Wood Callum, Phillips Cheryl
Department of Health Sciences, University of York, Seebohm Rowntree Building, York, UK, YO10 5DD.
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2016 May 18;2016(5):CD008062. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD008062.pub4.
Surgical site infections (i.e. incisions that become infected) are a continuing concern in health care. Microbial sealant is a liquid that can be applied to the skin immediately before surgery and is thought to help reduce the incidence of surgical site infections (SSIs) by sealing in the skin flora, thus preventing contamination and infection of the surgical site.
To assess the effects of the preoperative application of microbial sealants (compared with no microbial sealant) on rates of SSI in people undergoing clean surgery.
For this second update we searched the following electronic databases in May 2015: the Cochrane Wounds Specialised Register; the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) (The Cochrane Library); Ovid MEDLINE; Ovid MEDLINE (In-Process & Other Non-Indexed Citations); Ovid EMBASE and EBSCO CINAHL. There were no restrictions based on language or date of publication or study setting.
Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) were eligible for inclusion if they involved people undergoing clean surgery (i.e. surgery that does not involve the breathing system, gut, genital or urinary tract, or any part of the body with an existing infection) in an operating theatre and compared the use of preoperative microbial sealants with no microbial sealant.
All review authors independently extracted data on the characteristics, risk of bias and outcomes of the eligible trials.
Seven trials (859 participants undergoing clean surgery) met the inclusion criteria. The trials all compared cyanoacrylate microbial sealant with no sealant. We found there were fewer SSIs with the use of microbial sealant (23/443 participants) than with the control comparison (46/416 participants). There was no evidence of a difference between the two groups in surgical site infection rates following the use of microbial sealants when the results were pooled (risk ratio (RR) 0.53, 95% CI 0.24 to 1.18). There were adverse events in three studies, but these were not judged to be a result of the use of microbial sealant.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: In this second update there is still insufficient evidence available to determine whether the use of microbial sealants reduces the risk of surgical site infection or not. Further rigorous, adequately-powered RCTs are required to investigate this properly.
手术部位感染(即手术切口发生感染)一直是医疗保健领域关注的问题。微生物密封剂是一种可在手术前立即涂抹于皮肤的液体,据认为它通过封闭皮肤菌群来帮助降低手术部位感染(SSIs)的发生率,从而防止手术部位受到污染和感染。
评估术前应用微生物密封剂(与不使用微生物密封剂相比)对接受清洁手术患者手术部位感染率的影响。
在本次第二次更新中,我们于2015年5月检索了以下电子数据库:Cochrane伤口专业注册库;Cochrane对照试验中央注册库(CENTRAL)(Cochrane图书馆);Ovid MEDLINE;Ovid MEDLINE(在研及其他未索引引文);Ovid EMBASE和EBSCO CINAHL。检索没有基于语言、出版日期或研究背景的限制。
如果随机对照试验(RCTs)涉及在手术室接受清洁手术(即不涉及呼吸系统、肠道、生殖器或泌尿道,或身体任何存在现有感染部位的手术)的患者,并将术前使用微生物密封剂与不使用微生物密封剂进行比较,则符合纳入标准。
所有综述作者独立提取符合条件试验的特征、偏倚风险和结局数据。
七项试验(859名接受清洁手术的参与者)符合纳入标准。这些试验均将氰基丙烯酸酯微生物密封剂与不使用密封剂进行了比较。我们发现使用微生物密封剂的手术部位感染患者较少(443名参与者中有23名),而对照组(416名参与者中有46名)。汇总结果时,两组在使用微生物密封剂后的手术部位感染率没有差异的证据(风险比(RR)0.53,95%置信区间0.24至1.18)。三项研究中出现了不良事件,但这些不良事件未被判定为使用微生物密封剂的结果。
在本次第二次更新中,仍然没有足够的证据来确定使用微生物密封剂是否能降低手术部位感染的风险。需要进一步进行严格的、有足够样本量的随机对照试验来对此进行恰当的研究。