Surgical site infections: a scoping review on current intraoperative prevention measures.

INTRODUCTION: Surgical site infections (SSIs) remain a significant cause of morbidity for surgical patients worldwide and with growing rates of antibiotic resistance, the development of new nonantimicrobial techniques to target SSI reduction is crucial. This review aimed to explore available nonantibiotic intraoperative interventions to reduce the risk of SSI. METHODS: A literature search was undertaken using Medline, Web of Science, Embase, and Cochrane Library databases. Any study published from 1 January 1980 to 1 September 2021 that described any nonantibiotic intraoperative physical technique aiming to reduce SSI rates, with a primary or secondary outcome of SSI rates, was included. FINDINGS: A total of 45 articles were included in the final scoping review. The current nonantibiotic intraoperative interventions advised for use include chlorhexidine skin preparation with alcohol, pressurised wound irrigation, Triclosan-coated sutures for skin closure, and negative pressure wound therapy. Many other widely used surgical practices do not have the supporting evidence to validate their routine use in clinical practice to reduce SSI rates. CONCLUSIONS: We identified several techniques that can be used in the operating theatre to provide additional opportunities to reduce SSI rates. However, strict adherence to current established SSI prevention guidelines remains the mainstay of ensuring SSI rates remain low.

Does pulsed lavage reduce the risk of surgical site infection? A systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Surgical site infections (SSIs) remain a significant and common postoperative complication. Whereas most surgeons use some form of wound irrigation during closure, its impact on SSI rates is debated. Preliminary studies in the use of pressurized irrigation, termed pulsed lavage, may have potential benefit to reduce the risk of SSI. AIM: To perform a systematic review to identify studies that reported SSI rates following surgery, comparing the use of pulsed lavage to controls, following PRISMA guidelines. METHODS: All study types and those published up to January 1st, 2021 were included. Odds ratios (ORs) were calculated for each included study using a Mantel-Haenszel statistical analysis, via a random effects model. A sub-analysis on abdominal procedures only was also performed. FINDINGS: Eleven studies met the inclusion criteria, covering either orthopaedic or general surgery procedures; 1875 patients were included, with 816 patients in the pulsed lavage group and 1059 patients in the control group. Overall study quality was low. There was a significant reduction in the SSI rate with the use of pulsed lavage (odds ratio (OR): 0.39; 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.25-0.62; P < 0.0001). Sub-analysis on abdominal operations only showed further improvement to the SSI rate with pulsed lavage (OR: 0.32; 95% CI: 0.21-0.49; P < 0.0001). CONCLUSION: Pulsed lavage significantly reduces the rate of SSIs in surgical procedures, the effect being most pronounced in abdominal operations; however, current study quality is low. Randomized controlled trial data are essential to fully assess the potential clinical and financial benefits pulsed lavage can confer to SSI reduction.