LAUSR

Background: Despite advances in infection control measures, surgical site infections (SSIs) remain a real and present danger to patients. In most studies addressing SSI prevention measures, recommendations are often made in the absence of information such as culture results, the antibiotic agents used for prophylaxis, and antibiotic sensitivity data. The aim of this study is to document this latter claim by reviewing studies published in the last five years in highly read and cited surgical journals. Methods: A systematic review evaluating SSIs from four highly cited surgical journals, Annals of Surgery, the British Journal of Surgery, JAMA Surgery, and the Journal of the American College of Surgeons was conducted for articles published between 2016 and 2021. We focused our analysis on the following key features: how SSI is defined; bacterial culture information; antibiotic sensitivity data; and identification of the antibiotic chosen for prophylaxis. We hypothesized that, in most cases among the journals queried, this information would be unavailable. Results: Of the 71 studies included, 32 diagnosed SSIs based on criteria developed by the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention while five provided no definition of SSI. Of the 27 articles recommending increasing antibiotic usage, only one study performed antibiotic sensitivity testing to guide the antibiotic choice. Of 71 studies reviewed, only one reported all key features we considered to be important for SSI antibiotic decision-making; 46 reported none of the key features. Conclusions: Among publications addressing SSIs in four highly cited surgical journals, key information regarding diagnosis and with which to base antibiotic recommendations, is routinely unavailable.