Longitudinal Rates, Patient Risk Factors, and Economic Impact of Superficial and Deep Incisional Surgical Site Infection After Primary and Revision Total Hip Arthroplasty: A U.S. Retrospective Commercial Claims Database Analysis.

Background: Longitudinal rates, risk factors, and costs of superficial and deep incisional surgical site infection (SSI) were evaluated six months after primary total hip arthroplasty (pTHA) and revision total hip replacement (rTHA). Patients and Methods: Patients who had pTHA or rTHA between January 1, 2016 and March 31, 2018 were identified using the IBM® MarketScan® administrative claims databases. Kaplan-Meier survival curves evaluated time to SSI over six months. Cox proportional hazard models evaluated SSI risk factors. Generalized linear models estimated SSI costs up to 12 months. Results: The total cohort included 17,514 pTHA patients (mean [standard deviation] age 59.6 [10.1] years, 50.2% female; 66.4% commercial insurance), and 2,954 rTHA patients (61.2 [12.0] years, 52.0% female; 48.6% commercial insurance). Deep and superficial post-operative SSI at six months affected 0.30% (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.22%-0.39%) and 0.67% (95% CI, 0.55%-0.79% of patients in the pTHA, and 8.9% (95%CI: 7.8%-10.0%) and 4.8% (95% CI, 4.0%-5.6%) of patients in the rTHA cohorts. Hazards for SSI were related to patient comorbidities that included diabetes mellitus, obesity, renal failure, pulmonary or circulatory disorders, and depression. The adjusted average all-cause incremental commercial costs associated with post-operative infection ranged from $21,434 to $42,879 for superficial incisional SSI and $53,884 to $76,472 for deep incisional SSI, over a 12-month post-operative assessment period. Conclusions: The SSI rate after revision total hip arthroplasty (rTHA) was nearly 9% compared with 1.0% after pTHA. The risk of infection was influenced by several comorbid risk factors. The incremental cost associated with SSIs was substantial.

Longitudinal rates, risk factors, and costs of superficial and deep incisional surgical-site infection (SSI) after primary and revision total knee arthroplasty: A US retrospective claims database analysis.

OBJECTIVE: We evaluated longitudinal rates, risk factors, and costs of superficial and deep incisional surgical-site infection (SSI) 6 months after primary total knee arthroplasty (pTKA) and revision total knee arthroplasty (rTKA). METHODS: Patients were identified from January 1, 2016 through March 31, 2018, in the IBM MarketScan administrative claims databases. Kaplan-Meier survival curves evaluated time to SSI over 6 months. Cox proportional hazard models evaluated SSI risk factors. Generalized linear models estimated SSI costs up to 12 months. RESULTS: Of the 26,097 pTKA patients analyzed (mean age, 61.6 years; SD, 9.2; 61.4% female; 60.4% commercial insurance), 0.65% (95% CI, 0.56%-0.75%) presented with a deep incisional SSI and 0.82% (95% CI, 0.71%-0.93%) with a superficial incisional SSI. Also, 3,663 patients who had rTKA (mean age, 60.9 years; SD, 10.1; 60.6% female; 53.0% commercial insurance), 10.44% (95% CI, 9.36%-11.51%) presented with a deep incisional SSI and 2.60% (95% CI, 2.07%-3.13%) presented with a superficial incisional SSI. Infections were associated with male sex and multiple patient comorbidities including chronic pulmonary disease, pulmonary circulatory disorders, fluid and electrolyte disorders, malnutrition, drug abuse, and depression. Adjusted average all-cause incremental commercial cost ranged from $14,298 to $29,176 and from $41,381 to 59,491 for superficial and deep incisional SSI, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: SSI occurred most frequently following rTKA and among patients with pulmonary comorbidities and depression. The incremental costs associated with SSI following TKA were substantial.

Risk and economic burden of surgical site infection following spinal fusion in adults.

BACKGROUND: Spinal fusion surgery (SFS) is one of the most common operations in the United States, >450,000 SFSs are performed annually, incurring annual costs >$10 billion. OBJECTIVES: We used a nationwide longitudinal database to accurately assess incidence and payments associated with management of postoperative infection following SFS. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective, observational cohort analysis of 210,019 patients undergoing SFS from 2014 to 2018 using IBM MarketScan commercial and Medicaid-Medicare databases. We assessed rates of superficial/deep incisional SSIs, from 3 to 180 days after surgery using Cox proportional hazard regression models. To evaluate adjusted payments for patients with/without SSIs, adjusted for inflation to 2019 Consumer Price Index, we used generalized linear regression models with log-link and γ distribution. RESULTS: Overall, 6.6% of patients experienced an SSI, 1.7% superficial SSIs and 4.9% deep-incisional SSIs, with a median of 44 days to presentation for superficial SSIs and 28 days for deep-incisional SSIs. Selective risk factors included surgical approach, admission type, payer, and higher comorbidity score. Postoperative incremental commercial payments for patients with superficial SSI were $20,800 at 6 months, $26,937 at 12 months, and $32,821 at 24 months; incremental payments for patients with deep-incisional SSI were $59,766 at 6 months, $74,875 at 12 months, and $93,741 at 24 months. Corresponding incremental Medicare payments for patients with superficial incisional at 6, 12, 24-months were $11,044, $17,967, and $24,096; while payments for patients with deep-infection were: $48,662, $53,757, and $73,803 at 6, 12, 24-months. CONCLUSIONS: We identified a 4.9% rate of deep infection following SFS, with substantial payer burden. The findings suggest that the implementation of robust evidence-based surgical-care bundles to mitigate postoperative SFS infection is warranted.

Delphi Consensus on Intraoperative Technical/Surgical Aspects to Prevent Surgical Site Infection after Colorectal Surgery.

BACKGROUND: Previous studies have focused on the development and evaluation of care bundles to reduce the risk of surgical site infection (SSI) throughout the perioperative period. A focused examination of the technical/surgical aspects of SSI reduction during CRS has not been conducted. This study aimed to develop an expert consensus on intraoperative technical/surgical aspects of SSI prevention by the surgical team during colorectal surgery (CRS). STUDY DESIGN: In a modified Delphi process, a panel of 15 colorectal surgeons developed a consensus on intraoperative technical/surgical aspects of SSI prevention undertaken by surgical personnel during CRS using information from a targeted literature review and expert opinion. Consensus was developed with up to three rounds per topic, with a prespecified threshold of ≥70% agreement. RESULTS: In 3 Delphi rounds, the 15 panelists achieved consensus on 16 evidence-based statements. The consensus panel supported the use of wound protectors/retractors, sterile incision closure tray, preclosure glove change, and antimicrobial sutures in reducing SSI along with wound irrigation with aqueous iodine and closed-incision negative pressure wound therapy in high-risk, contaminated wounds. CONCLUSIONS: Using a modified Delphi method, consensus has been achieved on a tailored set of recommendations on technical/surgical aspects that should be considered by surgical personnel during CRS to reduce the risk of SSI, particularly in areas where the evidence base is controversial or lacking. This document forms the basis for ongoing evidence for the topics discussed in this article or new topics based on newly emerging technologies in CRS.

Assessment of risk and economic burden of surgical site infection (SSI) posthysterectomy using a U.S. longitudinal database.

BACKGROUND: Surgical site infection posthysterectomy has significant impact on patient morbidity, mortality, and health care costs. This study evaluates incidence, risk factors, and total payer costs of surgical site infection after hysterectomy in commercial, Medicare, and Medicaid populations using a nationwide claims database. METHODS: IBM MarketScan databases identified women having hysterectomy between 2014 and 2018. Deep-incisional/organ space (DI/OS) and superficial infections were identified over 6 months postoperatively with risk factors and direct infection-associated payments by insurance type over a 24-month postoperative period. RESULTS: Analysis identified 141,869 women; 7.8% Medicaid, 5.8% Medicare, and 3.9% commercially insured women developed deep-incisional/organ space surgical site infection, whereas 3.9% Medicaid, 3.2% Medicare, and 2.1% commercially insured women developed superficial infection within 6 months of index procedure. Deep-incisional/organ space risk factors were open approach (hazard ratio, 1.6; 95% confidence interval, 1.5-1.8) and payer type (Medicaid versus commercial [hazard ratio, 1.4; 95% confidence interval, 1.3-1.5]); superficial risk factors were payer type (Medicaid versus commercial [hazard ratio, 1.4; 95% confidence interval, 1.3-1.6]) and solid tumor without metastasis (hazard ratio, 1.4; 95% confidence interval, 1.3-1.6). Highest payments occurred with Medicare ($44,436, 95% confidence interval: $33,967-$56,422) followed by commercial ($27,140, 95% confidence interval: $25,990-$28,317) and Medicaid patients ($17,265, 95% confidence interval: $15,247-$19,426) for deep-incisional/organ space infection at 24-month posthysterectomy. CONCLUSIONS: Real-world cost of managing superficial, deep-incisional/organ space infection after hysterectomy was significantly higher than previously reported. Surgical approach, payer type, and comorbid risk factors contributed to increased risk of infection and economic burden. Medicaid patients experienced the highest risk of infection, followed by Medicare patients. The study suggests adoption of a robust evidence-based surgical care bundle to mitigate risk of surgical site infection and economic burden is warranted.

Assessment of the Risk and Economic Burden of Surgical Site Infection Following Colorectal Surgery Using a US Longitudinal Database: Is There a Role for Innovative Antimicrobial Wound Closure Technology to Reduce the Risk of Infection?

BACKGROUND: Colorectal surgical procedures place substantial burden on health care systems because of the high complication risk, of surgical site infections in particular. The risk of surgical site infection after colorectal surgery is one of the highest of any surgical specialty. OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to determine the incidence, cost of infections after colorectal surgery, and potential economic benefit of using antimicrobial wound closure to improve patient outcomes. DESIGN: Retrospective observational cohort analysis and probabilistic cost analysis were performed. SETTINGS: The analysis utilized a database for colorectal patients in the United States between 2014 and 2018. PATIENTS: A total of 107,665 patients who underwent colorectal surgery were included in the analysis. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Rate of infection was together with identified between 3 and 180 days postoperatively, infection risk factors, infection costs over 24 months postoperatively by payer type (commercial payers and Medicare), and potential costs avoided per patient by using an evidence-based innovative wound closure technology. RESULTS: Surgical site infections were diagnosed postoperatively in 23.9% of patients (4.0% superficial incisional and 19.9% deep incisional/organ space). Risk factors significantly increased risk of deep incisional/organ-space infection and included several patient comorbidities, age, payer type, and admission type. After 12 months, adjusted increased costs associated with infections ranged from $36,429 to $144,809 for commercial payers and $17,551 to $102,280 for Medicare, depending on surgical site infection type. Adjusted incremental costs continued to increase over a 24-month study period for both payers. Use of antimicrobial wound closure for colorectal surgery is projected to significantly reduce median payer costs by $809 to $1170 per patient compared with traditional wound closure. LIMITATIONS: The inherent biases associated with retrospective databases limited this study. CONCLUSIONS: Surgical site infection cost burden was found to be higher than previously reported, with payer costs escalating over a 24-month postoperative period. Cost analysis results for adopting antimicrobial wound closure aligns with previous evidence-based studies, suggesting a fiscal benefit for its use as a component of a comprehensive evidence-based surgical care bundle for reducing the risk of infection. See Video Abstract at http://links.lww.com/DCR/B358. EVALUACIÓN DEL RIESGO Y LA CARGA ECONÓMICA DE LA INFECCIÓN DEL SITIO QUIRÚRGICO DESPUÉS DE UNA CIRUGÍA COLORRECTAL UTILIZANDO UNA BASE DE DATOS LONGITUDINAL DE EE.UU.: ¿EXISTE UN PAPEL PARA LA TECNOLOGÍA INNOVADORA DE CIERRE DE HERIDAS ANTIMICROBIANAS PARA REDUCIR EL RIESGO DE INFECCIÓN?: Los procedimientos quirúrgicos colorrectales suponen una carga considerable para los sistemas de salud debido al alto riesgo de complicaciones, particularmente las infecciones del sitio quirúrgico. El riesgo de infección posoperatoria del sitio quirúrgico colorrectal es uno de los más altos de cualquier especialidad quirúrgica.El propósito de este estudio fue determinar la incidencia, el costo de las infecciones después de la cirugía colorrectal y el beneficio económico potencial del uso del cierre de la herida con antimicrobianos para mejorar los resultados de los pacientes.Análisis retrospectivo de cohorte observacional y análisis de costo probabilístico.El análisis utilizó la base de datos para pacientes colorrectales en los Estados Unidos entre 2014 y 2018.Un total de 107,665 pacientes sometidos a cirugía colorrectal.Se identificó una tasa de infección entre 3 y 180 días después de la operación, los factores de riesgo de infección, los costos de infección durante 24 meses posteriores a la operación por tipo de pagador (pagadores comerciales y Medicare), y los costos potenciales evitados por paciente utilizando una tecnología innovadora de cierre de heridas basada en evidencias.Infecciones del sitio quirúrgico, diagnosticadas postoperatoriamente en el 23,9% de los pacientes (4,0% incisional superficial y 19,9% incisional profunda / espacio orgánico). Los factores de riesgo aumentaron significativamente el riesgo de infección profunda por incisión / espacio orgánico e incluyeron comorbilidades selectivas del paciente, edad, tipo de pagador y tipo de admisión. Después de 12 meses, el aumento de los costos asociados con las infecciones varió de $ 36,429 a $ 144,809 para los pagadores comerciales y de $ 17,551 a $ 102,280 para Medicare, según el tipo de infección del sitio quirúrgico. Los costos incrementales ajustados continuaron aumentando durante un período de estudio de 24 meses para ambos pagadores. Se prevé que el uso del cierre antimicrobiano de la herida para la cirugía colorrectal reducirá significativamente los costos medios del pagador en $ 809- $ 1,170 por paciente en comparación con el cierre tradicional de la herida.Los sesgos inherentes asociados a las bases de datos retrospectivas limitaron este estudio.Se encontró que la carga del costo de la infección del sitio quirúrgico es mayor que la reportada previamente, y los costos del pagador aumentaron durante un período postoperatorio de 24 meses. Los resultados del análisis de costos para la adopción del cierre de heridas antimicrobianas se alinean con estudios previos basados en evidencia, lo que sugiere un beneficio fiscal para su uso como componente de un paquete integral de atención quirúrgica basada en evidencia para reducir el riesgo de infección. Consulte Video Resumen en http://links.lww.com/DCR/B358.

Revisiting Perioperative Hair Removal Practices.

The standard of practice for perioperative hair removal is largely based on research that is outdated and underpowered. Although there is evidence to support the practice of clipping instead of shaving, current recommendations are to remove hair only when absolutely necessary. Human hair is bacteria-laden and challenging to disinfect, and clipping can be a safe method of hair removal that does not damage the skin. This article considers the removal of hair at the incision site with clippers, either before the patient enters the OR or in a manner that completely contains clipped hair, for every procedure, not just when absolutely necessary. There have been only two studies to date comparing clipping with no hair removal; more research is needed on this subject.

Effects and safety of atmospheric low-temperature plasma on bacterial reduction in chronic wounds and wound size reduction: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

The use of atmospheric low-temperature plasma (AP) on chronic wounds and its effect on microbial bioburden in open wounds has not been explored with a systematic review and meta-analysis. PRISMA guidelines were followed and PubMed, Embase, CENTRAL, and CINAHL databases searched for randomised controlled trials (RCTs), which compared AP with no AP for the management of open, chronic wounds. The primary outcomes of reduction of bioburden or wound size were included. Meta-analyses were performed; odds ratio (OR) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were extracted and pooled in a random effects model. Four RCTs investigated the effect of AP on chronic wound healing. Chronic wounds treated with AP did not show a significant improvement in healing (AP vs control: OR = 1.46; 95% CI = 0.89-2.38; P = 0.13). Five further RCTs investigated the reduction of bioburden in wounds, but AP demonstrated no significant reduction of bioburden (AP vs control: OR = 0.85; 95% CI = 0.45-1.62; P = 0.63). All nine RCTs recorded the presence of any severe adverse events (SAEs) in the 268 patients studied, with only one unrelated SAE identified in each group (AP vs control: OR = 1.00; 95% CI = 0.05-19.96; P = 1.00). Use of AP in wound care is safe, but the retrieved evidence and meta-analysis show that there is no clinical benefit of AP in chronic open wounds using currently available AP device settings.

Consensus guidelines for the identification and treatment of biofilms in chronic nonhealing wounds.

BACKGROUND: Despite a growing consensus that biofilms contribute to a delay in the healing of chronic wounds, conflicting evidence pertaining to their identification and management can lead to uncertainty regarding treatment. This, in part, has been driven by reliance on in vitro data or animal models, which may not directly correlate to clinical evidence on the importance of biofilms. Limited data presented in human studies have further contributed to the uncertainty. Guidelines for care of chronic wounds with a focus on biofilms are needed to help aid the identification and management of biofilms, providing a clinical focus to support clinicians in improving patient care through evidence-based medicine. METHODS: A Global Wound Biofilm Expert Panel, comprising 10 clinicians and researchers with expertise in laboratory and clinical aspects of biofilms, was identified and convened. A modified Delphi process, based on published scientific data and expert opinion, was used to develop consensus statements that could help identify and treat biofilms as part of the management of chronic nonhealing wounds. Using an electronic survey, panel members rated their agreement with statements about biofilm identification and treatment, and the management of chronic nonhealing wounds. Final consensus statements were agreed on in a face-to-face meeting. RESULTS: Participants reached consensus on 61 statements in the following topic areas: understanding biofilms and the problems they cause clinicians; current diagnostic options; clinical indicators of biofilms; future options for diagnostic tests; treatment strategies; mechanical debridement; topical antiseptics; screening antibiofilm agents; and levels of evidence when choosing antibiofilm treatments. CONCLUSION: This consensus document attempts to clarify misunderstandings about the role of biofilms in clinical practice, and provides a basis for clinicians to recognize biofilms in chronic nonhealing wounds and manage patients optimally. A new paradigm for wound care, based on a stepped-down treatment approach, was derived from the consensus statements.

The Role of Topical Antiseptic Agents Within Antimicrobial Stewardship Strategies for Prevention and Treatment of Surgical Site and Chronic Open Wound Infection.

Scope and Significance: The topical use of antiseptics for wound care has a role in an antimicrobial stewardship strategy. However, the details of this role need clarification. Further clinical research into the use of topical antiseptics in wound care would lower the risk of furthering antibiotic resistance and contribute to more effective antibiotic use. As part of this research, experimental and surveillance data are needed on the resistance and tolerance patterns associated with topical antiseptic use in wound infections. Objective: The development of antibiotic resistance presents global challenges in terms of patient harm and increased healthcare costs. The treatment of "at risk" and infected wounds contributes to this conundrum. Synergies between antibiotics and antiseptics and their appropriate combined use need exploration. Approach: A review of available evidence on the appropriateness of antiseptics as a fundamental component of antimicrobial stewardship strategies has been undertaken. Innovation: Opening up new ways of thinking and identifying gaps of knowledge will lead to optimizing justification of antimicrobial choices and combinations. This may lead to changes in practice in terms of solutions for the prevention and treatment of wound infection. Conclusion: Antiseptics are an integral part of antimicrobial stewardship strategies for the prevention and treatment of surgical site and chronic open wound infections.

Intra-Operative Surgical Irrigation of the Surgical Incision: What Does the Future Hold-Saline, Antibiotic Agents, or Antiseptic Agents?

BACKGROUND: Intra-operative surgical site irrigation (lavage) is common practice in surgical procedures in general, with all disciplines advocating some form of irrigation before incision closure. This practice, however, has been neither standardized nor is there compelling evidence that it effectively reduces the risk of surgical site infection (SSI). This narrative review addresses the laboratory and clinical evidence that is available to support the practice of irrigation of the abdominal cavity and superficial/deep incisional tissues, using specific irrigation solutions at the end of an operative procedure to reduce the microbial burden at wound closure. METHODS: Review of PubMed and OVID for pertinent, scientific, and clinical publications in the English language was performed. RESULTS: Incision irrigation was found to afford a three-fold benefit: First, to hydrate the bed; second, to assist in allowing better examination of the area immediately before closure; and finally, by removing superficial and deep incisional contamination and lowering the bioburden, expedite the healing process. The clinical practice of intra-operative peritoneal lavage is highly variable and is dependent solely on surgeon preference. By contrast, intra-operative irrigation after device-related procedures has become a standard of care for the prophylaxis of acute peri-prosthetic infection. The clinical evidence that supports the use of antibiotic irrigation is limited and based on retrospective analysis and few acceptable randomized controlled trials. The results of laboratory and animal studies using aqueous 0.05% chlorhexidine gluconate are favorable, suggesting that further studies are justified to determine its clinical efficacy. CONCLUSION: The adoption of appropriate and standardized intra-operative irrigation practices into peri-operative care bundles, which include other evidence-based strategies (weight-based antimicrobial prophylaxis, antimicrobial sutures, maintenance of normothermia, and glycemic control), offers an inexpensive and effective method to reduce the risk of post-operative SSI and deserves further evaluation.

Preadmission Application of 2% Chlorhexidine Gluconate (CHG): Enhancing Patient Compliance While Maximizing Skin Surface Concentrations.

OBJECTIVE: Surgical site infections (SSIs) are responsible for significant morbidity and mortality. Preadmission skin antisepsis, while controversial, has gained acceptance as a strategy for reducing the risk of SSI. In this study, we analyze the benefit of an electronic alert system for enhancing compliance to preadmission application of 2% chlorhexidine gluconate (CHG). DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: Following informed consent, 100 healthy volunteers in an academic, tertiary care medical center were randomized to 5 chlorhexidine gluconate (CHG) skin application groups: 1, 2, 3, 4, or 5 consecutive applications. Participants were further randomized into 2 subgroups: with or without electronic alert. Skin surface concentrations of CHG (µg/mL) were analyzed using a colorimetric assay at 5 separate anatomic sites. INTERVENTION: Preadmission application of chlorhexidine gluconate, 2% RESULTS: Mean composite skin surface CHG concentrations in volunteer participants receiving EA following 1, 2, 3, 4, and 5 applications were 1,040.5, 1,334.4, 1,278.2, 1,643.9, and 1,803.1 µg/mL, respectively, while composite skin surface concentrations in the no-EA group were 913.8, 1,240.0, 1,249.8, 1,194.4, and 1,364.2 µg/mL, respectively (ANOVA, P<.001). Composite ratios (CHG concentration/minimum inhibitory concentration required to inhibit the growth of 90% of organisms [MIC90]) for 1, 2, 3, 4, or 5 applications using the 2% CHG cloth were 208.1, 266.8, 255.6, 328.8, and 360.6, respectively, representing CHG skin concentrations effective against staphylococcal surgical pathogens. The use of an electronic alert system resulted in significant increase in skin concentrations of CHG in the 4- and 5-application groups (P<.04 and P<.007, respectively). CONCLUSION: The findings of this study suggest an evidence-based standardized process that includes use of an Internet-based electronic alert system to improve patient compliance while maximizing skin surface concentrations effective against MRSA and other staphylococcal surgical pathogens.

Surgical site infection: poor compliance with guidelines and care bundles.

Surgical site infections (SSIs) are probably the most preventable of the health care-associated infections. Despite the widespread international introduction of level I evidence-based guidelines for the prevention of SSIs, such as that of the National Institute for Clinical Excellence (NICE) in the UK and the surgical care improvement project (SCIP) of the USA, SSI rates have not measurably fallen. The care bundle approach is an accepted method of packaging best, evidence-based measures into routine care for all patients and, common to many guidelines for the prevention of SSI, includes methods for preoperative removal of hair (where appropriate), rational antibiotic prophylaxis, avoidance of perioperative hypothermia, management of perioperative blood glucose and effective skin preparation. Reasons for poor compliance with care bundles are not clear and have not matched the wide uptake and perceived benefit of the WHO 'Safe Surgery Saves Lives' checklist. Recommendations include the need for further research and continuous updating of guidelines; comprehensive surveillance, using validated definitions that facilitate benchmarking of anonymised surgeon-specific SSI rates; assurance that incorporation of checklists and care bundles has taken place; the development of effective communication strategies for all health care providers and those who commission services and comprehensive information for patients.

A prospective, randomised study of a novel transforming methacrylate dressing compared with a silver-containing sodium carboxymethylcellulose dressing on partial-thickness skin graft donor sites in burn patients.

This prospective, randomised study compares a new transforming methacrylate dressing (TMD) with a silver-containing carboxymethylcellulose dressing (CMC-Ag) after application to split-thickness skin graft (STSG) donor sites. This was an unblinded, non-inferiority, between-patient, comparison study that involved patients admitted to a single-centre burn unit who required two skin graft donor sites. Each patient's donor sites were covered immediately after surgery: one donor site with TMD and the other with CMC-Ag. The donor sites were evaluated until healing or until 24 days post-application, whichever came first. Study endpoints were time to healing, daily pain scores, number of dressing changes, patient comfort and physicians' and patients' willingness to use the dressings in the future. Nineteen patients had both the dressings applied. No statistically significant difference was noted in time to healing between the two dressings (14·2 days using TMD compared with 13·2 days using CMC-Ag). When pain scores were compared, TMD resulted in statistically significantly less pain at three different time periods (2-5 days, 6-10 days and 11-15 days; P < 0·001 at all time periods). Patients also reported greater comfort with TMD (P < 0·001). Users rated TMD as being less easy to use because of the time and technique required for application. Reductions in pain and increased patient comfort with the use of the TMD dressing, compared with CMC-Ag, were seen as clinical benefits as these are the major issues in donor site management.

Bacterial growth kinetics under a novel flexible methacrylate dressing serving as a drug delivery vehicle for antiseptics.

A flexible methacrylate powder dressing (Altrazeal®) transforms into a wound contour conforming matrix once in contact with wound exudate. We hypothesised that it may also serve as a drug delivery vehicle for antiseptics. The antimicrobial efficacy and influence on bacterial growth kinetics in combination with three antiseptics was investigated in an in vitro porcine wound model. Standardized in vitro wounds were contaminated with Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA; ATCC 33591) and divided into six groups: no dressing (negative control), methacrylate dressing alone, and combinations with application of 0.02% Polyhexamethylene Biguanide (PHMB), 0.4% PHMB, 0.1% PHMB + 0.1% betaine, 7.7 mg/mL Povidone-iodine (PVP-iodine), and 0.1% Octenidine-dihydrochloride (OCT) + 2% phenoxyethanol. Bacterial load per gram tissue was measured over five days. The highest reduction was observed with PVP-iodine at 24 h to log10 1.43 cfu/g, followed by OCT at 48 h to log10 2.41 cfu/g. Whilst 0.02% PHMB resulted in a stable bacterial load over 120 h to log10 4.00 cfu/g over 120 h, 0.1% PHMB + 0.1% betaine inhibited growth during the first 48 h, with slightly increasing bacterial numbers up to log10 5.38 cfu/g at 120 h. These results indicate that this flexible methacrylate dressing can be loaded with various antiseptics serving as drug delivery system. Depending on the selected combination, an individually shaped and controlled antibacterial effect may be achieved using the same type of wound dressing.

Extending the TIME concept: what have we learned in the past 10 years?(*).

The TIME acronym (tissue, infection/inflammation, moisture balance and edge of wound) was first developed more than 10 years ago, by an international group of wound healing experts, to provide a framework for a structured approach to wound bed preparation; a basis for optimising the management of open chronic wounds healing by secondary intention. However, it should be recognised that the TIME principles are only a part of the systematic and holistic evaluation of each patient at every wound assessment. This review, prepared by the International Wound Infection Institute, examines how new data and evidence generated in the intervening decade affects the original concepts of TIME, and how it is translated into current best practice. Four developments stand out: recognition of the importance of biofilms (and the need for a simple diagnostic), use of negative pressure wound therapy (NPWT), evolution of topical antiseptic therapy as dressings and for wound lavage (notably, silver and polyhexamethylene biguanide) and expanded insight of the role of molecular biological processes in chronic wounds (with emerging diagnostics and theranostics). Tissue: a major advance has been the recognition of the value of repetitive and maintenance debridement and wound cleansing, both in time-honoured and novel methods (notably using NPWT and hydrosurgery). Infection/inflammation: clinical recognition of infection (and non infective causes of persisting inflammation) is critical. The concept of a bacterial continuum through contamination, colonisation and infection is now widely accepted, together with the understanding of biofilm presence. There has been a return to topical antiseptics to control bioburden in wounds, emphasised by the awareness of increasing antibiotic resistance. Moisture: the relevance of excessive or insufficient wound exudate and its molecular components has led to the development and use of a wide range of dressings to regulate moisture balance, and to protect peri-wound skin, and optimise healing. Edge of wound: several treatment modalities are being investigated and introduced to improve epithelial advancement, which can be regarded as the clearest sign of wound healing. The TIME principle remains relevant 10 years on, with continuing important developments that incorporate new evidence for wound care.

Near infrared spectroscopy for monitoring flap viability following breast reconstruction.

Free flap monitoring is essential to the early detection of compromise thereby increasing the chance of successful salvage surgery. Many alternatives to classical clinical monitoring have been proposed. This study seeks to investigate a relatively new monitoring technology: near infrared spectroscopy (NIRS). Patients were recruited prospectively to the study from a single center. During the research period, 10 patients underwent reconstruction with a free deep inferior epigastric perforator flap (DIEP). Measurements of flap perfusion were taken using NIRS in the preoperative and intraoperative phases and postoperatively for 72 hours. NIRS showed characteristic changes in all cases which returned to theater for pedicle compromise. In these cases, NIRS identified pedicle compromise prior to clinical identification. There were no false-positives. NIRS accurately identified all compromised flaps in our study. In most cases, there was an evidence of changes in oxygen saturation on NIRS prior to clinical observation. Further research, ideally double blind randomized control trials with large sample groups would be required to definitively establish NIRS as an ideal flap monitoring modality.

Randomized trial of antimicrobial-coated sutures to prevent surgical site infection after breast cancer surgery.

BACKGROUND: Surgical site infection (SSI) is the fourth commonest healthcare-associated infection and complicates at least 5% of open operations. In a randomized clinical trial, antimicrobial-coated sutures were compared with their conventional counterparts, polyglactin and poliglecaprone, for skin closure after breast cancer surgery to assess their role in reducing the rate of SSI. METHODS: Between November 2008 and February 2011, 150 female patients presenting with breast cancer to a single center were randomized to skin closure with antimicrobial-coated or plain sutures. Postoperatively, SSI was defined using the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) definitions and scored using the ASEPSIS or Southampton systems by trained, blinded observers with close post-discharge surveillance and patient diaries. Surgeons and patients were blinded to the type of suture used. RESULTS: Using CDC criteria, the overall rate of SSI was 18.9% at six weeks. Six patients (4.7%) needed intervention or readmission for SSI. Skin closure with antimicrobial sutures showed a non-statistically significant reduction in the SSI rate, to 15.2%, compared with conventional sutures (22.9%). A uniform tendency for fewer SSIs in the antimicrobial-coated suture group was found using ASEPSIS and Southampton scores, but again, the difference was not statistically significant. CONCLUSION: The previously reported high rate of SSI related to breast surgery was confirmed. Using statistical modeling and earlier reports, the study was powered to show a difference using ASEPSIS scores, but the modification used in this trial failed to find a difference. Finding a statistically significant difference would have needed two to three times the number of patients recruited. Further evaluation of antimicrobial-coated sutures is merited, particularly if used as part of a care bundle to reduce SSI after breast cancer surgery.