The Surgical Infection Society Guidelines on the Management of Intra-Abdominal Infection: 2024 Update

Abstract

Background: The Surgical Infection Society (SIS) published evidence-based guidelines for the management of intra-abdominal infection (IAI) in 1992, 2002, 2010, and 2017. Here, we present the most recent guideline update based on a systematic review of current literature.

Methods: The writing group, including current and former members of the SIS Therapeutics and Guidelines Committee and other individuals with content or guideline expertise within the SIS, working with a professional librarian, performed a systematic review using PubMed/Medline, the Cochrane Library, Embase, and Web of Science from 2016 until February 2024. Keyword descriptors combined “surgical site infections” or “intra-abdominal infections” in adults limited to randomized controlled trials, systematic reviews, and meta-analyses. Additional relevant publications not in the initial search but identified during literature review were included. The Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluations (GRADE) system was utilized to evaluate the evidence. The strength of each recommendation was rated strong (1) or weak (2). The quality of the evidence was rated high (A), moderate (B), or weak (C). The guideline contains new recommendations and updates to recommendations from previous IAI guideline versions. Final recommendations were developed by an iterative process. All writing group members voted to accept or reject each recommendation.

Results: This updated evidence-based guideline contains recommendations from the SIS for the treatment of adult patients with IAI. Evidence-based recommendations were developed for antimicrobial agent selection, timing, route of administration, duration, and de-escalation; timing of source control; treatment of specific pathogens; treatment of specific intra-abdominal disease processes; and implementation of hospital-based antimicrobial agent stewardship programs.

Summary: This document contains the most up-to-date recommendations from the SIS on the prevention and management of IAI in adult patients.

Surgical Infection Society: Chest Wall Injury Society Recommendations for Antibiotic Use during Surgical Stabilization of Traumatic Rib or Sternal Fractures to Reduce Risk of Implant Infection

Abstract

Background: Surgical stabilization of rib fractures is recommended in patients with flail chest or multiple displaced rib fractures with physiologic compromise. Surgical stabilization of rib fractures (SSRF) and surgical stabilization of sternal fractures (SSSF) involve open reduction and internal fixation of fractures with a plate construct to restore anatomic alignment. Most plate constructs are composed of titanium and presence of this foreign, non-absorbable material presents opportunity for implant infection. Although implant infection rates after SSRF and SSSF are low, they present a challenging clinical entity often requiring prolonged antibiotic therapy, debridement, and potentially implant removal.

Methods: The Surgical Infection Society’s Therapeutics and Guidelines Committee and Chest Wall Injury Society’s Publication Committee convened to develop recommendations for antibiotic use during and after surgical stabilization of traumatic rib and sternal fractures. Clinical scenarios included patients with concomitant infectious processes (sepsis, pneumonia, empyema, cellulitis) or sources of contamination (open chest, gross contamination) incurred as a result of their trauma and present at the time of their surgical stabilization. PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane databases were searched for pertinent studies. Using a process of iterative consensus, all committee members voted to accept or reject each recommendation.

Results: For patients undergoing SSRF or SSSF in the absence of pre-existing infectious process, there is insufficient evidence to suggest existing peri-operative guidelines or recommendations are inadequate. For patients undergoing SSRF or SSSF in the presence of sepsis, pneumonia, or an empyema, there is insufficient evidence to provide recommendations on duration and choice of antibiotic. This decision may be informed by existing guidelines for the concomitant infection. For patients undergoing SSRF or SSSF with an open or contaminated chest there is insufficient evidence to provide specific antibiotic recommendations.

Conclusions: This guideline document summarizes the current Surgical Infection Society and Chest Wall Injury Society recommendations regarding antibiotic use during and after surgical stabilization of traumatic rib or sternal fractures. Limited evidence exists in the chest wall surgical stabilization literature and further studies should be performed to delineate risk of implant infection among patients undergoing SSSRF or SSSF with concomitant infectious processes.

Surgical Infection Society Guidelines for Antibiotic Use in Patients Undergoing Cholecystectomy for Gallbladder Disease

Abstract

Background: Manifestations of gallbladder disease range from intermittent abdominal pain (symptomatic cholelithiasis) to potentially life-threatening illness (gangrenous cholecystitis). Although surgical intervention to treat acute cholecystitis is well defined, the role of antibiotic administration before or after cholecystectomy to decrease morbidity or mortality is less clear.

Methods: The Surgical Infection Society’s Therapeutics and Guidelines Committee convened to develop guidelines for antibiotic use in patients undergoing cholecystectomy for gallbladder disease to prevent surgical site infection, other infection, hospital length of stay, or mortality. PubMed, Embase, and the Cochrane Database were searched for relevant studies. Evaluation of the published evidence was performed using the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluations (GRADE) system. Using a process of iterative consensus, all authors voted to accept or reject each recommendation.

Results: We recommend against routine use of peri-operative antibiotic agents in low-risk patients undergoing elective laparoscopic cholecystectomy. We recommend use of peri-operative antibiotic agents for patients undergoing laparoscopic cholecystectomy for acute cholecystitis. We recommend against use of post-operative antibiotic agents after elective laparoscopic cholecystectomy for symptomatic cholelithiasis. We recommend against use of post-operative antibiotic agents in patients undergoing laparoscopic cholecystectomy for mild or moderate acute cholecystitis. We recommend a maximum of four days of antibiotic agents, and perhaps a shorter duration in patients undergoing cholecystectomy for severe (Tokyo Guidelines grade III) cholecystitis.

Conclusions: This guideline summarizes the current Surgical Infection Society recommendations for antibiotic use in patients undergoing cholecystectomy for gallbladder disease.

Surgical Infection Society Guidelines for Total Abdominal Colectomy versus Diverting Loop Ileostomy with Antegrade Intra-Colonic Lavage for the Surgical Management of Severe or Fulminant, Non-Perforated Clostridioides difficile Colitis

Abstract

Background: Clostridioides difficile infection (CDI) can result in life-threatening illness requiring surgery. Surgical options for managing severe or fulminant, non-perforated C. difficile colitis include total abdominal colectomy with end ileostomy or creation of a diverting loop ileostomy with antegrade vancomycin lavage.

Methods: The Surgical Infection Society’s Therapeutics and Guidelines Committee convened to develop guidelines for summarizing the current SIS recommendations for total abdominal colectomy versus diverting loop ileostomy with antegrade lavage for severe or fulminant, non-perforated C. difficile colitis. PubMed, Embase, and the Cochrane database were searched for pertinent studies. Severe infection was defined as laboratory diagnosis of C. difficile infection with leukocytosis (white blood cell count of ≥15,000 cells/mL) or elevated creatinine (serum creatinine level >1.5 mg/dL). Fulminant infection was defined as laboratory diagnosis of C. difficile infection with hypotension or shock, ileus, or megacolon. Perforation was defined as complete disruption of the colon wall. Total abdominal colectomy was defined as resection of the ascending, transverse, descending, and sigmoid colon with end ileostomy. For the purpose of the guideline, the terms subtotal colectomy, total abdominal colectomy, and rectal-sparing total colectomy were used interchangeably. Diverting loop ileostomy with antegrade enema was defined as creation of both a diverting loop ileostomy with intra-operative colonic lavage and post-operative antegrade vancomycin unless otherwise specified. Evaluation of the published evidence was performed using the Grades of Recommendation Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) system. Using a process of iterative consensus, all committee members voted to accept or reject each recommendation.

Results: We recommend that total abdominal colectomy be the procedure of choice for definitive therapy of severe or fulminant, non-perforated C. difficile colitis. In select patients, colon preservation using diverting loop ileostomy with intra-colonic vancomycin may be associated with higher rates of ostomy reversal and restoration of gastrointestinal continuity but may lead to development of recurrent C. difficile colitis.

Conclusions: This guideline summarizes the current Surgical Infection Society recommendations regarding use of total abdominal colectomy versus diverting loop ileostomy with antegrade lavage for adults with severe or fulminant, non-perforated C. difficile infection.

Surgical Infection Society Guidance for Restoration of Surgical Services during the Coronavirus Disease-2019 Pandemic

Abstract

Background: As the coronavirus disease-2019 (COVID-19) pandemic continues globally, high numbers of new infections are developing nationwide, particularly in the U.S. Midwest and along both the Atlantic and Pacific coasts. The need to accommodate growing numbers of hospitalized patients has led facilities in affected areas to suspend anew or curtail normal hospital activities, including elective surgery, even as earlier-affected areas normalized surgical services. Backlogged surgical cases now number in the tens of millions globally. Facilities will be hard-pressed to address these backlogs, even absent the recrudescence of COVID-19. This document provides guidance for the safe and effective resumption of surgical services as circumstances permit. 

Methods: Review and synthesis of pertinent international peer-reviewed literature, with integration of expert opinion. 

Results: The “second-wave” of serious infections is placing the healthcare system under renewed stress. Surgical teams likely will encounter persons harboring the virus, whether symptomatic or not. Continued vigilance and protection of patients and staff remain paramount. Reviewed are the impact of COVID-19 on the surgical workforce, considerations for operating on a COVID-19 patient and the outcomes of such operations, the size and nature of the surgical backlog, and the logistics of resumption, including organizational considerations, patient and staff safety, preparation of the surgical candidate, and the role of enhanced recovery programs to reduce morbidity, length of stay, and cost by rational, equitable resource utilization. 

Conclusions: Resumption of surgical services requires institutional commitment (including teams of surgeons, anesthesiologists, nurses, pharmacists, therapists, dieticians, and administrators). Structured protocols and equitable implementation programs, and iterative audit, planning, and integration will improve outcomes, enhance safety, preserve resources, and reduce cost, all of which will contribute to safe and successful reduction of the surgical backlog.

Surgical Infection Society 2020 Updated Guidelines on the Management of Complicated Skin and Soft Tissue Infections

Abstract

Background: The Surgical Infection Society (SIS) Guidelines for the treatment of complicated skin and soft tissue infections (SSTIs) were published in October 2009 in Surgical Infections. The purpose of this project was to provide a succinct update on the earlier guidelines based on an additional decade of data.

Methods: We reviewed the previous guidelines eliminating bite wounds and diabetic foot infections including their associated references. Relevant articles on the topic of complicated SSTIs from 2008–2020 were reviewed and graded individually. Comparisons were then made between the old and the new graded recommendations with review of the older references by two authors when there was disparity between the grades.

Results: The majority of new studies addressed antimicrobial options and duration of therapy particularly in complicated abscesses. There were fewer updated studies on diagnosis and specific operative interventions. Many of the topics addressed in the original guidelines had no new literature to evaluate.

Conclusions: Most recommendations remain unchanged from the original guidelines with the exception of increased support for adjuvant antimicrobial therapy after drainage of complex abscess and increased data for the use of alternative antimicrobial agents.

Surgical Infection Society Guidance for Operative and Peri-Operative Care of Adult Patients Infected by the Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus-2 (SARS-CoV-2)

Abstract

Background: Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus-2 (SARS-CoV-2)-associated viral infection (coronavirus disease 2019, COVID-19) is a virulent, contagious viral pandemic that is affecting populations worldwide. As with any airborne viral respiratory infection, surgical and non-surgical patients may be affected. 

Methods: Review and synthesis of pertinent English-language literature pertaining to COVID-19 infection among adult patients. 

Results: COVID-19 disease that requires hospitalization results in critical illness approximately 25% of the time and requires mechanical ventilation with positive airway pressure. Acute kidney injury, a marked hypercoagulable state, and sometimes myocarditis can be features of COVID-19 in addition to the characteristic severe acute lung injury. Even if not among the most seriously afflicted, older patients with medical comorbidities are both predisposed to infection and risk increased morbidity and mortality, however, all persons presenting for surgical intervention should be suspected of infection (and thus transmissibility) even if asymptomatic. Although most elective surgery has been curtailed by administrative or governmental fiat, patients will still need urgent or emergency operative intervention for time-sensitive disease processes such as malignant neoplasia or for true emergencies such as perforated viscus or traumatic injury. It is possible to provide safe surgical care for SARS-CoV-2-positive patients and minimize nosocomial transmission to healthcare workers. 

Conclusions: This guidance will facilitate appropriate protection of patients and staff, and maintenance of infection control measures to assist surgical personnel and facilities to prepare for COVID-19-infected adult patients requiring urgent or emergent operative intervention and to provide optimal patient care.

Role of Empiric Anti-Fungal Therapy in the Treatment of Perforated Peptic Ulcer Disease: Review of the Evidence and Future Directions

Abstract

Background: Peptic ulcer disease (PUD) affects four million people worldwide. Perforated peptic ulcer (PPU) occurs in less than 15% of cases but is associated with significant morbidity and mortality rates. Administration of antibiotics is standard treatment for gastrointestinal perforations, including PPU. Although fungal growth is common in peritoneal fluid cultures from patients with PPU, current data suggest empiric anti-fungal therapy fails to improve outcomes. To examine the role of anti-fungal agents in the treatment of PPU, the Surgical Infection Society hosted an Update Symposium at its 37th Annual Meeting. Here, we provide a synopsis of the symposium’s findings and a brief review of prospective and retrospective reports on the subject. 

Methods: A search of Pubmed/MEDLINE, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Library was performed between January 1, 2000, and November 1, 2018, comparing outcomes of PPU following empiric anti-fungal treatment versus no anti-fungal therapy. We used the search terms “perforated peptic ulcer,” “gastroduodenal ulcer,” “anti-fungal,” and “perforated” or “perforation.” 

Results: There are no randomized clinical trials comparing outcomes specifically for patients with PPU treated with or without empiric anti-fungal therapy. We identified one randomized multi-center trial evaluating outcomes for patients with intra-abdominal perforations, including PPU, that were treated with or without empiric anti-fungal therapy. We identified one single-center prospective series and three additional retrospective studies comparing outcomes for patients with PPU treated with or without empiric anti-fungal therapy. 

Conclusion: The current evidence reviewed here does not demonstrate efficacy of anti-fungal agents in improving outcomes in patients with PPU. As such, we caution against the routine use of empiric anti-fungal agents in these patients. Further studies should help identify specific subpopulations of patients who might derive benefit from anti-fungal therapy and help define appropriate treatment regimens and durations that minimize the risk of resistance, adverse events, and cost.

Antibiotics versus No Antibiotics for the Treatment of Acute Uncomplicated Diverticulitis: Review of the Evidence and Future Directions

Abstract

Background: Acute diverticulitis occurs in 25% of individuals with diverticular disease and is associated with significant morbidity and mortality rates. Disease severity is classified as uncomplicated or complicated, with the latter including perforation, fistula, obstruction, or distant abscess. Uncomplicated diverticulitis often improves without surgery or invasive therapies. Administration of antibiotics is a standard of care for treatment of acute uncomplicated diverticulitis. However, recent data suggest antibiotics do not influence outcomes significantly. To address these conflicting approaches, the Surgical Infection Society hosted an Update Symposium at its 37th Annual Meeting examining the role of antibiotics in the treatment of acute uncomplicated diverticulitis. Here, we provide a synopsis of the symposium’s findings and a brief review of recent prospective and randomized clinical trials on the topic.

Methods: A search of Embase, MEDLINE, and the Cochrane Library was performed for prospective series and randomized clinical trials published between January 1, 2010, and January 1, 2018, comparing outcomes of antibiotic versus no antibiotic therapy for acute uncomplicated diverticulitis.

Results: We identified two single-center prospective series and two randomized clinical trials comparing outcomes for patients with acute uncomplicated diverticulitis treated with antibiotics versus no antibiotics.

Conclusion: Current evidence does not support administration of antibiotics to improve outcomes in carefully selected healthy patients with acute uncomplicated left-sided diverticulitis. Further studies should help identify specific subpopulations of patients who would derive benefit from antibiotic therapy and help define appropriate antibiotic regimens and treatment durations that minimize cost, adverse effects, and risk of anti-microbial resistance.