Surgical site infections (SSIs) lead to adverse outcomes, including prolonged hospitalization and death. It is estimated that each patient with SSI requires at least six more days of hospitalization, thus doubling the cost of hospital care. Approximately 40–60% of SSIs are preventable with the appropriate use of prophylactic antimicrobials. The rate of SSI ranges from 0.5% to 10.1%, depending on the type of surgical procedure. Surgical site infections are responsible for 3% of mortality, and 75% of SSI-related deaths are due directly to SSIs. In this way, SSI appears to be a financial burden on health systems. In the last 20 years, the ERAS program has entered colorectal cancer surgery and, in recent years, gynecological surgery. Some ERAS protocol elements are directly aimed at surgical incisional infections—antimicrobial prophylaxis, skin preparation, avoidance of hypothermia, avoidance of surgical drainage, and reduction of perioperative hyperglycemia. All of them result in a faster recovery as well as improved health and economic outcomes.
Horan TC, Gaynes RP, Martone WJ, et al. CDC definitions of nosocomial surgical site infections, 1992: a modification of CDC definitions of surgical wound infections. Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol1992;13:606–8.doi:10.1017/S0195941700015241 CrossRefPubMedWeb of ScienceGoogle Scholar
de Lissovoy G, Fraeman K, Hutchins V, et al. Surgical site infection: incidence and impact on hospital utilization and treatment costs. Am J Infect Control2009;37:387–97.doi:10.1016/j.ajic.2008.12.010 CrossRefPubMedWeb of ScienceGoogle Scholar
Nugent EK, Hoff JT, Gao F, et al. Wound complications after gynecologic cancer surgery. Gynecol Oncol2011;121:347–52.doi:10.1016/j.ygyno.2011.01.026 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
Taylor JS, Marten CA, Munsell MF, et al. The DISINFECT Initiative: decreasing the incidence of surgical infections in gynecologic oncology. Ann Surg Oncol2017;24:362–8.doi:10.1245/s10434-016-5517-4 Google Scholar
Tran CW, McGree ME, Weaver AL, et al. Surgical site infection after primary surgery for epithelial ovarian cancer: predictors and impact on survival. Gynecol Oncol2015;136:278–84.doi:10.1016/j.ygyno.2014.12.007 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
Bakkum-Gamez JN, Dowdy SC, Borah BJ, et al. Predictors and costs of surgical site infections in patients with endometrial cancer. Gynecol Oncol2013;130:100–6.doi:10.1016/j.ygyno.2013.03.022 Google Scholar
Novetsky AP, Zighelboim I, Guntupalli SR, et al. A phase II trial of a surgical protocol to decrease the incidence of wound complications in obese gynecologic oncology patients. Gynecol Oncol2014;134:233–7.doi:10.1016/j.ygyno.2014.06.012 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
Lavallée JF, Gray TA, Dumville J, et al. The effects of care bundles on patient outcomes: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Implement Sci2017;12.doi:10.1186/s13012-017-0670-0 Google Scholar
Zywot A, Lau CSM, Stephen Fletcher H, et al. Bundles prevent surgical site infections after colorectal surgery: meta-analysis and systematic review. J Gastrointest Surg2017;21:1915–30.doi:10.1007/s11605-017-3465-3 Google Scholar
Schiavone MB, Moukarzel L, Leong K, et al. Surgical site infection reduction bundle in patients with gynecologic cancer undergoing colon surgery. Gynecol Oncol2017;147:115–9.doi:10.1016/j.ygyno.2017.07.010 Google Scholar
Waits SA, Fritze D, Banerjee M, et al. Developing an argument for bundled interventions to reduce surgical site infection in colorectal surgery. Surgery2014;155:602–6.doi:10.1016/j.surg.2013.12.004 Google Scholar
ACOG practice Bulletin No. 195: prevention of infection after gynecologic procedures. Obstet Gynecol2018;131:e172–
Bratzler DW, Dellinger EP, Olsen KM, et al. Clinical practice guidelines for antimicrobial prophylaxis in surgery. Surg Infect2013;14:73–156.doi:10.1089/sur.2013.9999 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Alexander JW, Solomkin JS, Edwards MJ. Updated recommendations for control of surgical site infections. Ann Surg2011;253:1082–93.doi:10.1097/SLA.0b013e31821175f8 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
Berríos-Torres SI, Umscheid CA, Bratzler DW, et al. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention guideline for the prevention of surgical site infection, 2017. JAMA Surg2017;152:784–91.doi:10.1001/jamasurg.2017.0904 Google Scholar
Wong PF, Kumar S, Bohra A, et al. Randomized clinical trial of perioperative systemic warming in major elective abdominal surgery. Br J Surg2007;94:421–6.doi:10.1002/bjs.5631 CrossRefPubMedWeb of ScienceGoogle Scholar
Dower R, Turner ML. Pilot study of timing of biofilm formation on closed suction wound drains. Plast Reconstr Surg2012;130:1141–6.doi:10.1097/PRS.0b013e318267d54e Google Scholar
Cheatham ML, Chapman WC, Key SP, et al. A meta-analysis of selective versus routine nasogastric decompression after elective laparotomy. Ann Surg1995;221:469–78.doi:10.1097/00000658-199505000-00004 CrossRefPubMedWeb of ScienceGoogle Scholar
Nelson R, Edwards S, Tse B. Prophylactic nasogastric decompression after abdominal surgery. Cochrane Database Syst Rev2007;8:CD004929.doi:10.1002/14651858.CD004929.pub3 Google Scholar
Scribner DR, Mannel RS, Walker JL, et al. Cost analysis of laparoscopy versus laparotomy for early endometrial cancer. Gynecol Oncol1999;75:460–3.doi:10.1006/gyno.1999.5606 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
Hopkins L, Brown-Broderick J, Hearn J, et al. Implementation of a referral to discharge glycemic control initiative for reduction of surgical site infections in gynecologic oncology patients. Gynecol Oncol2017;146:228–33.doi:10.1016/j.ygyno.2017.05.021 Google Scholar
Gustafsson, Thorell, Soop, et. Haemoglobin A1c as a predictor of postoperative hyperglycaemia and complications after major colorectal surgery. Br J Surg2009;96:1358–64.doi:10.1002/bjs.6724 CrossRefPubMedWeb of ScienceGoogle Scholar
Steiner, Strand. Surgical-site infection in gynecologic surgery: pathophysiology and prevention. Am J Obstet Gynecol2017;217:121–8.doi:10.1016/j.ajog.2017.02.014 Google Scholar
Mahdi, Goodrich, Lockhart, et. Predictors of surgical site infection in women undergoing hysterectomy for benign gynecologic disease: a multicenter analysis using the National surgical quality improvement program data. J Minim Invasive Gynecol2014;21:901–9.doi:10.1016/j.jmig.2014.04.003 Google Scholar
Martin, Kaye, Knott, et. Diabetes and risk of surgical site infection: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol2016;37:88–99.doi:10.1017/ice.2015.249 PubMedGoogle Scholar
Al-Niaimi, Ahmed M, Burish N, et al. Intensive postoperative glucose control reduces the surgical site infection rates in gynecologic oncology patients. Gynecol Oncol2015;136:71–6.doi:10.1016/j.ygyno.2014.09.013 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
Van den Berghe G, Wouters P, Weekers F, et al. Intensive insulin therapy in critically ill patients. N Engl J Med Overseas Ed2001;345:1359–67.doi:10.1056/NEJMoa011300 Google Scholar
van den Boom W, Schroeder RA, Manning MW, et al. Effect of A1C and glucose on postoperative mortality in noncardiac and cardiac surgeries. Diabetes Care2018;41:782–8.doi:10.2337/dc17-2232 Abstract/FREE Full TextGoogle Scholar
Gustafsson UO, Scott MJ, Hubner M, et al. Guidelines for perioperative care in elective colorectal surgery: Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS®) society recommendations: 2018. World J Surg2019;43:659–95.doi:10.1007/s00268-018-4844-y Google Scholar
