The costs of surgical site infection after abdominal surgery in middle-income countries: Key resource use In Wound Infection (KIWI) study.

BACKGROUND: Surgical site infection (SSI) is the most common complication of abdominal surgery, with substantial costs to patients and health systems. Heterogeneity in costing methods in existing SSI studies makes multi-country comparison challenging. The objective of the study was to assess the costs of SSI across middle-income countries. METHODS: Centres from a randomized controlled trial assessing interventions to reduce SSI (FALCON, ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03700749NCT) were sampled from two upper-middle- (India, Mexico) and two lower-middle- (Ghana, Nigeria) income countries. The Key resource use In Wound Infection (KIWI) study collected data on postoperative resource use and costs from consecutive patients undergoing abdominal surgery with an incision >5 cm (including caesarean section) that were recruited to FALCON between April and October 2020. The overall costs faced by patients with and without SSI were compared by operative field contamination (clean-contaminated vs contaminated-dirty), country and timing (inpatient vs outpatient). FINDINGS: A total of 335 patients were included in KIWI; SSI occurred in 7% of clean-contaminated cases and 27% of contaminated-dirty cases. Overall, SSI was associated with an increase in postoperative healthcare costs by 75.3% (€412 international Euros) after clean-contaminated surgery and 66.6% (€331) after contaminated-dirty surgery. The highest and lowest cost increases were in India for clean-contaminated cases (€517) and contaminated-dirty cases (€223), respectively. Overall, inpatient costs accounted for 96.4% of the total healthcare costs after clean-contaminated surgery and 92.5% after contaminated-dirty surgery. CONCLUSION: SSI was associated with substantial additional postoperative costs across a range of settings. Investment in health technologies to reduce SSI may mitigate the financial burden to patients and low-resource health systems.

Mesh versus suture repair of primary inguinal hernia in Ghana.

Background: Most patients in Ghana undergo suture repair for primary inguinal hernia. Although there is strong evidence from high-income country settings to indicate superiority of mesh repair for inguinal hernia, the evidence to support the safety and effectiveness of mesh repair in the Ghanaian setting is limited. This study aimed to compare hernia recurrence rates following suture versus mesh repair in Ghana. Methods: Men aged 18 years or over presenting with symptomatic, reducible inguinal hernias were included. Over the first 6 months all consecutive patients were enrolled prospectively and underwent a standardized suture repair; an equal number of patients were subsequently enrolled to undergo mesh repair. The primary outcome was hernia recurrence within 3 years of the index operation. Multivariable analysis was adjusted for age and right or left side. Adjusted odds ratios (ORs) with 95 per cent confidence intervals are reported. Results: A total of 116 sutured and 116 mesh inguinal hernia repairs were performed. Three years after surgery, follow-up data were available for 206 of the 232 patients (88·8 per cent). Recurrence occurred significantly more frequently in the suture repair group (23 of 103, 22·3 per cent) than in the mesh group (7 of 103, 6·8 per cent) (P = 0·002). In multivariable analysis, suture repair was independently associated with an increased risk of recurrence (OR 4·51, 95 per cent c.i. 1·76 to 11·52; P = 0·002). Conclusion: In Ghana, mesh inguinal hernia repair was associated with reduced 3-year recurrence compared with sutured repair. Controlled dissemination across Ghana should now be assessed.