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]. 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]. 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] 唐旭, 韩冰, 刘威, 陈茹星. 结直肠癌根治术后隐匿性肝转移危险因素分析及预测模型构建[J]. 中华普外科手术学杂志(电子版), 2024, 18(01): 16-20.
[2] 张生军, 赵阿静, 李守博, 郝祥宏, 刘敏丽. 高糖通过HGF/c-met通路促进结直肠癌侵袭和迁移的实验研究[J]. 中华普外科手术学杂志(电子版), 2024, 18(01): 21-24.
[3] 张焱辉, 张蛟, 朱志贤. 留置肛管在中低位直肠癌新辅助放化疗后腹腔镜TME术中的临床研究[J]. 中华普外科手术学杂志(电子版), 2024, 18(01): 25-28.
[4] 李婷, 张琳. 血清脂肪酸代谢物及维生素D水平与结直肠癌发生的关系研究[J]. 中华普外科手术学杂志(电子版), 2023, 17(06): 661-665.
[5] 付振保, 曹万龙, 刘富红. 腹腔镜直肠癌低位前切除术中不同缝合方法的回肠双腔造口术临床效果研究[J]. 中华普外科手术学杂志(电子版), 2023, 17(06): 684-687.
[6] 贺亮, 王松林, 周业江. 两种预防性回肠造口在腹腔镜ISR术治疗超低位直肠癌的效果对比研究[J]. 中华普外科手术学杂志(电子版), 2023, 17(06): 697-700.
[7] 徐金林, 陈征. 抗菌药物临床应用监测对腹股沟疝修补术预防用药及感染的影响[J]. 中华疝和腹壁外科杂志(电子版), 2023, 17(06): 720-723.
[8] 李静如, 王江玲, 吴向阳. 简易负压引流在腹股沟疝术后浅部感染中的疗效分析[J]. 中华疝和腹壁外科杂志(电子版), 2023, 17(06): 745-749.
[9] 倪文凯, 齐翀, 许小丹, 周燮程, 殷庆章, 蔡元坤. 结直肠癌患者术后发生延迟性肠麻痹的影响因素分析[J]. 中华结直肠疾病电子杂志, 2023, 12(06): 484-489.
[10] 范小彧, 孙司正, 鄂一民, 喻春钊. 梗阻性左半结肠癌不同手术治疗方案的选择应用[J]. 中华结直肠疾病电子杂志, 2023, 12(06): 500-504.
[11] 杨红杰, 张智春, 孙轶. 直肠癌淋巴结转移诊断研究进展[J]. 中华结直肠疾病电子杂志, 2023, 12(06): 512-518.
[12] 马慧颖, 凡新苓, 覃仕瑞, 陈佳赟, 曹莹, 徐源, 金晶, 唐源. 磁共振加速器治疗局部晚期直肠癌的初步经验[J]. 中华结直肠疾病电子杂志, 2023, 12(06): 519-523.
[13] 关旭, 王锡山. 基于外科与免疫视角思考结直肠癌区域淋巴结处理的功与过[J]. 中华结直肠疾病电子杂志, 2023, 12(06): 448-452.
[14] 顾睿祈, 方洪生, 蔡国响. 循环肿瘤DNA检测在结直肠癌诊治中的应用与进展[J]. 中华结直肠疾病电子杂志, 2023, 12(06): 453-459.
[15] 卢艳军, 马健, 白鹏宇, 郭凌宏, 刘海义, 江波, 白文启, 张毅勋. 纳米碳在腹腔镜直肠癌根治术中253组淋巴结清扫的临床效果[J]. 中华结直肠疾病电子杂志, 2023, 12(06): 473-477.
阅读次数
全文


摘要