Prophylactic antibiotics for hemorrhoidectomy: are they really needed?

BACKGROUND: Hemorrhoidectomy is considered by many to be a contaminated operation that requires antibiotic prophylaxis to lower the incidence of surgical site infection. In reality, little evidence exists to either support or refute the use of antibiotic prophylaxis in this setting. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to determine if antibiotic prophylaxis is associated with reduced incidence of postoperative surgical site infection following hemorrhoidectomy. DESIGN: This is a retrospective database review. SETTING: This study was conducted at multiple institutions. PATIENTS: All patients undergoing hemorrhoidectomy with minimum 3-month follow-up were included. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The primary outcome measure was the incidence of postoperative surgical site infection. RESULTS: Eight hundred fifty-two patients met the inclusion criteria (50.1% female; mean age, 50.0 ± 13.7 years). The prevalence of preoperative risk factors for surgical site infection included 7.7% with a smoking history, 2.5% with diabetes mellitus, 0.8% receiving steroids, and 0.2% with Crohn's disease. Surgery was performed predominately for 3-column prolapsed internal and mixed internal/external hemorrhoidal disease. All surgeries performed were closed hemorrhoidectomies. Antibiotic prophylaxis was used in a fewer number of cases (41.3% vs 58.7%). Overall, there were only 12 documented postoperative infections identified, producing an overall incidence of 1.4%. Of those patients who developed postoperative surgical site infections, 9 (75%) did not receive antibiotic prophylaxis (p = 0.25). On multivariate regression analysis, no perioperative risk factor was associated with an increased risk of developing a posthemorrhoidectomy surgical site infection. Conversely, there were no adverse antibiotic-related complications such as Clostridium difficile colitis or antibiotic-associated diarrhea in those receiving antibiotic prophylaxis. LIMITATIONS: This study was limited by the retrospective nature of the analysis. CONCLUSIONS: Postoperative surgical site infection is an exceedingly rare event following hemorrhoidectomy. Antibiotic prophylaxis does not reduce the incidence of postoperative surgical site infection, and its routine use appears unnecessary.

Spinal 2-chloroprocaine: the effect of added clonidine.

Preservative-free 2-chloroprocaine (2-CP) is being investigated for short-acting spinal anesthesia. Clonidine improves the quality of spinal bupivacaine and ropivacaine, but in traditional doses (1-2 microg/kg) it produces systemic side effects. It has not been studied in combination with 2-CP. In this double-blind, randomized crossover study, we compared spinal 2-CP (30 mg) with and without clonidine (15 microg) in eight volunteers. Pinprick anesthesia, motor strength, tolerance to electrical stimulation and thigh tourniquet, and time to ambulation were assessed. Peak block height was similar between 2-CP (T8 [range, T6 to L2]) and 2-CP with clonidine (T8 [range, T4 to T11]) (P = 0.57). Sensory anesthesia was prolonged with clonidine at L1 (51 +/- 23 min versus 76 +/- 11 min; P = 0.002), as was complete block regression (99 +/- 18 min versus 131 +/- 15 min; P = 0.001). Lower extremity motor blockade was increased with clonidine (return to baseline Bromage score: 65 +/- 13 min versus 79 +/- 19 min, P = 0.004; return to 90% gastrocnemius strength: P = 0.003). Clonidine increased tourniquet tolerance from 33 to 45 min (P = 0.06) and increased time to ambulation, spontaneous voiding, and discharge (99 +/- 18 min versus 131 +/- 15 min for all; P = 0.001). There were no differences in hemodynamic measurements, and no subject reported transient neurologic symptoms. We conclude that small-dose clonidine increases the duration and improves the quality of 2-CP spinal anesthesia without systemic side effects.