Controversies in perioperative management and antimicrobial prophylaxis in urologic surgery

Abstract:   The Japanese Urological Association (JUA) recently published guidelines for the prevention of perioperative urologic infections. Although the general remarks in the JUA guidelines are almost similar to those in guidelines previously published by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) and in the European Association of Urology (EAU) guidelines, their differences leave several questions that need to be answered. To clarify agreements and differences in guidelines for perioperative management in urologic interventions for development of more optimal guidelines, reports and reviews previously published were overlooked and discussed. In terms of surgical site infections (SSI) in urologic surgery, consensus for open and endoscopic-instrumental procedures is still somewhat controversial, while a consensus has not yet emerged for its use in laparoscopic procedures. Further research is required to determine what is an optimal prophylactic protocol to effectively prevent both SSI and remote infections (RI).     

A multi-center prospective study for antibiotic prophylaxis to prevent perioperative infections in urologic surgery

In order to assess the ability of our protocol for antibiotic prophylaxis to prevent perioperative infections in urologic surgery, 1,353 operations of open and laparoscopic urologic surgery conducted in 21 hospitals between September 2002 and August 2003 were subjected to analyses. We classified surgical procedures into four categories by invasiveness and contamination levels: Category A; clean less invasive surgery, Category B; clean invasive or clean-contaminated surgery, Category C; surgery with urinary tract diversion using the intestine. Prophylactic antibiotics were administrated intravenously according to our protocol, such as Category A; first or second generation cephems or penicillins on the operative day only, Category B; first and second generation cephems or penicillins for 3 days, and Category C; first, second or third generation cephems or penicillins for 4 days. The wound conditions and general conditions were evaluated in terms of the surgical site infection (SSI) as well as remote infection (RI) up to postoperative day (POD) 30. The SSI rate highest (23.3%) for surgery with intestinal urinary diversion, followed by 10.0% for surgery for lower urinary tract, 8.9% for nephroureterctomy, and 6.0% for radical prostatectomy. The SSI rates in clean surgery including open and laparoscopic nephrectomy/adrenalectomy were 0.7 and 1.4%, respectively. In SSIs, gram-positive cocci such as methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (58.8%) or Enterobacter faecalis (26.5%) were the most common pathogen. Similarly, the RI rate was the highest (35.2%) for surgery using intestinal urinary diversion, followed by 16.7% for surgery for lower urinary tract, 11.4% for nephroureterctomy, and 7.6% for radical prostatectomy, while RI rates for clean surgery were less than 5%. RIs most frequently reported were urinary tract infections (2.6%) where Pseudomonas aeruginosa (20.3%) and Enterobacter faecalis (15.3%) were the major causative microorganisms. Parameters such as age, obesity, nutritional status (low proteinemia), diabetes mellitus, lung disease, duration of operation, and blood loss volume were recognized as risk factors for SSI or RI in several operative procedures. Postoperative body temperatures, peripheral white blood counts, C reactive protein (CRP) levels in POD 3 were much higher than those in POD 2 in cases suffering from perioperative infections, especially suggesting that CRP could be a predictable marker for perioperative infections.     

Questionnaire survey on the theory of antimicrobial prophylaxis in urologic surgery

In order to establish an acceptable guideline for prevention of perioperative infection following urologic surgery, a questionnaire survey on the theory of antimicrobial prophylaxis (AMP) was conducted among urologists in Japan in February 2004. A reply was obtained from 149 urologists working for institutes located all over Japan from Hokkaido to Kyushu areas. Ninety-two percent of the urologists agreed that AMP should be administered 30 min before an incision, and 44% replied that an additional dose of AMP is required in the case of prolonged intervention. Penicillins or the 1st or 2nd generation cephems were used by 89 to 93% of the urologists in operations not including bowel segments, while 78% preferred such AMP agents in the procedures including bowel segments. AMP was terminated within 3 days in 87% for genital operations, in 70 to 76% for laparoscopic operations, in 54 to 65% for other clean or clean-contaminated operations, and in 24% for operations without the bowel segments. Especially, 58% of the urologists continued AMP for more than 5 days after operations with urinary diversion using the intestine. When compared with the previous questionnaire survey by Shinagawa et al, our survey demonstrated that standard consensus of AMP has spread widely among urologists in Japan, although the recommendations published in Europe and United States are still controversial in Japan. Thus, further well-designed clinical trials are required to establish original guidelines in Japan.     

Controversies in antimicrobial prophylaxis for urologic surgery: more up-to-date evidence is needed

The American Urological Association has published guidelines for the use of antimicrobial prophylaxis in the prevention of surgical site infection. The guidelines recommend that antimicrobial prophylaxis is required for most urologic operations, including transurethral endoscopic, open and laparoscopic procedures. By contrast, the guidelines published by the European Association of Urology recommend that no procedures require antimicrobial prophylaxis, except surgery that involves the use of bowel segments. The main reason for these differences is that both guidelines are largely based on data from general surgery, because few well-controlled, randomized studies of urologic surgery have been reported. Controversies have arisen because of differing views regarding the applicability of evidence from general to urologic surgery. Particularly controversial are the guidelines for clean-contaminated procedures, such as entering the urinary tract and using bowel segments. This commentary discusses the practical application of these new guidelines by considering previously published recommendations.     

Assessment of a protocol for prophylactic antibiotics to prevent perioperative infection in urological surgery: A preliminary study

BACKGROUND: The aim of the present study was to assess the usability and efficacy of our new protocol of prophylactic antibiotic use to prevent perioperative infection in urological surgery. METHODS: We prospectively investigated 339 cases of typical urological surgery in our department between April 2001 and March 2002 (group I). We classified surgical procedures into four categories by invasiveness and contamination levels: category A, clean less invasive or endoscopic surgery; category B, clean invasive or clean contaminated surgery; category C, urinary tract diversion using the intestine; and category D, infected surgery. Antibiotics were administrated intravenously according to our protocol: category A, first or second generation cephems or penicillins during the operative day only; category B, first and second generation cephems or penicillins for 3 days; and category C, second or third generation cephems for 4 days. Category D was excluded from the analysis. To judge perioperative infections, the wound condition and general conditions were evaluated in terms of the surgical site infection (SSI) as well as remote infection (RI) up to postoperative day (POD) 14. We retrospectively reviewed 308 patients who underwent urological surgery between April 2000 and March 2001 (group II) as reference cases that were administered antibiotics without any restriction. RESULTS: Perioperative infection rates (SSI + RI) in group I and group II were 25 of 339 (7.4%) and 35 of 308 (11.4%), respectively. Surgical site infection rates of categories A, B, and C in group I were 1.8%, 7.6%, and 30.0%, respectively, while those in group II were 2.0%, 7.4%, and 46.2%, respectively. There was no significant difference in infection rates in terms of RI and SSI between group I and group II. The amounts, as well as the prices, for intravenously administrated antibiotics and oral antibiotics decreased to approximately half and one-fifth, respectively. CONCLUSION: Our protocol effectively decreased the amount of antibiotics used without increasing perioperative infection rates. Thus, our protocol of prophylactic antibiotic therapy would be recommended as an appropriate method for preventing perioperative infection in urological surgery.     

A randomized, prospective study of perioperative antimicrobial prophylaxis for vascular access surgery

A blinded, randomized, prospective study of 38 chronic renal failure patients was done to evaluate perioperative antibiotics in the prevention of postoperative infection of vascular access prostheses. Expanded polytetrafluoroethylene (PTFE) hemodialysis grafts were placed either in radiocephalic (19) or femorosaphenous (19) position. Cefamandole or placebo was given intravenously 30 minutes prior to operation and six to 12 hours postoperatively. The overall infection rate for the group was 26.3 percent with two of 19 antibiotic-treated and eight of 19 placebo-treated patients developing an infection (p less than 0.04). Grafts placed in the thigh have a greater risk of intraoperative contamination and infection. Postoperative infection associated with implantation of hemodialysis prostheses was significantly reduced by perioperative antimicrobials.     

A questionnaire survey on the theory of postoperative infection prophylaxis in urologic surgery

The implementation of the Japanese guidelines for prevention of postoperative infection in urological surgery, based on the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) was surveyed. In October 2006, questionnaires about selection of prophylactic antibiotics, timing and period of administration, were distributed to 25 urologists. Surgical procedures were classified into four categories by contamination levels: 1. clean surgery, 2. clean-contaminated surgery, 3. contaminated surgery (surgery with urinary tract diversion using the intestine), and 4. laparoscopic surgery. Implementation of recommendations was about 70% in the selection of prophylactic antibiotics, and 20-30% for the timing of administration in four categories. Adequate implementation was low for the timing of administration. Period of administration in contaminated surgery was longest in all categories. Concerning the administration period and the selection of antibiotics for contaminated surgery, marked differences from recommendations were seen. Therefore further education in hospitals in Japan is needed.     

Mezlocillin single-dose prophylaxis in biliary tract surgery

A prospective, controlled, double-blind, randomized multicenter trial including 12 Swiss hospitals with 358 patients was carried out. The aim of the study was to investigate whether a single-dose prophylaxis with 5 g mezlocillin given immediately before surgery can reduce not only the incidence of wound infections but other bacterial complications as well. Of the 324 correct protocols, 165 belonged to the placebo and 159 to the mezlocillin group. The two groups are comparable in all regards. The incidence of wound infections was 10% in the control and 4% in the treated group (p less than 0.05). The number of other infectious complications could not be reduced. No side effects due to the prevention were observed. Single-dose prevention with mezlocillin is proposed for all patients undergoing biliary tract surgery.     

Major reasons to prescribe antimicrobial prophylaxis in surgery

Based on the Belgian recommendation for antimicrobial prophylaxis (AMP) in surgery in 1996, a prospective survey of 3 months was carried out in 10 acute care hospitals in Lebanon to describe the major reasons to prescribe AMP in surgery. Of 961 surgical procedures, 767 (80%) received one or several antibiotics; the surgical site infection rate was 4%. Results indicate that duration of procedures over 1 hour and patient older than 60 years represent the main reasons for prescribing AMP in Lebanese hospitals.     

Randomized clinical trial of single-dose antibiotic prophylaxis for non-reconstructive breast surgery

BACKGROUND: The aim of this randomized clinical trial was to determine whether a single intravenous dose of 2 g flucloxacillin could prevent wound infection after primary non-reconstructive breast surgery. METHODS: The study included 618 patients undergoing local excision (n = 490), mastectomy (n = 107) or microdochectomy (n = 21). Patients were randomized to receive either a single dose of flucloxacillin immediately after the induction of anaesthesia or no intervention. Wound morbidity was monitored by an independent research nurse for 42 days after surgery. RESULTS: The incidence of wound infection was similar in the two groups: 10 of 311 (3.2 percent) in the flucloxacillin group and 14 of 307 (4.6 percent) in the control group (chi(2) = 0.75, P = 0.387; relative risk 0.71, 95 percent confidence interval 0.32 to 1.53). The groups also had similar wound scores and rates of moderate or severe cellulitis. Wound infection presented a median of 16 days after surgery. CONCLUSION: The administration of a single dose of flucloxacillin failed to reduce the rate of wound infection after non-reconstructive breast surgery.     

Topical perioperative antibiotic prophylaxis for minor clean inguinal surgery

BACKGROUND: In minor clean procedures, such as inguinal hernia repair and varicocelectomy, the efficacy of systemic perioperative antibiotic prophylaxis is not well established. To determine the efficacy of topical antibiotic prophylaxis alone in preventing postoperative wound infection in a minor urologic clean procedure, we retrospectively reviewed the medical records of 1,654 patients who had undergone microsurgical varicocelectomy. STUDY DESIGN: From September 1985 until December 2000, 1,654 men underwent 2,554 microsurgical varicocelectomies (900 bilateral) by a single surgeon (MG). The skin was shaved and then prepped with standard Betadine gel (Purdue Frederick) that was wiped away with 70% ethanol. No systemic antibiotics were used. The wound was irrigated with 1% neomycin at the moment the incision was made, and then every few minutes until the completion of the procedure, which averaged 45 minutes per side. No postoperative antibiotics were used. RESULTS: No wound infections occurred. No patient developed an adverse reaction to topical application of neomycin. One can conclude that the infection rate in this study is no higher than 0.2% with 95% confidence. CONCLUSIONS: Our review of a large series of consecutive clean urologic procedures indicates that by combining a skin preparation of Betadine gel and 70% ethanol with perioperative topical neomycin irrigation at the moment of skin incision, the risk of postoperative wound infection when performing microsurgical varicocelectomy can be effectively reduced to less than 0.2%.     

Universal perioperative antimicrobial prophylaxis is not necessary in kidney transplantation

Despite significant improvements in renal transplantation, certain basic issues remain unresolved such as the routine use of perioperative antimicrobial prophylaxis (AMP). To address the need for AMP, we retrospectively evaluated the clinical course of 442 consecutive renal transplant recipients (RTRs) who did not receive any AMP except for trimethoprim/sulfamethoxazole. Three hundred and forty RTRs received induction therapy with low-dose rabbit anti-thymocyte globulin, while the other 102 patients were treated with basiliximab. All RTRs received tacrolimus, mycophenolic acid, and prednisone. Nine patients (2%) developed surgical site infection (SSI). SSIs were more common in obese and older patients. All SSIs were superficial and responded well to wound drainage and outpatient antibiotic therapy. No patient or graft was lost owing to SSI. Our study shows that despite many predisposing factors, SSIs are rare following renal transplantation even in the absence of AMP. Therefore, to avoid the emergence of antibiotic-resistant pathogens, excessive costs, and antibiotic-related adverse events, we suggest that AMP should be used only in selected circumstances such as in recipients older than 65 yr or when the body mass index (BMI) is > 35.     

Evolution of antimicrobial prophylaxis in cardiovascular surgery.

OBJECTIVE: To examine the optimal duration of antibiotic prophylaxis in major cardiovascular surgery. MTHODSs: In the past 15 years, four prospective randomized, controlled studies, conducted by the same group of authors, compared seven prophylactic antimicrobial regimens in 2970 patients undergoing major cardiovascular surgery. In 1980/81, a 4-day cefazolin (CFZ) prophylaxis was compared with a 2-day cefuroxime (CFX) administration (n=566). In 1982/83, a 2-day CFX prophylaxis was compared with a two shot ceftriaxone (CRO) prophylaxis (n=512). In 1984/87, a 1-day CFZ prophylaxis was compared with a single shot prophylaxis of CRO (n=883). In 1994/1995, a 4 day combination of amoxicillin (AM) and netilmicin (NET) prophylaxis was compared with a single shot prophylaxis of CFX (n=1009). RESULTS: Total infection rate varied between 4.5 and 5.7%, despite different antimicrobial regimen used and their varying duration. Wound infection rate was 1.1% (range 0.4-2.5%), sepsis rate was 0.8% (range 0.4-1.6%), pneumonia rate 2% (0.7-2.9%), urinary tract infection rate 0.4% (range 0-1.4%), and central venous catheter-related infection rate was 0.4% (0-1%). The 30-day mortality rate was 1.3% (range 0.4-2%). All these differences were not statistically significant. CONCLUSIONS: A low infection rate (range 4.5-5.7%) occurred despite changes in duration of various prophylactic antibiotic regimen with cephalosporins of first, second or third generation. As a single shot prophylaxis could nowadays successfully be used in cardiovascular surgery, no postoperative antibiotics should be used, unless an intraoperative or a postoperative infection is documented or in presence of major perioperative complications.     

Antibiotic prophylaxis for prostatic surgery. Single-dose cephradine compared with single-dose cefotaxime

Several previous studies have attested to the value of antibiotic prophylaxis for prostatic surgery. We report a prospective randomised study which compared a single dose of cefotaxime with a single dose of cephradine given with the induction of anaesthesia. There was little difference between these regimens and it was concluded that either may be used, depending on availability and cost of the antibiotic. We have now completed a 5-year study of antibiotic prophylaxis for prostatic surgery and we also report the results of a long-term survey of the ward flora. There has been no significant change and there is no evidence for the emergence of resistant strains.