Intrawound vancomycin for prevention of surgical site infection: meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials.

IF 4.9 3区 医学 Q1 SURGERY
BJS Open Pub Date : 2026-09-04 DOI:10.1093/bjsopen/zrag131
Shaan Patel, Shiva A Nischal, Kush M Kale, Angelette Mendonca, Nelson Sofoluke, Srinivas K Prasad, James S Harrop, Daniel Refai
{"title":"Intrawound vancomycin for prevention of surgical site infection: meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials.","authors":"Shaan Patel, Shiva A Nischal, Kush M Kale, Angelette Mendonca, Nelson Sofoluke, Srinivas K Prasad, James S Harrop, Daniel Refai","doi":"10.1093/bjsopen/zrag131","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Surgical site infection remains a major cause of postoperative morbidity. Intrawound vancomycin has been proposed as an adjunct to standard prophylaxis, but its effectiveness across surgical settings remains uncertain. This systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials aimed to evaluate the association between intraoperative intrawound vancomycin and surgical site infection in adults undergoing surgery.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>MEDLINE, Embase, and CENTRAL were searched from database inception to March 2026 for randomized clinical trials comparing intrawound vancomycin with standard care in adults undergoing operative procedures. Two reviewers independently performed screening, data extraction, and risk-of-bias assessment using the Cochrane Risk of Bias 2 tool. Random-effects meta-analyses were undertaken, with certainty of evidence rated using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation framework. Primary outcomes were overall surgical site infection, deep surgical site infection, superficial surgical site infection, and Gram-positive surgical site infection.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Twenty-two trials enrolling 8424 patients (vancomycin 4228, control 4196) were included. Intrawound vancomycin was associated with a lower risk of overall surgical site infection (risk ratio 0.79, 95% confidence interval 0.64 to 0.99) and Gram-positive surgical site infection (risk ratio 0.53, 0.35 to 0.79), corresponding to numbers needed to treat of 82 and 78, respectively. No significant differences were observed for deep or superficial surgical site infection, Gram-negative infection, reoperation, wound complications, mortality, or length of hospital stay. The certainty of evidence was moderate.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Intrawound vancomycin was associated with a modest reduction in surgical site infection, driven by reductions in Gram-positive infections. These findings support a selective, context-specific use rather than routine application across all procedures.</p>","PeriodicalId":9028,"journal":{"name":"BJS Open","volume":"10 5","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":4.9000,"publicationDate":"2026-09-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC13591277/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"BJS Open","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/bjsopen/zrag131","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"SURGERY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Surgical site infection remains a major cause of postoperative morbidity. Intrawound vancomycin has been proposed as an adjunct to standard prophylaxis, but its effectiveness across surgical settings remains uncertain. This systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials aimed to evaluate the association between intraoperative intrawound vancomycin and surgical site infection in adults undergoing surgery.

Methods: MEDLINE, Embase, and CENTRAL were searched from database inception to March 2026 for randomized clinical trials comparing intrawound vancomycin with standard care in adults undergoing operative procedures. Two reviewers independently performed screening, data extraction, and risk-of-bias assessment using the Cochrane Risk of Bias 2 tool. Random-effects meta-analyses were undertaken, with certainty of evidence rated using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation framework. Primary outcomes were overall surgical site infection, deep surgical site infection, superficial surgical site infection, and Gram-positive surgical site infection.

Results: Twenty-two trials enrolling 8424 patients (vancomycin 4228, control 4196) were included. Intrawound vancomycin was associated with a lower risk of overall surgical site infection (risk ratio 0.79, 95% confidence interval 0.64 to 0.99) and Gram-positive surgical site infection (risk ratio 0.53, 0.35 to 0.79), corresponding to numbers needed to treat of 82 and 78, respectively. No significant differences were observed for deep or superficial surgical site infection, Gram-negative infection, reoperation, wound complications, mortality, or length of hospital stay. The certainty of evidence was moderate.

Conclusion: Intrawound vancomycin was associated with a modest reduction in surgical site infection, driven by reductions in Gram-positive infections. These findings support a selective, context-specific use rather than routine application across all procedures.

万古霉素用于预防手术部位感染:随机临床试验的meta分析。
背景:手术部位感染仍然是术后发病的主要原因。创面内万古霉素已被建议作为标准预防的辅助用药,但其在手术环境中的有效性仍不确定。本研究对随机临床试验进行了系统回顾和荟萃分析,旨在评估手术中万古霉素与手术部位感染之间的关系。方法:MEDLINE、Embase和CENTRAL检索从数据库建立到2026年3月的随机临床试验,比较万古霉素与标准护理在成人手术中的应用。两位审稿人使用Cochrane Risk of Bias 2工具独立进行筛选、数据提取和偏倚风险评估。进行了随机效应荟萃分析,使用建议分级评估、发展和评估框架对证据进行了确定性评级。主要结局为手术部位感染、深部感染、浅表感染和革兰氏阳性手术部位感染。结果:纳入22项试验,共纳入8424例患者(万古霉素4228例,对照组4196例)。创面万古霉素与总体手术部位感染(风险比0.79,95%可信区间0.64 ~ 0.99)和革兰氏阳性手术部位感染(风险比0.53,0.35 ~ 0.79)的风险较低相关,对应的治疗人数分别为82和78。深层或浅表手术部位感染、革兰氏阴性感染、再手术、伤口并发症、死亡率或住院时间无显著差异。证据的确定性是中等的。结论:由于革兰氏阳性感染的减少,伤口内万古霉素与手术部位感染的适度减少有关。这些发现支持选择性的、特定环境的使用,而不是在所有程序中常规应用。
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
BJS Open
BJS Open SURGERY-
CiteScore
6.00
自引率
3.20%
发文量
144
×
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信
小红书