Tailored Pre-Operative Antibiotic Prophylaxis to Prevent Post-Operative Surgical Site Infections in General Surgery.

The average American today undergoes three inpatient and two outpatient surgical procedures during one's life, each of which carries with it a risk of post-operative infection. It has long been known that post-operative infections cause significant morbidity in the immediate peri-operative period, but recent evidence suggests that they can have long-term consequences as well, increasing a patient's risk of infectious complications in unrelated surgeries performed months or even years later. While there are several theories on the origin of this association, including bacterial colonization of a post-operative infectious wound site, antimicrobial resistance from curative courses of antibiotics, subclinical immunosuppression, or the creation of an inflammatory "pathobiome" following an infectious insult, it is ultimately still unclear why patients who experience a single post-operative infection seem to be at a significantly higher risk of experiencing subsequent ones. Regardless, this association has significant implications for the routine use of pre-operative antibiotic prophylaxis. Indeed, while the prescription of antibiotics pre-operatively has dramatically reduced the rate of post-operative infections, the chosen prophylaxis regimens are typically standardized according to national guidelines, are facing increasing antimicrobial resistance patterns, and have been unable to reduce the risk of post-operative infection to acceptably low levels for certain surgeries. As a result, some clinicians have speculated that tailoring pre-operative antibiotic prophylaxis according to a patient's prior infectious and operative history could improve efficacy and further reduce the rate of post-operative infections. The purpose of this review is to describe the evidence for the link between multiple post-operative infections and explore the efficacy of individualized pre-operative prophylaxis.

Fragmentation of Care in Patients with Peritoneal Metastases Undergoing Cytoreductive Surgery.

BACKGROUND: The delivery of multimodal treatment at a high-volume center is known to optimize the outcomes of gastrointestinal malignancies. However, patients undergoing cytoreductive surgery (CRS) for peritoneal metastases often must 'fragment' their surgical and systemic therapeutic care between different institutions. We hypothesized that this adversely affects outcomes. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Adults undergoing CRS for colorectal or appendiceal adenocarcinoma at our institution between 2016 and 2022 were identified retrospectively and grouped by care network: 'coordinated care' patients received exclusively in-network systemic therapy, while 'fragmented care' patients received some systemic therapy from outside-network providers. Factors associated with fragmented care were also ascertained. Overall survival (OS) from CRS and systemic therapy-related serious adverse events (SAEs) were compared across the groups. RESULTS: Among 85 (80%) patients, 47 (55%) had colorectal primaries and 51 (60%) received fragmented care. Greater travel distance [OR 1.01 (CI 1.00-1.02), p = 0.02] and educational status [OR 1.04 (CI 1.01-1.07), p = 0.01] were associated with receiving fragmented care. OS was comparable between patients who received fragmented and coordinated care in the colorectal [32.5 months versus 40.8 months, HR 0.95 (CI 0.43-2.10), p = 0.89] and appendiceal [31.0 months versus 27.4 months, HR 1.17 (CI 0.37-3.74), p = 0.55] subgroups. The frequency of SAEs (7.8% versus 17.6%, p = 0.19) was also similar. CONCLUSIONS: There were no significant differences in survival or SAEs based on the networks of systemic therapy delivery. This suggests that patients undergoing CRS at a high-volume center may safely receive systemic therapy at outside-network facilities with comparable outcomes.

A Tailored Approach to Laparoscopic Fundoplication: Outcomes in Patients with Esophageal Dysmotility.

BACKGROUND: Esophageal dysmotility is a common finding in patients being evaluated for antireflux surgery, although its implication remains unclear. We aimed to evaluate outcomes of patients with esophageal dysmotility after fundoplication. METHODS: A retrospective review of a prospective quality-database was performed. All patients who underwent laparoscopic Nissen (NF) or Toupet (TF) fundoplication were included. Esophageal dysmotility was defined using the Chicago Classification v4.0 and conventional metrics, creating three sub-groups: ineffective esophageal motility (IEM), distal/diffuse esophageal spasm (DES), and hypercontractile esophagus (HE). Quality of life (QOL) outcomes were measured by the Reflux Severity Index (RSI), Gastroesophageal Reflux Disease-Health Related Quality of Life (GERD-HRQL), and Dysphagia Scores. RESULTS: Of 487 patients included, 99 (20.3%) had esophageal dysmotility (49 IEM, 40 DES, 10 HE). While a majority in the dysmotility group (81.8%) underwent TF, most patients in the normal group (76.5%) underwent NF (p < 0.001). On multivariable analysis controlling for sex, age, BMI, hiatal hernia, and surgery type, the normal group had higher Dysphagia Scores at 3 weeks (2.2 ± 0.9 vs. 1.7 ± 0.8, p < 0.001), but not at 6-month, 1-year, 2-year, or 5-year follow-up. There were no differences between normal and dysmotility groups in terms of RSI or GERD-HRQL scores at any time point. Patients with different sub-types of esophageal dysmotility had similar QOL outcomes at all time points. CONCLUSION: Patients with esophageal dysmotility had similar outcomes compared to those with normal motility after fundoplication, suggesting the tailored approach favoring partial fundoplication for patients with dysmotility as part of an appropriate treatment algorithm.

Celecoxib and Myrtol: A Novel Therapy for Recurrent Appendiceal Mucinous Neoplasms With Extensive Peritoneal Dissemination.

BACKGROUND: Unresectable appendiceal mucinous neoplasms (AMNs) with extensive peritoneal dissemination cause significant morbidity and have limited treatment options. We evaluated a novel combination of Celecoxib and Myrtol in treating such AMNs. METHODS: Patients with recurrent AMNs with extensive peritoneal disease treated with a daily regimen of 200 mg Celecoxib and 1200 mg Myrtol Standardized were included. Progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) were calculated, and carcinoembryonic antigen (CEA) trends were compared pretreatment and post-treatment in terms of percentage change. RESULTS: Thirteen patients with extensive, recurrent disease (median peritoneal carcinomatosis index of 36) were included between 2017 and 2020. The median age was 63 years (interquartile range: 55 to 67) and 7 (54%) were male. A total of 85% had undergone prior cytoreductive surgery while 15% underwent cytoreductive surgery >2 times. 54% had received multiple cycles of systemic chemotherapy before starting Celecoxib-Myrtol. After a median follow-up of 8 months, median PFS and OS were 16 months (interquartile range: 5 to 17) and 27 months, respectively. Nine (69.2%) showed improvement in CEA values 3 months after treatment compared with 3-month pretreatment CEA trends. None had adverse events attributable to Celecoxib-Myrtol. CONCLUSIONS: Our feasibility study suggests that a regimen of Celecoxib-Myrtol is well tolerated and may prolong PFS and OS in patients with recurrent AMNs with peritoneal spread.