162. Vardakas KZ, Soteriades ES, Chrysanthopoulou SA, Papagelopoulos PJ,Falagas ME. <strong>Perioperative</strong> anti-<strong>in</strong>fective <strong>prophylaxis</strong> with teicoplan<strong>in</strong> compared tocephalospor<strong>in</strong>s <strong>in</strong> orthopaedic and vascular surgery <strong>in</strong>volv<strong>in</strong>g prosthetic material.Cl<strong>in</strong>ical Microbiology and Infection 2005;11:775-7.163. Reccomandations for prevent<strong>in</strong>g the spread of vancomyc<strong>in</strong> resistence.Recommendations of the Hospital Infection Control Practices Advisory Committee(HICPAC) US Department of Health and Human Service, Centers for DiseaseControl and Prevention, September 1995.(http://www.cdc.gov/drugresistance/technical/cl<strong>in</strong>ical.htm)164. Gemmell CG, Edwards DI, Fraise AP, Gould KF, Ridgway GL, Warren RE.Guidel<strong>in</strong>es for the <strong>prophylaxis</strong> and treatment of methicill<strong>in</strong>-resistant Staphylococcusaureus (MRSA) <strong>in</strong>fections <strong>in</strong> the UK. Journal of Antimicrobial Chemotherapy(2006);57:589–608.165. Burke JF. The effective period of preventive <strong>antibiotic</strong> action <strong>in</strong> experimental<strong>in</strong>cision and dermal lesions. Surgery 1961;50:161-68.166.We<strong>in</strong>ste<strong>in</strong> WM, Onderdonk AB, Bartlett JG, Gorbach SL. Experimental <strong>in</strong>traabdom<strong>in</strong>alabscesses <strong>in</strong> rats: development of an experimental model. Infect Immun1974;10:1250-55.167. Bagley DH, Herlihy E, McGuire EJ. Infections and <strong>antibiotic</strong> <strong>prophylaxis</strong> <strong>in</strong> thefulgurated rat bladder. Invest Urol 1980;17:277-283.168. Classen DC, Evans RS, Pestonik SL, Horn SD, Menlove RL, Burke JP. Thetim<strong>in</strong>g of prophylactic adm<strong>in</strong>istration of <strong>antibiotic</strong>s and the risk of surgical-wound<strong>in</strong>fection. N Engl J Med 1992;326:281-86.169. Van Kasteren E, Manniën J, Ott A, Kullberg BJ,de Boer AS,3 Gyssens IGAntibiotic <strong>prophylaxis</strong> and the risk of surgical site <strong>in</strong>fections follow<strong>in</strong>g total hiparthroplasty: timely adm<strong>in</strong>istration is the most important factor. Cl<strong>in</strong> Infect Dis.2007;44:921-7.
170. van Dijk-van Dam MS, Moll FL, de Letter JA, Langemeijer JJ, Kuks PF. Themyth of the second prophylactic <strong>antibiotic</strong> dose <strong>in</strong> aortoiliac reconstructions. Eur JVasc Endovasc Surg 1996;12:428-30.171. Vuorisalo S, Pokela R, Syrjala H. Is s<strong>in</strong>gle-dose <strong>antibiotic</strong> <strong>prophylaxis</strong> sufficientfor coronary artery bypass surgery? An analysis of peri- and postoperative serumcefuroxime and vancomyc<strong>in</strong> levels. J Hosp Infect 1997;37:237-47.172. Cuthbertson AM, McLeish AR, Penfold JC, Ross H. A comparison betweens<strong>in</strong>gle and double dose <strong>in</strong>travenous Timent<strong>in</strong> for the <strong>prophylaxis</strong> of wound <strong>in</strong>fection<strong>in</strong> elective colorectal surgery. Dis Colon Rectum 1991;34:151-55.173. Scher KS. Studies on the duration of <strong>antibiotic</strong> adm<strong>in</strong>istration for surgical<strong>prophylaxis</strong>. Am Surg 1997;63:59-62.174. Zanetti G, Flanagan J, Cohn LH, Giard<strong>in</strong>a R, Platt R. Improvement of<strong>in</strong>traoperative <strong>antibiotic</strong> <strong>prophylaxis</strong> <strong>in</strong> prolonged cardiac surgery by automated alerts<strong>in</strong> the operat<strong>in</strong>g room. Infection Control and Hospital Epidemiology 2003;24:13-6.175. Zanetti G, Giard<strong>in</strong>a R, Platt R. Intraoperative redos<strong>in</strong>g of cefazol<strong>in</strong> and risk forsurgical site <strong>in</strong>fection <strong>in</strong> cardiac surgery. Emerg<strong>in</strong>g Infectious Diseases2001;7:828-31.176. Stone H.H. Basic pr<strong>in</strong>ciples <strong>in</strong> the use of prophylactic <strong>antibiotic</strong>s. J AntimicrobChemother 1984;14:33S.177. Levy M, Egersegi P, Strong A, Tessoro A, Sp<strong>in</strong>o M, Bannatyne R et al.Pharmacok<strong>in</strong>etic analysis of cloxacill<strong>in</strong> loss <strong>in</strong> children undergo<strong>in</strong>g major surgerywith massive bleed<strong>in</strong>g. Antimicrob Agents Chemother 1990;34:1150-53.178. Woll<strong>in</strong>sky KH, Buchele M, Oeth<strong>in</strong>ger M, Kluger P, Mehrkens HH, Marre R etal. Influence of hemodilution on cefuroxime levels and bacterial contam<strong>in</strong>ation of<strong>in</strong>tra-and postoperative processed wound blood dur<strong>in</strong>g hip replacement. BeitrInfusionsther Transfusionsmed 1996;33:191-95.179. van L<strong>in</strong>dert AC, Giltaij AR, Derksen MD, Alsbach GP, Rozenberg-Arska M,Verhoef J. S<strong>in</strong>gle-dose <strong>prophylaxis</strong> with broad-spectrum penicill<strong>in</strong>s (piperacill<strong>in</strong> and
- Page 1 and 2:
SNLG17Perioperative antibiotic prop
- Page 3 and 4:
Perioperative antibiotic prophylaxi
- Page 5:
In this regard, the website of the
- Page 9 and 10:
MULTIDISCIPLINARY PANELFulvio Calis
- Page 11 and 12:
Società Italiana di Ortopedia e Tr
- Page 13 and 14:
RCT: Randomised Clinical (controlle
- Page 15 and 16:
Implementation strategies most wide
- Page 17 and 18:
1. Proper ventilation systems in th
- Page 19 and 20:
VI/B Clean-contaminated procedures
- Page 21 and 22:
# Radical prostatectomyRadical cyst
- Page 23 and 24:
I/A Antibiotic prophylaxis should b
- Page 25 and 26:
contact with the surgical field dur
- Page 27 and 28:
3. Management of colonised or infec
- Page 29 and 30:
*measures strongly recommended and
- Page 31 and 32:
included (this issue has been marke
- Page 33 and 34:
possible, the evidence base for the
- Page 35 and 36:
The working group considered that t
- Page 37 and 38:
omission of more recent studies was
- Page 39 and 40:
particular circumstances. Nonethele
- Page 41 and 42:
Dirty:encountered or there is visib
- Page 43 and 44:
• the duration of surgery (when t
- Page 45 and 46:
colitis or diarrhoea. The prevalenc
- Page 47 and 48:
Where evidence of efficacy is avail
- Page 49 and 50:
(1-expected baseline risk) x expect
- Page 51 and 52:
Contamination of the operative site
- Page 53 and 54: • exanthema (rash)Other less spec
- Page 55 and 56: The steady increase in the frequenc
- Page 57 and 58: impact is the same, preference shou
- Page 59 and 60: II/A In most cases antibiotic proph
- Page 61 and 62: For heart surgery performed with ex
- Page 63 and 64: Implementation of the guidelineDeve
- Page 65 and 66: in the field, and the distribution
- Page 67 and 68: If the recommendations indicated in
- Page 69 and 70: - type of antibiotic, dosage and ro
- Page 71 and 72: diagnostic or surgical procedures a
- Page 73 and 74: RESPIRATORY TRACT PROCEDURES AND OP
- Page 75 and 76: - cephalexin § 2 g 30-60 minutes b
- Page 77 and 78: • Vascular graftsNo randomised co
- Page 79 and 80: • infection of both superficial a
- Page 81 and 82: - myocarditis, pericarditis- endoca
- Page 83 and 84: Other CNS surgeryCaesarean sectionA
- Page 85 and 86: 2. Preparation of the surgical team
- Page 87 and 88: - For how many hours does the proto
- Page 89 and 90: 11. Jobe BA, Grasley A, Deveney KE,
- Page 91 and 92: 30. Scottish Intercollegiate Guidel
- Page 93 and 94: 52. Wilcox MH, Cunniffe JG, Trundle
- Page 95 and 96: 71. Aznar R, Mateu M, Miro JM, Gate
- Page 97 and 98: 93. Preclik G, Grune S, Leser HG, L
- Page 99 and 100: 113. Sawaya GF, Grady D, Kerlikowsk
- Page 101 and 102: 133. Pitt HA, Postier RG, MacGowan
- Page 103: 153. Ballow CH, Schentag JJ. Trends
- Page 107 and 108: 188. Crowe MJ, Cooke EM. Review of
- Page 109 and 110: 205. White A, Schneider T Improving