surgical site infection: new solutions to a continuing problem r. lawrence reed, ii, md, facs, fccm...
TRANSCRIPT
![Page 1: Surgical Site Infection: New Solutions to a Continuing Problem R. Lawrence Reed, II, MD, FACS, FCCM Professor of Surgery Loyola University Medical Center](https://reader035.vdocument.in/reader035/viewer/2022062619/55168956550346a25b8b4c10/html5/thumbnails/1.jpg)
Surgical Site Infection:New Solutions to a Continuing Problem
R. Lawrence Reed, II, MD, FACS, FCCMProfessor of Surgery
Loyola University Medical CenterDirector, SICU, Hines VA Medical Center
Maywood, IL
![Page 2: Surgical Site Infection: New Solutions to a Continuing Problem R. Lawrence Reed, II, MD, FACS, FCCM Professor of Surgery Loyola University Medical Center](https://reader035.vdocument.in/reader035/viewer/2022062619/55168956550346a25b8b4c10/html5/thumbnails/2.jpg)
Surgical Site Infections (SSI)
• Third most common nosocomial infection (14%–16%)
• Most common nosocomial infection among surgical patients (38%)– 2/3 incisional– 1/3 organs or spaces accessed during surgery
• 7.3 additional postoperative days at cost of $3,152 in extra charges
Mangram AJ et al. Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol. 1999;20:250-278.
![Page 3: Surgical Site Infection: New Solutions to a Continuing Problem R. Lawrence Reed, II, MD, FACS, FCCM Professor of Surgery Loyola University Medical Center](https://reader035.vdocument.in/reader035/viewer/2022062619/55168956550346a25b8b4c10/html5/thumbnails/3.jpg)
Colonization vs Contamination – Definitions
• Colonization– Bacteria present in a wound with no signs or symptoms
of systemic inflammation– Usually less than 105 cfu/mL
• Contamination– Transient exposure of a wound to bacteria– Varying concentrations of bacteria possible– Time of exposure suggested to be < 6 hours– SSI prophylaxis best strategy
![Page 4: Surgical Site Infection: New Solutions to a Continuing Problem R. Lawrence Reed, II, MD, FACS, FCCM Professor of Surgery Loyola University Medical Center](https://reader035.vdocument.in/reader035/viewer/2022062619/55168956550346a25b8b4c10/html5/thumbnails/4.jpg)
SSI – Definitions
• Infection– Systemic and local signs of inflammation– Bacterial counts ≥ 105 cfu/mL– Purulent versus nonpurulent– LOS effect– Economic effect
• Surgical wound infection is SSI
LOS=length of stay.
![Page 5: Surgical Site Infection: New Solutions to a Continuing Problem R. Lawrence Reed, II, MD, FACS, FCCM Professor of Surgery Loyola University Medical Center](https://reader035.vdocument.in/reader035/viewer/2022062619/55168956550346a25b8b4c10/html5/thumbnails/5.jpg)
Superficial Incisional SSI
Infection occurs within 30 days after the operation and involves only skin or subcutaneous tissue of the incision
Mangram AJ et al. Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol. 1999;20:250-278.
Subcutaneous Subcutaneous tissuetissue
SkinSkinSuperficial incisional SSI
![Page 6: Surgical Site Infection: New Solutions to a Continuing Problem R. Lawrence Reed, II, MD, FACS, FCCM Professor of Surgery Loyola University Medical Center](https://reader035.vdocument.in/reader035/viewer/2022062619/55168956550346a25b8b4c10/html5/thumbnails/6.jpg)
Deep Incisional SSIInfection occurs within 30 days after the operation if no implant is left in place or within 1 year if implant is in place and the infection appears to be related to the operation and the infection involves the deep soft tissue (e.g., fascia and muscle layers)
Deep soft tissue Deep soft tissue (fascia & muscle)(fascia & muscle)
Deep incisional SSI
Superficial incisional SSI
Mangram AJ et al. Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol. 1999;20:250-278.
![Page 7: Surgical Site Infection: New Solutions to a Continuing Problem R. Lawrence Reed, II, MD, FACS, FCCM Professor of Surgery Loyola University Medical Center](https://reader035.vdocument.in/reader035/viewer/2022062619/55168956550346a25b8b4c10/html5/thumbnails/7.jpg)
Organ/Space SSI
Infection occurs within 30 days after the operation if no implant is left in place or within 1 year if implant is in place and the infection appears to be related to the operation and the infection involves any part of the anatomy, other than the incision, which was opened or manipulated during the operation
Deep incisional SSI
Superficial incisional SSI
Organ/space SSIOrgan/spaceOrgan/space
Mangram AJ et al. Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol. 1999;20:250-278.
![Page 8: Surgical Site Infection: New Solutions to a Continuing Problem R. Lawrence Reed, II, MD, FACS, FCCM Professor of Surgery Loyola University Medical Center](https://reader035.vdocument.in/reader035/viewer/2022062619/55168956550346a25b8b4c10/html5/thumbnails/8.jpg)
SSI – Risk FactorsOperation Factors
• Duration of surgical scrub• Maintain body temp• Skin antisepsis• Preoperative shaving• Duration of operation• Antimicrobial prophylaxis• Operating room ventilation• Inadequate sterilization of
instruments
Mangram AJ et al. Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol. 1999;20:250-278.
• Foreign material at surgical site
• Surgical drains• Surgical technique
– Poor hemostasis– Failure to obliterate
dead space – Tissue trauma
![Page 9: Surgical Site Infection: New Solutions to a Continuing Problem R. Lawrence Reed, II, MD, FACS, FCCM Professor of Surgery Loyola University Medical Center](https://reader035.vdocument.in/reader035/viewer/2022062619/55168956550346a25b8b4c10/html5/thumbnails/9.jpg)
SSI – Risk FactorsPatient Characteristics
• Age• Diabetes
– HbA1C and SSI– Glucose > 200 mg/dL
postoperative period (<48 hours)
• Nicotine use: delays primary wound healing
• Steroid use: controversial• Malnutrition: no
epidemiological association• Obesity: 20% over ideal body
weight
Mangram AJ et al. Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol. 1999;20:250-278.
• Prolonged preoperative stay: surrogate of the severity of illness and comorbid conditions
• Preoperative nares colonization with Staphylococcus aureus: significant association
• Perioperative transfusion: controversial
• Coexistent infections at a remote body site
• Altered immune response
![Page 10: Surgical Site Infection: New Solutions to a Continuing Problem R. Lawrence Reed, II, MD, FACS, FCCM Professor of Surgery Loyola University Medical Center](https://reader035.vdocument.in/reader035/viewer/2022062619/55168956550346a25b8b4c10/html5/thumbnails/10.jpg)
Bacterial dose Virulence
Impairedhost resistance
Risk of Infection
![Page 11: Surgical Site Infection: New Solutions to a Continuing Problem R. Lawrence Reed, II, MD, FACS, FCCM Professor of Surgery Loyola University Medical Center](https://reader035.vdocument.in/reader035/viewer/2022062619/55168956550346a25b8b4c10/html5/thumbnails/11.jpg)
Bacterial dose Virulence
Impairedhost resistance
Risk of Infection
![Page 12: Surgical Site Infection: New Solutions to a Continuing Problem R. Lawrence Reed, II, MD, FACS, FCCM Professor of Surgery Loyola University Medical Center](https://reader035.vdocument.in/reader035/viewer/2022062619/55168956550346a25b8b4c10/html5/thumbnails/12.jpg)
Bacterial dose Virulence
Impairedhost resistance
Virulence
Impairedhost resistance
Risk of InfectionRisk of Surgical Infection
Bacterial dose
![Page 13: Surgical Site Infection: New Solutions to a Continuing Problem R. Lawrence Reed, II, MD, FACS, FCCM Professor of Surgery Loyola University Medical Center](https://reader035.vdocument.in/reader035/viewer/2022062619/55168956550346a25b8b4c10/html5/thumbnails/13.jpg)
SSI – Wound Classification
• Class 1 = Clean
• Class 2 = Clean contaminated
• Class 3 = Contaminated
• Class 4 = Dirty infected
Mangram AJ et al. Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol. 1999;20:250-278.
Prophylactic antibiotics indicated
Therapeutic antibiotics
![Page 14: Surgical Site Infection: New Solutions to a Continuing Problem R. Lawrence Reed, II, MD, FACS, FCCM Professor of Surgery Loyola University Medical Center](https://reader035.vdocument.in/reader035/viewer/2022062619/55168956550346a25b8b4c10/html5/thumbnails/14.jpg)
SSI – Risk Stratification NNIS Project
3 independent variables associated with SSI risk
– Contaminated or dirty/infected woundclassification
– ASA > 2– Length of operation > 75th percentile of the
specific operation being performed
NNIS=National Nosocomial Infections Surveillance.
NNIS. CDC. Am J Infect Control. 2001;29:404-421.
![Page 15: Surgical Site Infection: New Solutions to a Continuing Problem R. Lawrence Reed, II, MD, FACS, FCCM Professor of Surgery Loyola University Medical Center](https://reader035.vdocument.in/reader035/viewer/2022062619/55168956550346a25b8b4c10/html5/thumbnails/15.jpg)
SSI – Wound Class vs NNIS Class
Wound Class All NNIS 0 NNIS 1 NNIS 2 NNIS 3
Clean 2.1% 1.0% 2.3% 5.4% N/A
Clean contaminated 3.3% 2.1% 4.0% 9.5% N/A
Contaminated 6.4% N/A 3.4% 6.8% 13.2%
Dirty infected 7.1% N/A 3.1% 8.1% 12.8%
All 2.8% 1.5% 2.9% 6.8% 13.0%
NNIS. CDC. Am J Infect Control. 2001;29:404-421.
![Page 16: Surgical Site Infection: New Solutions to a Continuing Problem R. Lawrence Reed, II, MD, FACS, FCCM Professor of Surgery Loyola University Medical Center](https://reader035.vdocument.in/reader035/viewer/2022062619/55168956550346a25b8b4c10/html5/thumbnails/16.jpg)
Campaign to PreventAntimicrobial Resistance
• Centers for Disease Control and Prevention
• National Center for Infectious Diseases
• Division of Healthcare Quality Promotion
Link to: Campaign to Prevent Antimicrobial Resistance OnlineLink to: Federal Action Plan to Combat Antimicrobial Resistance
Clinicians hold the solution!
![Page 17: Surgical Site Infection: New Solutions to a Continuing Problem R. Lawrence Reed, II, MD, FACS, FCCM Professor of Surgery Loyola University Medical Center](https://reader035.vdocument.in/reader035/viewer/2022062619/55168956550346a25b8b4c10/html5/thumbnails/17.jpg)
12 Steps to Prevent Antimicrobial Resistance AmongSurgical Patients
• Step 1 – Prevent SSIs – Monitor and maintain normal
glycemia
– Maintain normothermia
– Perform proper skin preparation using appropriate antiseptic agent and, when necessary, hair removal techniques
– Think outside the wound to stop surgical site infections
CDC. Available at http://www.cdc.gov/drugresistance/healthcare/surgery/12steps_surgery.htm. Accessed July 16, 2004.
![Page 18: Surgical Site Infection: New Solutions to a Continuing Problem R. Lawrence Reed, II, MD, FACS, FCCM Professor of Surgery Loyola University Medical Center](https://reader035.vdocument.in/reader035/viewer/2022062619/55168956550346a25b8b4c10/html5/thumbnails/18.jpg)
Opportunity to Prevent SSI
• An estimated 40%–60% of SSIs are preventable
• Overuse, underuse, improper timing, and misuse of antibiotics occurs in 25%–50% of operations
Mangram AJ et al. Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol. 1999;20:250-278.
![Page 19: Surgical Site Infection: New Solutions to a Continuing Problem R. Lawrence Reed, II, MD, FACS, FCCM Professor of Surgery Loyola University Medical Center](https://reader035.vdocument.in/reader035/viewer/2022062619/55168956550346a25b8b4c10/html5/thumbnails/19.jpg)
Principles of Antibiotic Prophylaxis
Mangram AJ et al. Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol. 1999;20:250-278.
Preop administration, serum levels adequate throughout procedure with a drug active
against expected microorganisms.
High Serum Levels1. Preop timing2. IV route3. Highest dose
of drug
During Procedure1. Long half-life2. Long procedure–
redose3. Large blood loss–
redose
Duration1. None after wound
closed2. 24 hours maximum
![Page 20: Surgical Site Infection: New Solutions to a Continuing Problem R. Lawrence Reed, II, MD, FACS, FCCM Professor of Surgery Loyola University Medical Center](https://reader035.vdocument.in/reader035/viewer/2022062619/55168956550346a25b8b4c10/html5/thumbnails/20.jpg)
Surgical Site Infection (SSI)
Mangram AJ et al. Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol. 1999;20:250-278.
![Page 21: Surgical Site Infection: New Solutions to a Continuing Problem R. Lawrence Reed, II, MD, FACS, FCCM Professor of Surgery Loyola University Medical Center](https://reader035.vdocument.in/reader035/viewer/2022062619/55168956550346a25b8b4c10/html5/thumbnails/21.jpg)
Surgical Infection Prevention ProjectMedicare Quality Improvement Community
Clinical Infectious Diseases 2004 June; 38:1706–15
![Page 22: Surgical Site Infection: New Solutions to a Continuing Problem R. Lawrence Reed, II, MD, FACS, FCCM Professor of Surgery Loyola University Medical Center](https://reader035.vdocument.in/reader035/viewer/2022062619/55168956550346a25b8b4c10/html5/thumbnails/22.jpg)
National Data Collection
• State-level baseline description from random sample of 788 cases per state
• Data collected from records by two professional clinical data abstraction centers
• Abstraction tool for hospitals is available….Is JCAHO compatible
![Page 23: Surgical Site Infection: New Solutions to a Continuing Problem R. Lawrence Reed, II, MD, FACS, FCCM Professor of Surgery Loyola University Medical Center](https://reader035.vdocument.in/reader035/viewer/2022062619/55168956550346a25b8b4c10/html5/thumbnails/23.jpg)
Surgical Infection PreventionPreliminary Results
34,133 (87.3)Cases eligible for analysis
205 (0.52)
1,817 (4.7)
2 (0.01)
1,461 (3.74)
1,432 (3.66)
36 (0.09)
General Exclusions
Surgery of interest not performed
Infection present pre-operatively
Missing antibiotic dates and times
Patient on antibiotics prior to admission
Patient on antibiotics for more than 24 hours pre-op
Other
39,086 (100)Number of cases reviewed
N (%)
![Page 24: Surgical Site Infection: New Solutions to a Continuing Problem R. Lawrence Reed, II, MD, FACS, FCCM Professor of Surgery Loyola University Medical Center](https://reader035.vdocument.in/reader035/viewer/2022062619/55168956550346a25b8b4c10/html5/thumbnails/24.jpg)
26.2
10
22.6
6.2 6.32.2 2.7
9.3
14.5
40.7
50.7
73.3
79.5
85.888
90.7
0
20
40
60
80
100
12 o
r les
s
>12-
24
>24-
36
>36-
48
>48-
60
>60-
72
>72-
84
>84-
96>
96
Hours After Surgery End Time
Pe
rce
nt
0
20
40
60
80
100
Cu
mu
lati
ve
Pe
rce
nt
Discontinuation of Antibiotics
Patients were excluded from the denominator of this performance measure if there was any documentation of an infection during surgery or in the first 48 hours after surgery.
![Page 25: Surgical Site Infection: New Solutions to a Continuing Problem R. Lawrence Reed, II, MD, FACS, FCCM Professor of Surgery Loyola University Medical Center](https://reader035.vdocument.in/reader035/viewer/2022062619/55168956550346a25b8b4c10/html5/thumbnails/25.jpg)
Most Common Pathogens Associated With Nosocomial Infections
(NNIS 1989–1998) Medical & Surgical Combined
Pathogen All Sites BSI Pneumonia SSIn=235,758 n=50,091 n=64,056 n=22,043
Coag-neg Staph 14.3 39.3 2.5 13.5S aureus 11.4 10.7 16.8 12.6Enterococci spp. 8.1 10.3 1.9 14.5P aeruginosa 9.9 3.0 16.1 9.2Enterobacter spp. 7.3 4.2 10.7 8.8E coli 7.0 2.9 4.4 7.1C albicans 6.6 4.9 4.0 4.8K pneumoniae 4.7 2.9 6.5 3.5Others 30.7 21.8 37.1 26.0
Relative Percentage by Site of Infection
BSI=bloodstream infection; SSI=surgical site infection.Fridkin SK et al. Clin Chest Med. 1999;20:303-316.
![Page 26: Surgical Site Infection: New Solutions to a Continuing Problem R. Lawrence Reed, II, MD, FACS, FCCM Professor of Surgery Loyola University Medical Center](https://reader035.vdocument.in/reader035/viewer/2022062619/55168956550346a25b8b4c10/html5/thumbnails/26.jpg)
Predominance of S aureus in Skin and Skin Structure Infections (SSSIs)
SENTRY – US and Canada 2000
Rennie RP et al. Diagn Microbiol Infect Dis. 2003;45:287-293.
N=1,404 isolates
S aureus 45.9%
10.8% P aeruginosa
Enterococci 8.2%
E coli 7.0%
Enterobacter 5.8%
Other 17.3% MSSA 30.9%
MRSA ~15%
Klebsiella 5.1%
![Page 27: Surgical Site Infection: New Solutions to a Continuing Problem R. Lawrence Reed, II, MD, FACS, FCCM Professor of Surgery Loyola University Medical Center](https://reader035.vdocument.in/reader035/viewer/2022062619/55168956550346a25b8b4c10/html5/thumbnails/27.jpg)
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
Re
sist
an
t is
ola
tes
(%)
CDC. MMWR. 1997;46:624-628, 635. (1975 data); Lowy FD. N Engl J Med. 1998;339:520-532. (1987-1997 data); CDC. NNIS System Report, January–November 1998. (1998 data); CDC. NNIS System Report, January 1990–May 1999, issued June 1999. Am J Infect Control. 1999;27:520-532. (1999 data); CDC. NNIS System Report, January 1992–June 2001. Am J Infect Control. 2001;29:404-421. (2000 data); NNIS. CDC. Am J Infect Control. 2003;31:481-498.
Progression of Methicillin Resistant S aureus – United States 13%
![Page 28: Surgical Site Infection: New Solutions to a Continuing Problem R. Lawrence Reed, II, MD, FACS, FCCM Professor of Surgery Loyola University Medical Center](https://reader035.vdocument.in/reader035/viewer/2022062619/55168956550346a25b8b4c10/html5/thumbnails/28.jpg)
Impact of MRSA on SSI
• N=479 patients• MRSA greater 90-d
mortality vs MSSA (adjusted odds ratio, 3.4; 95% CI: 1.5–7.2)
• MRSA longer LOS after infection (median additional days=5; P<0.001)
• MRSA associated with greater hospital charges (1.19-fold increase in hospital charges, P=0.03)
Engemann JJ et al. Clin Infect Dis. 2003;36:592-598.
29,455
52,971
92,363
0
10,000
20,000
30,000
40,000
50,000
60,000
70,000
80,000
90,000
100,000
Control
MSSA
MRSA
Median Hospital Charges
![Page 29: Surgical Site Infection: New Solutions to a Continuing Problem R. Lawrence Reed, II, MD, FACS, FCCM Professor of Surgery Loyola University Medical Center](https://reader035.vdocument.in/reader035/viewer/2022062619/55168956550346a25b8b4c10/html5/thumbnails/29.jpg)
Vascular SSI
• Retrospective review (1993–2000)– Leicester Royal Infirmary, United Kingdom
– 172 patients MRSA-positive (4.4% of total)
– 75 infected, 97 colonized
• Proportion of wound/graft infections caused by MRSA has increased– 4% in 1994, increased to 63% in 2000
• All patients with aortic graft infection died
• All patients with infected prosthetic infrainguinal bypass required amputations
Nasim A et al. Eur J Vasc Endovasc Surg. 2001;22:211-214.
![Page 30: Surgical Site Infection: New Solutions to a Continuing Problem R. Lawrence Reed, II, MD, FACS, FCCM Professor of Surgery Loyola University Medical Center](https://reader035.vdocument.in/reader035/viewer/2022062619/55168956550346a25b8b4c10/html5/thumbnails/30.jpg)
MRSA in Orthopedic SSI
• Prospective study, London, United Kingdom• 12-month study, January through December 2000• Total of 1,879 patients admitted, 121 screened• 1.6% of total with MRSA infection/colonization• Higher risk for MRSA infection
– Hip surgery– Emergency surgery for femoral neck fracture– Presence of wound
• MRSA infection – increased hospital LOS (88 vs 11 days)• 41% of positive patients still carried MRSA on discharge
Tai CC et al. Int Orthop. 2004;28:32-35.
![Page 31: Surgical Site Infection: New Solutions to a Continuing Problem R. Lawrence Reed, II, MD, FACS, FCCM Professor of Surgery Loyola University Medical Center](https://reader035.vdocument.in/reader035/viewer/2022062619/55168956550346a25b8b4c10/html5/thumbnails/31.jpg)
MRSA in Cardiac Surgery
• 3,443 CABG patients, all received antimicrobial prophylaxis
• June 1997 through December 2000
• Sternal SSI developed in 122 (3.5%)– 71 (58.2%) were superficial SSI
– 51 (41.8%) were deep SSI
• Gram-positive cocci were most frequently recovered (81%)
• S aureus was the most frequently isolated pathogen (49%)
• S aureus bacteremia occurred in 18% and was significantly associated with deep SSI (P=0.002)
CABG=coronary artery bypass grafting.Sharma M et al. Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol. 2004;25:468-471.
![Page 32: Surgical Site Infection: New Solutions to a Continuing Problem R. Lawrence Reed, II, MD, FACS, FCCM Professor of Surgery Loyola University Medical Center](https://reader035.vdocument.in/reader035/viewer/2022062619/55168956550346a25b8b4c10/html5/thumbnails/32.jpg)
Impact of MRSA in Cardiac Surgery
• Retrospective review (41 patients)– Poststernotomy S aureus
mediastinitis– MRSA: 15 patients– MSSA: 26 patients
• Logistic regression analysis: MRSA was the only independent risk factor for increased mortality, P=0.04
Mekontso-Dessap A et al. Clin Infect Dis. 2001;32:877-883.
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
MRSA MSSA
1 month
1 year
3 years
Survival Rates
![Page 33: Surgical Site Infection: New Solutions to a Continuing Problem R. Lawrence Reed, II, MD, FACS, FCCM Professor of Surgery Loyola University Medical Center](https://reader035.vdocument.in/reader035/viewer/2022062619/55168956550346a25b8b4c10/html5/thumbnails/33.jpg)
Nasal Mupirocin and SSI
• 4,030 patients enrolled, 3,864 ITT patients
• PRDBPCT, intranasal mupirocin
• 891 patients (23.1%) had S aureus in anterior nares– 444 mupirocin,– 447 placebo
• S aureus SSI:– 2.3% mupirocin– 2.4% placebo
ITT=intent-to-treat; PRDBPCT=prospective, randomized, double-blind placebo-controlled trial.Perl TM et al. N Engl J Med. 2002;346:1871-1877.
Per
cent
of p
atie
nts
with
S a
ureu
s (
%)
4
7.7
Mupirocin Placebo
P=0.02
All postoperative S aureus Infections
![Page 34: Surgical Site Infection: New Solutions to a Continuing Problem R. Lawrence Reed, II, MD, FACS, FCCM Professor of Surgery Loyola University Medical Center](https://reader035.vdocument.in/reader035/viewer/2022062619/55168956550346a25b8b4c10/html5/thumbnails/34.jpg)
Surgical Wound ManagementSSI Prophylaxis in MRSA-Colonized Patient
• Must use same principles• Drug choice difference• MRSA drugs
– Vancomycin
– Quinupristin/dalfopristin*
– Linezolid
– Daptomycin
*Not FDA approved for MRSA.
![Page 35: Surgical Site Infection: New Solutions to a Continuing Problem R. Lawrence Reed, II, MD, FACS, FCCM Professor of Surgery Loyola University Medical Center](https://reader035.vdocument.in/reader035/viewer/2022062619/55168956550346a25b8b4c10/html5/thumbnails/35.jpg)
Vancomycin
• Bactericidal glycopeptide– Discovered in 1956– Produced by Streptococcus
orientalis, an actinomycete isolated from soil samples from Indonesia & India
• Introduced clinically in 1958• Quickly overshadowed by
less toxic anti-staphylococcal penicillins and cephalosporins
• Re-emergence as an important antibiotic in 1980s & 1990s
![Page 36: Surgical Site Infection: New Solutions to a Continuing Problem R. Lawrence Reed, II, MD, FACS, FCCM Professor of Surgery Loyola University Medical Center](https://reader035.vdocument.in/reader035/viewer/2022062619/55168956550346a25b8b4c10/html5/thumbnails/36.jpg)
Historical Yearly Usage of Vancomycin
Kirst HA et al. Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 1998;42:1303-1304; NNIS. Am J Infect Control. 2001;29:404-421.
2001: 1.8 million courses of vancomycin annually in U.S.30 million doses of vancomycin estimated
![Page 37: Surgical Site Infection: New Solutions to a Continuing Problem R. Lawrence Reed, II, MD, FACS, FCCM Professor of Surgery Loyola University Medical Center](https://reader035.vdocument.in/reader035/viewer/2022062619/55168956550346a25b8b4c10/html5/thumbnails/37.jpg)
12 Steps to Prevent Antimicrobial Resistance AmongSurgical Patients
• Step 9. Know when to say “no” to vanco– Vanco should be used to treat
known infections, not for routine prophylaxis
– Treat staphylococcal infection, not contaminants or colonization
– Consider other antimicrobials in treating MRSA
CDC. Available at http://www.cdc.gov/drugresistance/healthcare/surgery/12steps_surgery.htm. Accessed July 16, 2004.
![Page 38: Surgical Site Infection: New Solutions to a Continuing Problem R. Lawrence Reed, II, MD, FACS, FCCM Professor of Surgery Loyola University Medical Center](https://reader035.vdocument.in/reader035/viewer/2022062619/55168956550346a25b8b4c10/html5/thumbnails/38.jpg)
Vancomycin Tissue Penetration
• 33 open-heart surgery patients, mean vancomycin concentrations after 15 mg/kg IV dose– Below the mean
MICs for many strains of staphylococci
MIC=minimum inhibitory concentration.Daschner FD et al. J Antimicrob Chemother. 1987;19:359-362.
0
0.5
1
1.5
2
2.5
3
3.5
4
4.5
Cardiac Valve Myocardium Fat
Tissue
Lev
el (
mg
/L) Tissue Level (mg/L)
MIC (mg/L)
![Page 39: Surgical Site Infection: New Solutions to a Continuing Problem R. Lawrence Reed, II, MD, FACS, FCCM Professor of Surgery Loyola University Medical Center](https://reader035.vdocument.in/reader035/viewer/2022062619/55168956550346a25b8b4c10/html5/thumbnails/39.jpg)
Bone5:7%–13%
Vancomycin Penetration
Sternal Bone1:57%
Heart Valve4:12%
CNS:<10%
Fat4: 14%
Muscle4:9%
Epitheliallining fluid3:
18%
Lung tissue2:17%–24%
1. Massias L et al. Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 1992;36:2539-2541; 2. Cruciani M et al. J Antimicrob Chemother. 1996;38:865-869. 3. Lamer C et al. Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 1993;37:281-286; 4. Daschner FD et al. J Antimicrob Chemother. 1987;19:359-362; 5. Graziani AL et al. Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 1988;32:1320-1322.
![Page 40: Surgical Site Infection: New Solutions to a Continuing Problem R. Lawrence Reed, II, MD, FACS, FCCM Professor of Surgery Loyola University Medical Center](https://reader035.vdocument.in/reader035/viewer/2022062619/55168956550346a25b8b4c10/html5/thumbnails/40.jpg)
Quinupristin/Dalfopristin (Synercid®)
• Streptogramin class related to macrolide-lincosamides– Quinupristin is a Group B streptogramin
– Dalfopristin is a Group A streptogramin
• Activity against:– MSSA – potently bactericidal
– Streptococcus pneumoniae (including PRSP) – potently bactericidal
– MRSA – moderately active
– E faecium – moderately active against most E faecium strains
– NO activity against E faecalis
PRSP=penicillin-resistant Streptococcus pneumoniae.Synercid® IV (quinupristin/dalfopristin for injection) [package insert]. Bristol, Tenn: Monarch Pharmaceuticals, Inc; 2002.
![Page 41: Surgical Site Infection: New Solutions to a Continuing Problem R. Lawrence Reed, II, MD, FACS, FCCM Professor of Surgery Loyola University Medical Center](https://reader035.vdocument.in/reader035/viewer/2022062619/55168956550346a25b8b4c10/html5/thumbnails/41.jpg)
Quinupristin/Dalfopristin (Synercid®)
• Central line access used to decrease incidence of infusion-related venous irritation
• 3%–30% incidence of severe myalgias and arthralgias
• Resistance has already been reported • Bacteriostatic• Does not have indication for pneumonia
– Did not perform as well as vancomycin
Synercid® IV (quinupristin/dalfopristin for injection) [package insert]. Bristol, Tenn: Monarch Pharmaceuticals, Inc; 2002.
![Page 42: Surgical Site Infection: New Solutions to a Continuing Problem R. Lawrence Reed, II, MD, FACS, FCCM Professor of Surgery Loyola University Medical Center](https://reader035.vdocument.in/reader035/viewer/2022062619/55168956550346a25b8b4c10/html5/thumbnails/42.jpg)
Daptomycin (Cubicin™)
• Lipopeptide natural product • Activity in Gram-positive organisms• Distinct mechanism of action• Rapidly bactericidal in vitro and in vivo• No mechanisms of resistance identified • No cross-resistance with other antibiotics • Safety profile similar to comparators• Once-daily IV dosing
Cubicin™ (daptomycin for injection) [prescribing information]. Lexington, MA: Cubist Pharmaceuticals; September 2003.
![Page 43: Surgical Site Infection: New Solutions to a Continuing Problem R. Lawrence Reed, II, MD, FACS, FCCM Professor of Surgery Loyola University Medical Center](https://reader035.vdocument.in/reader035/viewer/2022062619/55168956550346a25b8b4c10/html5/thumbnails/43.jpg)
Linezolid (ZYVOX®)
• An oxazolidinone: a novel antimicrobial class
• 100% oral bioavailability
• Equivalent dosing oral/IV
• No dose adjustment in renal failure
• Bacteriostatic
• No cross-resistance with other antibiotics
• Reversible thrombocytopenia with prolonged use
• Binds selectively to the 50S ribosomal subunit– Inhibits the formation of a functional initiation complex
ZYVOX® (linezolid injection, tablets, and oral suspension) [package insert]. Kalamazoo, Mich: Pharmacia & Upjohn, a Pfizer Company; revised June 2004.
![Page 44: Surgical Site Infection: New Solutions to a Continuing Problem R. Lawrence Reed, II, MD, FACS, FCCM Professor of Surgery Loyola University Medical Center](https://reader035.vdocument.in/reader035/viewer/2022062619/55168956550346a25b8b4c10/html5/thumbnails/44.jpg)
Average Steady-State Plasma Linezolid Concentrations After Oral Administration
of 400 or 600 mg Twice Daily
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
16
18
20
0 5 10 15 20
Lin
ezol
id c
once
ntra
tion
(μg
/mL
)
Time After Last Dose (hours)
600 mg BID
400 mg BID
MIC-90 Staph
MIC-90 Entero
MIC-90 Strep
Linezolid Research Update. Denver, Colo: Infectious Diseases Society of America; November 13, 1998.
![Page 45: Surgical Site Infection: New Solutions to a Continuing Problem R. Lawrence Reed, II, MD, FACS, FCCM Professor of Surgery Loyola University Medical Center](https://reader035.vdocument.in/reader035/viewer/2022062619/55168956550346a25b8b4c10/html5/thumbnails/45.jpg)
Linezolid Penetration
Saliva2:120%
CNS1:70%*
Bone3:40%–60%
Sweat2:55%
Skin Blister Fluid5:100%
Epitheliallining fluid4:
450%
Alveolar cells4:15%
1. Cottagnound et al. J Antimicrob Chemother. 2000;46:981-985; 2. ZYVOX® (linezolid injection, tablets, and oral suspension) [package insert]. Kalamazoo, Mich: Pharmacia & Upjohn, a Pfizer Company; revised 2003; 3. Lovering AM et al. J Antimicrob Chemother. 2002, 50:73-77; 4. Conte JE et al. Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 2002;46:1475-1480; 5. Gee T. Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 2001;45:1843-1846.
![Page 46: Surgical Site Infection: New Solutions to a Continuing Problem R. Lawrence Reed, II, MD, FACS, FCCM Professor of Surgery Loyola University Medical Center](https://reader035.vdocument.in/reader035/viewer/2022062619/55168956550346a25b8b4c10/html5/thumbnails/46.jpg)
1. Graziani AL et al. Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 1988;32:1320-1322; 2. Matzke et al. Clin Pharmacokinet. 1986;11:257-282; 3. Albanese J et al. Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 2000;44:1356-1358; 4. Georges H et al. Eur J Clin Microbiol Infect Dis. 1997;16:385-388; 5. Lamer C et al. Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 1993;37:281-286; 6. Daschner FD et al. J Antimicrob Chemother. 1987;20:776-782; 7. Blevins RD et al. Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 1984;25:603-606; 8. Lovering AM et al. J Antimicrob Chemother. 2002;50:73-77; 9. Conte JE et al. Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 2002;46:1475-1480; 10. Gee T et al. Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 2001;45:1843-1846; 11. Gendjar SR et al. 2001 ASN/ISN World Congress of Nephrology; 2001; San Francisco, Calif. Abstract 550865.
Comparison of Tissue Concentrations (% Tissue/Serum)
Tissue Vancomycin Linezolid
Bone 7%–13%1 60%8
Cerebral Spinal Fluid 0%–18%2,3 70%9
Epithelial Lining Fluid (Lung) 11%–17%4,5 450%9
Inflammatory Blister Fluid ---- 104%10
Muscle ~30%6 94%8
Peritoneal dialysis fluid ~20%7 61%11
![Page 47: Surgical Site Infection: New Solutions to a Continuing Problem R. Lawrence Reed, II, MD, FACS, FCCM Professor of Surgery Loyola University Medical Center](https://reader035.vdocument.in/reader035/viewer/2022062619/55168956550346a25b8b4c10/html5/thumbnails/47.jpg)
Complicated Skin and Soft Tissue Infection (cSSTI) Treatment
• Staph most common cause• Staph resistance continues to increase
– 57.1% in 2002
• Treatment for MRSA cSSTI prior to 2000– Vancomycin– Quinupristin/dalfopristin*
• New alternatives for treatment of MRSA cSSTI– Linezolid– Daptomycin
NNIS. CDC. Am J Infect Control. 2003;31:481-498.
*Not FDA approved for MRSA.
![Page 48: Surgical Site Infection: New Solutions to a Continuing Problem R. Lawrence Reed, II, MD, FACS, FCCM Professor of Surgery Loyola University Medical Center](https://reader035.vdocument.in/reader035/viewer/2022062619/55168956550346a25b8b4c10/html5/thumbnails/48.jpg)
Quinupristin/Dalfopristin† (Q/D) Efficacy• Design: 2 randomized, open-label, controlled clinical trials in cSSSI
– Study 1: Q/D (7.5 mg/kg q12h IV) vs oxacillin (2 g q6h IV)*
– Study 2: Q/D (7.5 mg/kg q12h IV) vs cefazolin (1 g q8h IV)*
Q/D (n=450)
Comparator (n=443)
Study 1 (US) 49.5% 51.9%
Study 2 (International) 66.4% 64.2%
Postoperative infections‡ 14/38 (36.8%) 24/42 (57.1%)
Traumatic wound infections‡ 33/55 (60.0%) 33/55 (60.0%)
*Vancomycin 1 g q12h IV could be substituted if the pathogen was suspected or confirmed methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus or the patient was allergic to penicillin, cephalosporins, or carbapenems. †Patients cured or improved. ‡Results are combined from the 2 clinical trials. Statistical conclusions could not be reached due to the small number of patients in the subsets.
Efficacy in the Clinically Evaluable Population†
Synercid® IV (quinupristin/dalfopristin for injection) [package insert]. Bristol, Tenn: Monarch Pharmaceuticals, Inc; 2002.
†Not FDA approved for MRSA.
![Page 49: Surgical Site Infection: New Solutions to a Continuing Problem R. Lawrence Reed, II, MD, FACS, FCCM Professor of Surgery Loyola University Medical Center](https://reader035.vdocument.in/reader035/viewer/2022062619/55168956550346a25b8b4c10/html5/thumbnails/49.jpg)
Quinupristin/Dalfopristin† (Q/D) Efficacy• Design: 2 randomized, open-label, controlled clinical trials in cSSSI
Summary of Clinical and Microbiologic Results*Q/D
(n=450)
Comparator
(n=443)
Clinical efficacy† 68.2% 70.7%
Microbiologic eradication‡ 66.6% 77.7%
MSSA 64.3% 76.6%
MRSA 77.8% 50.0%
Gram-positive cocci only 56.3% 69.7%
*Results are combined from the 2 clinical trials. ††Patients cured or improved in the clinically evaluable population. ‡Overall and by-pathogen bacteriologic eradication rates in the microbiologically evaluable population.cSSSIs=complicated skin and skin structure infections.
Nichols RL et al. J Antimicrob Chemother. 1999;44:263-273.
†Not FDA approved for MRSA.
![Page 50: Surgical Site Infection: New Solutions to a Continuing Problem R. Lawrence Reed, II, MD, FACS, FCCM Professor of Surgery Loyola University Medical Center](https://reader035.vdocument.in/reader035/viewer/2022062619/55168956550346a25b8b4c10/html5/thumbnails/50.jpg)
• Study design: Open-label, randomized, comparator-controlled, multicenter, multinational clinical study
• Population: 1,200 hospitalized adult patients with cSSTI• Treatment arms:
Vancomycin (IV only) 1 g every 12 hours
Linezolid (oral or IV) 600 mg every 12
hours
OR
Linezolid vs Vancomycin for cSSTI Presumed or Known to Be Caused by MRSA
Weigelt JA et al. Infectious Diseases Society of America, 2003, poster 314. San Diego, CA.
If MSSA, vancomycin could be switched to
oxacillin/nafcillin/flucloxacillin (IV only) 1–2 g q6h or dicloxacillin (oral) 500
mg q6h
4- to 14-day treatment duration
![Page 51: Surgical Site Infection: New Solutions to a Continuing Problem R. Lawrence Reed, II, MD, FACS, FCCM Professor of Surgery Loyola University Medical Center](https://reader035.vdocument.in/reader035/viewer/2022062619/55168956550346a25b8b4c10/html5/thumbnails/51.jpg)
Linezolid vs Vancomycin for cSSTI Clinical Cure Rates in Clinically Evaluable Subset
9094
0
20
40
60
80
100
Cli
nica
l cur
e ra
te (
%)
Linezolid 600 mg q12h IV/ PO Vancomycin 1g q12h IV*
436/ 462 394/ 436
P=0.023
Weigelt JA et al. Infectious Diseases Society of America, 2003, poster 314. San Diego, CA.
![Page 52: Surgical Site Infection: New Solutions to a Continuing Problem R. Lawrence Reed, II, MD, FACS, FCCM Professor of Surgery Loyola University Medical Center](https://reader035.vdocument.in/reader035/viewer/2022062619/55168956550346a25b8b4c10/html5/thumbnails/52.jpg)
Linezolid vs Vancomycin for cSSTIClinical Cure Rates in MRSA Subgroup
84
94
0
20
40
60
80
100
Clin
ical
cur
e ra
te (%
)
Linezolid 600 mg q12h IV/ PO Vancomycin 1g q12h IV*
*P=0.011
126/134
112/134
Weigelt JA et al. Infectious Diseases Society of America, 2003, poster 314. San Diego, CA.
![Page 53: Surgical Site Infection: New Solutions to a Continuing Problem R. Lawrence Reed, II, MD, FACS, FCCM Professor of Surgery Loyola University Medical Center](https://reader035.vdocument.in/reader035/viewer/2022062619/55168956550346a25b8b4c10/html5/thumbnails/53.jpg)
Linezolid Reduces LOS vs Vancomycinin cSSTI due to MRSA
Study Sample (linezolid/vancomycin)
Linezolid Vancomycin P Value
ITT (592/588) 7.4 9.8 <0.0001
CE (491/472) 7.4 9.9 <0.0001
ME (349/334) 7.6 9.8 <0.0001
MRSA (143/146) 8.1 10.7 0.0026
Mean LOS (days)
CE=clinically evaluable; ITT=intent-to-treat; LOS=length of stay; ME=microbiologically evaluable.Weigelt JA et al. Infectious Diseases Society of America; 2003, poster 315. San Diego, CA.
![Page 54: Surgical Site Infection: New Solutions to a Continuing Problem R. Lawrence Reed, II, MD, FACS, FCCM Professor of Surgery Loyola University Medical Center](https://reader035.vdocument.in/reader035/viewer/2022062619/55168956550346a25b8b4c10/html5/thumbnails/54.jpg)
CE=clinically evaluable; ITT=intent-to-treat; ME=microbiologically evaluable; MITT=modified intent-to-treat.
Linezolid vs Vancomycin for cSSTI IV Antibiotic Treatment Days
1.9 2 1.9 2 1.8
9 9.19.9 9.9
12.6
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
ITT MITT CE ME MRSA
Sample population
Linezolid Vancomycin
Du
rati
on
of
IV t
reat
men
t (d
ays)
Weigelt JA et al. Infectious Diseases Society of America, 2003, poster 315. San Diego, CA.
![Page 55: Surgical Site Infection: New Solutions to a Continuing Problem R. Lawrence Reed, II, MD, FACS, FCCM Professor of Surgery Loyola University Medical Center](https://reader035.vdocument.in/reader035/viewer/2022062619/55168956550346a25b8b4c10/html5/thumbnails/55.jpg)
Cost Effectiveness of Linezolid vs Vancomycin in cSSTI
0
1000
2000
3000
4000
5000
6000
COST
($)
$4,143
CI (3,750–4,576)
$5,187
CI (4,691–5,714)
2003 Per diem hospital cost, administration of IV therapy, wholesale acquisition cost
Linezolid Vancomycin
Fleming T, ed. Red Book. 2004 edition. Montvale NJ: Thompson PDR;2004.
![Page 56: Surgical Site Infection: New Solutions to a Continuing Problem R. Lawrence Reed, II, MD, FACS, FCCM Professor of Surgery Loyola University Medical Center](https://reader035.vdocument.in/reader035/viewer/2022062619/55168956550346a25b8b4c10/html5/thumbnails/56.jpg)
Linezolid vs Vancomycin for Surgical Site Infection (SSI )
Total Patients With cSSTI1,200
Total Patients With SSI135
Linezolid 66
Vancomycin69
-Weigelt J et al.: Am J Surg 2004;188:760-766.
![Page 57: Surgical Site Infection: New Solutions to a Continuing Problem R. Lawrence Reed, II, MD, FACS, FCCM Professor of Surgery Loyola University Medical Center](https://reader035.vdocument.in/reader035/viewer/2022062619/55168956550346a25b8b4c10/html5/thumbnails/57.jpg)
Linezolid vs Vancomycin in SSIStudy Population
Study Population Linezolid
(n, %)
Vancomycin
(n, %)
All patients 66 (100) 69 (100)
MRSA 34 (52) 31 (45)
Baseline demographics:No significant difference
Baseline comorbidities/MRSA risk factors:No significant difference
-Weigelt J et al.: Am J Surg 2004;188:760-766.
![Page 58: Surgical Site Infection: New Solutions to a Continuing Problem R. Lawrence Reed, II, MD, FACS, FCCM Professor of Surgery Loyola University Medical Center](https://reader035.vdocument.in/reader035/viewer/2022062619/55168956550346a25b8b4c10/html5/thumbnails/58.jpg)
Linezolid vs Vancomycin in SSI:Clinical Cure Rates at TOC
87
98
0
20
40
60
80
100
52/53 47/54
Clin
ical
cur
e ra
te (%
)
Linezolid 600 mg q12h IV/ PO Vancomycin 1g q12h IV
P=0.06
-Weigelt J et al.: Am J Surg 2004;188:760-766.
![Page 59: Surgical Site Infection: New Solutions to a Continuing Problem R. Lawrence Reed, II, MD, FACS, FCCM Professor of Surgery Loyola University Medical Center](https://reader035.vdocument.in/reader035/viewer/2022062619/55168956550346a25b8b4c10/html5/thumbnails/59.jpg)
Linezolid vs Vancomycin in SSI: Microbiological Cure Rates at TOC
58
84
0
20
40
60
80
100
41/ 49 28/ 49
Clin
ical
cur
e ra
te (%
)
Linezolid 600 mg q12h IV/ PO Vancomycin 1g q12h IV
P=0.007
-Weigelt J et al.: Am J Surg 2004;188:760-766.
![Page 60: Surgical Site Infection: New Solutions to a Continuing Problem R. Lawrence Reed, II, MD, FACS, FCCM Professor of Surgery Loyola University Medical Center](https://reader035.vdocument.in/reader035/viewer/2022062619/55168956550346a25b8b4c10/html5/thumbnails/60.jpg)
Linezolid vs Vancomycin in SSI:Microbiological Cure Rates at TOC in MRSA
Pts.
48
87
0
20
40
60
80
100
26/ 30 14/ 29
Clin
ical
cur
e ra
te (%
)
Linezolid 600 mg q12h IV/ PO Vancomycin 1g q12h IV
P=0.002
-Weigelt J et al.: Am J Surg 2004;188:760-766.
![Page 61: Surgical Site Infection: New Solutions to a Continuing Problem R. Lawrence Reed, II, MD, FACS, FCCM Professor of Surgery Loyola University Medical Center](https://reader035.vdocument.in/reader035/viewer/2022062619/55168956550346a25b8b4c10/html5/thumbnails/61.jpg)
Daptomycin for cSSSIs
• Phase III: 2 international, multicenter, randomized, double-blind (evaluator blinded) studies (Studies 9801 & 9901):– Daptomycin (4 mg/kg IV qd) vs 1 of 2 comparators:
• Vancomycin (1 g q12h)
• Synthetic penicillin (4–12 g/d in 4 daily doses)
• Primary endpoint was safety and efficacy • Both studies demonstrated equivalence of
daptomycin to the comparator
Arbeit RD et al. Clin Infect Dis. 2004;38:1673-1681.
![Page 62: Surgical Site Infection: New Solutions to a Continuing Problem R. Lawrence Reed, II, MD, FACS, FCCM Professor of Surgery Loyola University Medical Center](https://reader035.vdocument.in/reader035/viewer/2022062619/55168956550346a25b8b4c10/html5/thumbnails/62.jpg)
Daptomycin Efficacy• Design: 2 randomized, multinational, multicenter investigator-blinded studies• Daptomycin 4 mg/kg IV q24h or vancomycin 1 g IV q12h or a semisynthetic penicillin
(nafcillin, oxacillin, cloxacillin, flucloxacillin)
Type of Infection Daptomycin
No. of Pts (Success rate %)
Comparator*
No. of Pts (Success rate %)
Wound infection 169 (84%) 180 (87%)
Major abscess 102 (92%) 92 (88%)
Ulcer infection 47 (66%) 56 (70%)
Other infection† 47 (79%) 58 (83%)
*Comparator was vancomycin or a semisynthetic penicillin.†Other infections included complicated cellulitis, major abscess, or traumatic wound infection.
Clinical Success Rate: CE Population
Arbeit RD et al. Clin Infect Dis. 2004;38:1673-1681.
![Page 63: Surgical Site Infection: New Solutions to a Continuing Problem R. Lawrence Reed, II, MD, FACS, FCCM Professor of Surgery Loyola University Medical Center](https://reader035.vdocument.in/reader035/viewer/2022062619/55168956550346a25b8b4c10/html5/thumbnails/63.jpg)
Comparison of MRSA Antimicrobials
Unfamiliarity and cost, reversible hematologic abnormalities, resistance (ie, VRE with prolonged use)
Limited indications, acquisition cost, myalgia, not effective for pneumonia
Infusion site inflammation, myalgias, arthralgias, and resistance
Toxicity, resistance (VRE, VISA, VRSA)
Disadvantages
Potential for less resistance
“Faster cure” (rapidly cidal)
QD
Parenteral
cSSSI
Daptomycin
Oral dosingremoval of catheters, early discharge, evidence of superiority to vancomycin in cSSTI
Alternative to vancomycin
FamiliarityAdvantages
“Gets patients home”“Works when vancomycin won’t”
“Cheap”Sales pitch
BIDq8-12hVariable depending upon renal function
Dosing
Parenteral, oralParenteral (central?)ParenteralRoute(s)
cSSSI and pneumoniacSSSI (not MRSA)MultipleFDA approved for MRSA
LinezolidQuinupristin/ Dalfopristin
Vancomycin
![Page 64: Surgical Site Infection: New Solutions to a Continuing Problem R. Lawrence Reed, II, MD, FACS, FCCM Professor of Surgery Loyola University Medical Center](https://reader035.vdocument.in/reader035/viewer/2022062619/55168956550346a25b8b4c10/html5/thumbnails/64.jpg)
Summary
• SSI is a preventable morbidity• Gram-positive organisms are the primary pathogens
– MRSA increasing
• Treatment alternatives in MRSA SSIs and cSSTIs– Vancomycin
– Linezolid
– Daptomycin
– Quinupristin/dalfopristin*
*Not FDA approved for MRSA.