Division of Anesthesia, Critical Care and Pain Management, Tel-Aviv Medical Center, Sackler Faculty of Medicine, Tel-Aviv University, Israel; Department of Outcomes Research, Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, OH, USA.
Internal Medicine C, Sheba Medical Center, Sackler Faculty of Medicine, Tel-Aviv University, Israel; Department of Outcomes Research, Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, OH, USA.
Br J Anaesth. 2018 Jun;120(6):1176-1186. doi: 10.1016/j.bja.2018.02.027. Epub 2018 Apr 5.
Whether supplemental intraoperative oxygen reduces surgical site infections remains unclear. Recent recommendations from the World Health Organization and Center for Disease Control to routinely use high inspired oxygen concentrations to reduce infection risk have been widely criticized. We therefore performed a meta-analysis to evaluate the influence of inspired oxygen on infection risk, including a recent large trial.
A systematic literature search was performed. Primary analysis included all eligible trials. Sensitivity analyses distinguished studies of colorectal and non-colorectal surgeries, and excluded studies with high risk of bias. Another post-hoc sensitivity analysis excluded studies from one author that appear questionable.
The primary analysis included 26 trials (N=14,710). The RR [95%CI] for wound infection was 0.81 [0.70, 0.94] in the high vs. low inspired oxygen groups. The effect remained significant in colorectal patients (N=10,469), 0.79 [0.66, 0.96], but not in other patients (N=4,241), 0.86 [0.69, 1.09]. When restricting the analysis to studies with low risk of bias, either by strict inclusion criteria (N=5,047) or by researchers' judgment (N=12,547), no significant benefit remained: 0.84 [0.67, 1.06] and 0.89 [0.76, 1.05], respectively.
When considering all available data, intraoperative hyperoxia reduced wound infection incidence. However, no significant benefit remained when analysis was restricted to objective- or investigator-identified low-bias studies, although those analyses were not as well-powered. Meta-analysis of the most reliable studies does not suggest that supplemental oxygen substantively reduces wound infection risk, but more research is needed to fully answer this question.
补充术中氧气是否能降低手术部位感染仍不清楚。世界卫生组织和疾病控制中心最近建议常规使用高吸入氧浓度来降低感染风险,这一建议受到了广泛的批评。因此,我们进行了一项荟萃分析,以评估吸入氧对感染风险的影响,包括最近的一项大型试验。
进行了系统的文献检索。主要分析包括所有符合条件的试验。敏感性分析将研究分为结直肠和非结直肠手术,并排除了高偏倚风险的研究。另一项事后敏感性分析排除了一位作者有疑问的研究。
主要分析包括 26 项试验(N=14710)。高与低吸入氧组的伤口感染 RR [95%CI]为 0.81 [0.70, 0.94]。在结直肠患者(N=10469)中,这一效果仍然显著,0.79 [0.66, 0.96],但在其他患者(N=4241)中则不显著,0.86 [0.69, 1.09]。当将分析限制在低偏倚风险的研究中时,无论是通过严格的纳入标准(N=5047)还是研究人员的判断(N=12547),都没有显著的益处:0.84 [0.67, 1.06] 和 0.89 [0.76, 1.05]。
考虑到所有可用数据,术中高氧血症降低了伤口感染的发生率。然而,当分析仅限于客观或研究者确定的低偏倚研究时,这种益处就不再显著,尽管这些分析的效能较低。对最可靠的研究进行荟萃分析表明,补充氧气并不能实质性地降低伤口感染的风险,但需要进一步的研究来充分回答这个问题。