切换至 "中华医学电子期刊资源库"

中华结直肠疾病电子杂志 ›› 2022, Vol. 11 ›› Issue (06) : 497 -505. doi: 10.3877/cma.j.issn.2095-3224.2022.06.008

论著

厄他培南预防直肠癌高危手术部位感染的临床疗效分析
刘准1, 王枭杰1, 孙艳武1, 黄胜辉1, 唐子涵1, 陈锦华2, 池畔1,(), 黄颖1,()   
  1. 1. 350000 福州,福建医科大学附属协和医院结直肠外科
    2. 350000 福州,福建医科大学附属协和医院医务部随访中心
  • 收稿日期:2022-08-24 出版日期:2022-12-25
  • 通信作者: 池畔, 黄颖
  • 基金资助:
    福建省科技创新联合资金项目(2020Y9071); 福建省自然科学基金(2020J01130); 北京医卫建康公益基金会医学科学研究基金(B2006DS); 福建省卫生健康科技计划项目(2020CXA025); 白求恩公益基金(BCF-SY-0311-20190807-08)

Efficacy of ertapenem in the prevention of high-risk surgical site infection in rectal cancer surgery

Zhun Liu1, Xiaojie Wang1, Yanwu Sun1, Shenghui Huang1, Zihan Tang1, Jinhua Chen2, Pan Chi1,(), Ying Huang1,()   

  1. 1. Department of Colorectal Surgery, Fujian Medical University Union Hospital, Fuzhou 350000, China
    2. Follow-up Center of Medical Department, Fujian Medical University Union Hospital, Fuzhou 350000, China
  • Received:2022-08-24 Published:2022-12-25
  • Corresponding author: Pan Chi, Ying Huang
引用本文:

刘准, 王枭杰, 孙艳武, 黄胜辉, 唐子涵, 陈锦华, 池畔, 黄颖. 厄他培南预防直肠癌高危手术部位感染的临床疗效分析[J/OL]. 中华结直肠疾病电子杂志, 2022, 11(06): 497-505.

Zhun Liu, Xiaojie Wang, Yanwu Sun, Shenghui Huang, Zihan Tang, Jinhua Chen, Pan Chi, Ying Huang. Efficacy of ertapenem in the prevention of high-risk surgical site infection in rectal cancer surgery[J/OL]. Chinese Journal of Colorectal Diseases(Electronic Edition), 2022, 11(06): 497-505.

目的

探讨厄他培南预防直肠癌术后手术部位感染的临床疗效及其影响因素分析。

方法

选取2010年3月到2022年3月在福建医科大学附属协和医院结直肠外科术前应用抗生素预防手术部位感染的直肠癌患者775例;通过倾向性评分匹配(PSM)后,共纳入230例术前应用抗生素预防手术部位感染的直肠癌患者,厄他培南组46例、非厄他培南组184例,对比厄他培南组和非厄他培南组预防直肠癌手术部位感染的疗效;采用Logistic回归单、多因素分析直肠癌手术部位感染的危险因素。

结果

厄他培南组患者表浅手术部位感染发生率低于非厄他培南组(8.7% vs. 22.3%,P=0.038);单因素分析发现厄他培南(OR=4.317,P=0.038)、手术方式(P=0.0001)、肿瘤距离肛缘的距离(OR=0.718,P=0.011)、手术时间(OR=1.010,P=0.002)与直肠癌术后表浅手术部位感染密切相关;多因素分析结果表明:非厄他培南(OR=4.392,95%CI:1.325~14.564;P=0.016)、手术方式(APR手术,OR=25.65,95%CI:2.960~222.37;P=0.003)、手术时间(OR=1.011,95%CI:0.003~1.019;P=0.004)是直肠癌术后表浅手术部位感染的独立危险因素。

结论

厄他培南比非厄他培南组更有效预防直肠癌表浅手术部位感染,APR手术和手术时间长的直肠癌患者应积极应用厄他培南预防手术部位感染。

Objective

To investigate the effect of ertapenem in preventing surgical site infection (SSI) of rectal cancer (RC) surgery.

Methods

From March 2010 to March 2022, a total of 775 RC patients who received perioperative prophylaxis with antibiotics to prevent SSI in Fujian Medical University Union Hospital were collected. After propensity score matching, 230 RC patients were enrolled in the ertapenem group (46 cases) and the non-ertapenem group (184 cases). The efficacy of prevention of SSI in the ertapenem and non-ertapenem groups was compared using following propensity score matching (PSM). Risk factors of SSI in RC surgery were analyzed by univariate and multivariate Logistic regression anlaysis.

Results

The incidence of SSI in the ertapenem group was significantly lower than that in the non-ertapenem group (8.7% vs. 22.3%, P=0.038). Univariate analysis found ertapenem (OR=4.317, P=0.038), operation method (P=0.0001) distance from the anal verge to the tumor (OR=0.718, P=0.011) and operation time (OR=1.010, P=0.002) were closely related to SSI. Multivariate analysis revealed that non-ertapenem (OR=4.392, 95%CI: 1.325~14.564; P=0.016), abdominoperineal resection (APR) surgery (OR=25.65; 95%CI: 2.960~222.37; P=0.003) and operation time (OR=1.011, 95%CI: 0.003~1.019; P=0.004) were independent risk factors of SSI.

Conclusion

Ertapenem can effectively prevent SSI in rectal cancer surgery. RC patients with APR surgery and long operation time are candidates that should receive ertapenem for the prevention of SSI.

表1 预防性应用抗生素的直肠癌患者临床配对资料PSM前后比较分析[例(%)]
变量 PSM匹配前 χ2 P PSM匹配后 χ2 P

厄他培南

n=46)

非厄他培南

n=729)

厄他培南(n=46)

非厄他培南

n=184)

年龄(岁) 3.613 0.057 0.398 0.528
<65 29(63.04) 551(75.58) 29(63.04) 125(67.93)
≥65 17(36.96) 178(24.42) 17(36.96) 59(32.07)
性别 0.065 0.798 0.072 0.789
26(56.52) 426(58.44) 26(56.52) 108(58.70)
20(43.48) 303(41.56) 20(43.48) 76(41.30)
BMI(kg/m2 0.487 0.784 1.119 0.549
BMI<18.5 3(6.52) 53(7.27) 3(6.52) 19(10.33)
18.5≤ BMI <25 31(67.39) 456(62.55) 31(67.39) 128(69.57)
25≤BMI 12(26.09) 144(19.75) 12(26.09) 37(20.11)
BMI缺失 0(0.00) 76(10.43) 0(0.00) 0(0.00)
糖尿病 1.289 0.256 0.035 0.851
7(15.22) 163(22.63) 7(15.22) 26(14.13)
39(84.78) 566(77.64) 39(84.78) 158(85.87)
高血压病 2.512 0.113 0.006 0.940
12(26.09) 275(37.72) 12(26.09) 47(25.54)
34(73.91) 454(62.28) 34(73.91) 137(74.46)
新辅助放化疗 2.124 0.145 0.020 0.889
31(67.39) 560(76.82) 31(67.39) 122(66.30)
15(32.61) 169(23.18) 15(32.61) 62(33.70)
pT分期 1.120 0.891 6.838 0.145
0 9(19.57) 77(10.56) 9(19.57) 26(14.13)
1 3(6.52) 80(10.97) 3(6.52) 29(15.76)
2 13(28.26) 216(29.63) 13(28.26) 54(29.35)
3 19(41.30) 304(41.70) 19(41.30) 67(36.41)
4 2(4.35) 52(7.13) 2(4.35) 8(4.35)
pN分期 0.381 0.826 0.090 0.956
0 31(67.39) 446(61.18) 31(67.39) 125(67.93)
1 11(23.91) 190(26.06) 11(23.91) 41(22.28)
2 4(8.70) 73(10.01) 4(8.70) 18(9.78)
pM分期 0.046 0.830 0.014 0.905
0 42(91.30) 672(92.18) 42(91.30) 169(91.85)
1 4(8.70) 57(7.82) 4(8.70) 15(8.15)
手术路径 30.916 <0.0001 0.326 0.850
开放 1(2.17) 122(16.74) 1(2.17) 7(3.8)
腹腔镜 22(47.83) 478(65.57) 22(47.83) 87(47.28)
机器人 23(50.00) 129(17.69) 23(50.00) 90(48.91)
手术方式 26.085 <0.0001 0.480 0.923
ISR-盆腔 6(13.04) 184(25.24) 6(13.04) 25(13.59)
ISR-会阴 5(10.87) 72(9.88) 5(10.87) 26(14.13)
ISR-混合 28(60.87) 196(26.89) 28(60.87) 103(55.98)
APR 7(15.22) 277(38.00) 7(15.22) 30(16.30)
表2 厄他培南组和非厄他培南组直肠癌患者术后并发症分析[例(%)]
表3 ISR亚组人群厄他培南组和非厄他培南组术后并发症分析[例(%)]
表4 厄他培南组和非厄他培南组直肠癌患者临床资料对比分析[例(%)]
表5 直肠癌术后手术部位感染临床资料Logistic回归单、多因素分析[例(%)]
变量 单因素分析 多因素分析
手术浅部感染 (n=45) 无手术浅部感染 (n=185) OR P OR(95% CI P
厄他培南(否) 41(91.11) 143(77.30) 4.317 0.038 4.392(1.325~14.564) 0.016
年龄(
x¯
±s, 岁)
58.33±11.41 56.73±12.22 1.011 0.423
BMI(
x¯
±s
22.85±3.84 22.46±2.95 0.960 0.452
性别(男) 27(60.00) 107(57.84) 1.093 0.792
吸烟(是) 15(33.33) 52(28.11) 1.279 0.490
饮酒(是) 15(33.33) 58(31.35) 1.095 0.798
糖尿病(是) 5(11.11) 28(15.14) 1.427 0.492
高血压(是) 10(22.22) 49(26.49) 1.261 0.557
新辅助放化疗(是) 31(68.89) 122(65.95) 1.143 0.708
手术路径 0.862
开放 2(4.44) 6(3.24) 参考
腹腔镜 20(44.44) 89(48.11) 0.647 0.644
机器人 23(51.11) 90(48.65) 0.767 0.754
手术方式 0.001 0.001
ISR-盆腔 1(2.22) 30(16.22) 参考 参考
ISR-会阴 2(4.44) 29(15.68) 2.069 0.561 1.603(0.132~19.416) 0.711
ISR-混合 23(51.11) 108(58.38) 6.389 0.075 6.601(0.850~51.290) 0.071
APR 19(42.22) 18(9.73) 31.67 0.001 25.65(2.960~222.37) 0.003
pT分期 0.845
0 5(11.11) 30(16.22) 参考
1 6(13.33) 26(14.05) 1.385 0.623
2 13(28.89) 54(29.19) 1.444 0.521
3 18(40.00) 68(36.76) 1.588 0.401
4 3(6.67) 7(3.78) 2.571 0.262
PN分期 0.288
0 28(62.22) 128(69.19) 参考
1 14(31.11) 38(20.54) 1.684 0.165
2 3(6.67) 19(10.27) 0.722 0.619
pM分期
0 41(91.11) 170(91.89) 参考
1 4(8.89) 15(8.11) 1.106 0.865
分化程度 0.999
2(4.44) 8(4.32) 参考
43(95.56) 174(94.05) 0.989 0.989
0(0.00) 3(1.62) 0.001 0.999
神经侵犯(是) 7(15.56) 25(13.51) 1.179 0.723
脉管瘤栓(是) 4(8.89) 21(11.35) 0.762 0.635
清扫淋巴结个数(
x¯
±s
14.73±6.81 14.74±7.71 0.998 0.940
肿瘤距肛缘距离(
x¯
±s,cm)
3.757±1.71 4.389±1.15 0.718 0.011
手术时间(
x¯
±s,min)
378.8±56.61 284.5±56.72 1.010 0.002 1.011(0.003~1.019) 0.004
术中出血量(
x¯
±s,mL)
79.55±60.23 77.15±109.83 1.000 0.913
吻合口距离(
x¯
±s,cm)
2.23±0.38 2.30±0.65 0.944 0.799
[1]
郑晖, 池畔, 林惠铭, 等. 结直肠癌术后手术部位切口感染的预后因素分析[J]. 中华外科杂志, 2016, 54(6): 424-428.
[2]
Badia JM, Casey AL, Petrosillo N, et al. Impact of surgical site infection on healthcare costs and patient outcomes: a systematic review in six European countries[J]. J Hosp Infect, 2017, 96(1): 1-15.
[3]
Carshon-Marsh R, Squire JS, Kamara KN, et al. Incidence of surgical site infection and use of antibiotics among patients who underwent caesarean section and herniorrhaphy at a regional referral hospital, sierra leone [J]. Int J Environ Res Public Health, 2022, 19(7): 4048.
[4]
Ruiz-Tovar J, Boermeester MA, Bordeianou L, et al. Delphi consensus on intraoperative technical/surgical aspects to prevent surgical site infection after colorectal surgery[J]. J Am Coll Surg, 2022, 234(1): 1-11.
[5]
Yao L, Xiao M, Luo Y, et al. Research on the factors that influence patients. with colorectal cancer participating in the prevention and control of surgical site infection: based on the extended theory of planned behaviour[J]. Health Expect, 2021, 24(6): 2087-2097.
[6]
Mahajan SN, Ariza-Heredia EJ, Rolston KV, et al. Perioperative antimicrobial prophylaxis for intra-abdominal surgery in patients with cancer: a retrospective study comparing ertapenem and nonertapenem antibiotics[J]. Ann Surg Oncol, 2014, 21(2): 513-519.
[7]
Papp G, Dede K, Bursics A. Short-term advantages of ELAPE over APR[J]. Acta Chir Belg, 2021, 121(5): 327-332.
[8]
吴安华, 任南, 文细毛, 等. 外科手术部位感染病原菌分布[J]. 中华医院感染学杂志, 2005, 15(2): 210-212.
[9]
吕艳霞. 厄他培南——治疗多重耐药菌感染的新选择[J]. 海峡药学, 2007, 19(1): 3.
[10]
Nutman A, Temkin E, Harbarth S, et al. Personalized ertapenem prophylaxis for carriers of extended-spectrum beta-Lactamase-producing enterobacteriaceae undergoing colorectal surgery[J]. Clin Infect Dis, 2020, 70(9): 1891-1897.
[11]
Sanclemente G, Bodro M, Cervera C, et al. Perioperative prophylaxis with ertapenem reduced infections caused by extended-spectrum betalactamase-producting Enterobacteriaceae after kidney transplantation[J]. BMC Nephrol, 2019, 20(1): 274.
[12]
Tang B, Liu X, Xing F, et al. Single dose based ertapenem prophylaxis reduces surgical site infection after selective hepatectomy of hepatocellular carcinoma: A propensity score matching study[J]. Biomed Res Int, 2018, 2018: 2520191.
[13]
Kent I, Gilshtein H, Montorfano L, et al. Perineal reconstruction after extralevator abdominoperineal resection: differences among minimally invasive, open, or open with a vertical rectus abdominis myocutaneous flap approaches[J]. Surgery, 2021, 170(5): 1342-1346.
[14]
陈致奋, 池畔, 官国先, 等. 经盆腔途径肛提肌外腹会阴联合直肠切除术36例[J]. 中华胃肠外科杂志, 2014, 17(1): 60-64.
[15]
中华人民共和国卫生部. 医院感染诊断标准(试行)摘登[J]. 新医学, 2005, 36(8): 1.
[16]
Zimlichman E, Henderson D, Tamir O, et al. Health care-associated infections: a. meta-analysis of costs and financial impact on the US health care system[J]. JAMA Intern Med, 2013, 173(22): 2039-2046.
[17]
Berríos-Torres SI, Umscheid CA, Bratzler DW, et al. Centers for disease control and prevention guideline for the prevention of surgical site infection, 2017[J]. JAMA Surg, 2017, 152(8): 784-791.
[18]
王选华, 钱小毛. 剖宫产术前预防用药对预防切口感染效果的研究[J]. 中华医院感染学杂志, 2009, 16: 2.
[19]
Antonacci AC, Antonacci CL, Dechario SP, et al. Reducing surgical site infections after colectomy: bundle item compliance, process, and outlier identification[J]. Surg Endosc, 2022, 36: 6049-6058.
[20]
张欢. 普外手术中应用抗生素预防切口感染的疗效观察[J]. 临床医药文献电子杂志, 2016, 3(15): 2.
[21]
Howard DP, Datta G, Cunnick G, et al. Surgical site infection rate is lower in laparoscopic than open colorectal surgery[J]. Colorectal Dis, 2010, 12(5): 423-427.
[22]
Kiran RP, El-Gazzaz GH, Vogel JD, et al. Laparoscopic approach significantly reduces surgical site infections after colorectal surgery: data from national surgical quality improvement program[J]. J Am Coll Surg, 2010, 211(2): 232-238.
[23]
杨玉波, 关铁军, 王斌, 等. 直肠癌手术切口感染的危险因素分析与预防对策[J]. 中华医院感染学杂志, 2015, 25(1): 3.
[24]
孙虎, 范发明, 孙颖, 等. 结直肠癌切除术患者发生手术切口感染的相关因素研究[J]. 山西医药杂志, 2019, 48(2): 136-139.
[25]
Sutton E, Miyagaki H, Bellini G, et al. Risk factors for superficial surgical site infection after elective rectal cancer resection: a multivariate analysis of 8880 patients from the American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program database[J]. J Surg Res, 2017, 207: 205-214.
[26]
Shin JK, Kim HC, Lee WY, et al. Minimally invasive versus open intersphincteric resection of low rectal cancer regardless of neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy: long-term oncologic outcomes[J]. Sci Rep, 2021, 11(1): 11001.
[27]
Schietroma M, Cecilia EM, Sista F, et al. High-concentration supplemental perioperative oxygen and surgical site infection following elective colorectal surgery for rectal cancer: a prospective, randomized, double-blind, controlled, single-site trial[J]. Am J Surg, 2014, 208(5): 719-726.
[28]
张翠红, 冒海敏, 王海燕, 等. 不同抗菌药物对老年腰椎手术后切口感染预防效果[J]. 中华医院感染学杂志, 2021, 31(22): 3444-3448.
[29]
徐锋, 唐斌, 刘晓琳, 等. 肝癌肝切除术围术期抗生素预防术后手术部位感染的效果评价[J]. 中国临床研究, 2018, 31(4): 451-454.
[30]
De Werra C, Di Micco R, Pilone V, et al. Serum in vivo and in vitro activity of single dose of ertapenem in surgical obese patients for prevention of SSIs[J]. Obes Surg, 2013, 23(7): 911-919.
[31]
张璐莹, 刘强. 厄他培南对比哌拉西林/他唑巴坦治疗复杂性腹腔感染的成本效果-分析[J]. 中国药物评价, 2017, 34(5): 386-389.
[32]
高玲燕, 刘雨玲, 满春霞, 等. 厄他培南对比头孢曲松治疗成人复杂性尿路感染的Meta分析[J]. 中日友好医院学报, 2019(4): 229-231, 234.
[33]
张璐莹, 刘强. 厄他培南对比头孢曲松治疗复杂性尿路感染的成本-效果分析[J]. 中国药物经济学, 2018, 13(2): 11-14.
[34]
Nelson RL, Glenny AM, Song F. Antimicrobial prophylaxis for colorectal surgery[J]. Cochrane Database Syst Rev, 2008, 1(1): 367-371.
[35]
Hagihara M, Suwa M, Ito Y, et al. Preventing surgical-site infections after colorectal surgery[J]. J Infect Chemother, 2012, 18(1): 83-89.
[1] 王振宁, 杨康, 王得晨, 邹敏, 归明彬, 王雅楠, 徐明. 机器人与腹腔镜手术联合经自然腔道取标本对中低位直肠癌患者远期疗效比较[J/OL]. 中华普通外科学文献(电子版), 2024, 18(06): 437-442.
[2] 赵丽霞, 王春霞, 陈一锋, 胡东平, 张维胜, 王涛, 张洪来. 内脏型肥胖对腹腔镜直肠癌根治术后早期并发症的影响[J/OL]. 中华普外科手术学杂志(电子版), 2025, 19(01): 35-39.
[3] 吴晖, 佴永军, 施雪松, 魏晓为. 两种解剖入路下行直肠癌侧方淋巴结清扫的效果比较[J/OL]. 中华普外科手术学杂志(电子版), 2025, 19(01): 40-43.
[4] 周世振, 朱兴亚, 袁庆港, 刘理想, 王凯, 缪骥, 丁超, 汪灏, 管文贤. 吲哚菁绿荧光成像技术在腹腔镜直肠癌侧方淋巴结清扫中的应用效果分析[J/OL]. 中华普外科手术学杂志(电子版), 2025, 19(01): 44-47.
[5] 徐逸男. 不同术式治疗梗阻性左半结直肠癌的疗效观察[J/OL]. 中华普外科手术学杂志(电子版), 2025, 19(01): 72-75.
[6] 李代勤, 刘佩杰. 动态增强磁共振评估中晚期低位直肠癌同步放化疗后疗效及预后的价值[J/OL]. 中华普外科手术学杂志(电子版), 2025, 19(01): 100-103.
[7] 郑民华, 蒋天宇, 赵轩, 马君俊. 中国腹腔镜直肠癌根治术30年发展历程与未来[J/OL]. 中华普外科手术学杂志(电子版), 2024, 18(06): 591-595.
[8] 池畔, 黄胜辉. 中国腹腔镜直肠癌根治术30年来的巨大进步[J/OL]. 中华普外科手术学杂志(电子版), 2024, 18(06): 596-600.
[9] 李明, 屠松, 闫鹏, 钱军, 高鹏程, 许文山, 杨发英, 胡振涛, 单永玮. 应用前列腺电切镜引导置管治疗直肠低位吻合口漏研究[J/OL]. 中华普外科手术学杂志(电子版), 2024, 18(06): 603-606.
[10] 李玲, 刘亚, 李培玲, 张秀敏, 李萍. 直肠癌患者术后肠道菌群的变化与抑郁症相关性研究[J/OL]. 中华普外科手术学杂志(电子版), 2024, 18(06): 607-610.
[11] 赵梓竣, 兰运升. 改良一针法末端回肠造口术对低位直肠癌保肛术后应激反应及安全性的影响[J/OL]. 中华普外科手术学杂志(电子版), 2024, 18(06): 611-614.
[12] 吴胜伟, 王志伟, 陈贵进, 刘序, 吴晓翔. 系膜肥厚低位直肠癌患者改良NOSES Ⅰ式手术的临床效果评价[J/OL]. 中华普外科手术学杂志(电子版), 2024, 18(06): 615-618.
[13] 严虹霞, 王晓娟, 张毅勋. 2 型糖尿病对结直肠癌患者肿瘤标记物、临床病理及预后的影响[J/OL]. 中华结直肠疾病电子杂志, 2024, 13(06): 483-487.
[14] 赵磊, 刘文志, 林峰, 于剑, 孙铭骏, 崔佑刚, 张旭, 衣宇鹏, 于宝胜, 冯宁. 深部热疗在改善结直肠癌术后辅助化疗副反应及生活质量中的作用研究[J/OL]. 中华结直肠疾病电子杂志, 2024, 13(06): 488-493.
[15] 陈杰, 武明胜, 李一金, 李虎, 向源楚, 荣新奇, 彭健. 低位直肠癌冷冻治疗临床初步分析[J/OL]. 中华结直肠疾病电子杂志, 2024, 13(06): 494-498.
阅读次数
全文


摘要