ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Surgical site infection (SSI) after dermatologic surgery is associated with poor outcomes including increased recovery time, poor cosmesis, and repeat visits to doctors. Prophylactic antibiotics are prescribed to reduce these adverse outcomes. Identifying risk factors for SSI will facilitate judicious antibiotic prophylaxis. OBJECTIVE: To identify risk factors for SSI after minor dermatologic surgery. METHODS: Individual patient data from four large randomized controlled trials were combined to increase statistical power. A total of 3,819 adult patients requiring minor skin procedures at a single facility were recruited over a 10-year period. The main outcome measure was SSI. MAIN RESULTS: A total of 298 infections occurred, resulting in an overall incidence of 7.8% (95% confidence interval [CI], 5.8-9.6), although the incidence varied across the four studies (P = .042). Significant risk factors identified were age (relative risk [RR], 1.01; 95% CI, 1.001-1.020; P = .008), excisions from the upper limbs (RR, 3.03; 95% CI, 1.76-5.22; P = .007) or lower limbs (RR, 3.99; 95% CI, 1.93-8.23; P = .009), and flap/two-layer procedures (RR, 3.23; 95% CI, 1.79-5.85; P = .008). Histology of the excised lesion was not a significant independent risk factor for infection. CONCLUSIONS: This study demonstrated that patients who were older, underwent complex excisions, or had excisions on an extremity were at higher risk of developing an SSI. An awareness of such risk factors will guide evidence-based and targeted antibiotic prophylaxis.
Subject(s)
Dermatologic Surgical Procedures/adverse effects , Surgical Wound Infection/etiology , Aged , Anti-Bacterial Agents/therapeutic use , Dermatologic Surgical Procedures/methods , Dermatologic Surgical Procedures/statistics & numerical data , Female , Humans , Incidence , Male , Middle Aged , Risk FactorsABSTRACT
OBJECTIVE: To compare the incidence of infection after minor surgery conducted using non-sterile clean boxed gloves with surgery conducted using sterile gloves. DESIGN: Prospective randomised controlled single-centre trial testing for non-inferiority in infection rates. SETTING: Primary care regional centre, Queensland, Australia. PARTICIPANTS: Consecutive patients presenting to participating general practitioners for a minor skin excision, between 30 June 2012 and 28 March 2013, were eligible to participate. INTERVENTION: The use of non-sterile clean boxed gloves was compared with normal treatment using sterile gloves in the control group. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Wound infection, assessed at the time of removal of sutures, and other adverse events. RESULTS: Four hundred and ninety-three consecutive patients presenting for minor skin excisions were randomly allocated to the two treatment groups: non-sterile clean boxed gloves (n = 250) or sterile gloves (n = 243). Four hundred and seventy-eight patients contributed data for analysis (241 non-sterile, 237 sterile gloves). The incidence of infection in the non-sterile gloves group (8.7%; 95% CI, 4.9%-12.6%) was significantly non-inferior compared with the incidence in the control group (9.3%; 95% CI, 7.4%-11.1%). The two-sided 95% CI for the difference in infection rate (- 0.6%) was - 4.0% to 2.9%, and did not reach the predetermined margin of 7% which had been assumed as the non-inferiority limit. RESULTS of the intention-to-treat analysis were confirmed by per-protocol and sensitivity analyses. There were no important adverse effects. CONCLUSION: Our study suggests that in regard to wound infection, non-sterile clean boxed gloves are not inferior to sterile gloves for minor skin excisions in general practice. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ACTRN12612000698875.
