Antibiotic prophylaxis in orthopedic surgery.
ABSTRACT This review covers four areas: the use of prophylactic antibiotics in orthopedic surgery not involving prosthetic devices; the use of prophylactic antibiotics in prosthetic joint implantation; the use of antibiotic-containing cement in prosthetic joint surgery; and the use of prophylactic antibiotics for dental procedures in individuals with implanted prosthetic joints. The major conclusions are as follows: (1) Prophylactic antimicrobial agents lower the rate of wound infection following surgery for closed hip fractures. (2) Antimicrobial prophylaxis reduces the frequency of deep wound infection following total joint replacement; operating rooms with ultraclean air have a similar effect. (3) Antibiotic-impregnated cement is as effective as systemic antibiotics in preventing early infection following total joint replacement. (4) For routine dental work in most patients with total joint replacement, there is insufficient evidence to support antibiotic prophylaxis; for such individuals with periodontal disease or potential dental infection, antimicrobial prophylaxis seems indicated.
- SourceAvailable from: John D Pemberton[Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: PURPOSE:: To investigate the necessity and usefulness of prophylactic postoperative antibiotics in patients undergoing enucleation or ocular evisceration. METHODS:: A retrospective, multicenter, comparative case series was designed. After obtaining Institutional Review Board authorization, a medical records' review was conducted. Demographics, indication for surgery, surgical technique, postoperative antibiotic dosing, and postoperative course were evaluated. Records were grouped according to antibiotic protocols, and presence or absence of postoperative wound infection (orbital cellulitis) was recorded. Rates of postoperative infection were analyzed statistically. RESULTS:: Between 1996 and 2011, 666 evisceration or enucleation surgeries were conducted at 4 institutions. Six hundred forty-eight records were available for analysis, of which 4 were excluded due to insufficient follow-up data. All the remaining 644 patients received a single, perioperative, intravenous dose of antibiotics. Five hundred seventy-eight patients (90%) received an orbital implant, while 66 (10%) did not. Three hundred eighty-one patients (59%) received postoperative antibiotics, and 263 patients (41%) did not. Two cases were identified with signs suggestive of infection, but no culture-positive infections were found, and no patient was admitted to the hospital for management. Of the 2 suspicious cases, 1 was found in the group that received postoperative antibiotics (group 1) and 1 in the group that did not receive postoperative antibiotics (group 2). No statistically significant difference in postoperative infection rate was noted between the 2 groups (p = 0.52). While patients with infectious indications for surgery were more likely to receive postoperative antibiotics (p < 0.001), there was no statistically significant difference in rates of infection among patients with infectious indications for surgery based on receiving or not receiving postoperative antibiotics (p = 0.79), and no patients with infectious indications for surgery not receiving postoperative antibiotics developed a postoperative infection. CONCLUSIONS:: This study demonstrates the clinical safety of withholding postoperative prophylactic antibiotics in orbital surgery even when implanting alloplastic material in a sterile field. Furthermore, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention guidelines mandate cessation of postoperative antibiotics within 24 hours of surgery. Surgeons are cautioned not to generalize these results to nonsterile surgery such as sinonasal or nasolacrimal surgery.Ophthalmic plastic and reconstructive surgery 05/2013; · 0.69 Impact Factor
- [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: One of the most important goals of health care organizations is measuring and improving the quality of health care and reduction of adverse events. The aim of this study was to evaluate the degree of observance of the WHO surgical safety checklist at two hospitals in Tehran. During this analytic cross-sectional study the degree of observance and the effects of the checklist on patient outcomes were studied. The checklist was implemented at two teaching hospitals in Tehran, Iran. One hundred patients (40 ± 15 years, 44 (44%) male and 56 (56%) female) were enrolled in our study. Determination of patients diagnoses, anesthesia safety check before anesthesia, patient connection to pulse oximetry, allergic airway disturbance check and aspiration risk, confirmation of patient identity, location of surgery and surgical method by surgeon and nurse, correct numbering of materials by nurse and correct ticketing by nurse were carried out in more than 90% of cases. In conclusion, our study demonstrated that surgery team members comply moderately to the WHO surgery safety checklist in Iran. Iranian health care providers need to show more adherence to some items of the checklist compared to their previous routine.Trauma monthly. 01/2012; 17(3):315-318.
- [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: The purpose of this literature review is, after a history and a point about current situation, to present the military use and precautions of use of tourniquet for civil and military medicine. A review of the Anglo-Saxon and French literature was performed in PUBMED database, from 1962 to 2012. The research was conducted using the following keywords: "tourniquet", "complications", "haemorrhage", "emergency", "military medicine", used alone or in combination. The extracted data concerned the history, the epidemiology, the interest of tourniquet during peacetime and wartime, adverse effects and the ratio benefit/risk. The tourniquet is "a device which is tightened, in case of haemorrhage, around a limb in order to slow or stop the venous or arterial circulation before surgery…". This item is thus used in surgery to reduce intraoperative bleeding and in emergency medicine as a rescue technique for bleeding places non accessible to compression or to other technical hemostasis. It is also used for treating bleeding of mass casualties. However, its use is too poorly managed by health professionals and it remains risky. Recent armed conflicts have yet revived its day use. The tourniquet has utility in times of war and in peacetime. In each case, indications and complications must be known.Annales francaises d'anesthesie et de reanimation 02/2014; · 0.77 Impact Factor