Antibiotics and Surgically Treated Acute Appendicitis, When, Where, and Why?

IF 1.4 4区 医学 Q4 INFECTIOUS DISEASES
Andrew Hendrix, Alexander Kammien, Adrian A Maung, Bishwajit Battacharya, Kimberly A Davis, Kevin M Schuster
{"title":"Antibiotics and Surgically Treated Acute Appendicitis, When, Where, and Why?","authors":"Andrew Hendrix, Alexander Kammien, Adrian A Maung, Bishwajit Battacharya, Kimberly A Davis, Kevin M Schuster","doi":"10.1089/sur.2024.264","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p><b><i>Background:</i></b> Antibiotics within an hour of incision reduce the incidence of surgical site infection (SSI) in clean-contaminated abdominal surgery. However, patients undergoing emergency surgery for an intra-abdominal infectious process often receive treatment antibiotics and may not benefit from additional pre-incisional antibiotics (POA). We hypothesized that POA would not lead to a reduction in the occurrence of SSIs following emergency appendectomy. <b><i>Patients and Methods:</i></b> All patients at a single institution undergoing emergency appendectomies for acute appendicitis from 2013 to 2020 were included. Age, gender, perforation, body mass index (BMI), Elixhauser comorbidity index (ECI), surgical approach, emergency department antibiotics (EDA), EDA administration time, and pre-operative antibiotics were abstracted. Primary outcomes were superficial/deep and organ-space SSIs. Bi-variable logistic regression models assessed the independent impact of each tactic. Multi-variable models compared those receiving pre-incisional cefazolin with those receiving no POA. <b><i>Results:</i></b> Patients (n = 1380) had a mean age (standard deviation) of 39.5 (17.0) years, and 48.6% were female. Age, gender, perforated appendicitis, EDA, ECI, and BMI all were predictive of infection. POA were not predictive of SSI (p = 0.632). After adjustment for age, gender, perforation, EDA, EDA administration timing, ECI, and BMI, only perforation (odds ratio [OR]: 17.08, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 6.97-51.43) and male gender (OR: 2.75, 95% CI = 1.29-6.43) were associated with organ-space infection, whereas pre-incisional cefazolin was not (OR: 0.83, 95% CI = 0.38-1.97). Emergency department broad-spectrum antibiotics were associated with a lower incidence of superficial/deep infection (OR: 0.06, 95% CI = 0.00-0.68); however, pre-incisional cefazolin was not (OR: 0.71, 95% CI = 0.08-15.34). <b><i>Conclusion:</i></b> For patients undergoing emergency appendectomies who have received broad-spectrum antibiotic treatment, additional pre-incisional cefazolin does not reduce the incidence of superficial/deep or organ-space SSI.</p>","PeriodicalId":22109,"journal":{"name":"Surgical infections","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.4000,"publicationDate":"2025-02-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Surgical infections","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1089/sur.2024.264","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"INFECTIOUS DISEASES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Antibiotics within an hour of incision reduce the incidence of surgical site infection (SSI) in clean-contaminated abdominal surgery. However, patients undergoing emergency surgery for an intra-abdominal infectious process often receive treatment antibiotics and may not benefit from additional pre-incisional antibiotics (POA). We hypothesized that POA would not lead to a reduction in the occurrence of SSIs following emergency appendectomy. Patients and Methods: All patients at a single institution undergoing emergency appendectomies for acute appendicitis from 2013 to 2020 were included. Age, gender, perforation, body mass index (BMI), Elixhauser comorbidity index (ECI), surgical approach, emergency department antibiotics (EDA), EDA administration time, and pre-operative antibiotics were abstracted. Primary outcomes were superficial/deep and organ-space SSIs. Bi-variable logistic regression models assessed the independent impact of each tactic. Multi-variable models compared those receiving pre-incisional cefazolin with those receiving no POA. Results: Patients (n = 1380) had a mean age (standard deviation) of 39.5 (17.0) years, and 48.6% were female. Age, gender, perforated appendicitis, EDA, ECI, and BMI all were predictive of infection. POA were not predictive of SSI (p = 0.632). After adjustment for age, gender, perforation, EDA, EDA administration timing, ECI, and BMI, only perforation (odds ratio [OR]: 17.08, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 6.97-51.43) and male gender (OR: 2.75, 95% CI = 1.29-6.43) were associated with organ-space infection, whereas pre-incisional cefazolin was not (OR: 0.83, 95% CI = 0.38-1.97). Emergency department broad-spectrum antibiotics were associated with a lower incidence of superficial/deep infection (OR: 0.06, 95% CI = 0.00-0.68); however, pre-incisional cefazolin was not (OR: 0.71, 95% CI = 0.08-15.34). Conclusion: For patients undergoing emergency appendectomies who have received broad-spectrum antibiotic treatment, additional pre-incisional cefazolin does not reduce the incidence of superficial/deep or organ-space SSI.

抗生素和手术治疗急性阑尾炎,何时,何地,为什么?
背景:在清洁污染腹部手术中,切口1小时内应用抗生素可降低手术部位感染的发生率。然而,因腹腔内感染过程而接受紧急手术的患者通常接受抗生素治疗,可能无法从额外的切口前抗生素(POA)中获益。我们假设POA不会减少急诊阑尾切除术后ssi的发生。患者和方法:纳入2013年至2020年在单一机构接受急性阑尾炎急诊阑尾切除术的所有患者。年龄、性别、穿孔、体重指数(BMI)、Elixhauser合并症指数(ECI)、手术入路、急诊科抗生素(EDA)、EDA给药时间、术前抗生素。主要结局是浅表/深部和器官间隙ssi。双变量逻辑回归模型评估了每种策略的独立影响。多变量模型比较了切开前接受头孢唑林治疗的患者和未接受POA治疗的患者。结果:1380例患者平均年龄(标准差)为39.5(17.0)岁,女性48.6%。年龄、性别、穿孔性阑尾炎、EDA、ECI和BMI均可预测感染。POA不能预测SSI (p = 0.632)。在调整年龄、性别、穿孔、EDA、EDA给药时间、ECI和BMI后,只有穿孔(优势比[OR]: 17.08, 95%可信区间[CI] = 6.97-51.43)和男性性别(OR: 2.75, 95% CI = 1.29-6.43)与器官间隙感染相关,而切前头孢唑林与器官间隙感染无关(OR: 0.83, 95% CI = 0.38-1.97)。急诊科广谱抗生素与较低的浅表/深部感染发生率相关(OR: 0.06, 95% CI = 0.00-0.68);而切前头孢唑林则没有(OR: 0.71, 95% CI = 0.08-15.34)。结论:对于接受过广谱抗生素治疗的急诊阑尾切除术患者,额外的切前头孢唑林并不能降低浅/深或器官间隙SSI的发生率。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Surgical infections
Surgical infections INFECTIOUS DISEASES-SURGERY
CiteScore
3.80
自引率
5.00%
发文量
127
审稿时长
6-12 weeks
期刊介绍: Surgical Infections provides comprehensive and authoritative information on the biology, prevention, and management of post-operative infections. Original articles cover the latest advancements, new therapeutic management strategies, and translational research that is being applied to improve clinical outcomes and successfully treat post-operative infections. Surgical Infections coverage includes: -Peritonitis and intra-abdominal infections- Surgical site infections- Pneumonia and other nosocomial infections- Cellular and humoral immunity- Biology of the host response- Organ dysfunction syndromes- Antibiotic use- Resistant and opportunistic pathogens- Epidemiology and prevention- The operating room environment- Diagnostic studies
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信