Sterile Draping of Operative Microscopes in Breast Free Flaps and Surgical Site Infections.

IF 1.4 4区 医学 Q3 SURGERY Annals of Plastic Surgery Pub Date : 2024-10-01 Epub Date: 2024-08-15 DOI:10.1097/SAP.0000000000004067
Julian K Marable, Daisy L Spoer, Varsha Harish, Lauren E Berger, David H Song, Kenneth L Fan
{"title":"Sterile Draping of Operative Microscopes in Breast Free Flaps and Surgical Site Infections.","authors":"Julian K Marable, Daisy L Spoer, Varsha Harish, Lauren E Berger, David H Song, Kenneth L Fan","doi":"10.1097/SAP.0000000000004067","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Operative microscopes are traditionally draped in single-use plastic to prevent infection theoretically. The necessity of this routine in breast free flap surgery is unclear. Alternatively, sterile wrapping of microscope handles would reduce operating room waste and provide a more cost-effective and environmentally sustainable approach to sterility. This study aimed to determine whether the draping technique used during abdominally based free flaps (Ab-FF) influenced the rate of surgical site infections.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We conducted a retrospective review of Ab-FF performed consecutively between March 2017 and August 2022. Patient demographics, comorbidities, perioperative data, and postoperative complications were collected. The primary outcomes included postoperative surgical site infections and environmental impact.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Of the 281 identified breasts reconstructed with Ab-FF, operating microscopes were sterilely covered with microscope drapes (n = 215) or handle covers (n = 66) composed of polyethylene-based plastic. Overall, postoperative infections occurred in 9.3% of cases (n = 26) in either the recipient breast (n = 11, 3.9%) or abdominal donor site (n = 15, 5.3%), primarily due to S. aureus and Streptococcus species . The handle (n = 6, 9.1%) and drape (n = 20, 9.3%) cohorts had similar infection rates with no sequelae of operative complications. In multivariate analysis, radiation was the only independent predictor of postoperative infection, while bilateral reconstructions were independently protective. Replacing a microscope drape with a handle reduces carbon emissions by 1276 grams of CO 2 and direct costs by $7.84 per item.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>The principles of \"Lean and Green\" surgery prioritize reducing operating room generated waste to achieve financial and environmental sustainability. This cohort study of 281 breast free flaps demonstrates that switching from whole microscope draping to handle wrapping was not associated with an increased rate or odds of infection. Adopting a microscope handle wrapping protocol decreased the carbon footprint and operative costs. The results of this study offer evidence to support adoption and further exploration of pragmatic, cost-effective, and sustainable approaches to microsurgical breast reconstruction.</p>","PeriodicalId":8060,"journal":{"name":"Annals of Plastic Surgery","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.4000,"publicationDate":"2024-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Annals of Plastic Surgery","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1097/SAP.0000000000004067","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/8/15 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"SURGERY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Operative microscopes are traditionally draped in single-use plastic to prevent infection theoretically. The necessity of this routine in breast free flap surgery is unclear. Alternatively, sterile wrapping of microscope handles would reduce operating room waste and provide a more cost-effective and environmentally sustainable approach to sterility. This study aimed to determine whether the draping technique used during abdominally based free flaps (Ab-FF) influenced the rate of surgical site infections.

Methods: We conducted a retrospective review of Ab-FF performed consecutively between March 2017 and August 2022. Patient demographics, comorbidities, perioperative data, and postoperative complications were collected. The primary outcomes included postoperative surgical site infections and environmental impact.

Results: Of the 281 identified breasts reconstructed with Ab-FF, operating microscopes were sterilely covered with microscope drapes (n = 215) or handle covers (n = 66) composed of polyethylene-based plastic. Overall, postoperative infections occurred in 9.3% of cases (n = 26) in either the recipient breast (n = 11, 3.9%) or abdominal donor site (n = 15, 5.3%), primarily due to S. aureus and Streptococcus species . The handle (n = 6, 9.1%) and drape (n = 20, 9.3%) cohorts had similar infection rates with no sequelae of operative complications. In multivariate analysis, radiation was the only independent predictor of postoperative infection, while bilateral reconstructions were independently protective. Replacing a microscope drape with a handle reduces carbon emissions by 1276 grams of CO 2 and direct costs by $7.84 per item.

Conclusions: The principles of "Lean and Green" surgery prioritize reducing operating room generated waste to achieve financial and environmental sustainability. This cohort study of 281 breast free flaps demonstrates that switching from whole microscope draping to handle wrapping was not associated with an increased rate or odds of infection. Adopting a microscope handle wrapping protocol decreased the carbon footprint and operative costs. The results of this study offer evidence to support adoption and further exploration of pragmatic, cost-effective, and sustainable approaches to microsurgical breast reconstruction.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
乳房游离皮瓣手术显微镜的无菌铺巾与手术部位感染。
背景:传统上,手术显微镜都用一次性塑料布包扎,理论上是为了防止感染。但在乳房游离皮瓣手术中是否有必要这样做还不清楚。或者,对显微镜手柄进行无菌包扎可减少手术室废物,并提供一种更具成本效益和环境可持续性的无菌方法。本研究旨在确定腹部游离皮瓣(Ab-FF)手术中使用的铺巾技术是否会影响手术部位感染率:我们对 2017 年 3 月至 2022 年 8 月期间连续进行的 Ab-FF 进行了回顾性审查。我们收集了患者的人口统计学资料、合并症、围手术期数据和术后并发症。主要结果包括术后手术部位感染和环境影响:结果:在281例用Ab-FF重建的乳房中,手术显微镜均由聚乙烯塑料制成的显微镜帘布(215例)或手柄盖(66例)无菌覆盖。总体而言,9.3%的病例(n = 26)在受体乳房(n = 11,3.9%)或腹部供体部位(n = 15,5.3%)发生术后感染,主要是金黄色葡萄球菌和链球菌引起的。手柄组(n = 6,9.1%)和帘布组(n = 20,9.3%)的感染率相似,均无手术并发症后遗症。在多变量分析中,辐射是术后感染的唯一独立预测因素,而双侧重建则具有独立的保护作用。用手柄取代显微镜帘布可减少 1276 克二氧化碳的碳排放,每件物品的直接成本减少 7.84 美元:结论:"精益和绿色 "手术原则优先考虑减少手术室产生的废物,以实现财务和环境的可持续发展。这项对 281 个乳房游离皮瓣进行的队列研究表明,将整个显微镜铺巾改为手柄包裹与感染率或感染几率的增加无关。采用显微镜手柄包裹方案减少了碳足迹和手术成本。这项研究结果为采用实用、经济、可持续的乳房显微外科重建方法提供了支持和进一步探索的证据。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
2.70
自引率
13.30%
发文量
584
审稿时长
6 months
期刊介绍: The only independent journal devoted to general plastic and reconstructive surgery, Annals of Plastic Surgery serves as a forum for current scientific and clinical advances in the field and a sounding board for ideas and perspectives on its future. The journal publishes peer-reviewed original articles, brief communications, case reports, and notes in all areas of interest to the practicing plastic surgeon. There are also historical and current reviews, descriptions of surgical technique, and lively editorials and letters to the editor.
期刊最新文献
Application Discrepancies in the 2023-2024 Integrated Plastic Surgery Match. Facial Artery Branch Thrombolysis for Nasal Vascular Embolism Induced by Hyaluronic Acid Injection. Management of Delayed Vascular Occlusion in Free Flap Breast Reconstruction: A Systematic Review of Literature and Case Report. Management of Venoarterial Extracorporeal Membrane Oxygenation Cannulation-Associated Groin Wound Complications With Muscle Flaps at a High-Acuity Cardiac Referral Center. Micro/Nanobubble-Assisted Lipotransfer: In Vivo Evidence of Improved Graft Outcomes.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1