Are Prophylactic Antibiotic Agents Indicated in Anorectal Surgery for Patients with Human Immunodeficiency Virus?

BACKGROUND: With increased survival among patients with human immunodeficiency virus (HIV), surgeons have been seeing more cases of anal dysplasia and cancer. There is, however, no data on the incidence of surgical site infections (SSIs) in HIV-positive patients undergoing elective anorectal procedures, nor on the administration of prophylactic antibiotic agents. We reviewed a HIV-positive population that has undergone elective anorectal biopsy of areas of dysplasia observed on office anoscopy to assess the need for antibiotic prophylaxis. PATIENTS AND METHODS: A retrospective chart review was performed of all HIV-positive patients seen as outpatients in the Colorectal Surgery Division from 2007-2016. Demographics, dates of surgery and follow-up, antibiotic prophylaxis, and pre-operative CD4 count and HIV viral load were recorded for 229 patients. Post-operative examination notes were reviewed to determine the presence of SSIs. The proportion of patients who received prophylaxis was assessed and the SSI rate was calculated. RESULTS: Surgical site infections occurred in 2 of 237 (0.8%) cases without antibiotic prophylaxis and in none of the 38 cases with prophylaxis. This infection rate was found to be lower than that of the general surgery population, with no statistical difference from hemorrhoidectomy patients without HIV. One SSI occurred in a 51-year-old male with a pre-operative CD4 count of 612 per microliter and viral load of zero. Another occurred in a 57-year-old female with an unknown CD4 count and viral load. A χ2 analysis showed the incidence of SSIs in the groups with and without prophylaxis was not significantly different (p = 0.563). CONCLUSION: Surgical site infection rates in HIV-positive patients undergoing biopsies for anal dysplasia were similar to patients without HIV undergoing similar minor anorectal procedures, and no difference was noted in the rate of SSI with the administration of prophylactic antibiotic agents. We do not recommend routine use of prophylactic antibiotic agents in this population.

Condyloma Acuminatum, Anal Intraepithelial Neoplasia, and Anal Cancer in the Setting of HIV: Do We Really Understand the Risk?

BACKGROUND: The gold standard for surveillance of patients with anal lesions is unclear. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to stratify patients for risk of progression of disease and to determine appropriate intervals for surveillance of patients with anal disease. DESIGN: This was a retrospective chart review for patients treated for anal lesions between 2007 and 2014. Only patients with ≥1 year of follow-up from index evaluation, pathology, documented physical examination, and anoscopy findings were included for analysis. SETTINGS: The study was conducted at an urban university hospital. PATIENTS: HIV-positive patients with anal lesions treated with excision and fulguration were included. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Recurrence of anal lesions, progression of disease, and progression to cancer were measured. RESULTS: Ninety-one patients met inclusion criteria. The mean age was 41.6 years, and mean follow-up was 38.6 months (range, 11.0-106.0 mo). On initial pathology, 8 patients (8.8%) had a diagnosis of condyloma acuminatum without dysplasia, 20 patients (22%) had anal intraepithelial neoplasia I, 32 (35.2%) had anal intraepithelial neoplasia II, and 31 (34.1%) had anal intraepithelial neoplasia III. Sixty-nine patients (75.8%) had repeat procedures. Seven (87.5%) of 8 patients with condyloma and 6 (30%) of 20 patients with anal intraepithelial neoplasia I progressed to high-grade lesions. Five (15.6%) of 32 patients progressed from anal intraepithelial neoplasia II to III, and 2 patients with anal intraepithelial neoplasia III (6.5%) developed squamous cell carcinoma (2.3% for the entire cohort). LIMITATIONS: This was a single institution study. High-resolution anoscopy was not used. CONCLUSIONS: All of the HIV-positive patients with condyloma or anal intraepithelial neoplasia, regardless of the presence of dysplasia, should be surveyed at equivalent 3-month time intervals, because their risk of progression of disease is high. Video Abstract at http://links.lww.com/DCR/A389.