Incisional Wound Irrigation for the Prevention of Surgical Site Infection: A Systematic Review and Network Meta-Analysis.

Importance: Surgical site infections (SSIs) are common postoperative complications and associated with significant morbidity, mortality, and costs. Prophylactic intraoperative incisional wound irrigation is used to reduce the risk of SSIs, and there is great variation in the type of irrigation solutions and their use. Objective: To compare the outcomes of different types of incisional prophylactic intraoperative incisional wound irrigation for the prevention of SSIs in all types of surgery. Data Sources: PubMed, Embase, CENTRAL, and CINAHL databases were searched up to June 12, 2023. Study Selection: Included in this study were randomized clinical trials (RCTs) comparing incisional prophylactic intraoperative incisional wound irrigation with no irrigation or comparing irrigation using different types of solutions, with SSI as a reported outcome. Studies investigating intracavity lavage were excluded. Data Extraction and Synthesis: This systematic review and network meta-analysis is reported in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis statement. Two reviewers independently extracted the data and assessed the risk of bias within individual RCTs using the Cochrane Risk of Bias 2 tool and the certainty of evidence using the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation framework. A frequentist network meta-analysis was conducted, and relative risks (RRs) with corresponding 95% CIs were reported. Main Outcome and Measure: The primary study outcome was SSI. Results: A total of 1587 articles were identified, of which 41 RCTs were included in the systematic review, with 17 188 patients reporting 1328 SSIs, resulting in an overall incidence of 7.7%. Compared with no irrigation, antiseptic solutions (RR, 0.60; 95% CI, 0.44-0.81; high level of certainty) and antibiotic solutions (RR, 0.46; 95% CI, 0.29-0.73; low level of certainty) were associated with a beneficial reduction in SSIs. Saline irrigation showed no statistically significant difference compared with no irrigation (RR, 0.83; 95% CI, 0.63-1.09; moderate level of certainty). Conclusions and Relevance: This systematic review and network meta-analysis found high-certainty evidence that prophylactic intraoperative incisional wound irrigation with antiseptic solutions was associated with a reduction in SSIs. It is suggested that the use of antibiotic wound irrigation be avoided due to the inferior certainty of evidence for its outcome and global antimicrobial resistance concerns.

Identification of subgroups of patients with oesophageal cancer based on exercise intensity during prehabilitation.

PURPOSE: To identify subgroups of patients with oesophageal cancer based on exercise intensity during prehabilitation, and to investigate whether training outcomes varied between subgroups. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Data from a multicentre cohort study were used, involving participants following prehabilitation before oesophagectomy. Hierarchical cluster analysis was performed using four cluster variables (intensity of aerobic exercise, the Borg score during resistance exercise, intensity of physical activity, and degree of fatigue). Aerobic capacity and muscle strength were estimated before and after prehabilitation. RESULTS: In 64 participants, three clusters were identified based on exercise intensity. Cluster 1 (n = 23) was characterised by fatigue and physical inactivity, cluster 2 (n = 9) by a low training capacity, despite high physical activity levels, and cluster 3 (n = 32) by a high training capacity. Cluster 1 showed the greatest improvement in aerobic capacity (p = 0.37) and hand grip strength (p = 0.03) during prehabilitation compared with other clusters. CONCLUSIONS: This cluster analysis identified three subgroups with distinct patterns in exercise intensity during prehabilitation. Participants who were physically fit were able to train at high intensity. Fatigued participants trained at lower intensity but showed the greatest improvement. A small group of participants, despite being physically active, had a low training capacity and could be considered frail.

Implications for rehabilitationPatients with oesophageal cancer show different patterns of exercise intensity during prehabilitation, resulting in three distinct subgroups.Patients with a good level of physical fitness are able to train at high intensity and may require less intensive supervision during the programme.Fatigued patients are able to perform the training programme, having more room for improvement.A small group of frail patients seem to be at risk for overtraining and may require an adjusted training intensity.

Incisional negative pressure wound therapy for the prevention of surgical site infection: an up-to-date meta-analysis and trial sequential analysis.

Background: The evidence on prophylactic use of negative pressure wound therapy on primary closed incisional wounds (iNPWT) for the prevention of surgical site infections (SSI) is confusing and ambiguous. Implementation in daily practice is impaired by inconsistent recommendations in current international guidelines and published meta-analyses. More recently, multiple new randomised controlled trials (RCTs) have been published. We aimed to provide an overview of all meta-analyses and their characteristics; to conduct a new and up-to-date systematic review and meta-analysis and Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) assessment; and to explore the additive value of new RCTs with a trial sequential analysis (TSA). Methods: PubMed, Embase and Cochrane CENTRAL databases were searched from database inception to October 24, 2022. We identified existing meta-analyses covering all surgical specialties and RCTs studying the effect of iNPWT compared with standard dressings in all types of surgery on the incidence of SSI, wound dehiscence, reoperation, seroma, hematoma, mortality, readmission rate, skin blistering, skin necrosis, pain, and adverse effects of the intervention. We calculated relative risks (RR) with corresponding 95% confidence intervals (CI) using a Mantel-Haenszel random-effects model. We assessed publication bias with a comparison-adjusted funnel plot. TSA was used to assess the risk of random error. The certainty of evidence was evaluated using the Cochrane Risk of Bias-2 (RoB2) tool and GRADE approach. This study is registered with PROSPERO, CRD42022312995. Findings: We identified eight previously published general meta-analyses investigating iNPWT and compared their results to present meta-analysis. For the updated systematic review, 57 RCTs with 13,744 patients were included in the quantitative analysis for SSI, yielding a RR of 0.67 (95% CI: 0.59-0.76, I2 = 21%) for iNPWT compared with standard dressing. Certainty of evidence was high. Compared with previous meta-analyses, the RR stabilised, and the confidence interval narrowed. In the TSA, the cumulative Z-curve crossed the trial sequential monitoring boundary for benefit, confirming the robustness of the summary effect estimate from the meta-analysis. Interpretation: In this up-to-date meta-analysis, GRADE assessment shows high-certainty evidence that iNPWT is effective in reducing SSI, and uncertainty is less than in previous meta-analyses. TSA indicated that further trials are unlikely to change the effect estimate for the outcome SSI; therefore, if future research is to be conducted on iNPWT, it is crucial to consider what the findings will contribute to the existing robust evidence. Funding: Dutch Association for Quality Funds Medical Specialists.

[How often do medical guidelines refer to articles written in Dutch?] / Hoe vaak verwijzen richtlijnen naar artikelen in hetNTvG?

OBJECTIVE: For Dutch medical guidelines, Dutch research articles published in the NTvG (NederlandsTijdschriftvoorGeneeskunde) and other medical journals are not searched systematically and are only used sporadically. Using these publications in the process of guideline development can be useful for recommendations regarding the Dutch context of care. In this research, we have investigated how often and in which parts of Dutch guidelines articles published in NTvG are used. DESIGN: We specifically investigated how often articles published in NTvG are mentioned in Dutch medical guidelines published on www.richtlijnendatabase.nl, that were developed in 2019, 2020 and 2021. METHOD: In all parts of new or revised Dutch medical guidelines published in these years on www.richtlijnendatabase.nl, we searched for references of articles published in NTvG. RESULTS: The results show that in 3% of all Dutch medical guidelines a reference to an article published in NTvG is made. These references were made in the literature summaries (21% of the references), the reflections on the literature for the Dutch context of care (48% of the references), or in other areas such as the introduction (10% of the references) or appendices (21% of the references). CONCLUSION: Articles published in NTvG may be relevant for making recommendations in Dutch medical guidelines, as these publications usually reflect the Dutch care context, and may do more so than research published in international journals. The results of this research show that the number of Dutch guidelines where these articles are used is limited. Dutch research articles may be a source of information that is yet to be tapped into.

Efficacy of different preoperative skin antiseptics on the incidence of surgical site infections: a systematic review, GRADE assessment, and network meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Surgical site infection (SSI) is the most common postoperative complication and substantially increases health-care costs. Published meta-analyses and international guidelines differ with regard to which preoperative skin antiseptic solution and concentration has the highest efficacy. We aimed to compare the efficacy of different skin preparation solutions and concentrations for the prevention of SSIs, and to provide an overview of current guidelines. METHODS: This systematic review and network meta-analysis compared different preoperative skin antiseptics in the prevention of SSIs in adult patients undergoing surgery of any wound classification. We searched for randomised controlled trials (RCTs) in MEDLINE, Embase, and Cochrane CENTRAL, published up to Nov 23, 2021, that directly compared two or more antiseptic agents (ie, chlorhexidine, iodine, or olanexidine) or concentrations in aqueous and alcohol-based solutions. We excluded paediatric, animal, and non-randomised studies, and studies not providing standard preoperative intravenous antibiotic prophylaxis. Studies with no SSIs in both groups were excluded from the quantitative analysis. Two reviewers screened and reviewed eligible full texts and extracted data. The primary outcome was the occurrence of SSI (ie, superficial, deep, and organ space). We conducted a frequentist random effects network meta-analysis to estimate the network effects of the skin preparation solutions on the prevention of SSIs. A risk-of-bias and Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation assessment were done to determine the certainty of the evidence. This study is registered with PROSPERO, CRD42021293554. FINDINGS: Overall, 2326 articles were identified, 33 studies were eligible for the systematic review, and 27 studies with 17 735 patients reporting 2144 SSIs (overall incidence of 12·1%) were included in the quantitative analysis. Only 2·0-2·5% chlorhexidine in alcohol (relative risk 0·75, 95% CI 0·61-0·92) and 1·5% olanexidine (0·49, 0·26-0·92) significantly reduced the rate of SSIs compared with aqueous iodine. For clean surgery, we found no difference in efficacy between different concentrations of chlorhexidine in alcohol. Seven RCTs were at high risk of bias, 24 had some concerns, and two had low risk of bias. Heterogeneity across the studies was moderate (I2=27·5%), and netsplitting did not show inconsistencies between direct and indirect comparisons. Five of ten studies that mentioned adverse events related to the skin preparation solutions reported no adverse events, and five reported a total of 56 mild events (mainly erythema, pruritus, dermatitis, skin irritation, or mild allergic symptoms); none reported a substantial difference in adverse events between groups. INTERPRETATION: For adult patients undergoing a surgical procedure of any wound classification, skin preparation using either 2·0-2·5% chlorhexidine in alcohol or 1·5% olanexidine is most effective in the prevention of SSIs. For clean surgery, no specific concentration of chlorhexidine in alcohol can be recommended. The efficacy of olanexidine was established by a single randomised trial and further investigation is needed. FUNDING: Dutch Association for Quality Funds Medical Specialists.

A Network Meta-Analysis and GRADE Assessment of the Effect of Preoperative Oral Antibiotics with and Without Mechanical Bowel Preparation on Surgical Site Infection Rate in Colorectal Surgery.

Objective: To compare the effect of different methods of bowel preparation on the incidence of surgical site infections (SSI), anastomotic leakage (AL), and mortality in patients undergoing elective colorectal surgery. Background: Recent guidelines advise mechanical bowel preparation with oral antibiotics (MBP-OA) for the prevention of SSI in colorectal surgery. Recent trials suggest oral antibiotics (OA) alone may be sufficient. Methods: PubMed, MEDLINE, and Embase were searched from inception until 10-08-2021. We included randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing multiple methods of bowel preparation (mechanical bowel preparation [MBP], OA, MBP-OA, or no preparation) with regards to clinical outcomes such as incidence of SSI, AL, and mortality rates. A frequentist random-effects network meta-analysis was conducted to estimate the network effects of the different treatment options. Results: We included 48 studies with 13,611 patients. Compared to no preparation, combined direct and indirect network estimates showed a relative risk (RR) for SSI of 0.57 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.45-0.72) for MBP-OA, 0.68 (95% CI, 0.49-0.95) for OA, and 1.05 (95% CI, 0.87-1.26) for MBP. The RR for MBP-OA compared to OA was 0.84 (95% CI, 0.60-1.19); in sensitivity analysis of mainly laparoscopic procedures this effect of MBP-OA was more profound (RR, 0.56; 95% CI, 0.31-0.99). Conclusions: This network meta-analysis of RCTs finds that both mechanical bowel preparation with oral antibiotics and oral antibiotics alone are comparably effective in the prevention of SSI. The evidence is uncertain about the relative benefit of MBP-OA compared to OA alone. Therefore, it seems justified to use either of the 2 for the prevention of SSI in colorectal surgery.