术中伤口冲洗预防手术部位感染:系统回顾和荟萃分析。

IF 2.3 3区 医学 Q2 SURGERY
Kaique Flavio Xavier Cardoso Filardi,Gustavo Roberto Minetto Wegner,Arnaldo Bastos Dos Santos,Rafaela Goes Machado Filardi,Luana Ferreira Vasques,Marília Cardoso Massoni,Milena Poliana Chimanski Da Costa
{"title":"术中伤口冲洗预防手术部位感染:系统回顾和荟萃分析。","authors":"Kaique Flavio Xavier Cardoso Filardi,Gustavo Roberto Minetto Wegner,Arnaldo Bastos Dos Santos,Rafaela Goes Machado Filardi,Luana Ferreira Vasques,Marília Cardoso Massoni,Milena Poliana Chimanski Da Costa","doi":"10.1002/wjs.12339","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"INTRODUCTION\r\nThe potential benefit of intraoperative wound irrigation (IOWI) in preventing surgical site infection (SSI) remains unclear. The use of antimicrobial agents (AMA) or antiseptic agents (ASA) is controversial worldwide.\r\n\r\nMETHODS\r\nWe performed a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials comparing AMA or ASA with saline solution in patients who underwent abdominal surgery. Sub-analyses were performed on the type of surgery, type of intervention agent, and wound classification.\r\n\r\nRESULTS\r\nNineteen studies comprising 4915 patients undergoing abdominal surgery were included. SSI was observed in 207 out of 2504 patients in the intervention group (8.26 %) and 344 out of 2411 patients in the control group (14.27%). Overall, intraoperative wound irrigation (IOWI) with AMA or ASA was associated with a lower SSI (Odds ratio (OR) 0.62; 95% CI 0.47, 0.82; p < 0.01; I2 = 50%). Sub-analyses have shown a tendency for decreased SSI in patients from emergency surgery (OR 0.46; 95% CI 0.30, 0.70; p < 0.01; I2 = 23%), patients with contaminated wound (OR 0.48; 95% CI 0.31, 0.74; p < 0.01; I2 = 24%), and either the use of AMA or ASA (OR 0.53 vs. 0.65).\r\n\r\nCONCLUSION\r\nThe overall use of AMA or ASA before skin closure was associated with decreased SSI. Lower rates of SSI were observed in the subgroup analysis. Furthermore, we must consider the critical heterogeneity of the studies.","PeriodicalId":23926,"journal":{"name":"World Journal of Surgery","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.3000,"publicationDate":"2024-09-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Intraoperative wound irrigation to prevent surgical site infection: A systematic review and meta-analysis.\",\"authors\":\"Kaique Flavio Xavier Cardoso Filardi,Gustavo Roberto Minetto Wegner,Arnaldo Bastos Dos Santos,Rafaela Goes Machado Filardi,Luana Ferreira Vasques,Marília Cardoso Massoni,Milena Poliana Chimanski Da Costa\",\"doi\":\"10.1002/wjs.12339\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"INTRODUCTION\\r\\nThe potential benefit of intraoperative wound irrigation (IOWI) in preventing surgical site infection (SSI) remains unclear. The use of antimicrobial agents (AMA) or antiseptic agents (ASA) is controversial worldwide.\\r\\n\\r\\nMETHODS\\r\\nWe performed a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials comparing AMA or ASA with saline solution in patients who underwent abdominal surgery. Sub-analyses were performed on the type of surgery, type of intervention agent, and wound classification.\\r\\n\\r\\nRESULTS\\r\\nNineteen studies comprising 4915 patients undergoing abdominal surgery were included. SSI was observed in 207 out of 2504 patients in the intervention group (8.26 %) and 344 out of 2411 patients in the control group (14.27%). Overall, intraoperative wound irrigation (IOWI) with AMA or ASA was associated with a lower SSI (Odds ratio (OR) 0.62; 95% CI 0.47, 0.82; p < 0.01; I2 = 50%). Sub-analyses have shown a tendency for decreased SSI in patients from emergency surgery (OR 0.46; 95% CI 0.30, 0.70; p < 0.01; I2 = 23%), patients with contaminated wound (OR 0.48; 95% CI 0.31, 0.74; p < 0.01; I2 = 24%), and either the use of AMA or ASA (OR 0.53 vs. 0.65).\\r\\n\\r\\nCONCLUSION\\r\\nThe overall use of AMA or ASA before skin closure was associated with decreased SSI. Lower rates of SSI were observed in the subgroup analysis. Furthermore, we must consider the critical heterogeneity of the studies.\",\"PeriodicalId\":23926,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"World Journal of Surgery\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.3000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-09-11\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"World Journal of Surgery\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1002/wjs.12339\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"SURGERY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"World Journal of Surgery","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1002/wjs.12339","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"SURGERY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

引言 术中伤口冲洗(IOWI)对预防手术部位感染(SSI)的潜在益处尚不明确。我们对腹部手术患者使用抗菌剂(AMA)或防腐剂(ASA)与生理盐水进行比较的随机临床试验进行了系统回顾和荟萃分析。结果共纳入 19 项研究,包括 4915 名腹部手术患者。干预组 2504 例患者中有 207 例(8.26%)观察到 SSI,对照组 2411 例患者中有 344 例(14.27%)观察到 SSI。总体而言,术中伤口冲洗(IOWI)使用AMA或ASA与较低的SSI相关(Odds ratio (OR) 0.62; 95% CI 0.47, 0.82; p < 0.01; I2 = 50%)。子分析表明,急诊手术患者(OR 0.46; 95% CI 0.30, 0.70; p < 0.01; I2 = 23%)、伤口污染患者(OR 0.48; 95% CI 0.31, 0.74; p < 0.01; I2 = 24%)以及使用 AMA 或 ASA 的患者(OR 0.53 vs. 0.65)的 SSI 有下降趋势。在亚组分析中观察到较低的 SSI 发生率。此外,我们还必须考虑到研究的严重异质性。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Intraoperative wound irrigation to prevent surgical site infection: A systematic review and meta-analysis.
INTRODUCTION The potential benefit of intraoperative wound irrigation (IOWI) in preventing surgical site infection (SSI) remains unclear. The use of antimicrobial agents (AMA) or antiseptic agents (ASA) is controversial worldwide. METHODS We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials comparing AMA or ASA with saline solution in patients who underwent abdominal surgery. Sub-analyses were performed on the type of surgery, type of intervention agent, and wound classification. RESULTS Nineteen studies comprising 4915 patients undergoing abdominal surgery were included. SSI was observed in 207 out of 2504 patients in the intervention group (8.26 %) and 344 out of 2411 patients in the control group (14.27%). Overall, intraoperative wound irrigation (IOWI) with AMA or ASA was associated with a lower SSI (Odds ratio (OR) 0.62; 95% CI 0.47, 0.82; p < 0.01; I2 = 50%). Sub-analyses have shown a tendency for decreased SSI in patients from emergency surgery (OR 0.46; 95% CI 0.30, 0.70; p < 0.01; I2 = 23%), patients with contaminated wound (OR 0.48; 95% CI 0.31, 0.74; p < 0.01; I2 = 24%), and either the use of AMA or ASA (OR 0.53 vs. 0.65). CONCLUSION The overall use of AMA or ASA before skin closure was associated with decreased SSI. Lower rates of SSI were observed in the subgroup analysis. Furthermore, we must consider the critical heterogeneity of the studies.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
World Journal of Surgery
World Journal of Surgery 医学-外科
CiteScore
5.10
自引率
3.80%
发文量
460
审稿时长
3 months
期刊介绍: World Journal of Surgery is the official publication of the International Society of Surgery/Societe Internationale de Chirurgie (iss-sic.com). Under the editorship of Dr. Julie Ann Sosa, World Journal of Surgery provides an in-depth, international forum for the most authoritative information on major clinical problems in the fields of clinical and experimental surgery, surgical education, and socioeconomic aspects of surgical care. Contributions are reviewed and selected by a group of distinguished surgeons from across the world who make up the Editorial Board.
×
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