated group (14.8% vs. 17.3%) with an odds ratio (OR) of 0.84 (95% CI [0.75, 0.93], p = 0.001). When polydioxanone was evaluated separately (coated N = 3999, uncoated N = 3900), triclosan-coating reduced SSI; 17.5% vs. 20.1%, OR 0.86 (95% CI [0.77; 0.96], p = 0.008). When polyglactin 910 was evaluated (coated N = 1160, uncoated N = 1175), triclosan-coating reduced the incidence of SSI; 5.4% vs. 7.8%, OR 0.67 (95% CI [0.48; 0.94], p = 0.02). According to the results of this meta-analysis the use of triclosan-coated sutures for fascial closure statistically significantly reduces the incidence of SSI after abdominal surgery with a risk difference of about 2%.

Clinical relevance of positive intraoperative bacterial culture in tibial plateau leveling osteotomy in dogs: a retrospective study

BackgroundTibial plateau leveling osteotomy (TPLO) belongs to the most frequently used surgical method for the treatment of cranial cruciate ligament rupture in dogs. Surgical site infection (SSI) is one of the possible postoperative complications. The aim of this study was to evaluate the diagnostic value of intraoperative bacterial culture as a tool for the detection of intraoperative bacterial contamination progressing to infection development in canine TPLO. Electronic patient records from dogs who underwent TPLO between January 2018 to December 2020 were retrospectively reviewed. Intraoperative bacterial culture results, used antimicrobial drugs and presence of SSI were recorded.ResultsNinety-eight dogs were included in the study. SSI rate was 10.2%. All dogs who developed SSI (n = 10) had negative intraoperative bacterial cultures. None of the dogs with positive intraoperative bacterial culture (n = 6) developed SSI. The most cultured bacteria causing SSI was Staphylococcus pseudintermedius (n = 4).ConclusionsIntraoperative bacterial culture in dogs undergoing TPLO is not suitable as a predictor of surgical site infection.

Coronavirus Disease 2019 Pandemic and Reduced Surgical Site Infection After Cardiac Surgery: A Potential Blessing in Disguise.

Background: The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has brought about drastic hygienic measures, one upside of which might be the mitigated occurrence of surgical site infection (SSI). This study investigated the association of the pandemic with SSI occurrence after cardiac surgeries. Patients and Methods: From 2014 to 2022, patients undergoing cardiac surgery were included and categorized into pre-pandemic and during-pandemic groups. Surgical site infections were classified into harvest-site, superficial sternal, and complex sternal infection. Multiple logistic regression and inverse probability weighting assessed the association of the pandemic with SSI. Results: Among a total of 26,143 patients, 793 SSIs occurred. The during-pandemic patients were younger (61.87 ± 10.58 vs. 65.64 ± 11.82) with a higher male proportion (70.1% vs. 67.4%) and a higher prevalence of all studied comorbidities/risk factors (expect cigarette smoking). Total SSI rate decreased substantially from 3.3% before COVID-19 to 1.8% afterward (p < 0.001). Inverse probability weights analyses evinced an independent association of the pandemic with a reduced risk of total (adjusted odds ratio [OR]; 0.59; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.45-0.78), harvest-site (adjusted OR, 0.36; 95% CI, 0.19-0.70), and superficial sternal infection (adjusted OR, 0.60; 95% CI, 0.43-0.81). No significant association was observed with complex sternal site infection (adjusted OR, 1.05; 95% CI, 0.55-2.01). Multivariable regression recapitulated these findings. Conclusions: The COVID-19 pandemic independently pertained to more than a 40% reduction in SSI occurrence, particularly affecting harvest-site and superficial sternal infections. However, there remains the possibility of the implications of other known and unknown confounders on the observed association. To some extent, the decrease in SSIs after the pandemic can be justified by reinforced hygienic precautions, emphasizing the necessity of extending the adherence to these measurements into the post-COVID-19 era to maintain the status quo.

Abstract PO3-18-01: Cirrhosis is associated with worse post-operative survival among patients with breast cancer: a population-based study

Abstract Background: The relationship between cirrhosis and breast cancer treatment and outcomes has not been specifically explored. We evaluated the association between cirrhosis and surgical outcomes in female patients with breast cancer. Methods: We performed a retrospective cohort study of female patients undergoing surgery for breast cancer between 2007-2018 using health administrative data from Ontario, Canada. Breast cancer surgeries were captured using Canadian Classification of Health Intervention codes. Patients with cirrhosis were identified using validated coding definitions. Overall and cancer-specific survival from time of surgery to December 2021 was compared between patients with and without cirrhosis using Kaplan-Meier survival analysis. Modified Poisson regression, chi-square and ANOVA were used to assess the association between cirrhosis and 90-day post-operative mortality, post-operative complications, length of hospital stay, intensive care unit (ICU) admission, and post-operative hepatic decompensation within 6 months. Results: A total of 83,880 females with breast cancer undergoing surgery were identified with 910 (1%) having cirrhosis. The median age at diagnosis was 65 (IQR 57-72) in patients with cirrhosis and 61 (IQR 51-71) in those without (p&amp;lt; 0.001). The most common etiology of cirrhosis was non-alcoholic fatty liver disease (n = 602, 66%) followed by alcohol-related (n =144, 16%) with n=27 (3%) having a history of decompensation within two years prior to surgery. Model for end stage liver disease score (MELD-Na) was available in 24% (n = 218), with a median score of 8 (IQR 6 – 11). Patients with cirrhosis had similar breast cancer stage at diagnosis as patients without cirrhosis (47% stage I, 38% stage 2, 11% stage 3, and 0.5% stage 4) with the most common type of surgical procedure being lumpectomy (71%) in both groups. Use of pre-operative chemotherapy was less common in patients with cirrhosis (5.9% vs 7.9%, p=0.026). Post-operative radiation and chemotherapy within 6-months after surgery was lower in patients with cirrhosis (56.8% vs 63.7%, p&amp;lt; 0.001 and 48.4% vs 52.2%, p=0.019, respectively). Patients with cirrhosis had higher 90-day post-operative mortality compared to those without (1.4% vs 0.3%, p &amp;lt; 0.001). After adjusting for age, income quintile, and breast cancer surgery, cirrhosis was independently associated with 90-day post-operative mortality (RR, 4.1; 95% CI 2.4-6.8). Patients with cirrhosis had a higher prevalence of incision complications (6.4% vs 4.6%, p= 0.007) and blood transfusions (2.9% vs 1.1%, p &amp;lt; 0.001), but similar rates of surgical site infections (6.4% vs 5.3%, p=0.138) and venous thromboembolism (0.3% vs 0.5%, p=0.5). Re-operation was slightly higher in patients without cirrhosis (3.2% vs 4.6%, p=0.05). Length of hospital stay was 2 days in patients with cirrhosis and 1.3 days for patients without (p &amp;lt; 0.001); ICU admission was more likely in patients with cirrhosis (1.8% vs 0.9%, p=0.008); and 18 (2%) patients with cirrhosis developed post-operative hepatic decompensation within 6 months. Survival in patients with cirrhosis was lower than those without (5-year OS 77% vs 87%, p&amp;lt; 0.0001); stage 0/I (83% vs 94%, p&amp;lt; 0.05), stage II (75% vs 87%, p&amp;lt; 0.05), stage III (62% vs 73%, p&amp;lt; 0.05), stage IV (40% vs 40%). Cancer-specific survival was also lower in patients with cirrhosis (5-year CSS 88% vs 91%, p=0.017). Conclusion: This large population-based study demonstrates that, compared to patients without cirrhosis, patients with cirrhosis are older with similar stage at diagnosis, but are somewhat less likely to receive adjuvant therapies. While they have slightly higher risks of certain post-operative complications and lower overall and cancer-specific survival, their outcomes remain favourable and should be considered for curative-intent therapies. Citation Format: Manisha Jogendran, Jennifer Flemming, Maya Djerboua, Shaila Merchant, Sean Bennett. Cirrhosis is associated with worse post-operative survival among patients with breast cancer: a population-based study [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the 2023 San Antonio Breast Cancer Symposium; 2023 Dec 5-9; San Antonio, TX. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2024;84(9 Suppl):Abstract nr PO3-18-01.

Surgical Field Separation in Total Laparoscopic Hysterectomy.

We aimed to study whether separating the vaginal and abdominal surgical fields during total laparoscopic hysterectomy (TLH) is associated with surgical site infection rates. This was a retrospective cohort study of all patients who underwent TLH and any concomitant procedures with two minimally invasive gynecologic surgery subspecialists between January 2016 and May 2023. Among 680 included patients, the rate of infection was 0.8% with surgical field separation and 1.3% without (3/377 vs 4/303; odds ratio 0.60, 95% CI, 0.13-2.70). There was no statistical difference between groups; however, the difference in infection rates between groups was extremely small, which led to inadequate power. Our findings suggest that rates of infection after TLH are low, with or without surgical field separation. Treating the vagina, perineum, and abdomen as a single, continuous operative field during TLH may be an acceptable practice.

Database Analysis Comparing Incidence and Complication Rates Between Inpatient and Outpatient Laminotomies for Lumbar Disc Herniation

Background: Lumbar disc herniation (LDH) is a common condition that can be characterized with disabling pain. While most patients recover without surgery, some still require operative intervention. The epidemiology and trends of laminotomy for LDH have not been recently studied, and current practice patterns might be different from historical norms. This study aimed to investigate the trends of inpatient and outpatient laminotomies for LDH and compare complication rates between these two sites of service. Methods: A large, national database was utilized to identify patients >18 years old who underwent a laminotomy for LDH between 2009 and 2019. Two cohorts were created based on site of surgery: inpatient versus outpatient. The outpatient cohort was defined as patients who had a length of stay less than 1 day without any associated hospitalization. Epidemiologic analyses for these cohorts were performed by demographics. Patients in both groups were then 1:1 propensity-score matched based on age, sex, insurance type, geographic region, and comorbidities. Ninety-day postoperative complications were compared between cohorts utilizing multivariate logistic regressions. Results: The average incidence of laminotomy for LDH was 13.0 per 10,000 persons-years. Although the national trend in incidence had not changed from 2009 to 2019, the proportion of outpatient laminotomies significantly increased in this time period (p=0.02). Outpatient laminotomies were more common among younger and healthier patients. Patients with inpatient laminotomies had significantly higher rates of surgical site infections (odds ratio [OR] 1.61, p<0.001), venous thromboembolism (VTE) (OR 1.96, p<0.001), hematoma (OR 1.71, p<0.001), urinary tract infections (OR 1.41, p<0.001), and acute kidney injuries (OR 1.75, p=0.001), even when controlling for selected confounders. Conclusions: Our study demonstrated an increasing trend in the performance of laminotomy for LDH toward the outpatient setting. Even when controlling for certain confounders, patients requiring inpatient procedures had higher rates of postoperative complications. This study highlights the importance of carefully evaluating the advantages and disadvantages of performing these procedures in an outpatient versus inpatient setting.

Comparison of purse-string technique vs linear suture for skin closure after ileostomy reversal. A randomized controlled trial.

Protective stoma after rectal surgery has been associated with important complications. The most common is surgical site infection (SSI) high rates after stoma reversal reported in literature. Our study compared the rate of SSI of two skin closure techniques, linear closure, and purse string closure. We carried out a single center, prospective, randomized controlled trial in the Department of Colorectal Surgery of Fondazione Policlinico Campus Bio-Medico of Rome between January 2018 through December 2021, to compare LC vs PS closure of ileostomy sites. A total of 117 patients (53.84% male) with a mean age of 65.68 ± 14.33years were finally evaluated in the study. 58 patients were included in the PS group and 59 patients in the LC one. There was a marked difference in the SSI rate between the two arms of the study: 3 of 58 patients in the purse-string arm versus 11 of 59 in the control arm (p = 0.043). The outcome of cosmesis was also higher in PS, with a statistical significance (mean ± DS 4,01 ± 0,73 for PS group vs mean ± DS 2,38 ± 0,72 for LC group, p < 0,001). Our study demonstrated that the PS technique had a significantly lower incidence of stoma site SSI compared with LC technique. Our findings are in line with other randomized studies and suggest that PS closure could be considered as standard of care for wound closure after ileostomy reversal.

When Antimicrobial Treatment and Surgical Prophylaxis Collide: A Stewardship Opportunity

Background: In 2002, the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) in collaboration with the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) established the Surgical Infection Prevention (SIP) project for the purposes of developing and standardizing quality improvement measures known to reduce the rates of post-operative surgical site infections (SSIs). Four years later the Surgical Care Improvement Project (SCIP), an expansion of SIP, was published in governmental Specifications Manual for National Inpatient Quality Measures and provided several additional initiatives applicable to the perioperative period. Central to both projects are the assurance of the timeliness, selection, and duration of peri-operative surgical prophylactic antibiotics. In support of this objective, various medical associations, such as the American Society of Health-System Pharmacists (ASHP) and the Infectious Diseases Society of America (IDSA), have developed the Clinical Practice Guidelines for Antimicrobial Prophylaxis in Surgery. To ensure compliance with quality measures, hospitals are required to report data to the Physicians Quality Reporting System, which is then reviewed by CMS for reimbursement purposes and to measure hospital performance. To maintain optimal standards of care and satisfy all core measures, it is expected that patients undergoing most categories of surgical procedures receive prophylactic antibiotics. We recognized that patients already being administered antimicrobial therapy as treatment for the condition requiring the surgery not uncommonly also were prescribed unwarranted and redundant pre-operative antibiotics. Our study was meant to quantify such antibiotic redundancy, which only risks the development of antimicrobial resistance and adverse events, to bolster our and other hospitals antimicrobial stewardship programs. Methods: A retrospective analysis of computerized hospital records over a one-month period of time (November 2022) was conducted focusing on hospital admissions that involved surgical operative procedures. Only those patients who had received a pre-operative surgical prophylactic antibiotic were included in the analysis. Results: Of the 92 surgeries that fulfilled the inclusion criteria, 38 (41.3%) were performed on patients who were already receiving therapeutic antibiotics for more than 24 hours targeted to treat the infection for which they were undergoing surgery. These included laparoscopic cholecystectomy (24), appendectomy (12), wound debridement (12), and soft tissue incision and drainage procedures (9), comprising nearly 50% of each type of these operations performed during the study time period. Conclusion: These findings demonstrate a clear opportunity to strengthen both our, and presumably other, hospitals antimicrobial stewardship programs. Together with physician education, granting the pharmacy the ability to cancel unnecessary and redundant surgical prophylactic antibiotics would conceivably be of great benefit.

A Quality Improvement Project to Increase Compliance With a Facility Protocol on Surgical Antimicrobial Prophylaxis.

Surgical site infections (SSIs) contribute to negative outcomes for patients and health care organizations. Compliancewith clinical practice guidelines likely can help prevent SSIs. An interdisciplinary team at a regional referral center in Michigan sought to reduce SSIs by improving compliance with the facility's preoperative antibiotic selection, dosing, timing, and redosing protocol. The interventions for the quality improvement project included adding the preprocedural antibiotics and doses to the master OR schedule; holding an education session for all preoperative nurses, intraoperative nurses, and anesthesia professionals; and posting a reference guide in the preoperative and intraoperative areas. Compliance with the facility's protocol for antibiotic selection, dosing, and timing significantly improved. However, SSI rates and compliance with redosing recommendations did not change significantly. The team decided to add the antibiotic order information to the master OR schedule permanently. The team plans to consider providing education sessions on administering preprocedural antibiotics outside the OR.

Comparing cefazolin/ metronidazole, piperacillin-tazobactam, or c efoxitin as surgical antibiotic prophylaxis in patients undergoing pancreaticoduodenectomy: A retrospective cohort study.

Preoperative antibiotic options for pancreaticoduodenectomy (PD) include cefoxitin (CX), piperacillin-tazobactam (PT), or combined cefazolin and metronidazole (CM). Recent studies suggest the superiority of PT over CX, but evidence for CM is unclear. To explore the impact of preoperative antibiotic selection (CM vs. PT and CX vs. PT) on the development of surgical site infections (SSI). Consecutive adult patients at oneinstitution who underwent PDfrom November 2017 to December 2021 and received either CM, PT, or CX preoperatively, were included. The primary outcome was SSI. Secondary outcomes included postoperative infections and clinically significant postoperative pancreatic fistula (POPF). Logistic regression models were used. Among 127 patients included in the study, PT, CM, and CX were administered in 46 (36.2%), 44 (34.6%), and 37 (29.4%) patients, respectively. There were 32 (27.1%) SSI, 20 (36.1%) infections, and 21 (22.9%) POPF events. PT use was associated with reduced risk of SSI compared to CX (OR: 0.32, 95% CI: 0.11-0.89, p = 0.03), but there was no difference as compared to CM (OR: 0.75, 95% CI: 0.27-2.13, p = 0.59). There were no differences in secondary outcomes. PT reduced SSI rates compared to CX but was no different to CM among patients undergoing PDat our center.

Plastic Wound Protector vs Surgical Gauze for Surgical Site Infection Reduction in Open GI Surgery

Surgical site infections (SSIs) are prevalent hospital-acquired infections with significant patient impacts and global health care burdens. The World Health Organization recommends using wound protector devices in abdominal surgery as a preventive measure to lower the risk of SSIs despite limited evidence. To examine the efficacy of a dual-ring, plastic wound protector in lowering the SSI rate in open gastrointestinal (GI) surgery irrespective of intra-abdominal contamination levels. This multicenter, patient-blinded, parallel-arm randomized clinical trial was conducted from August 2017 to October 2022 at 13 hospitals in an academic setting. Patients undergoing open abdominal bowel surgery (eg, for bowel perforation) were eligible for inclusion. Patients were randomized 1:1 to a dual-ring, plastic wound protector to protect the incision site of the abdominal wall (experimental group) or a conventional surgical gauze (control group). The primary end point was the rate of SSI within 30 days of open GI surgery. A total of 458 patients were randomized; after 1 was excluded from the control group, 457 were included in the intention-to-treat analysis (mean [SD] age, 58.4 [12.1] years; 256 [56.0%] male; 341 [74.6%] with a clean-contaminated wound): 229 in the wound protector group and 228 in the surgical gauze group. The overall SSI rate in the intention-to-treat analysis was 15.7% (72 of 458 patients). The SSI rate for the wound protector was 10.9% (25 of 229 patients) compared with 20.5% (47 of 229 patients) with surgical gauze. The wound protector significantly reduced the risk of SSI, with a relative risk reduction (RRR) of 46.81% (95% CI, 16.64%-66.06%). The wound protector significantly decreased the SSI rate for clean-contaminated wounds (RRR, 43.75%; 95% CI, 3.75%-67.13%), particularly for superficial SSIs (RRR, 42.50%; 95% CI, 7.16%-64.39%). Length of hospital stay was similar in both groups (mean [SD], 15.2 [10.5] vs 15.3 [10.2] days), as were the overall postoperative complication rates (20.1% vs 18.8%). This randomized clinical trial found a significant reduction in SSI rates when a plastic wound protector was used during open GI surgery compared with surgical gaze, supporting the World Health Organization recommendation for use of wound protector devices in abdominal surgery. ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03170843.

Negative Pressure Wound Therapy to Reduce Surgical Site Infections after CRS/HIPEC.

Surgical site infections (SSIs) are a common cause of morbidity after cytoreductive surgery (CRS) and hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC) for peritoneal malignancy. Negative pressure wound therapy (NPWT) has been proposed as a method to reduce the rates of SSIs; however, there is paucity in the literature on the efficacy in this population. The goal of this study was to determine whether routine use of NPWT in patients undergoing CRS/HIPEC could reduce the risk of developing SSI. We performed a retrospective before-after study to assess the rates of SSI with NPWT compared with a standard postoperative surgical dressing (SSD) in all patients undergoing CRS/HIPEC from November 2013 to December 2021 at a single tertiary care center. The primary outcome was rate of SSI. A multivariate logistic regression analysis was performed to evaluate for risk factors for SSI. A total of 178 patients were treated with CRS/HIPEC over the study period. Seventy patients had placement of SSD, and 108 patients had placement of NPWT. Rates of SSI were 11.4% (8/70) and 5.6% (6/108) in the two groups, respectively (p = 0.16). On multivariate analysis, patients treated with NPWT had a significantly lower risk of developing an SSI (OR 0.24 [0.06, 0.92], p = 0.037). Patients living >50 km from the hospital had significantly higher risk of developing SSI (OR 2.03 [1.09, 3.78], p = 0.026). These results suggest that routine use of NPWT can reduce the risk of developing an SSI in patients undergoing CRS/HIPEC for peritoneal malignancy.

Primary Closure of External Fixator Pin Sites is Safe After Orthopaedic Trauma Surgery

OBJECTIVES: To determine if rates of pin site infection and surgical site infection amongst patients managed with primary closure after external fixator removal were similar to those allowed to heal secondarily. METHODS: Design: Retrospective cohort Setting: Urban/Suburban Academic Level I Trauma Center Patient Selection Criteria: Patients who had received a lower extremity external fixator for provisional management prior to definitive fixation of lower extremity fractures were included with pin site wounds closed primarily or allowed to heal by secondary intention. Outcome Measures and Comparisons: The rate of pin tract infection and surgical site infection following primary closure of external fixator pin sites relative to patients whose pin sites were allowed to heal via secondary intention. . RESULTS: 256 patients were evaluated, 143 patients (406 pin sites) in the primary closure group and 113 patients (340 in sites) in the secondary closure group. The average age was 49 ± 16 years. Sixty-five percent of included patients were male. There was no difference in pin tract infections between cohorts (Primary=0.5%, Secondary=1.5%, p=0.26). External fixator duration in the primary closure group was 11.5 ± 8.4 days, and 13.0 ± 8.1 days in the secondary closure group (p=0.15). There was a greater rate of surgical site infections in the secondary intention cohort (15.9% vs 7.7%, p=0.047). CONCLUSIONS: There was no difference in pin site infection rate after primary pin site closure relative to patients who were allowed to heal via secondary intention. Furthermore, there was a lower rate of surgical site infection after primary closure. These results challenge the dogma of secondary closure for ex fix pin sites, suggesting that debridement and primary closure is a safe option for management of external fixator pin sites, and may impart benefit in decreasing infection risk. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Therapeutic Level III. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

The Impact of Redosing Antibiotics for Pediatric Patients Undergoing Appendectomy for Complicated Appendicitis.

Currently, there is no universally accepted, standardized protocol for pre-operative antibiotic administration in the setting of appendectomy for complicated appendicitis among pediatric patients. Strategies to mitigate surgical site infections (SSIs) must be balanced with optimal antibiotic use and exposure. We conducted a retrospective chart review to compare outcomes between patients treated pre-operatively with a single pre-operative dose of antibiotics with those who received additional antibiotics prior to laparoscopic appendectomy for complicated appendicitis between 2020 and 2022. Of 124 pediatric patients, 18% received an additional dose of pre-operative antibiotics after initial treatment dose. Surgical site infection rates between the two groups were not statistically significant (P-value = .352), thereby suggesting that redosing antibiotics closer to the time of incision may not impact SSI rates. Additional studies are necessary to make clinical recommendations.

A Bicentric, International, Retrospective Study to Assess Steelex Sternum Set for Sternal Closure in Cardiac Surgery – STERCCAS a Cohort Study

Sternal fixation with steel wires or cerclages, is the gold standard for closing a midline sternotomy, the standard incision in cardiac surgery. Rare wound complications can occur following a sternotomy wire closure. The objective of this study is to establish that the clinical efficacy of the Steelex Sternum Set is equivalent to the results documented in existing literature. The cohorts of the previously conducted OPTICABG and PREMIVALVE studies served as a foundation for the design of this retrospective, bicentric, international, single-arm study. The purpose of the study was to evaluate the clinical performance of the Steelex Sternum Set for sternal closure after coronary artery bypass grafting or cardiac valve replacement/reconstruction surgery. The primary endpoint was the incidence of a composite consisting of sternum instability, sternum dehiscence, superficial and deep sternal wound infection up to six months after surgery. A quantitative summary of the available clinical literature has been conducted for comparison purposes. There were 229 patients in total (89 PREMIVALVE and 140 OPTICABG). The combined rate of surgical site infection and sternal dehiscence/instability was 3.49%, compared to 1.5 - 20% described in the literature. Severe complications such as mortality, stroke, myocardial infarction, and mediastinitis occurred in about 0.8 - 2% of cases. The Steelex Sternum Set is a safe and appropriate method for sternal closure in a diverse patient population undergoing cardiac valve replacement and/or reconstruction, as well as coronary artery bypass graft surgery, in routine clinical settings.

An explainable long short-term memory network for surgical site infection identification

BackgroundCurrently, surgical site infection surveillance relies on labor-intensive manual chart review. Recently suggested solutions involve machine learning to identify surgical site infections directly from the medical record. Deep learning is a form of machine learning that has historically performed better than traditional methods while being harder to interpret. We propose a deep learning model, a long short-term memory network, for the identification of surgical site infection from the medical record with an attention layer for explainability. MethodsWe retrieved structured data and clinical notes from the University of Utah Health System’s electronic health care record for operative events randomly selected for manual chart review from January 2016 to June 2021. Surgical site infection occurring within 30 days of surgery was determined according to the National Surgical Quality Improvement Program definition. We trained the long short-term memory model along with traditional machine learning models for comparison. We calculated several performance metrics from a holdout test set and performed additional analyses to understand the performance of the long short-term memory, including an explainability analysis. ResultsSurgical site infection was present in 4.7% of the total 9,185 operative events. The area under the receiver operating characteristic curve and sensitivity of the long short-term memory was higher (area under the receiver operating characteristic curve: 0.954, sensitivity: 0.920) compared to the top traditional model (area under the receiver operating characteristic curve: 0.937, sensitivity: 0.736). The top 5 features of the long short-term memory included 2 procedure codes and 3 laboratory values. ConclusionSurgical site infection surveillance is vital for the reduction of surgical site infection rates. Our explainable long short-term memory achieved a comparable area under the receiver operating characteristic curve and greater sensitivity when compared to traditional machine learning methods. With explainable deep learning, automated surgical site infection surveillance could replace burdensome manual chart review processes.

COMPARISON OF SURGICAL SITE INFECTION BETWEEN DIABETIC AND NON-DIABETIC PATIENTS IN CLEAN SURGICAL PROCEDURES

Surgical site infections (SSIs) are a major concern in healthcare, especially for individuals with diabetes. Diabetes can impair wound healing and weaken the immune system, increasing the risk of SSIs. Studying SSIs in diabetic versus non-diabetic patients undergoing clean surgeries is vital for improving patient care. Objective: The primary objective of this study was to investigate the incidence of surgical site infections (SSIs) in individuals with diabetes compared to those without diabetes who underwent clean surgical procedures. Methods: After the ethical approval from the institutional review board, this comparative study was conducted at Combined Military Hospital Jhelum from July 2022 to December 2023.  A consisted of people with diabetes (n=50), while Group B comprised patients who did not have diabetes (n=50). All patients were administered suitable antibiotics before surgery. Each patient received a singular intravenous dose of Ceftriaxone 1g, administered thirty minutes before initiating the initial incision. The patients were monitored for surgical site infections (SSI), defined as the presence of redness, fever, tenderness at the incision site, discharge from the surgical wound, or the development of an abscess within 28 days after surgery. Results: Most participants in both study groups underwent open ventral hernia repair procedures, 54% in group A and 58% in group B. Mean± S. D of the Hb1Ac levels of the participants in both groups was 8.46±1.16 and 4.14±1.01 (P=&lt;0.0001). 58% of participants in Group A, while 22% in Group B had surgery-associated complications (p&lt;0.0001). 30% of participants in Group A, while 10% in Group B had SSI (p&lt;0.0001). Conclusion: Individuals with diabetes are more susceptible to experiencing higher rates of surgical site infection, especially in cases of procedures that are considered clean, in comparison to individuals without diabetes.

Evaluation of 30-day outcomes for open ventral hernia repair using self-gripping versus nonself-gripping mesh.

The use of mesh is standard of care for large ventral hernias repaired on an elective basis. The most used type of mesh includes synthetic polypropylene mesh; however, there has been an increase in the usage of a new polyester self-gripping mesh, and there are limited data regarding its efficacy for ventral hernia. The purpose of the study is to determine whether there is a difference in surgical site occurrence (SSO), surgical site infection (SSI), surgical site occurrence requiring procedural intervention (SSOPI), and recurrence at 30 days after ventral hernia repair (VHR) using self-gripping (SGM) versus non-self-gripping mesh (NSGM). We performed a retrospective study from January 2014 to April 2022 using the Abdominal Core Health Quality Collaborative (ACHQC). We collected data on patients over 18 years of age who underwent elective open VHR using SGM or NSGM and whom had 30-day follow-up. Propensity matching was utilized to control for variables including hernia width, body mass index, age, ASA, and mesh location. Data were analyzed to identify differences in SSO, SSI, SSOPI, and recurrence at 30 days. 9038 patients were identified. After propensity matching, 1766 patients were included in the study population. Patients with SGM had similar demographic and clinical characteristics compared to NSGM. The mean hernia width to mesh width ratio was 8cm:18cm with NSGM and 7cm:15cm with SGM (p = 0.63). There was no difference in 30-day rates of recurrence, SSI or SSO. The rate of SSOPI was also found to be 5.4% in the nonself-gripping group compared to 3.1% in the self-gripping mesh group (p < .005). There was no difference in patient-reported outcomes at 30 days. In patients undergoing ventral hernia repair with mesh, self-gripping mesh is a safe type of mesh to use. Use of self-gripping mesh may be associated with lower rates of SSOPI when compared to nonself-gripping mesh.