Systematic review of the use of cyanoacrylate glue in addition to standard wound closure in the prevention of surgical site infection.

Surgical site infection (SSI) is associated with increased morbidity, length of stay, and cost. Cyanoacrylate glue is a low-cost, fluid-proof, antimicrobial barrier. The aim of this systematic review is to assess the use of cyanoacrylate glue after standard wound closure versus dressings in the reduction of SSI. Medline, Embase, Cochrane Library, and clinical trial registries were searched with no restrictions in accordance with PRISMA guidelines. Eligibility criteria were prospective studies comparing glue versus dressings after standardised wound closure. Two reviewers independently screened articles and utilised GRADE for quality assessment. Meta-analysis was not performed because of the heterogeneity of the data. Three articles were included in the review. Study quality was uniformly low. Incidence of SSI was low, between 0% and 4%. No significant differences were reported in the single randomised controlled trial. A single non-randomised parallel group trial reported a significant reduction in the incidence of SSI in the cyanoacrylate group. There was no consistent evidence demonstrating reduction in SSI as a result of the use of cyanoacrylate glue. Future studies should assess the use of cyanoacrylate in procedures with a higher rate of SSI, for example, lower limb bypass.

Metachronous colorectal cancer: a competing risks analysis with consideration for a stratified approach to surveillance colonoscopy.

BACKGROUND: The incidence of metachronous cancer will become an important clinical consideration as the life expectancy of the population increases and as rates of curative resection improve. OBJECTIVE: To assess the pattern of metachronous cancer development following curative resection of colorectal cancer in an unselected patient population offered postoperative colonoscopic surveillance. METHOD: Prospective clinical follow-up after curative colorectal cancer resection and surveillance colonoscopy with or without polypectomy in accordance with the national guidelines. Actuarial analysis and competing risk analysis were performed to account for death and recurrence and to stratify for age, gender, stage, and tumor site. RESULTS: Five hundred thirty-eight patients with median follow-up 4 years 2 month (0-16) years. Fifteen patients (3%) developed metachronous cancer, at a median time interval of 90 months from primary resection. Thirteen metachronous cancer patients (87%, 13/15) underwent one to five surveillance colonoscopies: nine patients were asymptomatic at time of diagnosis of metachronous cancer. Competing risks analysis suggests that the adjusted cumulative incidence in males aged 55 is 4% at 10 years compared with 1% in females aged 85 years old. CONCLUSIONS: A patient aged under 65 at the time of the primary curative resection carries a 2% 5-year risk of metachronous cancer, implying that 3 year surveillance colonoscopy is justified. Whereas patients aged over 75 carry less than a 2% 10-year risk, implying that it is seldom warranted to repeat the colonoscopy more frequently than every 5 years. A stratified approach to the frequency of surveillance colonoscopy requires further consideration.