4.6 Article

Supplemental intravenous crystalloid administration does not reduce the risk of surgical wound infection

Journal

ANESTHESIA AND ANALGESIA
Volume 101, Issue 5, Pages 1546-1553

Publisher

LIPPINCOTT WILLIAMS & WILKINS
DOI: 10.1213/01.ANE.0000180217.57952.FE

Keywords

-

Categories

Funding

  1. NIDCR NIH HHS [R03 DE014879, DE 14879, R03 DE014879-02] Funding Source: Medline
  2. NIGMS NIH HHS [GM 61655, R01 GM061655, R01 GM061655-03] Funding Source: Medline

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Wound perfusion and oxygenation are important determinants of the development of postoperative wound infections. Supplemental fluid administration significantly increases tissue oxygenation in surrogate wounds in the subcutaneous tissue of the upper arm in perioperative surgical patients. We tested the hypothesis that supplemental fluid administration during and after elective colon resections decreases the incidence of postoperative wound infections. Patients undergoing open colon resection were randomly assigned to small-volume (n = 124,8 mL (.) kg(-1) (.) h(-1)) or large-volume (n = 129, 16-18 mL (.) kg(-1) (.) h(-1)) fluid management. Our major outcomes were two distinct criteria for diagnosis of surgical wound infections: 1) purulent exudate combined with a culture positive for pathogenic bacteria, and 2) Center for Disease Control criteria for diagnosis of surgical wound infections. All wound infections diagnosed using either criterion by a blinded observer in the 15 days after surgery were considered in the analysis. Wound healing was evaluated with the ASEPSIS scoring system. Of the patients given small fluid administration, 14 had surgical wound infections; 11 given large fluid therapy had infections, P = 0.46. ASEPSIS wound-healing scores were similar in both groups: 7 +/- 16 (small volume) versus 8 +/- 14 (large volume), P = 0.70. Our results suggest that supplemental hydration in the range tested does not impact wound infection rate.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available