Literature DB >> 9474480

Methicillin-resistant staphylococci in clean surgery. Is there a role for prophylaxis?

E Mini1, S Nobili, P Periti.   

Abstract

The incidence of infection in clean surgery (i.e. surgery with no major contamination of the operative site) should be less than 2%, although the incidence of postoperative infections can be higher in patients with various risk factors (namely insertion of foreign bodies, a compromised immune status or prolonged duration of surgery). Although antibiotic prophylaxis has been shown to reduce the incidence of postoperative infections in clean surgery, there is still no consensus regarding its use in this area. However, for clean surgical procedures that involve implantation of foreign material, grafts or prosthetic devices, prophylaxis is well accepted and justifiable, since this practice is indicated when the benefits exceed the expected risks. Staphylococcus aureus and coagulase-negative staphylococci are responsible for 70 to 90% of wound infections in this type of surgery. First and second generation cephalosporins are considered the drugs of choice for surgical prophylaxis. Cefazolin and other cephalosporins have good tissue penetration but poor coverage against methicillin-resistant staphylococci. The frequency with which methicillin-resistant staphylococci have been recovered in nosocomial infections has increased steadily during recent years. This provides a rationale for the use of alternative antibiotics, such as the glycopeptides (vancomycin and teicoplanin), for prophylaxis in clean surgery in hospitals where the prevalence of methicillin-resistant staphylococci is high. The effectiveness and tolerability of teicoplanin as prophylaxis for orthopaedic surgery involving joint replacement were analysed in 4 randomised controlled trials. Two compared teicoplanin with cefamandole, while the others compared teicoplanin with either cefuroxime or cefazolin. The overall early wound infection rates (within 3 months) in these studies were 1.1% for teicoplanin and 1.7% for the comparator cephalosporin. The overall late infection rate was 0.2% for both treatment groups. Adverse events were attributed to the drug in 1% of patients in both treatment groups. Therefore, on the basis of these trials, single dose teicoplanin is as efficacious and as well tolerated as multiple dose cephalosporin regimens for prophylaxis in prosthetic joint surgery.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  1997        PMID: 9474480     DOI: 10.2165/00003495-199700546-00008

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Drugs        ISSN: 0012-6667            Impact factor:   9.546


  83 in total

Review 1.  Antibiotic prophylaxis in clean surgery: peripheral vascular surgery, noncardiovascular thoracic surgery, herniorrhaphy, and mastectomy.

Authors:  C C Hopkins
Journal:  Rev Infect Dis       Date:  1991 Sep-Oct

2.  Teicoplanin selects for Staphylococcus aureus that is resistant to vancomycin.

Authors:  D M Shlaes; J H Shlaes
Journal:  Clin Infect Dis       Date:  1995-04       Impact factor: 9.079

3.  Antimicrobial prophylaxis in surgery.

Authors: 
Journal:  Med Lett Drugs Ther       Date:  1995-09-15       Impact factor: 1.909

Review 4.  Cephalosporin antibiotics as applied in surgery of bones and joints.

Authors:  H C Neu
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  1984-11       Impact factor: 4.176

5.  Identifying patients at high risk of surgical wound infection. A simple multivariate index of patient susceptibility and wound contamination.

Authors:  R W Haley; D H Culver; W M Morgan; J W White; T G Emori; T M Hooton
Journal:  Am J Epidemiol       Date:  1985-02       Impact factor: 4.897

Review 6.  Infections associated with prosthetic devices: magnitude of the problem.

Authors:  B Sugarman; E J Young
Journal:  Infect Dis Clin North Am       Date:  1989-06       Impact factor: 5.982

7.  Methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus in Europe.

Authors:  A Voss; D Milatovic; C Wallrauch-Schwarz; V T Rosdahl; I Braveny
Journal:  Eur J Clin Microbiol Infect Dis       Date:  1994-01       Impact factor: 3.267

8.  Changes in susceptibilities to teicoplanin, vancomycin and other antibiotics among Staphylococcus aureus isolates in a tertiary-care University hospital.

Authors:  P Baiocchi; A Capone; P Carfagna; C Santini; M Venditti
Journal:  Int J Antimicrob Agents       Date:  1996-07       Impact factor: 5.283

9.  Cephalothin and cefamandole penetration into bone, synovial fluid, and wound drainage fluid.

Authors:  D J Schurman; H P Hirshman; D S Burton
Journal:  J Bone Joint Surg Am       Date:  1980-09       Impact factor: 5.284

Review 10.  The role of cephalosporins in surgical prophylaxis.

Authors:  S L Gorbach
Journal:  J Antimicrob Chemother       Date:  1989-04       Impact factor: 5.790

View more
  4 in total

Review 1.  [Evidence-based antibiotic prophylaxis in aseptic orthopedic surgery].

Authors:  K-P Hunfeld; T A Wichelhaus; V Schäfer; M Rittmeister
Journal:  Orthopade       Date:  2003-12       Impact factor: 1.087

2.  Strategy to control methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus post-operative infection in orthopaedic surgery.

Authors:  J C De Lucas-Villarrubia; M Lopez-Franco; J J Granizo; J C De Lucas-Garcia; E Gomez-Barrena
Journal:  Int Orthop       Date:  2003-05-15       Impact factor: 3.075

3.  Special issues involving periprosthetic infection in immunodeficiency patients.

Authors:  Eduard Tornero; Josep Riba; Sebastian Garcia-Ramiro
Journal:  Open Orthop J       Date:  2013-06-14

4.  Should antibiotic prophylaxis before orthopedic implant surgery depend on the duration of pre-surgical hospital stay?

Authors:  Marie Davat; Lydia Wuarin; Dimitrios Stafylakis; Mohamed Abbas; Stephan Harbarth; Didier Hannouche; Ilker Uçkay
Journal:  Antimicrob Resist Infect Control       Date:  2018-11-08       Impact factor: 4.887

  4 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.