Appropriate use of antimicrobial prophylaxis: an observational study in 21 surgical wards.

BACKGROUND: Surveillance of Surgical Site Infections (SSI) in 2010 found 39 % compliance with hospital guidelines in Piedmont (Italy). The aim of the study was to estimate the appropriate use of antimicrobial prophylaxis and compliance with hospitals guidelines in surgical wards. METHODS: This survey study took place in 21 surgery wards of 4 public hospitals. Forms were completed by public health resident doctors together with a medical ward referent and infection control nurses. 15 consecutive surgical procedures were randomly chosen from each ward. A total of 320 cases were analyzed. The study period was from July 2012 to January 2013. Data were collected using a survey form. A final score variable from 0 to 4 was given to each case. The results were compared with hospital and international guidelines. Data were analyzed using Epi-Info software. RESULTS: Of the 320 cases collected, 63 were excluded; of the remaining 257 cases, 56.4 % of the procedures were appropriate (score 4), 15.2 % were acceptable and 28.4 % were not acceptable. The study found an unjustified continuation of antimicrobial prophylaxis in 17.1 % of the 257 cases, an unjustified re-start of antimicrobial therapy in 9.7 % and a re-dosing omission in 7.8 %. CONCLUSIONS: The study demonstrated critical problems in antimicrobial prophylaxis management in surgical wards due to a lack of compliance between hospitals and national guidelines, a shortage of specific and updated recommendations for some surgical interventions and incorrect local specific procedures. Coordination between local and national recommendations, strengthening of evidence based decisions and continuous sharing of policy updates are needed.

Leiomyosarcoma of the inferior vena cava. Report of two cases and review of the literature.

INTRODUCTION: Leiomyosarcoma (LMS) occurs most frequently in the inferior vena cav (IVC). Since Perl's first description in 1871, about 300 cases of IVX have been reported in English literature. The Authors present their personal experience of two case of IVC leiomyosarcoma treated in their Institution. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Clinical and pathologic data, surgical management, ourcomes and follow-up of two patients admitted nb the Authors' Division respectively on February and November 2004 were collected. RESULTS: There were a 49-years-old female with rare epigastric pain and a 42-years-old female with one-month history of abdominal discomfort and weight loss. After preoperative evaluation, both of the patients had localised and resectable tumors and underwent radical surgical excision, with prosthetic replacement of the IVC in the first patient and ligation of the IVC in the other one. The first patient is still alive but in an advanced disease. The second patient died of recurrence at seven months. DISCUSSION: LMS of IVC is a rare tumor. The diagnosis is often delayed because of non-specificic symptoms. Radical resection with surgical margins free of tumor is the treatment of choice. The extent of venous resection does not seem to affect the survival. The type of IVC reconstruction is based on the extent of venal wall involvement. The prognosis is often poor because of tumor recurrence and/or metastatic disease. The role of chemo and radio therapy is not clear yet. CONCLUSION: Long term survival is related to an extensive surgery, being surgical margins free of tumor the only prognostic factor with significant influence on patients survival.

Surgical site infection surveillance: analysis of adherence to recommendations for routine infection control practices.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the application of surgical site infection control procedures in general surgery departments in hospitals in the Piemonte region of Italy. DESIGN: The descriptive study entailed 1 week of observation in the general surgery departments and 1 week of observation in the operating rooms of 49 hospitals in Piemonte; the survey was conducted in 2003. METHODS: Data collection forms were designed to record information about presurgical patient preparation (form 1) and infection control practices routinely used by surgical teams (form 2). RESULTS: A total of 856 patients were observed; 88% of operations were surgical wound class I or II; 70.6% of patients had hair removed, 28.8% showered the day before the operation; antimicrobial prophylaxis was administered in 63.3% of cases (68.4% on induction of anesthesia and 26% on the day of the operation) and was continued into the postoperative period in 43% of cases. A total of 799 operations were observed; the mean number of healthcare personnel in the operating room was 6; doors were opened an average of 12 times during an operation; 88% of the surgical team members wore a cap/hood and mask correctly; 25% of surgeons and 41% of instrument nurses wore an eye shield; preoperative hand and forearm scrubbing technique was correct in 78% of cases (surgeons, 74.6%; instrument nurses, 86.6%; and anesthesiologists, 73%). CONCLUSIONS: A comparison between the survey data and the international recommendations for SSI prevention highlighted practices that could be improved with corrective interventions. The study provided an opportunity for sharing feedback on appropriate data with healthcare personnel and was an effective instrument to audit infection control practices.