Effect of intraoperative hyperoxia on the incidence of surgical site infections: a meta-analysis

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 therefor...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:British journal of anaesthesia : BJA 2018-06, Vol.120 (6), p.1176-1186
Hauptverfasser: Cohen, B., Schacham, Y.N., Ruetzler, K., Ahuja, S., Yang, D., Mascha, E.J., Barclay, A.B., Hung, M.H., Sessler, D.I.
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
container_end_page 1186
container_issue 6
container_start_page 1176
container_title British journal of anaesthesia : BJA
container_volume 120
creator Cohen, B.
Schacham, Y.N.
Ruetzler, K.
Ahuja, S.
Yang, D.
Mascha, E.J.
Barclay, A.B.
Hung, M.H.
Sessler, D.I.
description 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.
doi_str_mv 10.1016/j.bja.2018.02.027
format Article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_2045275285</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><els_id>S0007091218301430</els_id><sourcerecordid>2045275285</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c462t-a38a78f1e61e16ecd31e3035588eae6b08ac5d561eee7a0a79d5b2085b841e453</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNp9kE1L7DAUhoNc0fHjB7iRLt10PEmbJtWViF8guNF1PE1PNUOnGZOOOP_elFGXFw4k8D7nhfMwdsJhzoFX54t5s8C5AK7nINKoHTbjpeJ5pRT_x2YAoHKoudhnBzEuALgStdxj-6JWdSF1OWOvN11Hdsx8l7lhDOhXFHB0n5S9b9LXfznM_JCN75Ry61oaLE1wXIc3Z7HPohunaCpxfogXGWZLGjHHAftNdPGI7XbYRzr-eQ_Zy-3N8_V9_vh093B99ZjbshJjjoVGpTtOFSdekW0LTgUUUmpNSFUDGq1sZUqJFAKqupWNAC0bXXIqZXHIzra9q-A_1hRHs3TRUt_jQH4djYBSCiWFnlC-RW3wMQbqzCq4JYaN4WAmsWZhklgziTUg0qi0c_pTv26W1P5t_JpMwOUWoHTkp6NgonWTrdaF5Ma03v2n_hvikomj</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>2045275285</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Effect of intraoperative hyperoxia on the incidence of surgical site infections: a meta-analysis</title><source>Elektronische Zeitschriftenbibliothek - Frei zugängliche E-Journals</source><source>Alma/SFX Local Collection</source><creator>Cohen, B. ; Schacham, Y.N. ; Ruetzler, K. ; Ahuja, S. ; Yang, D. ; Mascha, E.J. ; Barclay, A.B. ; Hung, M.H. ; Sessler, D.I.</creator><creatorcontrib>Cohen, B. ; Schacham, Y.N. ; Ruetzler, K. ; Ahuja, S. ; Yang, D. ; Mascha, E.J. ; Barclay, A.B. ; Hung, M.H. ; Sessler, D.I.</creatorcontrib><description>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.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0007-0912</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1471-6771</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1016/j.bja.2018.02.027</identifier><identifier>PMID: 29793584</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>England: Elsevier Ltd</publisher><subject>anaesthesia ; hyperoxia ; meta-analysis ; surgical wound infection</subject><ispartof>British journal of anaesthesia : BJA, 2018-06, Vol.120 (6), p.1176-1186</ispartof><rights>2018 British Journal of Anaesthesia</rights><rights>Copyright © 2018 British Journal of Anaesthesia. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c462t-a38a78f1e61e16ecd31e3035588eae6b08ac5d561eee7a0a79d5b2085b841e453</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c462t-a38a78f1e61e16ecd31e3035588eae6b08ac5d561eee7a0a79d5b2085b841e453</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><link.rule.ids>314,776,780,27901,27902</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29793584$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Cohen, B.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Schacham, Y.N.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Ruetzler, K.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Ahuja, S.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Yang, D.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Mascha, E.J.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Barclay, A.B.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Hung, M.H.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Sessler, D.I.</creatorcontrib><title>Effect of intraoperative hyperoxia on the incidence of surgical site infections: a meta-analysis</title><title>British journal of anaesthesia : BJA</title><addtitle>Br J Anaesth</addtitle><description>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.</description><subject>anaesthesia</subject><subject>hyperoxia</subject><subject>meta-analysis</subject><subject>surgical wound infection</subject><issn>0007-0912</issn><issn>1471-6771</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2018</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><recordid>eNp9kE1L7DAUhoNc0fHjB7iRLt10PEmbJtWViF8guNF1PE1PNUOnGZOOOP_elFGXFw4k8D7nhfMwdsJhzoFX54t5s8C5AK7nINKoHTbjpeJ5pRT_x2YAoHKoudhnBzEuALgStdxj-6JWdSF1OWOvN11Hdsx8l7lhDOhXFHB0n5S9b9LXfznM_JCN75Ry61oaLE1wXIc3Z7HPohunaCpxfogXGWZLGjHHAftNdPGI7XbYRzr-eQ_Zy-3N8_V9_vh093B99ZjbshJjjoVGpTtOFSdekW0LTgUUUmpNSFUDGq1sZUqJFAKqupWNAC0bXXIqZXHIzra9q-A_1hRHs3TRUt_jQH4djYBSCiWFnlC-RW3wMQbqzCq4JYaN4WAmsWZhklgziTUg0qi0c_pTv26W1P5t_JpMwOUWoHTkp6NgonWTrdaF5Ma03v2n_hvikomj</recordid><startdate>201806</startdate><enddate>201806</enddate><creator>Cohen, B.</creator><creator>Schacham, Y.N.</creator><creator>Ruetzler, K.</creator><creator>Ahuja, S.</creator><creator>Yang, D.</creator><creator>Mascha, E.J.</creator><creator>Barclay, A.B.</creator><creator>Hung, M.H.</creator><creator>Sessler, D.I.</creator><general>Elsevier Ltd</general><scope>6I.</scope><scope>AAFTH</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7X8</scope></search><sort><creationdate>201806</creationdate><title>Effect of intraoperative hyperoxia on the incidence of surgical site infections: a meta-analysis</title><author>Cohen, B. ; Schacham, Y.N. ; Ruetzler, K. ; Ahuja, S. ; Yang, D. ; Mascha, E.J. ; Barclay, A.B. ; Hung, M.H. ; Sessler, D.I.</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c462t-a38a78f1e61e16ecd31e3035588eae6b08ac5d561eee7a0a79d5b2085b841e453</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2018</creationdate><topic>anaesthesia</topic><topic>hyperoxia</topic><topic>meta-analysis</topic><topic>surgical wound infection</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Cohen, B.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Schacham, Y.N.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Ruetzler, K.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Ahuja, S.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Yang, D.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Mascha, E.J.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Barclay, A.B.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Hung, M.H.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Sessler, D.I.</creatorcontrib><collection>ScienceDirect Open Access Titles</collection><collection>Elsevier:ScienceDirect:Open Access</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><jtitle>British journal of anaesthesia : BJA</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Cohen, B.</au><au>Schacham, Y.N.</au><au>Ruetzler, K.</au><au>Ahuja, S.</au><au>Yang, D.</au><au>Mascha, E.J.</au><au>Barclay, A.B.</au><au>Hung, M.H.</au><au>Sessler, D.I.</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Effect of intraoperative hyperoxia on the incidence of surgical site infections: a meta-analysis</atitle><jtitle>British journal of anaesthesia : BJA</jtitle><addtitle>Br J Anaesth</addtitle><date>2018-06</date><risdate>2018</risdate><volume>120</volume><issue>6</issue><spage>1176</spage><epage>1186</epage><pages>1176-1186</pages><issn>0007-0912</issn><eissn>1471-6771</eissn><abstract>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.</abstract><cop>England</cop><pub>Elsevier Ltd</pub><pmid>29793584</pmid><doi>10.1016/j.bja.2018.02.027</doi><tpages>11</tpages><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 0007-0912
ispartof British journal of anaesthesia : BJA, 2018-06, Vol.120 (6), p.1176-1186
issn 0007-0912
1471-6771
language eng
recordid cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_2045275285
source Elektronische Zeitschriftenbibliothek - Frei zugängliche E-Journals; Alma/SFX Local Collection
subjects anaesthesia
hyperoxia
meta-analysis
surgical wound infection
title Effect of intraoperative hyperoxia on the incidence of surgical site infections: a meta-analysis
url https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-02-21T16%3A52%3A02IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Effect%20of%20intraoperative%20hyperoxia%20on%20the%20incidence%20of%20surgical%20site%20infections:%20a%20meta-analysis&rft.jtitle=British%20journal%20of%20anaesthesia%20:%20BJA&rft.au=Cohen,%20B.&rft.date=2018-06&rft.volume=120&rft.issue=6&rft.spage=1176&rft.epage=1186&rft.pages=1176-1186&rft.issn=0007-0912&rft.eissn=1471-6771&rft_id=info:doi/10.1016/j.bja.2018.02.027&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E2045275285%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=2045275285&rft_id=info:pmid/29793584&rft_els_id=S0007091218301430&rfr_iscdi=true