Initial Outcomes of a Novel Irrigating Wound Protector for Reducing the Risk of Surgical Site Infection in Elective Colectomies
Introduction
Surgical site infection (SSI) remains a persistent and morbid problem affecting colorectal patients at a high rate of 7%-25%.1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6 The negative outcomes of an SSI include a significant increase in morbidity, length of hospital stay, readmissions, and healthcare-associated cost as well as an overall decrease in patient satisfaction.7, 8, 9, 10 Thus, strategies to reduce the incidence of SSI following colorectal surgery are important for improving outcomes and reducing healthcare costs in the surgical patient. Numerous and varied evidence-based strategies have been implemented with variable degrees of successfully reducing SSI rates.11, 12, 13, 14
The mechanisms underlying SSI development represent a multifactorial process; however, the degree of intraoperative bacterial contamination in the surgical wound is arguably the most fundamental contributor to SSI pathogenesis.15 As strategies to decrease the effects of contamination have evolved, a number of techniques and technologies including the use of barrier wound protectors, intraperitoneal lavage, and end-of-case wound irrigation have each been shown to independently contribute to improvements in SSI rates, albeit to varying degrees.13,16,17
In an attempt to synthesize and standardize these anti-contamination strategies, a novel wound retractor device (CleanCision – Prescient Surgical, San Carlos, CA) that combines barrier protection and integrated antibiotic irrigation has recently been developed. Previous studies with this irrigating wound protector (IWP) have demonstrated significant reductions in microbial inoculation at the surgical wound site by 66% at the time of surgical site closure in addition to suppression of microbial growth for up to 4 hours postoperatively in both human and large animal studies, respectively.12,18 Another study demonstrated a 61% relative risk reduction in SSI when comparing similar cases to generalized NSQIP data.19 However, the cost of the new IWP at our institution is nearly 9 times more expensive than a more conventional wound protector (Alexis – Applied Medical, Rancho Santa Margarita, CA) that has also demonstrated significant SSI reductions.20,21 At our institution, both the IWP and the conventional barrier wound protector have been available for use by our colorectal surgeons since 2015. However, no prior studies have attempted to directly compare SSI outcomes of the new IWP with the conventional wound protector in the clinical setting. We aimed to compare 30-day SSI rates, hospital length of stay, and cost utilization for both retractors in the setting of elective colorectal resections.
Section snippets
Methods
A single-center retrospective cohort-matched study was performed in patients undergoing colorectal resection between April 2015 and July 2019 at the flagship tertiary care hospital for the Baylor Scott & White Health – Central Texas region located in Temple, TX. All patients undergoing elective colorectal resection with intraoperative use of the CleanCision (Prescient Surgical, San Carlos, CA) IWP device (Fig. 1) were included in the study. The study was approved by the Baylor Scott & White
Results
A total of 41 patients were identified for the IWP group. A total of 1164 potential control patients were identified as having an elective colorectal resection with a primary CPT code that matched one within the IWP group. Per the 2:1 matching algorithm, 82 patients were identified in the matched control group. Both groups had similar preoperative patient profiles (Table 1) and procedural characteristics (Table 2), including age, sex, BMI, preoperative comorbidities, surgical indication, type
Discussion
SSI remains a vexing problem in colorectal surgery, likely due to its multifactorial pathogenesis involving both patient predisposition as well as perioperative risk factors. Much effort has been undertaken to develop consistent strategies to reduce the modifiable procedural and postoperative risk factors for SSI during colorectal procedures, including the concept of “bundling” a set of evidence-supported processes in to enhanced recovery pathways – such as the use of separate sterile closure
Conclusions
The new IWP technology shows preliminary promise at reducing the SSI rate and potential cost in elective colorectal surgery. Further large-scale prospective studies should provide more conclusive evidence on its effect on SSI risk reduction in colorectal surgery.
Authorship
All authors attest that they meet the current ICMJE criteria for authorship. Specific contributions are listed here:
Study design: Adil Malek, Harry Papaconstantinou, Scott Thomas.
Data acquisition: Adil Malek, Scott Thomas.
Analysis and data interpretation: Adil Malek.
Critical revision: all authors.
Acknowledgments
The authors would like to thank Lauren Sager at the Baylor Scott & White Health Research Institute for their support with study design and statistical analysis.
Conflict of interest
All authors have nothing to disclose. This research did not receive any specific grant from funding agencies in the public, commercial, or not-for-profit sectors.
References (30)
- et al.
Grinbaum RS surgical site infection in patients submitted to digestive surgery: risk prediction and the NNIS risk index
Am J Infect Control
(2006) - et al.
Surgical site infection: incidence and impact on hospital utilization and treatment costs
Am J Infect Control
(2009) - et al.
Post-discharge surveillance to identify colorectal surgical site infection rates and related costs
J Hosp Infect
(2009) - et al.
Papaconstantinou HT surgical care improvement project and surgical site infections: can integration in the surgical safety checklist improve quality performance and clinical outcomes?
J Surg Res
(2013) - et al.
Effect of peritoneal lavage with clindamycin-gentamicin solution on infections after elective colorectal cancer surgery
J Am Coll SurgLapar
(2012) - et al.(2020)
- et al.
Bundles prevent surgical site infections after colorectal surgery: meta-analysis and systematic review
J Gastrointest Surg
(2017) - et al.
Systematic review of laparoscopic vs open surgery for colorectal cancer in elderly patients
World J Gastrointest Oncol
(2016) - et al.
Elective colon and rectal surgery differ in risk factors for wound infection: results of prospective surveillance
Ann of surg
(2006) - et al.
Surgical site infection in elective operations for colorectal cancer after the application of preventive measures
Arch Surg
(2011)
Wound infection after elective colorectal resection
Ann surg
Heard SO surgical site infection following bowel surgery: a retrospective analysis of 1446 patients
Arch Surg
Impact of surgical site infections on length of stay and costs in selected colorectal procedures
Surg Infect (Larchmt)
The preventive surgical site infection bundle in colorectal surgery: an effective approach to surgical site infection reduction and health care cost savings
JAMA Surg
Cited by (4)
Novel Strategies to Prevent Surgical Site Infections
2023, AORN JournalNovel antibiotic irrigation device versus standard O-ring wound retractor in the prevention of surgical site infection following colorectal resection
2023, International Journal of Colorectal DiseaseEffect of wound irrigation on the prevention of surgical site infections: A meta-analysis
2022, International Wound Journal