Predictors of surgical site infection after radical cystectomy: should we enhance surgical antibiotic prophylaxis?

  • Hanan GoldbergEmail author
  • Chen Shenhar
  • Hadar Tamir
  • Roy Mano
  • Jack Baniel
  • David Margel
  • Daniel Kedar
  • David Lifshitz
  • Ofer Yossepowitch
Original Article



To compare surgical site infections (SSI) rate after radical cystectomy (RC) over time and ascertain whether antibiotic prophylaxis should be enhanced.


All medical records of RC patients in a single tertiary uro-oncology center between 2007 and 2017 were analyzed. SSI was defined using the criteria of the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. All bacterial culture results and antimicrobial resistance rates were recorded. Lastly, multivariable logistic regression analysis was performed to ascertain SSI predictors.


RC was performed in 405 patients, of which 96 (23.7%) developed SSI. No differences were demonstrated in the mean age, gender, NIDDM prevalence, neoadjuvant chemotherapy, positive preoperative urine culture, bowel preparation, and surgery time between both groups. However, statistically significant higher median BMI, age-adjusted Charlson Comorbidity score, usage of ceftriaxone preoperatively, and intensive care unit (ICU) hospitalization were noted in SSI patients. Overall, 62/96 (63.5%) SSI patients had a positive wound culture, with only 16.7% of the pathogens being sensitive to their perioperative antibiotics. Lastly, on multivariable analysis rising BMI, preoperative ceftriaxone and ICU hospitalization were associated with a higher SSI rate.


Preoperative BMI reduction, and maximal preoperative medical optimization in an attempt to lower ICU admittance rates, should be part of the ideal strategy for lowering SSI rates. Additionally, preoperative antibiotics should be enhanced to harbor-wide spectrum coverage, based on local resistance rates.


Radical cystectomy Surgical site infection Surgical antibiotic prophylaxis 



American Urology association


Body mass index


US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention


European association of Urology


Enhanced recovery after surgery


Ileal conduit


Intensive care unit


Neoadjuvant chemotherapy


Odds Ratio


Radical cystectomy


Relative risk


Surgical antibiotic prophylaxis


Surgical site infection


Author contributions

HG: project development, data collection, data analysis, manuscript writing. CS: project development, data collection, data analysis, manuscript writing. HT: data collection, data analysis. RM: data collection, data analysis, manuscript editing. JB: project development, manuscript editing. DM: project development, manuscript editing. DK: project development, manuscript editing. OY: project development, data analysis, manuscript writing and editing


No disclosures. This research did not receive any specific grant from funding agencies in the public, commercial, or not-for-profit sectors.

Compliance with ethical standards

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Research involving human participants and/or animals

As this was a retrospective study, this study did not contain any contact with human participants or animals performed by any of the authors.

Informed consent

As this was a retrospective study, no informed consent was required for this study by the internal review board.

Supplementary material

345_2018_2482_MOESM1_ESM.docx (17 kb)
Supplementary material 1 (DOCX 16 kb)
345_2018_2482_MOESM2_ESM.docx (15 kb)
Supplementary material 2 (DOCX 14 kb)


  1. 1.
    Leaper DJ (2010) Surgical-site infection. Br J Surg 97(11):1601–1602CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Schmid M, Chiang HA, Sood A et al (2016) Causes of hospital readmissions after urologic cancer surgery. Urol Oncol 34(5):236.e1–236.e11CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Gagliardi AR, Fenech D, Eskicioglu C, Nathens AB, McLeod R (2009) Factors influencing antibiotic prophylaxis for surgical site infection prevention in general surgery: a review of the literature. Can J Surg 52(6):481–489PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Kirkland KB, Briggs JP, Trivette SL, Wilkinson WE, Sexton DJ (1999) The impact of surgical-site infections in the 1990s: attributable mortality, excess length of hospitalization, and extra costs. Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol 20(11):725–730CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Chang SS, Cookson MS, Baumgartner RG, Wells N, Smith JA Jr (2002) Analysis of early complications after radical cystectomy: results of a collaborative care pathway. J Urol 167(5):2012–2016CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Alonso-Isa M, Medina-Polo J, Lara-Isla A et al (2017) Surgical wound infection in urology. Analysis of risk factors and associated microorganisms. Actas Urol Espanolas 41(2):109–116Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Yamamoto T, Takahashi S, Ichihara K et al (2015) How do we understand the disagreement in the frequency of surgical site infection between the CDC and Clavien-Dindo classifications? J Infect Chemother 21(2):130–133CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Gondo T, Ohno Y, Nakashima J et al (2014) Factors predicting incisional surgical site infection in patients undergoing open radical cystectomy for bladder cancer. Int J Clin Oncol 19(5):935–939CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Krasnow RE, Mossanen M, Koo S et al (2017) Prophylactic antibiotics and postoperative complications of radical cystectomy: a population based analysis in the United States. J Urol 198(2):297–304CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Pariser JJ, Anderson BB, Pearce SM et al (2016) The effect of broader, directed antimicrobial prophylaxis including fungal coverage on perioperative infectious complications after radical cystectomy. Urol Oncol 34(3):121.e9–121.e14CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Darouiche RO, Wall MJ Jr, Itani KM et al (2010) Chlorhexidine-alcohol versus povidone-iodine for surgical-site antisepsis. N Engl J Med 362(1):18–26CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Hamilton-Reeves JM, Bechtel MD, Hand LK et al (2016) Effects of immunonutrition for cystectomy on immune response and infection rates: a pilot randomized controlled clinical trial. Eur Urol 69(3):389–392CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Varadhan KK, Neal KR, Dejong CH, Fearon KC, Ljungqvist O, Lobo DN (2010) The enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) pathway for patients undergoing major elective open colorectal surgery: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. Clin Nutr 29(4):434–440 (Edinburgh, Scotland) CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Cerantola Y, Valerio M, Persson B et al (2013) Guidelines for perioperative care after radical cystectomy for bladder cancer: enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS((R))) society recommendations. Clin Nutr 32(6):879–887 (Edinburgh, Scotland) CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Bonkat RPG, Bartoletti R, Bruyère F, Geerlings SE, Wagenlehner F, Wullt B, Cai T, Köves B, Pilatz A, Pradere B, Veeratterapillay R (2017) EAU guidelines on urologic infections. EAU Guidelines Office, ArnhemGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Mangram AJ, Horan TC, Pearson ML, Silver LC, Jarvis WR (1999) Guideline for prevention of surgical site infection,1999. Hospital Infection Control Practices Advisory Committee. Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol 20(4):250–278 (quiz 79–80) CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Lemeshow S, Hosmer DW Jr (1982) A review of goodness of fit statistics for use in the development of logistic regression models. Am J Epidemiol 115(1):92–106CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Castro Pde T, Carvalho AL, Peres SV, Foschini MM, Passos AD (2011) Surgical-site infection risk in oncologic digestive surgery. Br J Infect Dis 15(2):109–115CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Lee CT, Dunn RL, Chen BT, Joshi DP, Sheffield J, Montie JE (2004) Impact of body mass index on radical cystectomy. J Urol 172(4 Pt 1):1281–1285CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Takeyama K, Matsukawa M, Kunishima Y et al (2005) Incidence of and risk factors for surgical site infection in patients with radical cystectomy with urinary diversion. J Infect Chemother 11(4):177–181CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Berrios-Torres SI, Umscheid CA, Bratzler DW et al (2017) Centers for disease control and prevention guideline for the prevention of surgical site infection, 2017. JAMA Surg 152(8):784–791CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Lemanu DP, Singh PP, Stowers MD, Hill AG (2014) A systematic review to assess cost effectiveness of enhanced recovery after surgery programmes in colorectal surgery. Colorectal Dis 16(5):338–346CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Azhar RA, Bochner B, Catto J et al (2016) Enhanced recovery after urological surgery: a contemporary systematic review of outcomes, key elements, and research needs. Eur Urol 70(1):176–187CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Grant MC, Yang D, Wu CL, Makary MA, Wick EC (2017) Impact of enhanced recovery after surgery and fast track surgery pathways on healthcare-associated infections: results from a systematic review and meta-analysis. Ann Surg 265(1):68–79CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Becker K, Heilmann C, Peters G (2014) Coagulase-negative Staphylococci. Clin Microbiol Rev 27(4):870–926CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Barlam TF, Cosgrove SE, Abbo LM et al (2016) Implementing an antibiotic stewardship program: guidelines by the infectious diseases society of America and the society for healthcare epidemiology of America. Clin Infect Dis 62(10):e51–e77CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Allegranzi B, Bischoff P, de Jonge S et al (2016) New WHO recommendations on preoperative measures for surgical site infection prevention: an evidence-based global perspective. Lancet Infect Dis 16(12):e276–e287CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Roth B, Birkhauser FD, Zehnder P et al (2013) Parenteral nutrition does not improve postoperative recovery from radical cystectomy: results of a prospective randomised trial. Eur Urol 63(3):475–482CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of UrologyBeilinson Hospital, Rabin Medical Center and Tel Aviv University Sackler School of MedicinePetah TikvaIsrael

Personalised recommendations