Are iodophor-impregnated drapes associated with lower intraoperative contamination compared to no adhesive drape?: A protocol for systematic review and meta analysis

Background:Surgical site infection (SSI) is one of the most frightening complications after surgery. Adhesive drapes (AD) are widely used as an infection prevention tool. They can be non-impregnated or iodophor-impregnated, although non-impregnated are less used as they might be related to higher number of infections. One of the most common ways to study their efficacy is by analyzing the intraoperative contamination, which is a useful primary endpoint as it does not need follow-up and it has been strongly associated with infections. Therefore, we believe a systematic review (SR) and meta-analysis is needed to determine which is the literature available about this topic and to explore their results. Methods:All randomized controlled trials (RCT) published since 1984 through to January 15, 2023 will be included. Non-human and experimental studies will be excluded. We will only include studies written in English. We will conduct searches in the following electronic databases: MEDLINE (via PubMed), SCOPUS and Web Of Science. The protocol of the SR was registered in PROSPERO under the number CRD42023391651 and was written according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis Protocol guidelines. Discussion:The evidence regarding the benefits of using iodophor-impregnated adhesive drapes (IIAD) is scarce. Therefore, this SR and meta-analysis is required to determine if they are related with a lower intraoperative contamination incidence, compared to no AD

Groin surgical site infection incidence in vascular surgery with intradermal suture versus metallic stapling skin closure. A study protocol for a pragmatic open-label parallel-group randomized clinical trial (VASC-INF trial)

Background: Surgical site infection is 1 of the most frightening complications in vascular surgery due to its high morbimortality. The use of intradermal sutures for skin closure might be associated with a reduction in infections incidence. However, the data available in the literature is scarce and primarily built on low-evidence studies. To our knowledge, no multicenter clinical trial has been published to assess if the intradermal suture is associated with a lower surgical site infection incidence than metallic staples in patients who will undergo revascularization surgery requiring a femoral approach. Methods: VASC-INF is a pragmatic, multicenter, multistate (Spain, Italy, and Greece), randomized, open-label, clinical trial assessing the surgical site infection incidence in patients undergoing revascularization surgery requiring a femoral approach. Patients will be randomized on a 1:1 ratio to intradermal suture closure (experimental group) or to metallic staples closure (control group).The primary outcome is the number (percentage) of patients with surgical site infection (superficial and/or deep) associated with a femoral approach up to 28 (±2) days after surgery. Among the secondary outcomes are the number (percentage) of patients with other surgical wound complications; the number (percentage) of patients with surgical site infections who develop sepsis; type of antibiotic therapy used; type of microorganisms' species isolated and to describe the surgical site infection risk factors. Discussion: Intradermal suture closure may be beneficial in patients undergoing revascularization surgery requiring a femoral approach. Our working hypothesis is that intradermal suture closure reduces the incidence of surgical site infection respect to metallic staples closure

Procalcitonin and C-reactive protein to rule out early bacterial coinfection in COVID-19 critically ill patients

Although the prevalence of community-acquired respiratory bacterial coinfection upon hospital admission in patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) has been reported to be < 5%, almost three-quarters of patients received antibiotics. We aim to investigate whether procalcitonin (PCT) or C-reactive protein (CRP) upon admission could be helpful biomarkers to identify bacterial coinfection among patients with COVID-19 pneumonia. We carried out a multicentre, observational cohort study including consecutive COVID-19 patients admitted to 55 Spanish intensive care units (ICUs). The primary outcome was to explore whether PCT or CRP serum levels upon hospital admission could predict bacterial coinfection among patients with COVID-19 pneumonia. The secondary outcome was the evaluation of their association with mortality. We also conducted subgroups analyses in higher risk profile populations. Between 5 February 2020 and 21 December 2021, 4076 patients were included, 133 (3%) of whom presented bacterial coinfection. PCT and CRP had low area under curve (AUC) scores at the receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve analysis [0.57 (95% confidence interval (CI) 0.51-0.61) and 0.6 (95% CI, 0.55-0.64), respectively], but high negative predictive values (NPV) [97.5% (95% CI 96.5-98.5) and 98.2% (95% CI 97.5-98.9) for PCT and CRP, respectively]. CRP alone was associated with bacterial coinfection (OR 2, 95% CI 1.25-3.19; p = 0.004). The overall 15, 30 and 90 days mortality had a higher trend in the bacterial coinfection group, but without significant difference. PCT ≥ 0.12 ng/mL was associated with higher 90 days mortality. Our study suggests that measurements of PCT and CRP, alone and at a single time point, are not useful for ruling in or out bacterial coinfection in viral pneumonia by COVID-19

Major candidate variables to guide personalised treatment with steroids in critically ill patients with COVID-19: CIBERESUCICOVID study.

Although there is evidence supporting the benefits of corticosteroids in patients affected with severe coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), there is little information related to their potential benefits or harm in some subgroups of patients admitted to the intensive care unit (ICU) with COVID-19. We aim to investigate to find candidate variables to guide personalized treatment with steroids in critically ill patients with COVID-19. Multicentre, observational cohort study including consecutive COVID-19 patients admitted to 55 Spanish ICUs. The primary outcome was 90-day mortality. Subsequent analyses in clinically relevant subgroups by age, ICU baseline illness severity, organ damage, laboratory findings and mechanical ventilation were performed. High doses of corticosteroids (≥ 12 mg/day equivalent dexamethasone dose), early administration of corticosteroid treatment ( Between February 2020 and October 2021, 4226 patients were included. Of these, 3592 (85%) patients had received systemic corticosteroids during hospitalisation. In the propensity-adjusted multivariable analysis, the use of corticosteroids was protective for 90-day mortality in the overall population (HR 0.77 [0.65-0.92], p = 0.003) and in-hospital mortality (SHR 0.70 [0.58-0.84], p  Corticosteroid in ICU-admitted patients with COVID-19 may be administered based on age, severity, baseline inflammation, and invasive mechanical ventilation. Early administration since symptom onset may prove harmful

Safety of hospital discharge before return of bowel function after elective colorectal surgery

© 2020 BJS Society Ltd Published by John Wiley & Sons LtdBackground: Ileus is common after colorectal surgery and is associated with an increased risk of postoperative complications. Identifying features of normal bowel recovery and the appropriateness for hospital discharge is challenging. This study explored the safety of hospital discharge before the return of bowel function. Methods: A prospective, multicentre cohort study was undertaken across an international collaborative network. Adult patients undergoing elective colorectal resection between January and April 2018 were included. The main outcome of interest was readmission to hospital within 30 days of surgery. The impact of discharge timing according to the return of bowel function was explored using multivariable regression analysis. Other outcomes were postoperative complications within 30 days of surgery, measured using the Clavien–Dindo classification system. Results: A total of 3288 patients were included in the analysis, of whom 301 (9·2 per cent) were discharged before the return of bowel function. The median duration of hospital stay for patients discharged before and after return of bowel function was 5 (i.q.r. 4–7) and 7 (6–8) days respectively (P < 0·001). There were no significant differences in rates of readmission between these groups (6·6 versus 8·0 per cent; P = 0·499), and this remained the case after multivariable adjustment for baseline differences (odds ratio 0·90, 95 per cent c.i. 0·55 to 1·46; P = 0·659). Rates of postoperative complications were also similar in those discharged before versus after return of bowel function (minor: 34·7 versus 39·5 per cent; major 3·3 versus 3·4 per cent; P = 0·110). Conclusion: Discharge before return of bowel function after elective colorectal surgery appears to be safe in appropriately selected patients

Safety of hospital discharge before return of bowel function after elective colorectal surgery

Background: Ileus is common after colorectal surgery and is associated with an increased risk of postoperative complications. Identifying features of normal bowel recovery and the appropriateness for hospital discharge is challenging. This study explored the safety of hospital discharge before the return of bowel function.Methods: A prospective, multicentre cohort study was undertaken across an international collaborative network. Adult patients undergoing elective colorectal resection between January and April 2018 were included. The main outcome of interest was readmission to hospital within 30 days of surgery. The impact of discharge timing according to the return of bowel function was explored using multivariable regression analysis. Other outcomes were postoperative complications within 30 days of surgery, measured using the Clavien-Dindo classification system.Results: A total of 3288 patients were included in the analysis, of whom 301 (9.2 per cent) were discharged before the return of bowel function. The median duration of hospital stay for patients discharged before and after return of bowel function was 5 (i.q.r. 4-7) and 7 (6-8) days respectively (P &lt; 0.001). There were no significant differences in rates of readmission between these groups (6.6 versus 8.0 per cent; P = 0.499), and this remained the case after multivariable adjustment for baseline differences (odds ratio 0.90, 95 per cent c.i. 0.55 to 1.46; P = 0.659). Rates of postoperative complications were also similar in those discharged before versus after return of bowel function (minor: 34.7 versus 39.5 per cent; major 3.3 versus 3.4 per cent; P = 0.110).Conclusion: Discharge before return of bowel function after elective colorectal surgery appears to be safe in appropriately selected patients

Timing of nasogastric tube insertion and the risk of postoperative pneumonia: an international, prospective cohort study

Aim: Aspiration is a common cause of pneumonia in patients with postoperative ileus. Insertion of a nasogastric tube (NGT) is often performed, but this can be distressing. The aim of this study was to determine whether the timing of NGT insertion after surgery (before versus after vomiting) was associated with reduced rates of pneumonia in patients undergoing elective colorectal surgery. Method: This was a preplanned secondary analysis of a multicentre, prospective cohort study. Patients undergoing elective colorectal surgery between January 2018 and April 2018 were eligible. Those receiving a NGT were divided into three groups, based on the timing of the insertion: routine NGT (inserted at the time of surgery), prophylactic NGT (inserted after surgery but before vomiting) and reactive NGT (inserted after surgery and after vomiting). The primary outcome was the development of pneumonia within 30 days of surgery, which was compared between the prophylactic and reactive NGT groups using multivariable regression analysis. Results: A total of 4715 patients were included in the analysis and 1536 (32.6%) received a NGT. These were classified as routine in 926 (60.3%), reactive in 461 (30.0%) and prophylactic in 149 (9.7%). Two hundred patients (4.2%) developed pneumonia (no NGT 2.7%; routine NGT 5.2%; reactive NGT 10.6%; prophylactic NGT 11.4%). After adjustment for confounding factors, no significant difference in pneumonia rates was detected between the prophylactic and reactive NGT groups (odds ratio 1.03, 95% CI 0.56–1.87, P = 0.932). Conclusion: In patients who required the insertion of a NGT after surgery, prophylactic insertion was not associated with fewer cases of pneumonia within 30 days of surgery compared with reactive insertion