[Surgical site infection after lower limb arterial reconstruction: can we improve prevention?] / Infections postchirurgie artérielle des membres inférieurs : peut-on mieux faire?

Infections associated with arterial reconstructions of the lower limbs are associated with high morbidity. This article reviews the risk factors for infection associated with this surgery and the preventive measures. These include smoking cessation and glycemic control preoperatively; avoiding unnecessary exposure to antibiotics or corticosteroids; optimal peripheral wound care; rigorous antisepsis and antibiotic prophylaxis in the operating theatre ; and finally, meticulous post-operative wound monitoring. The benefit of Staphylococcus aureus decolonization in vascular surgery is less clearly established than in cardiac and thoracic surgery, but it is still recommended in cases of implant placement or where there is a high risk of S. aureus infection, depending on the planned approach and type of surgery.

Les infections associées aux reconstructions artérielles des membres inférieurs sont grevées d'une morbidité élevée. Cet article revoit les facteurs de risque d'infection associés à cette chirurgie et les mesures de prévention. Ces dernières incluent l'arrêt du tabac et le contrôle glycémique en préopératoire ; l'absence d'exposition inutile aux antibiotiques ou aux corticostéroïdes ; les soins de plaies périphériques optimaux ; une antisepsie et une antibioprophylaxie au bloc opératoire rigoureuses et, finalement, un suivi de plaie postopératoire minutieux. Le bénéfice de la décolonisation à Staphylococcus aureus dans le cadre de la chirurgie vasculaire est moins clairement établi qu'en chirurgies cardiaque et thoracique, mais celle-ci reste recommandée en cas de mise en place d'implant ou de risque élevé d'infection à S. aureus, selon la voie d'abord et le type de chirurgie prévue.

Implementing a surgical site infection prevention bundle for emergency appendectomy: Worth the effort or waste of time?

BACKGROUND: The aim of this study was to evaluate feasibility and impact of an intraoperative surgical site infection prevention bundle for emergency appendectomy. METHODS: Consecutive adult patients undergoing emergency appendectomy were prospectively included during a 10-year study period (2011-2020). The care bundle was implemented as of November 1, 2018, and focused on 4 intraoperative items (disinfection, antibiotic prophylaxis, induction temperature control >36.5°C, and intracavity lavage). The primary outcome was the compliance to bundle items. Thirty-day surgical site infections were assessed by the independent Swiss National SSI Surveillance Program (2011 to October 2018) and by an institutional audit (November 2018-2020). Independent risk factors for surgical site infection were identified through multinominal logistic regression analysis. RESULTS: Of 1,901 patients, 449 (23.6%) were included after bundle implementation. Overall surgical site infection rate was 111 (5.8%). In 42 patients with surgical site infection (37.8%), antibiotic treatment alone was done, and additional surgical management was necessary in 31 patients (27.9%), computed tomography-guided drainage in 30 patients (27%), and bedside wound opening in 9 cases (8.1%). Overall compliance to the bundle was 79.9%. Overall surgical site infection rates were decreased after bundle implementation (17/449 [3.8%] vs 94/1,452 [6.5%], P = .038), mainly due to a decrease in superficial incisional infections (P = .014). Independent risk factors for surgical site infection were surgical duration ≥60 minutes (odds ratio: 1.66, P = .018), contamination class IV (odds ratio: 2.64, P < .001), and open or converted approach (odds ratio: 4.0, P < .001), and the bundle was an independent protective factor (odds ratio: 0.58, P = .048). CONCLUSION: Implementation of an intraoperative surgical site infection prevention bundle was feasible and might have a beneficial impact on surgical site infection rates after emergency appendectomy.

Specific National Surveillance Program for Organ Space Infections after Colonic Surgery.

Background: The present study aimed to analyze risk factors and management strategies for organ space infections (OSI) specifically after colonic resections. Methods: This was a retrospective analysis of all consecutive colonic resections performed between February 2012 and October 2017 in a single-center quality-improvement project. All OSIs were assessed prospectively by an independent national surveillance program ( www.swissnoso.ch ) and classified according to the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) criteria (infection involves organ and spaces other than the incision), including anastomotic leaks. Risk factors for OSI were identified by univariable and multivariable analysis. Results: The study cohort included 1,263 patients (731 elective and 532 emergency colectomies). One hundred fifty-three patients (12%) were found to have an OSI, which occurred at median POD 8 [interquartile range 4-14]. Treatment strategies consisted of surgical management in 85 cases (56%), percutaneous drainage in 36 cases (24%), and antibiotic treatment alone in 32 patients (21%). Independent risk factors for OSI were emergency surgery (odds ratio [OR] 2.06; 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.35-3.16), operation duration >180 minutes (OR 2.10; 95% CI 1.29-3.40), and open surgery (OR 2.51; 95% CI 1.73-3.65). Conclusions: Organ space infections after colonic surgery were more frequent after open emergency surgery and occurred early in the post-operative course. Invasive management was required in 79% of cases.

Comparison of Surveillance of Surgical Site Infections by a National Surveillance Program and by Institutional Audit.

BACKGROUND: Reported incidence of surgical site infections (SSI) after colonic surgery varies widely. These variations depend not only on patient- and surgery-related parameters but are influenced by type and quality of follow-up. The aim of the study was to compare SSI assessed by two independent prospective surveillance systems, a national surveillance program based on recommendations of the National Healthcare Safety Network (Swissnoso) versus an international audit system, the ERAS® Interactive Audit System (EIAS; Encare, Stockholm, Sweden). METHODS: Comparative study of a consecutive cohort of colonic resections at a single institution from September 2015 to March 2017. Independent prospective SSI monitoring was available from Swissnoso and EIAS. Inter-observer reliability was calculated using Cohen k. Sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy of EIAS in assessing SSI was compared with Swissnoso, considered as gold standard. RESULTS: The final sample included 143 patients. Of these, 136 (95.1%) were classified into the same category by both systems, identifying 17 patients (12.5%) with SSI and 119 patients (87.5%) without SSI, respectively. Discrepant results were found for the remaining seven patients (4.9%) with four SSI categorization according to Swissnoso but not EIAS, and three SSI categorization in EIAS but not in Swissnoso; all miscategorized patients presented superficial SSI. Sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy of EIAS for SSI recording was 81%, 97.5%, and 95.1%, respectively. Inter-observer agreement was high (Cohen k value of 0.801, p < 0.001). Case-by-case analysis of discrepant findings revealed mainly discrepant interpretation of clinical symptoms and erroneous labeling of non-procedure-related infections. CONCLUSIONS: Surgical site infection recording by two independent systems showed high concordance and good inter-rater reliability.

Missed opportunities for HIV testing among patients newly presenting for HIV care at a Swiss university hospital: a retrospective analysis.

OBJECTIVES: To determine the frequency of missed opportunities (MOs) among patients newly diagnosed with HIV, risk factors for presenting MOs and the association between MOs and late presentation (LP) to care. DESIGN: Retrospective analysis. SETTING: HIV outpatient clinic at a Swiss tertiary hospital. PARTICIPANTS: Patients aged ≥18 years newly presenting for HIV care between 2010 and 2015. MEASURES: Number of medical visits, up to 5 years preceding HIV diagnosis, at which HIV testing had been indicated, according to Swiss HIV testing recommendations. A visit at which testing was indicated but not performed was considered an MO for HIV testing. RESULTS: Complete records were available for all 201 new patients of whom 51% were male and 33% from sub-Saharan Africa. Thirty patients (15%) presented with acute HIV infection while 119 patients (59%) were LPs (CD4 counts <350 cells/mm3 at diagnosis). Ninety-four patients (47%) had presented at least one MO, of whom 44 (47%) had multiple MOs. MOs were more frequent among individuals from sub-Saharan Africa, men who have sex with men and patients under follow-up for chronic disease. MOs were less frequent in LPs than non-LPs (42.5% vs 57.5%, p=0.03). CONCLUSIONS: At our centre, 47% of patients presented at least one MO. While our LP rate was higher than the national figure of 49.8%, LPs were less likely to experience MOs, suggesting that these patients were diagnosed late through presenting late, rather than through being failed by our hospital. We conclude that, in addition to optimising provider-initiated testing, access to testing must be improved among patients who are unaware that they are at HIV risk and who do not seek healthcare.

Impact of Teaching on Surgical Site Infection after Colonic Surgery.

OBJECTIVE: The present study aimed to evaluate whether teaching had an influence on surgical site infections (SSI) after colonic surgery. DESIGN: Colonic surgeries between January 2014 and December 2016 were retrospectively reviewed. Demographics, surgical details, and SSI rates were compared between teaching procedures vs. experts. Risk factors for SSI were identified by multinominal logistic regression. SETTING: SSI were prospectively assessed by an independent National Surveillance Program (www.swissnoso.ch) at Lausanne University Hospital CHUV, a tertiary academic institution. PARTICIPANTS: Included in the present analysis were patients documented in a prospective institutional enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) database and who were prospectively monitored by the independent National Infection Surveillance Committee between January 1, 2014 and December 31, 2016. RESULTS: In all, 315 patients constituted the study cohort. Demographic and surgical items were comparable between teaching (n = 161) vs. expert operations (n = 135) except for higher occurrence of wound contamination class III-IV (13 vs. 19%, p = 0.046) in patients operated by experts. Overall, 61 patients (19%) developed SSI, namely 25 patients (16%) in the teaching group and 32 patients (24%) in the expert group (p = 0.077). Contamination class III-IV (OR = 3.2; 95% CI: 1.4-7.5, p = 0.005) and open surgery (OR = 3.4; 95% CI: 1.8-6.7, p < 0.001) were independent risk factors for SSI, while teaching had no significant impact (OR = 0.6; 95% CI: 0.3-1.2, p = 0.153). CONCLUSIONS: Surgical teaching was feasible and safe after colonic surgery in the present cohort and had no impact on SSI rate.