“” Although it is recognized that perioperative prophylaxis is not the only preventive measure for SSI, failure to apply other measures such as appropriate skin cleansing, scrubbing of operating room personnel, use of aseptic technique, mechanical bowel preparation, and MRT67307 manufacturer avoidance of undo contamination subjects patients to complications and can negate the beneficial effects of prophylaxis. In addition, the increasing prevalence of minimally invasive surgical procedures, which are associated with a lower risk of SSI than open operations for the same conditions, may

also be impacting these observations [6]. We now understand that there are patient characteristics that also affect the risk of infection and can negate the beneficial effects of antimicrobial prophylaxis. These include glycemic control, tissue dessication,

hypothermia, obesity, smoking, immunosuppressive drugs, nutritional www.selleckchem.com/products/iwp-2.html state, and local tissue hypoxemia. Addressing each of these contributors requires a well-coordinated, team-based approach in order to consistently optimize the strategy to prevent SSI. In spite of the complexity of this problem, there are other questions about perioperative prophylaxis that have not been adequately addressed. For instance, three of the most common pathogens for SSIs- Staphylococcus aureus, coagulase-negative staphylococci, and enterococci- are frequently resistant to currently recommended agents. Should we expect that prophylaxis that is not demonstrable in vitro will work in our patients? Patients frequently report a history of allergic reaction to beta-lactam drugs and as a result, secondary agents are used. The data for selection of these Go6983 cell line agents are often based on expert opinion rather than class 1 or class 2 evidence [7]. Is it possible that our assumptions about their effectiveness are wrong? We know that the prevention of SSI also depends on delivery of an effective concentration of antibiotic to the site at risk for infection, in this case the surgical incision. With cephalosporins, tissue

concentrations Baf-A1 in vivo are often dependent on weight-based dosing and so adjustments need to be made for overweight and obese patients [8]. Do we know the compliance with this principle? There has been much progress made in surgery over the four decades since the benefits of perioperative antimicrobial prophylaxis were demonstrated in a prospective, randomized clinical trial. We now understand more about the complex interactions that affect SSI. We need to look to the challenges ahead and consider whether new principles need to be formulated. References 1. Polk HC Jr, Lopez-Mayor JF: Postoperative wound infection: a prospective study of determinant factors and prevention. Surg 1969, 66:97–103. 2. Bratzler DW, Houck PM, Surgical Infection Prevention Guideline Writers Workgroup: Antimicrobial prophylaxis for surgery: an advisory statement from the National Surgical Infection Prevention Project. Am J Surg 2005, 189:395–404.