GMJ Medicine
eISSN : 2626-3041
Embase
Biosis Previews
description
Volume 1, Issue 4 (2022)
GMJM 2022, 1(4): 115-118 |
Back to browse issues page
Article Type:
Subject:
History
Received: 2022/07/11 | Accepted: 2022/09/18 | Published: 2022/09/29
Received: 2022/07/11 | Accepted: 2022/09/18 | Published: 2022/09/29
How to cite this article
Mahdavi F, Eghdam Zamiri R. The Incidence and Risk Factors of Surgical Wound Infection after Abdominal Hysterectomy in Cancerous Women. GMJM 2022; 1 (4) :115-118
URL: http://gmedicine.de/article-2-210-en.html
URL: http://gmedicine.de/article-2-210-en.html
Download citation:
BibTeX | RIS | EndNote | Medlars | ProCite | Reference Manager | RefWorks
Send citation to:
Rights and permissions
BibTeX | RIS | EndNote | Medlars | ProCite | Reference Manager | RefWorks
Send citation to:
Authors
F. Mahdavi1, R. Eghdam Zamiri *1
1- Tuberculosis and Lung Disease Research Center, Tabriz University of Medical Sciences, Tabriz, Iran
Abstract (232 Views)
Aims: Hysterectomy is the most common surgery of choice after cesarean section in medical centers, and abdominal wall infection is one of the most important complications after this operation, which leads to readmission of the patient and long-term treatments. Therefore, this study was performed to determine the incidence and risk factors of surgical wound infection after abdominal hysterectomy in women with and without cancer.
Materials & Methods: This descriptive cross-sectional study was performed during the years 2019-2020 in the hospitals of Tabriz University of Medical Sciences with the participation of 400 women candidates for abdominal hysterectomy (with and without cancer). The incidence of infection after surgery was measured and its factors were examined.
Findings: The incidence of ulcers after hysterectomy was between 6 and 7%, which factors such as the use of drugs that weaken the immune system, diabetes, late shaving before surgery and the urgency of surgery lead to an increased risk of infection after surgery.
Conclusion: To reduce the rate of infection after abdominal hysterectomy, preventive measures should be taken based on the risk of infection.
Materials & Methods: This descriptive cross-sectional study was performed during the years 2019-2020 in the hospitals of Tabriz University of Medical Sciences with the participation of 400 women candidates for abdominal hysterectomy (with and without cancer). The incidence of infection after surgery was measured and its factors were examined.
Findings: The incidence of ulcers after hysterectomy was between 6 and 7%, which factors such as the use of drugs that weaken the immune system, diabetes, late shaving before surgery and the urgency of surgery lead to an increased risk of infection after surgery.
Conclusion: To reduce the rate of infection after abdominal hysterectomy, preventive measures should be taken based on the risk of infection.
Keywords:
References
1. Aghamohammadi D, Mehdinavaz Aghdam A, Khanbabayi Gol M. Prevalence of infections associated with port and predisposing factors in women with common cancers under chemotherapy referred to hospitals in Tabriz in 2015. IJOGI. 2019;21(11):7-13. [Persian] [Link]
2. Aghamohammadi D, Khanbabayi Gol M. Effect of intravenous infusion of magnesium sulfate on opioid use and hemodynamic status after hysterectomy: double-blind clinical trial. IJOGI. 2019;22(7):32-38. [Persian] [Link]
3. Surgical Site Infection (SSI) [Internet]. Georgia: CDC. 2010 Nov [cited 2021, 24 Feb]. Available from: https://www.cdc.gov/hai/ssi/ssi.html [Link]
4. Ban KA, Minei JP, Laronga C, Harbrecht BG, Jensen EH, Fry DE. American college of surgeons and surgical infection society: Surgical site infection guidelines, 2016 update. J Am Coll Surg. 2017;224(1):59-74. [Link] [DOI:10.1016/j.jamcollsurg.2016.10.029]
5. Winfield RD, Reese S, Bochicchio K, Mazuski JE, Bochicchio GV. Obesity and the risk for surgical site infection in abdominal surgery. Am Surg. 2016;82(4):331-6. [Link] [DOI:10.1177/000313481608200418]
6. Pop-Vicas A, Musuuza JS, Schmitz M, Al-Niaimi A, Safdar N. Incidence and risk factors for surgical site infection post-hysterectomy in a tertiary care center. Am J Infect Control. 2017;45(3):284-7. [Link] [DOI:10.1016/j.ajic.2016.10.008]
7. Mazzeffi M, Tanaka K, Galvagno S. Red Blood Cell Transfusion and surgical site infection after colon resection surgery: A cohort study. Anesth Analg. 2017;125(4):1316-21. [Link] [DOI:10.1213/ANE.0000000000002099]
8. Webster J, Osborne S. Preoperative bathing or showering with skin antiseptics to prevent surgical site infection. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2015;(2):CD004985. [Link] [DOI:10.1002/14651858.CD004985.pub5]
9. Edmiston Jr CE, Lee CJ, Krepel CJ, Spencer M, Leaper D, Brown KR, et al. Evidence for a standardized preadmission showering regimen to achieve maximal antiseptic skin surface concentrations of chlorhexidine gluconate, 4%, in surgical patients. JAMA Surg. 2015;150(11):1027-33. [Link] [DOI:10.1001/jamasurg.2015.2210]
10. Duggan EW, Carlson K, Umpierrez GE. Perioperative hyperglycemia management: An update. Anesthesiology. 2017;126(3):547-60. [Link] [DOI:10.1097/ALN.0000000000001515]
11. Berríos-Torres SI, Umscheid CA, Bratzler DW, Leas B, Stone EC, Kelz RR, et al. Centers for disease control and prevention guideline for the prevention of surgical site infection, 2017. JAMA Surg. 2017;152(8):784-91. [Link] [DOI:10.1001/jamasurg.2017.0904]
12. Sessler DI Perioperative thermoregulation and heat balance. Lancet. 2016;387(10038):2655-2664. [Link] [DOI:10.1016/S0140-6736(15)00981-2]
13. Hopf HW. Perioperative temperature management: time for a new standard of care?. Anesthesiology. 2015;122(2):229-30. [Link] [DOI:10.1097/ALN.0000000000000552]
14. Dumville JC, Gray TA, Walter CJ, Sharp CA, Page T, Macefield R, et al. Dressings for the prevention of surgical site infection. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2016;12(12):CD003091. [Link] [DOI:10.1002/14651858.CD003091.pub4]
15. Echebiri NC, McDoom MM, Aalto MM, Fauntleroy J, Nagappan N, Barnabei VM. Prophylactic use of negative pressure wound therapy after cesarean delivery. Obstet Gynecol. 2015;125(2):299-307. [Link] [DOI:10.1097/AOG.0000000000000634]
16. Webster J, Liu Z, Norman G, Dumville JC, Chiverton L, Scuffham P, et al. Negative pressure wound therapy for surgical wounds healing by primary closure. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2019;3(3):CD009261. [Link] [DOI:10.1002/14651858.CD009261.pub4]
17. Tartari E, Weterings V, Gastmeier P, Baño JR. Patient engagement with surgical site infection prevention: An expert panel perspective. Antimicrob Resist Infect Control. 2017;6(1):1-10. [Link] [DOI:10.1186/s13756-017-0202-3]
18. Anderson PA, Savage JW, Vaccaro AP, Radcliff K, Arnold PM, Lawrence BD, et al. Prevention of surgical site infection in spine surgery. Neurosurgery. 2017;80(3S):S114-S123. [Link] [DOI:10.1093/neuros/nyw066]
19. Pellegrini JE, Toledo P, Soper DE, Bradford WC, Cruz DA, et al. consensus bundle on prevention of surgical site infections after major gynecologic surgery. Obstet Gynecol. 2017;129(1):50-61. [Link] [DOI:10.1097/AOG.0000000000001751]
20. Khanbabayi Gol M. An investigation into the effects of magnesium sulfate on the complications of succinylcholine administration in nulliparous women undergoing elective cesarean section: A double-blind clinical trial. Int J Women Health Reprod Sci. 2019;7(4):520-5. [Link] [DOI:10.15296/ijwhr.2019.86]