Dressing Wear Time after Breast Reconstruction: A Randomized Clinical Trial

Daniela Francescato Veiga, Carlos Américo Veiga Damasceno, Joel Veiga-Filho, Luiz Francisley Paiva, Fernando Elias Martins Fonseca, Isaías Vieira Cabral, Natália Lana Larcher Pinto, Yara Juliano, Lydia Masako Ferreira, Daniela Francescato Veiga, Carlos Américo Veiga Damasceno, Joel Veiga-Filho, Luiz Francisley Paiva, Fernando Elias Martins Fonseca, Isaías Vieira Cabral, Natália Lana Larcher Pinto, Yara Juliano, Lydia Masako Ferreira

Abstract

Background: The evidence to support dressing standards for breast surgery wounds is empiric and scarce.

Objective: This two-arm randomized clinical trial was designed to assess the effect of dressing wear time on surgical site infection (SSI) rates, skin colonization and patient perceptions.

Methods: A total of 200 breast cancer patients undergoing breast reconstruction were prospectively enrolled. Patients were randomly allocated to group I (dressing removed on the first postoperative day, n = 100) or group II (dressing removed on the sixth postoperative day, n = 100). SSIs were defined and classified according to criteria from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Samples collected before placing the dressing and after 1 day (group I) and 6 days (both groups) were cultured for skin colonization assessments. Patients preferences and perceptions with regard to safety, comfort and convenience were recorded and analyzed.

Results: A total of 186 patients completed the follow-up. The global SSI rate was 4.5%. Six patients in group I and three in group II had SSI (p = 0.497). Before dressing, the groups were similar with regard to skin colonization. At the sixth day, there was a higher colonization by coagulase-negative staphylococci in group I (p<0.0001). Patients preferred to keep dressing for six days (p<0.0001), and considered this a safer choice (p<0.05).

Conclusions: Despite group I had a higher skin colonization by coagulase-negative staphylococci on the sixth postoperative day, there was no difference in SSI rates. Patients preferred keeping dressing for six days and considered it a safer choice.

Trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT01148823.

Conflict of interest statement

The authors have declared that no competing interests exist.

Figures

Fig 1. CONSORT Flow Diagram [43]
Fig 1. CONSORT Flow Diagram [43]

References

    1. Mlodinow AS, Ver Halen JP, Lim S, Nguyen KT, Gaido JA, Kim JY. Predictors of readmission after breast reconstruction: a multi-institutional analysis of 5012 patients. Ann Plast Surg. 2013; 71: 335–341. 10.1097/SAP.0b013e3182a0df25
    1. Edwards BL, Stukenborg GJ, Brenin DR, Schroen AT. Use of prophylactic postoperative antibiotics during surgical drain presence following mastectomy. Ann Surg Oncol. 2014; 21: 3249–3255. 10.1245/s10434-014-3960-7
    1. Xue DQ, Qian C, Yang L, Wang XF. Risk factors for surgical site infections after breast surgery: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Eur J Surg Oncol. 2012; 38: 375–381. 10.1016/j.ejso.2012.02.179
    1. Pittet B, Montandon D, Pittet D. Infection in breast implants. Lancet Infect Dis. 2005; 5: 94–106. 10.1016/S1473-3099(05)01281-8
    1. Jones DJ, Bunn F, Bell-Syer SV. Prophylactic antibiotics to prevent surgical site infection after breast cancer surgery. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2014; 3:CD005360.
    1. Eroglu A, Karasoy D, Kurt H, Baskan S. National practice in antibiotic prophylaxis in breast cancer surgery. J Clin Med Res. 2014; 6: 30–35. 10.4021/jocmr1642w
    1. Tran CL, Langer S, Broderick-Villa G, DiFronzo LA. Does reoperation predispose to postoperative wound infection on women undergoing operation for breast cancer? Am Surg. 2003; 69: 852–856.
    1. Viola GM, Raad II, Rolston KV. Breast tissue expander-related infections: perioperative antimicrobial regimens. Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol. 2014; 35: 75–81. 10.1086/674390
    1. Vilar-Compte D, Roldán-Marín R, Robles-Vidal C, Volkow P. Surgical site infection (SSI) rates among patients who underwent mastectomy after the introduction of SSI prevention policies. Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol. 2006; 27: 829–834. 10.1086/506395
    1. Kato H, Nakagami G, Iwahira Y, Otani R, Nagase T, Iizaka S, et al. Risk factors and risk scoring tool for infection during tissue expansion in tissue expander and implant breast reconstruction. Breast J. 2013; 19: 618–626. 10.1111/tbj.12175
    1. Degnim AC, Hoskin TL, Brahmbhatt RD, Warren-Peled A, Loprinzi M, Pavey ES, et al. Randomized trial of drain antisepsis after mastectomy and immediate prosthetic breast reconstruction. Ann Surg Oncol. 2014; 21: 3240–3248. 10.1245/s10434-014-3918-9
    1. Mukhtar RA, Throckmorton AD, Alvarado MD, Ewing CA, Esserman LJ, Chiu C, Hwang ES. Bacteriologic features of surgical site infections following breast surgery. Am J Surg. 2009;198:529–531. 10.1016/j.amjsurg.2009.06.006
    1. Olsen MA, Chu-Ongsakul S, Brandt KE, Dietz JR, Mayfield J, Fraser V. Hospital-associated costs due to surgical site infection after breast surgery. Arch Surg. 2008; 143: 53–60. 10.1001/archsurg.2007.11
    1. Anderson DJ, Kaye KS, Chen LF, Schmader KE, Choi Y, Sloane R, et al. Clinical and financial outcomes due to methicillin resistant Staphylococcus aureus surgical site infection: a multi-center matched outcomes study. PLoS One. 2009; 4: e8305 10.1371/journal.pone.0008305
    1. Anderson DJ, Kaye KS. Staphylococcal surgical site infections. Infect Dis Clin N Am. 2009; 23: 53–72.
    1. Alvarez JM. Use of an occlusive dressing for 2 weeks reduces the incidence of esternal wound infections. ANZ J Surg. 2005; 75: 179–180. 10.1111/j.1445-2197.2005.03320.x
    1. Khansa I, Hendrick RG Jr, Shore A, Meyerson J, Yang M, BoehmLer JH 4th. Breast reconstruction with tissue expanders: implementation of a standardized best-practices protocol to reduce infection rates. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2014; 134: 11–18. 10.1097/PRS.0000000000000261
    1. Anderson DJ, Podgorny K, Berríos-Torres SI, Bratzler DW, Dellinger EP, Greene L, et al. Strategies to prevent surgical site infections in acute care hospitals: 2014 update. Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol. 2014; 35: 605–627. 10.1086/676022
    1. Korol E, Johnston K, Waser N, Sifakis F, Jafri HS, Lo M, et al. A systematic review of risk factors associated with surgical site infections among surgical patients. PLoS One. 2013;8: e83743 10.1371/journal.pone.0083743
    1. Mangram AJ, Horan TC, Pearson ML, Silver LC, Jarvis WR, The Hospital Infection Control Practices Advisory Committee. Guideline for prevention of surgical site infection. Am J Infect Control. 1999; 27: 97–134.
    1. Segers P, de Jong AP, Spanjaard L, Ubbink DT, de Mol BAJM. Randomized clinical trial comparing two options for postoperative incisional care to prevent post sternotomy surgical site infections. Wound Rep Reg. 2007; 15: 192–196.
    1. Sticha RS, Swiriduk D, Wertheimer SJ. Prospective analysis of postoperative wound infections using an early exposure method of wound care. J Foot Ankle Surg. 1998; 37: 286–291.
    1. Heal C, Buettner P, Raasch B, Browning S, Graham D, Bidgood R, et al. Can sutures get wet? Prospective randomized controlled trial of wound management in general practice. BMJ. 2006; 332: 1053–1056. 10.1136/
    1. Rosenfeldt FL, Negri J, Holdaway D, Davis BB, Mack J, Grigg MJ, et al. Occlusive wrap dressing reduces infection rate in saphenous vein harvest site. Ann Thorac Surg. 2003; 75: 101–105.
    1. Al-Benna S, Collin TW, Jeffrey SL. Adverse reactions to wound dressings: a financial incendiary. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2007; 119: 1634.
    1. Sircar T, Chouhan A, Johri A. Cartella eye-shield as a dressing after nipple reconstruction—a technical innovation. Ann R Coll Surg Engl. 2010; 92: 439–440. 10.1308/003588410X12699663903719d
    1. Dustagheer S, Tohill M, Khan K. Vacuum-assisted closure dressing as an aid to salvage breast following severe postoperative infection. Breast J. 2009; 15: 214–215. 10.1111/j.1524-4741.2009.00705.x
    1. Wynne R, Botti M, Stedman H, Holsworth L, Harinos M, Flavell O, et al. Effect of three wound dressings on infection, healing comfort, and cost in patients with sternotomy wounds: a randomized trial. Chest. 2004; 125: 43–49.
    1. Paddle-Ledinek JE, Nasa Z, Cleland H. Effect of different wound dressings on cell viability and proliferation. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2006; 117(Suppl.): 110S–118S.
    1. Lionelli GT, Lawrence WT. Wound dressings. Surg Clin N Am. 2003; 83: 617–638. 10.1016/S0039-6109(02)00192-5
    1. Holm C, Petersen JS, Gronboek F, Gottrup F. Effects of occlusive and conventional gauze dressings on incisional healing after abdominal operations. Eur J Surg. 1998; 164: 179–183. 10.1080/110241598750004616
    1. Jones VJ. The use of gauze: will it ever change? Int Wound J. 2006; 3: 79–86.
    1. Chrintz H, Cordtz TO, Harreby JS, Waaddegaard P, Larsen SO. Need for surgical wound dressing. Br J Surg. 1989; 76: 204–205.
    1. Veiga-Filho J, Veiga DF, Sabino-Neto M, Damasceno CA, Sales EM, Garcia ES, et al. Dressing wear time after reduction mammaplasty: a randomized controlled trial. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2012; 129: 1e–7e. 10.1097/PRS.0b013e3182361ee9
    1. Veiga DF, Veiga-Filho J, Damasceno CA, Sales EM, Morais TB, Almeida WE, et al. Dressing wear time after breast reconstruction: study protocol for a randomized controlled trial. Trials. 2013; 14: 58 10.1186/1745-6215-14-58
    1. Gulluoglu BM, Guler SA, Ugurlu MU, Culha G. Efficacy of prophylactic antibiotic administration for breast cancer surgery in overweight or obese patients: a randomized controlled trial. Ann Surg. 2013; 257: 37–43. 10.1097/SLA.0b013e31826d832d
    1. Veiga DF, Damasceno CA, Veiga-Filho J, Figueiras RG, Vieira RB, Garcia ES, et al. Randomized controlled trial on the effectiveness of chlorhexidine showers before elective plastic surgical procedures. Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol. 2009; 30: 77–79. 10.1086/592980
    1. Veiga DF, Damasceno CA, Veiga-Filho J, Figueiras RG, Vieira RB, Florenzano FH, et al. Povidone-iodine (PVP-I) versus chlorhexidine in antisepsis before elective plastic surgery procedures: randomized controlled trial. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2008; 122: 170e–171e. 10.1097/PRS.0b013e318186cd7f
    1. Mendes DA, Veiga DF, Veiga-Filho J, Fonseca FE, Paiva LF, Novo NF, et al. Application time for postoperative wound dressing following breast augmentation with implants: study protocol for a randomized controlled trial. Trials. 2015; 16: 19 10.1186/s13063-014-0529-5
    1. Horan TC, Gaynes RPG, Martone WJ, Jarvis WR, Emori TG. CDC definitions of nosocomial surgical site infections, 1992: a modification of CDC definitions of surgical wound infections. Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol. 1992; 13: 606–608.
    1. Trabulsi LR, Alterthum F. Microbiologia. 4th ed. São Paulo: Atheneu; 2005.
    1. Siegel S, Castellan NJ Jr. Non parametric statistics for the behavioral sciences 2nd ed. Portuguese language edition. Carmona SIC, trans. Porto Alegre: Artmed Editora; 2006.
    1. Moher D, Hopewell S, Schulz KF, Montori V, Gøtzsche PC, Devereaux PJ, et al. CONSORT 2010 explanation and elaboration: updated guidelines for reporting parallel group randomised trials. BMJ. 2010; 340: c869 10.1136/bmj.c869
    1. Janis JE, Kwon RK, Lalonde DH. A practical guide to wound healing. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2010; 125: 230e–244e. 10.1097/PRS.0b013e3181d9a0d1
    1. Yao K, Bae L, Yew WP. Post-operative wound management. Aust Fam Physician. 2013; 42: 867–870.
    1. Grundfest-Broniatowski S. Evidenced based care in surgery: surgical practice and avoidance of infection in breast surgery. Gland Surg. 2013; 2:56–58. 10.3978/j.issn.2227-684X.2013.05.01
    1. Phillips BT, Halvorson EG. Antibiotic Prophylaxis Following Implant-Based Breast Reconstruction—What is the Evidence? Plast Reconstr Surg. 2016; June 8 [Epub ahead of print].
    1. Phillips BT, Fourman MS, Bishawi M, Zegers M, O'Hea BJ, Ganz JC, et al. Are prophylactic postoperative antibiotics necessary for immediate breast reconstruction? Results of a prospective randomized clinical trial. J Am Coll Surg. 2016; 222:1116–1124. 10.1016/j.jamcollsurg.2016.02.018
    1. Malay S, Chung KC. How to use outcomes questionnaires: pearls and pitfalls. Clin Plast Surg. 2013; 40: 261–269. 10.1016/j.cps.2012.10.002

Source: PubMed

Sponsorer og samarbeidspartnere

Medisinsk tilstand

Legemiddelintervensjoner

3
Abonnere