Video Thumbnail SSI Campaign

Let’s Stop Surgical Site Infections

Every patient undergoing a surgical procedure is at risk of a surgical site infection (SSI).   It is estimated that more than 1 in 10 surgical patients in lower-and-middle-income countries will suffer from an SSI costing the healthcare millions of dollars annually and placing patients at risk for increased morbidity and mortality1-4. While many risk factors contribute to SSIs, steps can be taken to address such risks. The more interventions, the lower the risk of SSIs1-3. Pledge now to support the prevention of SSIs and learn more about it.

 

The Plus Difference

The Plus Difference

The Evidence Tells the Story

Every patient with a surgical incision is at risk for Surgical Site Infection.5 These can be costly to both the hospital and paitents.1-5  Studies have found that sutures with Triclosan, a broad spectrum antimicrobial agent, inhibits bacterial colonization for 7 days or more.13-15 Learn how Ethicon Plus Sutures are effective at reducing the risk of SSIs.16

The Power of Plus

The Power of Plus

The Effectiveness of Plus Sutures

Ethicon Plus Sutures have been studied in 15 meta-analysis with more than 16,000 patients.16,20-33  The most recent meta-analysis with nearly 6,500 patients and twenty-one RCTs, showed a reduction in the risk of SSI’s by 28%.17i

Learn more about the breadth of data establishing Triclosan-coated Ethicon Plus Sutures’ ability to stop bacterial colonization of the suture line and help reduce the risk of infection.13-16

 

Here, There, Everywhere

Here, There, Everywhere

SSIs across the world

After surgery, all patients look forward to life as they knew it. Yet more than 1 in 10 surgical patients in lower- and middle- income countries suffer from Surgical Site Infections (SSIs)1. This not only costs hospitals millions of dollars in treatment and extra bed days, it can have a physical and mental impact on patients.1-5

 

Cost and Consequences

Cost and Consequences

The Economic and Social Impact of SSIs

SSIs are the second most common HealthCare Associated Infection.6  Patients with SSIs are five times more likely to be readmitted and hospitalized for up to ten additional days and in some Asia Pacific countries it is estimated an additional 20 days.3,5,7   Research has shown a single SSI can lead to additional costs of USD$21,000.4 This is in addition to the physical, social and mental impact on the patient.6

 

Let’s Stop Surgical Site Infections

Every patient undergoing a surgical procedure is at risk of a surgical site infection (SSI). It is estimated that more than 1 in 10 surgical patients in lower-and-middle-income countries will suffer from an SSI costing healthcare millions of dollars annually and placing patients at risk for increased morbidity and mortality2,7,8. While many risk factors contribute to SSIs, steps can be taken to address such risks. The more interventions, the lower the risk of SSIs1,2. Pledge now to support the prevention of SSIs and learn more about it.

References

  1. World Health Organisation. WHO Infographic ssi-nfogrpahic.pdf.  [accessed 24/5/2019]
  2. Ban KA, Minei JP, Laronga C, et al. American College of Surgeons and Surgical Infection Society: Surgical Site Infection Guidelines, 2016 Update. J Am Coll Surg. 2016;224:59-74.
  3. de Lissovoy G, at al. Surgical site infection incidence and burden assessment using multi-institutional real-world data. Poster presented at Int. Society for Pharmacoeconomics and Outcomes Research 11th Annual European Congress, 2011; Madrid, Spain
  4. WHO Global Guidelines for the Prevention of Surgical Site Infection, 2016.  [accessed 24/5/2019]  
  5. World Health Organization. WHO Guidelines for Safe Surgery, 2009.
  6. Perencevich, EN, Sands KE, Cosgrove SE, Guadagnoli E., Meara E and Platt R. Health and Economic Impact of Surgical Site Infections Diagnosed after Hospital Discharge.  Emerging Infections Diseases (2003);9(2):195-203.
  7. Lee, KY, Coleman K, Paech D, Norris S, Tan JT. The epidemiology and cost of surgical site infections in Korea: a systematic review.  J Korean Surg Soc 2011; 81:295-307.  
  8. National Health and Medical Research Council (NHMRC) , (May 2019) Australian Guidelines for the Prevention and Control of Infection in Healthcare, Canberra [Accessed 10 June]
  9. Saguil, EA, Nzer A, Bermudez, MD, Antonio CAT, Cochon KL,  Consensus Recommendations on the Prevention and Management of Surgical Site Infections (SSI) In the Philippine Setting Philippine Journal of Surgical Specialties (PJSS) 2017;Vol.72(2) Jul-Dec 70-84
  10. 中华医学会外科学分会外科感染与重症医学学组中国医师协会外科医师分会, 肠瘘外科医师专业委员会,  通信作者:任建安,中华胃肠外科杂志2019年4月第22卷第4期Chin J Gastrointest Surg,April 2019,Vol.22,No.4
  11. Elek SD, Conen PE.  The Virulence of Staphylococcus Pyogenes for Man. A Study of the Problems of Wound Infection. Br. J Exp Pathol 1957 Dec; 38(6): 573-86
  12. Mangram AJ, Horan TC, Pearson ML, Silver LC, Jarvis WR. Hospital Infection Control Practices Advisory Committee. Guideline for Prevention of Surgical Site Infection, 1999. Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol. 1999;20(4):250-278.4. Edmiston (2006)
  13. Rothenburger S, Spangler D, Bhende S, Burkely D. In vitro antimicrobial evaluation of Coated VICRYL* Plus Antibacterial Suture (coated polyglactin 910 with triclosan) using zone of inhibition assays. Surg Infect (Larchmt). 2002;3(Suppl 1):S79˜S87.
  14. Ming X, Rothenburger S, Yang D. In vitro antibacterial efficacy of MONOCRYL plus antibacterial suture (poliglecaprone 25 with triclosan). Surg Infect (Larchmt). 2007;8(2):201˜207.
  15. Ming X, Rothenburger S, Nichols M. In vivo and in vitro antibacterial efficacy of PDS plus (polidioxanone with triclosan) suture. Surg Infect (Larchmt). 2008;9(4):451˜457.
  16. de Jonge SW, Atema JJ, Solomkin JS, Boermeester MA. Meta-analysis and trial sequential analysis of triclosan-coated sutures for the prevention of surgical site infection. Brit J Surg. 2017;ePub-DOI: 10.1002/bjs.10445
  17. NPS MedicineWise (2019) Antibiotics, explained [Accessed 10 June 2019)
  18. Mcdonnell G and Russel A.D. Antiseptics and Disinfectants: Activity, Action, and Resistance. CLINICAL MICROBIOLOGY REVIEWS, 0893-8512/99/$04.0010 Jan. 1999, Vol. 12(1) p. 147–179
  19. Goodfellow G, Lee-Brotherton V, Daniels J, et al. CANTOX Health Sciences International–Antibacterial Resistance and Triclosan Poster, 2003. Ethicon, Inc.
  20. Apisarnthanarak A, Singh N, Bandong AN, et al. Triclosan Coated Sutures Reduce the Risk of Surgical Site Infections: A Systematic Review and MetaAnalysis. Infect Cont Hosp Epid. 2015;36:169-179
  21. Chang WK, Srinivasa S, Morton R, et al. Triclosan Impregnated Sutures to Decrease Surgical Site Infections: Systematic Review and Meta Analysis of Randomized Trials. Ann Surg. 2012; 255:854-859.
  22. Daoud FC. Systematic Literature Review Update of the PROUD Trial: Potential Usefulness of a Collaborative Database. Letter to Surg Infect (Larchmt). 2014;15:857-858.
  23. Edmiston CE, Daoud FC, Leaper D. Is there an evidence based argument for embracing an antimicrobial (triclosan) coated suture technology to reduce the risk for surgical?site infections?: A meta analysis. Surgery. 2013;154:89-100.
  24. Guo J, Pan LH, Li YX, et al. Efficacy of triclosan coated sutures for reducing risk of surgical site infection in adults: a meta analysis of randomized clinical trials. J Surg Res. 2016; 201:105-117.
  25. Sajid MS, Craciunas L, Sains P, et al. Use of antibacterial sutures for skin closure in controlling surgical site infections: a systematic review of published randomized, controlled trials. Gastroenterol Rep. 2013;1:42-50.
  26. Sandini M, Mattavelli I, Nespoli L, Uggeri F, Gianotti L. Systematic review and meta analysis of sutures coated with triclosan for the prevention of surgical site infection after elective colorectal surgery according to the PRISMA statement. Medicine. 2016;95:35(e40-57).
  27. Wang ZX, Jiang CP, Cao Y, et al. Systematic review and meta analysis of triclosan?coated sutures for the prevention of surgical site infection. Brit J Surg. 2013;100:465-473.
  28. Wu X, Kubilay NZ, Ren J, et al. Antimicrobial coated sutures to decrease surgical site infections: a systematic review and meta analysis. Eur J Clin Microbiol Infect Dis. 2016. DOI: 10.1007/s10096-016-2765y.
  29. Elsolh B, Zhang L, Patel SV. The Effect of Antibiotic-Coated Sutures on the Incidence of Surgical Site Infections in Abdominal Closures: a Meta-Analysis. Journal of gastrointestinal surgery : official journal of the Society for Surgery of the Alimentary Tract. 2017;21(5):896903.
  30. Henriksen N, Deerenberg E, Venclauskas L, Fortelny R, Miserez M, Muysoms F. Triclosan-coated sutures and surgical site infection in abdominal surgery. A meta-analysis. Hernia. 2017;21(2):S166.
  31. Uchino M, Mizuguchi T, Ohge H, Haji S, Shimizu J, Mohri Y, et al. The Efficacy of Antimicrobial-Coated Sutures for Preventing Incisional Surgical Site Infections in Digestive Surgery: a Systematic Review and Meta-analysis. Journal of gastrointestinal surgery : official journal of the Society for Surgery of the Alimentary Tract. 2018.
  32. Konstantelias AA, Andriakopoulou CS, Mourgela S. Triclosan-coated sutures for the prevention of surgical-site infections: a meta-analysis. Acta chirurgica Belgica. 2017;117(3):137?48.
  33. Leaper DJ, Edmiston CE, Jr., Holy CE. Meta-analysis of the potential economic impact following introduction of absorbable antimicrobial sutures. The British journal of surgery. 2017;104(2):e134-e44.
     

2019 Ethicon, Inc. All rights reserved 110404-190530 (July 2019) Johnson and Johnson Medical Pty Ltd. 1-5 Khartoum Road, North Ryde, NSW 2113 Australia.