Intraperitoneal drain placement and outcomes after elective colorectal surgery: international matched, prospective, cohort study

Despite current guidelines, intraperitoneal drain placement after elective colorectal surgery remains widespread. Drains were not associated with earlier detection of intraperitoneal collections, but were associated with prolonged hospital stay and increased risk of surgical-site infections.Background Many surgeons routinely place intraperitoneal drains after elective colorectal surgery. However, enhanced recovery after surgery guidelines recommend against their routine use owing to a lack of clear clinical benefit. This study aimed to describe international variation in intraperitoneal drain placement and the safety of this practice. Methods COMPASS (COMPlicAted intra-abdominal collectionS after colorectal Surgery) was a prospective, international, cohort study which enrolled consecutive adults undergoing elective colorectal surgery (February to March 2020). The primary outcome was the rate of intraperitoneal drain placement. Secondary outcomes included: rate and time to diagnosis of postoperative intraperitoneal collections; rate of surgical site infections (SSIs); time to discharge; and 30-day major postoperative complications (Clavien-Dindo grade at least III). After propensity score matching, multivariable logistic regression and Cox proportional hazards regression were used to estimate the independent association of the secondary outcomes with drain placement. Results Overall, 1805 patients from 22 countries were included (798 women, 44.2 per cent; median age 67.0 years). The drain insertion rate was 51.9 per cent (937 patients). After matching, drains were not associated with reduced rates (odds ratio (OR) 1.33, 95 per cent c.i. 0.79 to 2.23; P = 0.287) or earlier detection (hazard ratio (HR) 0.87, 0.33 to 2.31; P = 0.780) of collections. Although not associated with worse major postoperative complications (OR 1.09, 0.68 to 1.75; P = 0.709), drains were associated with delayed hospital discharge (HR 0.58, 0.52 to 0.66; P < 0.001) and an increased risk of SSIs (OR 2.47, 1.50 to 4.05; P < 0.001). Conclusion Intraperitoneal drain placement after elective colorectal surgery is not associated with earlier detection of postoperative collections, but prolongs hospital stay and increases SSI risk

Hepatitis B markers in heterosexual patients attending two genitourinary medicine clinics in the West Midlands

OBJECTIVE: To determine the prevalence of hepatitis B virus (HBV) infection in heterosexual patients attending two genitourinary medicine (GUM) clinics in the West Midlands and to examine whether heterosexual activity is a risk factor for acquiring HBV infection with the view to extend HBV vaccination policies to cover this group. DESIGN: HBV markers were determined in the GUM study group and compared with that of the control groups. Responses to a questionnaire were used to examine sexual behaviour patterns that may be related to heterosexual acquisition of HBV infection. SETTING: The West Midlands, UK April 1992-January 1993. SUBJECTS: 788 male patients and 688 female patients attending GUM clinics were compared with 498 male blood donors and 563 females attending antenatal clinics for the seroprevalence of HBV markers. Potential risk factors related to heterosexual activity were assessed in 1436 patients in the study group. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Prevalence of HBV markers in the GUM study group and the controls. The possible use of the risk factors examined as predictors for acquiring HBV infection. RESULTS: The seroprevalence of hepatitis B core antibody (anti-HBc) in GUM patients was 1.9% and 0.5% in the control group. In the study groups the prevalence of anti-HBc from Birmingham was 3.2% while that from Coventry was 0.8%. The low seroprevalence of HBV prevented a multiple logistic analysis. A limited regression analysis showed that being non-white (p < 0.001) and duration of sexual activity (p = 0.013) were risk factors for HBV infection. However, these two factors were poor predictors of the risk to exposure to HBV infection. CONCLUSION: The prevalence of HBV infection in heterosexual patients in the West Midlands is very low and does not provide any indications to broaden HBV vaccination into heterosexual patients attending GUM clinics. Risk factors were poor predictors of the exposure to HBV infection. This is partially due to the low prevalence of HBV infection in this study. Further studies are required before definitive conclusions are made regarding the potential predictive value of risk factors

Prevalence and risk factors for hepatitis B virus infections among visitors to an STD clinic.

OBJECTIVE: To determine the prevalence and risk factors for hepatitis B virus (HBV) infections among individuals attending an STD clinic in a low endemic region. STUDY DESIGN: A total of 1228 women and 1648 men attending the STD clinic at the University Hospital Rotterdam, Netherlands, were examined for HBV infection by determination of hepatitis B surface antigen (HBsAg) and antibodies to hepatitis B core antigen (anti-HBc). Demographic characteristics, information on sexual behaviour, and intravenous drug use were recorded. RESULTS: The seroprevalence of HBsAg was 1.4% in women and 2.1% in men (0% in homosexual men). The seroprevalence of anti-HBc was 13% in women and 20% in men (36% in homosexual men). Native country, intravenous drug use, a history of STD, and the number of partners in the past half year (inversely) were independent risk factors for HBsAg positivity in women and heterosexual men. For anti-HBc independent associations were observed for native country, age, intravenous drug use, commercial sex, number of lifetime partners, homosexual contacts, orogenital contact (inverse), and a history of STD. CONCLUSION: The HBV prevalence in the STD clinic attendants was high, exceeding the national estimate, and indicates that the STD clinic population may be considered a high risk group. Our data confirmed an increased risk for HBV infections among established risk groups. Therefore, these risk groups should be routinely screened to identify HBV cases for counselling and contact tracing

Opportunistic infections and AIDS malignancies early after initiating combination antiretroviral therapy in high-income countries

Background: There is little information on the incidence of AIDS-defining events which have been reported in the literature to be associated with immune reconstitution inflammatory syndrome (IRIS) after combined antiretroviral therapy (cART) initiation. These events include tuberculosis, mycobacterium avium complex (MAC), cytomegalovirus (CMV) retinitis, progressive multifocal leukoencephalopathy (PML), herpes simplex virus (HSV), Kaposi sarcoma, non-Hodgkin lymphoma (NHL), cryptococcosis and candidiasis. Methods: We identified individuals in the HIV-CAUSAL Collaboration, which includes data from six European countries and the US, who were HIV-positive between 1996 and 2013, antiretroviral therapy naive, aged at least 18 years, hadCD4+ cell count and HIV-RNA measurements and had been AIDS-free for at least 1 month between those measurements and the start of follow-up. For each AIDS-defining event, we estimated the hazard ratio for no cART versus less than 3 and at least 3 months since cART initiation, adjusting for time-varying CD4+ cell count and HIV-RNA via inverse probability weighting. Results: Out of 96 562 eligible individuals (78% men) with median (interquantile range) follow-up of 31 [13,65] months, 55 144 initiated cART. The number of cases varied between 898 for tuberculosis and 113 for PML. Compared with non-cART initiation, the hazard ratio (95% confidence intervals) up to 3 months after cART initiation were 1.21 (0.90-1.63) for tuberculosis, 2.61 (1.05-6.49) for MAC, 1.17 (0.34-4.08) for CMV retinitis, 1.18 (0.62-2.26) for PML, 1.21 (0.83-1.75) for HSV, 1.18 (0.87-1.58) for Kaposi sarcoma, 1.56 (0.82-2.95) for NHL, 1.11 (0.56-2.18) for cryptococcosis and 0.77 (0.40-1.49) for candidiasis. Conclusion: With the potential exception of mycobacterial infections, unmasking IRIS does not appear to be a common complication of cART initiation in high-income countries

Intraperitoneal drain placement and outcomes after elective colorectal surgery: international matched, prospective, cohort study

Many surgeons routinely place intraperitoneal drains after elective colorectal surgery. However, enhanced recovery after surgery guidelines recommend against their routine use owing to a lack of clear clinical benefit. This study aimed to describe international variation in intraperitoneal drain placement and the safety of this practice

Safety and efficacy of intraperitoneal drain placement after emergency colorectal surgery. An international, prospective cohort study

Intraperitoneal drains are often placed during emergency colorectal surgery. However, there is a lack of evidence supporting their use. This study aimed to describe the efficacy and safety of intraperitoneal drain placement after emergency colorectal surgery. Method: COMPlicAted intra-abdominal collectionS after colorectal Surgery (COMPASS) is a prospective, international, cohort study into which consecutive adult patients undergoing emergency colorectal surgery were enrolled (from 3 February 2020 to 8 March 2020). The primary outcome was the rate of intraperitoneal drain placement. Secondary outcomes included rate and time-to-diagnosis of postoperative intraperitoneal collections, rate of surgical site infections (SSIs), time to discharge and 30-day major postoperative complications (Clavien-Dindo III-V). Multivariable logistic and Cox proportional hazards regressions were used to estimate the independent association of the outcomes with drain placement. Results: Some 725 patients (median age 68.0 years; 349 [48.1%] women) from 22 countries were included. The drain insertion rate was 53.7% (389 patients). Following multivariable adjustment, drains were not significantly associated with reduced rates (odds ratio [OR] = 1.56, 95% CI: 0.48-5.02, p = 0.457) or earlier detection (hazard ratio [HR] = 1.07, 95% CI: 0.61-1.90, p = 0.805) of collections. Drains were not significantly associated with worse major postoperative complications (OR = 1.26, 95% CI: 0.67-2.36, p = 0.478), delayed hospital discharge (HR = 1.11, 95% CI: 0.91-1.36, p = 0.303) or increased risk of SSIs (OR = 1.61, 95% CI: 0.87-2.99, p = 0.128). Conclusion: This is the first study investigating placement of intraperitoneal drains following emergency colorectal surgery. The safety and clinical benefit of drains remain uncertain. Equipoise exists for randomized trials to define the safety and efficacy of drains in emergency colorectal surgery