• Users Online: 61
  • Print this page
  • Email this page


 
 
Table of Contents
ORIGINAL ARTICLE
Year : 2019  |  Volume : 2  |  Issue : 3  |  Page : 63-70

Surgical site infection in colorectal surgery


Department of Colorectal Surgery, SKIMS, Srinagar, Jammu and Kashmir, India

Date of Web Publication22-Sep-2020

Correspondence Address:
Dr. Arshad Ahmed Baba
Department of Colorectal Surgery, SKIMS, Srinagar, Jammu and Kashmir
India
Login to access the Email id

Source of Support: None, Conflict of Interest: None


DOI: 10.4103/IJCS.IJCS_12_18

Rights and Permissions
  Abstract 

SSI is a common complication following colorectal surgeries. We present data on the incidence of the same and the factors attributed for its causation at our centre which is a tertiary care centre and a high volume centre for colorectal surgeries. Of the total 538 patients, 316 (58.7%) were males while 222 (41.3%) were females. Mean age of the patients was 47.36±15.57 years, with a minimum age of 18 years and a maximum of 85 years. Elective procedures contributed for 84.01% (452) while 15.98% (86) cases were performed as emergency procedures. Of the total 538 patients 452 patients were electively operated, of which 67 (14.8%) developed SSIs. In emergency procedures 86 patient were operated, of which 31 (36.0%) developed SSI. In our study, total SSI was observed in 67 cases, of which superficial SSI were 46 (68.65%), and deep SSI cases, were11 (16.4%), and organ space SSI cases were 10 (14.9%).

Keywords: Colorectal surgery, complications in colorectal, surgical site infections


How to cite this article:
Baba AA, Wani AA, Mehraj A, Chowdri NA, Parray FQ, Wani RA, Khan MA. Surgical site infection in colorectal surgery. Indian J Colo-Rectal Surg 2019;2:63-70

How to cite this URL:
Baba AA, Wani AA, Mehraj A, Chowdri NA, Parray FQ, Wani RA, Khan MA. Surgical site infection in colorectal surgery. Indian J Colo-Rectal Surg [serial online] 2019 [cited 2022 Aug 13];2:63-70. Available from: https://www.ijcrsonweb.org/text.asp?2019/2/3/63/295851


  Background Top


Surgical site infections (SSIs) have been recognized as the third most common healthcare-associated infections (HAI).[1],[2] Hospital acquired infections are not only an important cause of morbidity and mortality but also cause severe economic impact throughout the world.[1]

Colon and rectal surgery (CRS) is consistently associated with higher SSI rates relative to other surgery. CRS SSI rates range from 4% to 45%.[3],[4],[5] Nearly, all the same risk factors that correlate with any type of SSI are similarly identified in CRS. Frequently identified predictive factors for CRS SSIs are obesity, diabetes, type of procedure, technique (e.g., open vs. laparoscopic) longer operative time, and emergency operations.[4],[6],[7]

The CDC describes three types of SSIs:[8]

  • Superficial incisional SSI – This infection occurs just in the area of the skin where the incision was made
  • Deep incisional SSI – This infection occurs beneath the incision area in muscle and the tissues surrounding the muscles
  • Organ or space SSI – This type of infection can be in any area of the body other than skin, muscle, and surrounding tissue that was involved in the surgery. This includes a body organ or a space between organs.


To prevent SSI various techniques starting from considering the aspect of health-care provider, environment of the operating room to the preoperative preparation for the patient, can be performed. The lower rates of SSI in developed countries compared to the developing countries indicate better implementation of infection control practices along with availability of proper surveillance system. The use of antimicrobial prophylaxis might lead to variations in incidence of SSI.


  Methods Top


The main objective of the study was to evaluate the colorectal SSI outcomes at a tertiary care center and high volume center for colorectal surgery.

The objectives may be summarized as follows:

  1. To determine the frequency of SSIs in colorectal surgeries
  2. To compare incidence of SSI in elective and emergency colorectal surgeries
  3. To identify the associated risk factors
  4. To suggest preventive measures (if any) for the prevention of SSI in colorectal surgeries.


Type of study

This was prospective study.

Place of study

The study was conducted in the Department of General and Minimal Invasive Surgery, Colorectal Division, Sheri-i-Kashmir Institute of Medical Science (SKIMS), Srinagar.

Period of study

The study includes all the patients presented to general surgery department with any type of colorectal surgery from July 1, 2013 to June 31, 2015.

Sample size

The sample size was 538 cases.

Inclusion criteria

Study includes all surgical inpatients, undergoing emergency, and elective colorectal surgery (following the ACS NSQIPs defined CPT codes).

Exclusion criteria

Patients with trauma and transplant patients and patients under 18 were excluded from the study.

Study procedure and data collection

During the study, data were collected on a predesigned pro forma for all the patients. The patients were monitored daily for any signs of infection.

Infected cases were identified using CDC, USA definition for SSI. After discharge, patients were followed up at weekly interval to check for any sign of infection. The patients were followed for 30 days to look for SSI. If there were no signs of infection within 30 days of operation, the patient was regarded as having no SSI. The patient who was not able to visit every week was contacted on phone to inquire about their wound condition.

Data analysis

Statistical software SPSS (IBM version 20.0) and Microsoft Excel were used to carry out the statistical analysis of data. Data were analyzed by means of descriptive statistics namely, means, standard deviations, and percentages and presented by Bar Diagrams. For parametric data, Student's independent t-test was employed. Chi-square test or Fisher's exact test, whichever appropriate, was used for nonparametric data. A P < 0.05 was considered statistically significant.

The patient consent was not required in our study as it did not involve any intervention on them or revealing their personal identity in any form.


  Results Top


This study was conducted in the Department of General and Minimal Invasive Surgery, Colorectal Division, SKIMS, Srinagar. The study includes 538 patients who presented to the said department with any type of colorectal surgery from July 1, 2013 to June 31, 2015, and this was a prospective study. Patients from the age groups of above 18 years were included in the study. The following observations were made.

Of the total 538 patients, 316 (58.7%) were male while 222 (41.3%) were female. The mean age of the patients was 47.36 ± 15.57 years, with a minimum age of 18 years and a maximum of 85 years.

Elective procedures contributed for 84.01% (452) whereas 15.98% (86) cases were performed as emergency procedures. Of the total 538 patients, 452 patients were electively operated, of which 67 (14.8%) developed SSIs. In emergency procedures, 86 patients were operated, of which 31 (36.0%) developed SSI.

In our study, the total SSI was observed in 67 cases, of which superficial SSI was 46 (68.65%), and deep SSI cases were 11 (16.4%), and organ space SSI cases were 10 (14.9%) [Figure 1].
Figure 1: Classification of surgical site infections

Click here to view


The rate of SSI was correlated with various variables and risk factors and compared between elective and emergency procedures. There was no effect of gender on the rate of SSI either in elective or emergency settings. Body mass index >25 was strongly associated with increased SSI rates. History of smoking, hemoglobin (Hb) levels <11, and albumin levels <3.0 were again associated with increased incidence of SSI. Patients receiving perioperative blood transfusion were more prone to develop SSI in both elective and emergency settings. The type of surgical wound had a significant impact on the rate of SSI, with class 3 and 4 wounds having more predilections for SSI as compared to class 1 and 2 wounds. The rectal surgeries as compared to rest of the colonic surgeries showed increased incidence of SSI. The American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) score of 3 and 4 was a significant factor for determining greater incidence in SSI as compared to ASA Grade 1 and 2. Operative time was again an important determinant on the rate of SSI, with surgeries lasting for >2 h showing higher incidence of SSI as compared to surgeries lasting for <2 h [Table 1].
Table 1: Comparision of different variables in elective and emergency setting

Click here to view


Of the 375 open cases, 67 developed SSI (14.8%). Eighty-five cases were operated laparoscopically, of which 7 (8.9%) cases developed SSI, that was statistically significant with P = 0.001. Decrease in SSI was seen in laparoscopy when compare to the open cases [Table 2].
Table 2: Open versus laparoscopy (elective surgeries; n=452)

Click here to view


The rate of SSI in the cardiovascular disease cases was found to be 32.8% in elective and 48.4% in emergency surgeries as compared to the cases without cardiovascular disease, whereas as in diabetic cases, it was 31.3% in elective and 35.5% in emergency surgeries. Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) cases showed SSI rate of 10.1% in elective and 3.3% in emergency surgeries. The SSI rate among the cases with hypothyroidism was 25.4% in elective and 6.5% in emergency surgeries [Table 3].
Table 3: Comorbidities

Click here to view


In elective surgeries, among 67 cases of SSI, 56 cases were culture positive, whereas in emergency surgeries among 31 cases of SSI, 28 cases were culture positive. The growth pattern of microorganisms is presented in [Table 4].
Table 4: Microbiome of operated patients

Click here to view



  Discussion Top


SSIs are one of the most common forms of nosocomial infections that can complicate the surgical procedure. Postoperative wound infection still remains one of the most important causes of morbidity and is the most common nosocomial infection in surgically treated patients. Surveillance for SSI is an essential part in control and prevention of SSI.

The rate of SSI varies greatly worldwide and from hospital to hospital. The rate of SSI after elective colorectal surgery range from 4% to 45%.[3],[4],[5],[9] The overall incidence of SSI in the present study was 18.2%.

Of the total 538 patients, 452 patients were electively operated, of which 67 (14.8%) developed SSIs as compared with various other studies, in which SSI varies from 15% to 21%.[10],[11],[12] In emergency procedures, 86 patients were operated, of which 31 (36.0%) developed SSI. Emergency surgical procedures carry a more risk for SSI as compared to elective procedures, varying from 30% to 60%.[13],[14],[15]

Infection rate was 13.9% in clean-contaminated wounds and 38% in contaminated wounds. Thus, there was clear correlation between the wound infection rate and the contamination of the wound which is in accordance with other studies.[11],[16]

Risk factors for superficial SSI and deep/organ-space SSI vary in terms of magnitude and significance, suggesting that these SSI types are somewhat different disease processes. In our study, total SSI was seen in 67 cases, of which superficial SSIs developed in 46 (68.65%) cases, deep SSI developed in 11 (16.4%) and organ-space SSI developed in 10 (14.9%) cases. There was no significant differences between these three groups in relation with the infection site.

The rate of SSI increases with the increase in age. In the current study, a higher proportion of SSI was found among the subjects with mean age 50.4 ± 16.16 years with P = 0.023, and in terms of mean age, our study was comparable to other studies.[17],[18],[19]

Smith et al. prospectively assessed the wound infection rate in 176 patients following colorectal resection. Using a multivariate logistic regression analysis, BMI ≥25 was found to be associated with increased rates of SSIs compared to those with a BMI of <25, overweight patients (BMI 25–29.9) had an odds ratio (OR) of 2.5 while obese patients (BMI >30) had an OR of 3.0 of developing a SSI.[20] A similar result was seen in a multicenter prospective trial of 534 patients undergoing colorectal surgery. Data were collected on 16 variables which may contribute to SSIs and following a multivariate regression analysis obesity remained predictive of SSI with an OR of 2.93.[21] In our study, SSI was noted more in patients who were overweight or obese (BMI ≥25) than in patients who were having BMI in normal range (BMI <25).

Comorbid conditions such as diabetes, COPD, cardiovascular disease, and hypothyroidism were the significant risk factors for SSI. Diabetes remained a significant predictor of SSI. 31.3% of SSI following colorectal resections were seen in patients with diabetes, (P < 0.001). This result was in concordance with the results of McConnel et al. 2008 who reported 29.7% of SSI following colorectal surgery in patients with diabetes.[22] In our study, comorbid conditions such as cardiovascular disease 22 (10.4%) and COPD 7 (10.4%) have independently increased the risk of SSI in elective colorectal surgery as compared to patients which were having no SSI and these both results were statistically significant with P value of 0.022 and 0.021, respectively. Other studies were also supporting our results such as those of Sergeant et al. 2013.[23] The association of hypothyroidism with SSI was statistically insignificant in our study (P = 0.152).

In our study, SSI was also more prevalent in patients having hypoalbuminemia <3.0 g/dl and low Hb <11 g/dl. There is a high incidence of preoperative and postoperative anemia in patients undergoing major noncardiac surgery, with a coincident increase in blood utilization. Preoperative anemia is associated with increased postoperative complications and mortality.[24] Hypoalbuminemia is an independent risk factor for the development of SSI following gastrointestinal surgery and is associated with deeper SSI and prolonged inpatient stay.[25] The only risk factor shared by all three site-specific SSIs was intra- or post-operative blood transfusion. In fact, in our study, this risk factor was also the most important factor for the development of SSI. Allogeneic blood transfusion induces immunosuppression and predisposes to postoperative infection.[26],[27],[28] An increased incidence of postoperative infection was observed in recipients of allogeneic transfusions in observational studies.[25],[26],[29],[30],[31] Allogeneic leukocytes have a critical role in the induction of transfusion-induced immunosuppression.[26],[32]

Of 352 patients, who received mechanical bowel preparation, 55 (15.62%) patients had SSI. Of 100 patients, who received no bowel preparation, 12 (12%) had SSI. The difference was not statistically significant (P = 0.368).

A meta-analysis in which 9 randomized controlled trials (RCTs) was analyzed to evaluate for primary outcome of anastomotic leakage and secondary outcomes of mortality and wound infection. In total, 791 patients received Mechanical Bowel Prepration and 803 had no preparation. There were 6.2% of the patients having MBP who had anastomotic leak, compared to 3.2% of the unprepared patients (OR 2.03, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.28–3.26), favoring no preparation. SSI was observed in 7.4% of the prepared patients and 5.4% of the unprepared patients (OR 1.45, 95% CI 0.97–2.18).[33] Another meta-analysis included 14 RCTs with 2452 patients in the MBP group and 2407 in the unprepared group. There was no statistically significant difference observed in the analysis of the primary outcome, anastomotic leakage (4.02% in the MBP group vs. 3.44% in the unprepared group, OR 1.12, 95% CI 0.82–1.53). However, the analysis of secondary outcomes demonstrated a difference in “all SSI” favouring no MBP (15.7% after MBP vs. 14.58% unprepared, OR 1.4, 95% CI 1.05–1.87).[34] Another analysis was an updated version of an earlier Cochrane review, performed by Guenga and colleagues included analysis of 13 RCTs, with 2390 patients allocated to MBP and 2387 to no preparation. The primary outcome measured was anastomotic leakage; secondary measures included wound infection and overall SSIs. Overall anastomotic leakage was 4.2% in the MBP group versus 3.4% in the unprepared group (OR 1.26, 95% CI 0.941–1.69). There was no difference in the rate of wound infection (9.6% in the MBP group vs. 8.3% in the unprepared group, OR 1.19, 95% CI 0.98–1.45).[35],[36]

Smoking is an independent risk factor for SSI.[37] In our study, of 452 patients of elective colorectal surgery group 196 patients were smokers, of which 37 patients developed SSI. In nonsmokers group which were a total of 256 patients of which 30 developed SSI which is statistically significant with P = 0.034.

In our study, among 439 patients with the ASA score of ≤2, 62 (14.1%) patients had SSI. Of 13 patients with ASA >2, 5 (38.5%) patients had SSI. As the ASA score increases, risk of SSI also increases. The difference is statistically significant (P = 0.015). McConnel et al.[22] reported that patients with ASA score >2 have a higher risk of SSI. Hübner et al.[17] reported in their study that 27/247 (10.9%) patients with ASA score 1 had SSI, 227/1294 (17.5%) patients with ASA score of 2 had SSI, 147/707 (20.8%) patients with ASA score of 3 had SSI, 27/137 (19.7%) patients with ASA score of 4 had SSI and 0/8 (0%) patient with ASA score of 5 had SSI.

In our study, with increasing operating time SSI rate also increased. Patients with a mean operating time of 2.49 ± 1.27 had more SSI than patients with mean operating time 2.15 ± 1.25. The present data indicated that the operating time of >3 h is risk factor for SSI. Increasing the length of procedure theoretically increases the susceptibility of the wound by increasing bacterial exposure and the extent of tissue trauma (more extensive surgical procedure) and decreasing the tissue level of the antibiotic.[38] Perioperative prophylactic abtibiotic reduces the wound sepsis rate when combined with oral antibiotics and mechanical bowel preparation in patients undergoing resection of colon and rectum.[39] This finding supports the notion that the administration of an additional dose of antibiotic in lengthy procedures (e.g., ≥3 h) might be effective in reducing the overall SSI rate. The difference was statistically significant with a P = 0.002. It was also consistent with findings of Hagihara et al and Kaiser et al. who showed that longer operative time (3.3 ± 1.6 vs. 2.7 ± 1.2; P < 0.05) more likely caused SSI than less operating time.[12],[40]

In the clinical practice, the left colon resections are considered to be more frequently associated with urgent setting and contaminated intra-abdominal conditions compared to right colon surgery. Furthermore, in the left colon resections and in rectal resections, it is expected to have a greater bacterial contamination because of the increasing bacterial density from ileocecal valve to the anal verge.[41] In our study, the SSI rate in elective colorectal resection was 14.8% while SSI rate in colon and rectal surgeries was 9.23% and 17.08%, respectively; this was statistically significant with P = 0.034. Rectal surgery differs from colon surgery due to greater bacterial contamination, more frequent need for ostomies, longer operations, and possible neoadjuvant treatments in oncological patients.[5],[42]

In our study, a total of 367 open cases, 60 developed SSI (16.3%) and 85 cases were operated laparoscopically, of which 7 (8.2%) cases developed SSI (P = 0.001). A meta-analysis including several larger RCTs (COlon Carcinoma Laparoscopic or Open Resection and conventional vs. laparoscopic-assisted surgery in colorectal cancer trials) found a decreased rate of wound complications (infection and dehiscence) in favor of the laparoscopic group when compared with the open group (4.7% vs. 7.3%, P = 0.01).[43]

Therefore, it can be concluded that laparoscopic surgery does not increase the risk of SSI and may well reduce the risk. So, when considering measures to reduce SSI, laparoscopic procedures should be attempted when possible to minimize SSI.

During the study, a total of 86 patients who underwent emergency colorectal resections were enrolled in the study. SSI developed in 31 (36.04%) patients, the high rates of infection in emergency surgeries can be attributed to inadequate preoperative preparation, the underlying condition which predisposed to emergency surgery and more frequency of contaminated or dirty wounds. Different studies from different places have shown SSI rate to vary from 4% to 45%.[4],[5],[13],[44]

Among 67 cases of SSI, of which 56 cases were culture positive. The bacteria isolated were Staphylococcus aureus 25/56 (44.78%),  Escherichia More Details coli 15/56 (26.78%), Enterococcus faecalis 08/56 (14.28%), Klebsiella 3/56 (5.35%), Pseudomonas 3/56 (5.35%), and coagulase-negative staphylococci 2 (3.57%). This is comparable to study conducted by Sexana et al.[23] In his study, isolated causative organism from different cultures were S. aureus (14/37, 37.83%), E. coli (9/37, 24.32%), Klebsiella sp. (4/37, 10.81%), coagulase-negative staphylococci (4/37, 10.81%), Pseudomonas aeruginosa (2/37, 5.40%), Proteus mirabilis (1/37, 2.7%), and others (3/37, 8.10%).

Among 31 cases of SSI, of which 28 (90.32%) cases were culture positive. The bacteria isolated in cultures obtained from surgical sites in emergency colorectal surgeries were S. aureus 11/28 (39.28%), E. faecalis 7/28 (25%), E. coli 6/28 (21.42%), Klebsiella pneumonia 2/28 (7.14%), Pseudomonas 1/28 (3.75%), and Acinetobacter baumannii 1/28 (3.75%). Some SSIs were associated with multiple organisms. This is comparable to study conducted by Degrate et al. where majority of SSIs (n = 37, 92.5% among all SSIs) were detected before hospital discharge. Pathogens identified from the cultures were coliforms, Staphylococci, anaerobes, and Pseudomonas, without a significant difference between the three groups. Multi-resistant bacteria such as MRSA, extended spectrum beta-lactamases-producing E. coli and Enterococcus faecium were identified in 11%, 12%, and 22% of the cultures, respectively.[16]


  Conclusion Top


From our work, we concluded that:

  1. SSI continues to be a major event following colorectal surgery in both emergency and elective settings, with an overall incidence of SSI being 18.2%, with 12.4% and 36.0% incidence after elective and emergency procedures, respectively
  2. The incidence of SSI increases with the age of patients
  3. Most of the cases of SSI are of the superficial type followed by deep and organ-space SSI
  4. Smoking, obesity, diabetes, cardiovascular diseases, COPD, hypoalbuminemia, anemia, perioperative blood transfusions, chemoradiation, longer operative time, and higher ASA scores, are all associated with higher incidence of SSI in colorectal surgeries
  5. The mechanical bowel preparation does not prevent the incidence of SSI in colorectal surgeries
  6. The administration of an additional dose of antibiotic in lengthy procedures (e.g., ≥3 h) was effective in reducing the overall SSI rate
  7. Laparoscopy is associated with decreased rate of SSI when compared with the open procedures
  8. We recommend proper preoperative optimization of patients with various comorbidities to prevent SSI
  9. Blood sugar should be under optimal level in the perioperative period
  10. Patients should be encouraged to lose weight before elective procedures
  11. Patients should be counseled to stop smoking before surgery
  12. Patients nutrition in the perioperative period should be tailored as per caloric requirements, with additional protein intake to cope up with the stress of surgery
  13. As surgeons, we should try to minimize the operative time, without wasting time on unnecessary steps and checking all the instruments and gadgets well before starting the operation.


Financial support and sponsorship

Nil.

Conflicts of interest

There are no conflicts of interest.

 
  References Top

1.
Pittet D, Boyce JM. Hand hygiene and patient care: Pursing the semmelweis legacy. Lancet Infect Dis 2001;1:9-20.  Back to cited text no. 1
    
2.
National Nosocomial Infections Surveillance System. National nosocomial infections surveillance (NNIS) system report, data summary from January 1992 to June 2002, issued August 2002. Am J Infect Control 2002;30:458-75.  Back to cited text no. 2
    
3.
Itani KM, Wilson SE, Awad SS, Jensen EH, Finn TS, Abramson MA, et al. Ertapenem versus cefotetan prophylaxis in elective colorectal surgery. N Engl J Med 2006;355:2640-51.  Back to cited text no. 3
    
4.
Tang R, Chen HH, Wang YL, Changchien CR, Chen JS, Hsu KC, et al. Risk factors for surgical site infection after elective resection of the colon and rectum: A single-center prospective study of 2,809 consecutive patients. Ann Surg 2001;234:181-9.  Back to cited text no. 4
    
5.
Anthony T, Murray BW, Sum-Ping JT, Lenkovsky F, Vornik VD, Parker BJ, et al. Evaluating an evidence-based bundle for preventing surgical site infection: A randomized trial. Arch Surg 2011;146:263-9.  Back to cited text no. 5
    
6.
Anaya DA, Cormier JN, Xing Y, Koller P, Gaido L, Hadfield D, et al. Development and validation of a novel stratification tool for identifying cancer patients at increased risk of surgical site infection. Ann Surg 2012;255:134-9.  Back to cited text no. 6
    
7.
Konishi T, Watanabe T, Kishimoto J, Nagawa H. Elective colon and rectal surgery differ in risk factors for wound infection: Results of prospective surveillance. Ann Surg 2006;244:758-63.  Back to cited text no. 7
    
8.
Horan TC, Gaynes RP, Martone WJ, Jarvis WR, Emori TG. CDC definitions of nosocomial surgical site infections, 1992: A modification of CDC definitions of surgical wound infections. Am J Infect Control 1992;20:271-4.  Back to cited text no. 8
    
9.
Fraccalvieri D, Kreisler Moreno E, Flor Lorente B, Torres García A, Muñoz Calero A, Mateo Vallejo F, et al. Predictors of wound infection in elective colorectal surgery. Multicenter observational case-control study. Cir Esp 2014;92:478-84.  Back to cited text no. 9
    
10.
Miki C, Inoue Y, Mohri Y, Kobayashi M, Kusunoki M. Site-specific patterns of surgical site infections and their early indicators after elective colorectal cancer surgery. Dis Colon Rectum 2006;49:S45-52.  Back to cited text no. 10
    
11.
Kobayashi M, Mohri Y, Inoue Y, Okita Y, Miki C, Kusunoki M, et al. Continuous follow-up of surgical site infections for 30 days after colorectal surgery. World J Surg 2008;32:1142-6.  Back to cited text no. 11
    
12.
Hagihara M, Suwa M, Ito Y, Muramatsu Y, Kato Y, Yamagishi Y, et al. Preventing surgical-site infections after colorectal surgery. J Infect Chemother 2012;18:83-9.  Back to cited text no. 12
    
13.
Watanabe M, Suzuki H, Nomura S, Maejima K, Chihara N, Komine O, et al. Risk factors for surgical site infection in emergency colorectal surgery: A retrospective analysis. Surg Infect (Larchmt) 2014;15:256-61.  Back to cited text no. 13
    
14.
Burton RC. Postoperative wound infection in colonic and rectal surgery. Br J Surg 1973;60:363-5.  Back to cited text no. 14
    
15.
Glenny AM, Song F. Antimicrobial prophylaxis in colorectal surgery. Qual Health Care 1999;8:132-6.  Back to cited text no. 15
    
16.
Degrate L, Garancini M, Misani M, Poli S, Nobili C, Romano F, et al. Right colon, left colon, and rectal surgeries are not similar for surgical site infection development. Analysis of 277 elective and urgent colorectal resections. Int J Colorectal Dis 2011;26:61-9.  Back to cited text no. 16
    
17.
Hübner M, Diana M, Zanetti G, Eisenring MC, Demartines N, Troillet N, et al. Surgical site infections in colon surgery: The patient, the procedure, the hospital, and the surgeon. Arch Surg 2011;146:1240-5.  Back to cited text no. 17
    
18.
Wick EC, Vogel JD, Church JM, Remzi F, Fazio VW. Surgical site infections in a “high outlier” institution: Are colorectal surgeons to blame? Dis Colon Rectum 2009;52:374-9.  Back to cited text no. 18
    
19.
Kaye KS, Schmit K, Pieper C, Sloane R, Caughlan KF, Sexton DJ, et al. The effect of increasing age on the risk of surgical site infection. J Infect Dis 2005;191:1056-62.  Back to cited text no. 19
    
20.
Smith RL, Bohl JK, McElearney ST, Friel CM, Barclay MM, Sawyer RG, et al. Wound infection after elective colorectal resection. Ann Surg 2004;239:599-605.  Back to cited text no. 20
    
21.
Gervaz P, Bandiera-Clerc C, Buchs NC, Eisenring MC, Troillet N, Perneger T, et al. Scoring system to predict the risk of surgical-site infection after colorectal resection. Br J Surg 2012;99:589-95.  Back to cited text no. 21
    
22.
McConnell YJ, Johnson PM, Porter GA. Surgical site infections following colorectal surgery in patients with diabetes: Association with postoperative hyperglycemia. J Gastrointest Surg 2009;13:508-15.  Back to cited text no. 22
    
23.
Sexana A, Singh MP, Brahmchari S, Banerjee M. Surgical site infection among postoperative patients of tertiary care centre in central India – A prospective study. Asian J Biomed Pharm Sci 2013;3:41-4.  Back to cited text no. 23
    
24.
Okuyama M, Ikeda K, Shibata T, Tsukahara Y, Kitada M, Shimano T. Preoperative iron supplementation and intraoperative transfusion during colorectal cancer surgery. Surg Today 2005;35:36-40.  Back to cited text no. 24
    
25.
Ford CD, VanMoorleghem G, Menlove RL. Blood transfusions and postoperative wound infection. Surgery 1993;113:603-7.  Back to cited text no. 25
    
26.
Heiss MM, Mempel W, Jauch KW, Delanoff C, Mayer G, Mempel M, et al. Beneficial effect of autologous blood transfusion on infectious complications after colorectal cancer surgery. Lancet 1993;342:1328-33.  Back to cited text no. 26
    
27.
Jensen LS, Andersen AJ, Christiansen PM, Hokland P, Juhl CO, Madsen G, et al. Postoperative infection and natural killer cell function following blood transfusion in patients undergoing elective colorectal surgery. Br J Surg 1992;79:513-6.  Back to cited text no. 27
    
28.
Tartter PI. Blood transfusion and infectious complications following colorectal cancer surgery. Br J Surg 1988;75:789-92.  Back to cited text no. 28
    
29.
Carson JL, Altman DG, Duff A, Noveck H, Weinstein MP, Sonnenberg FA, et al. Risk of bacterial infection associated with allogeneic blood transfusion among patients undergoing hip fracture repair. Transfusion 1999;39:694-700.  Back to cited text no. 29
    
30.
Garibaldi RA, Cushing D, Lerer T. Risk factors for postoperative infection. Am J Med 1991;91:158S-63S.  Back to cited text no. 30
    
31.
Innerhofer P, Walleczek C, Luz G, Hobisch-Hagen P, Benzer A, Stöckl B, et al. Transfusion of buffy coat-depleted blood components and risk of postoperative infection in orthopedic patients. Transfusion 1999;39:625-32.  Back to cited text no. 31
    
32.
Blumberg N, Heal JM. Effects of transfusion on immune function. Cancer recurrence and infection. Arch Pathol Lab Med 1994;118:371-9.  Back to cited text no. 32
    
33.
Wille-Jørgensen P, Guenaga KF, Matos D, Castro AA. Pre-operative mechanical bowel cleansing or not? An updated meta-analysis. Colorectal Dis 2005;7:304-10.  Back to cited text no. 33
    
34.
Slim K, Vicaut E, Launay-Savary MV, Contant C, Chipponi J. Updated systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials on the role of mechanical bowel preparation before colorectal surgery. Ann Surg 2009;249:203-9.  Back to cited text no. 34
    
35.
Guenaga KF, Matos D, Castro AA, Atallah AN, Wille-Jørgensen P. Mechanical bowel preparation for elective colorectal surgery. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2005;1:CD001544.  Back to cited text no. 35
    
36.
Guenaga KK, Matos D, Wille-Jørgensen P. Mechanical bowel preparation for elective colorectal surgery. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2009;1:CD001544.  Back to cited text no. 36
    
37.
Hawn MT, Houston TK, Campagna EJ, Graham LA, Singh J, Bishop M, et al. The attributable risk of smoking on surgical complications. Ann Surg 2011;254:914-20.  Back to cited text no. 37
    
38.
Hooton TM, Haley RW, Culver DH, White JW, Morgan WM, Carroll RJ, et al. The joint associations of multiple risk factors with the occurrence of nosocomial infection. Am J Med 1981;70:960-70.  Back to cited text no. 38
    
39.
Coppa GF, Eng K, Gouge TH, Ranson JH, Localio SA. Parenteral and oral antibiotics in elective colon and rectal surgery. A prospective, randomized trial. Am J Surg 1983;145:62-5.  Back to cited text no. 39
    
40.
Kaiser AB, Herrington JL Jr., Jacobs JK, Mulherin JL Jr., Roach AC, Sawyers JL, et al. Cefoxitin versus erythromycin, neomycin, and cefazolin in colorectal operations. Importance of the duration of the surgical procedure. Ann Surg 1983;198:525-30.  Back to cited text no. 40
    
41.
Shanahan F. The host-microbe interface within the gut. Best Pract Res Clin Gastroenterol 2002;16:915-31.  Back to cited text no. 41
    
42.
Law WL, Chu KW. Anterior resection for rectal cancer with mesorectal excision: A prospective evaluation of 622 patients. Ann Surg 2004;240:260-8.  Back to cited text no. 42
    
43.
Tjandra JJ, Chan MK. Systematic review on the short-term outcome of laparoscopic resection for colon and rectosigmoid cancer. Colorectal Dis 2006;8:375-88.  Back to cited text no. 43
    
44.
Kamat US, Fereirra AM, Kulkarni MS, Motghare DD. A prospective study of surgical site infections in a teaching hospital in Goa. Indian J Surg 2008;70:120-4.  Back to cited text no. 44
    


    Figures

  [Figure 1]
 
 
    Tables

  [Table 1], [Table 2], [Table 3], [Table 4]



 

Top
 
  Search
 
    Similar in PUBMED
   Search Pubmed for
   Search in Google Scholar for
 Related articles
    Access Statistics
    Email Alert *
    Add to My List *
* Registration required (free)  

 
  In this article
Abstract
Background
Methods
Results
Discussion
Conclusion
References
Article Figures
Article Tables

 Article Access Statistics
    Viewed1566    
    Printed114    
    Emailed0    
    PDF Downloaded143    
    Comments [Add]    

Recommend this journal