title: Is Staphylococcal Screening and Suppression an Effective Interventional Strategy for Reduction of Surgical Site Infection?
abstract: BACKGROUND
  Staphylococcus aureus has been recognized as a major microbial pathogen for over 100 y, having the capacity to produce a variety of suppurative and toxigenic disease processes. Many of these infections are life-threatening, with particularly enhanced virulence in hospitalized patients with selective risk factors. Strains of methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) have rapidly spread throughout the healthcare environment such that approximately 20% of S. aureus isolates recovered from surgical site infections are methicillin-resistant, (although this is now reducing following national screening and suppression programs and high impact interventions).
  
  
  METHODS
  Widespread nasal screening to identify MRSA colonization in surgical patients prior to admission are controversial, but selective, evidence-based studies have documented a reduction of surgical site infection (SSI) after screening and suppression.
  
  
  RESULTS
  Culture methods used to identify MRSA colonization involve selective, differential, or chromogenic media. These methods are the least expensive, but turnaround time is 24-48 h. Although real-time polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) technology provides rapid turnaround (1-2 h) with exceptional testing accuracy, the costs can range from three to 10 times more than conventional culture methodology. Topical mupirocin, with or without pre-operative chlorhexidine showers or skin wipes, is the current "gold-standard" for nasal decolonization, but inappropriate use of mupirocin is associated with increasing staphylococcal resistance.
  
  
  CONCLUSIONS
  Selection of an effective active universal or targeted surveillance strategy should be based upon the relative risk of MSSA or MRSA surgical site infection in patients undergoing orthopedic or cardiothoracic device related surgical procedures.
authors.affiliation: 1 Departments of Surgery (Vascular), Medical College of Wisconsin , Milwaukee, Wisconsin.
authors.forename: Charles E
authors.initials: CE
authors.lastname: Edmiston
authors.affiliation: 2 Department of Pathology, Medical College of Wisconsin , Milwaukee, Wisconsin.
authors.forename: Nathan A
authors.initials: NA
authors.lastname: Ledeboer
authors.affiliation: 2 Department of Pathology, Medical College of Wisconsin , Milwaukee, Wisconsin.
authors.forename: Blake W
authors.initials: BW
authors.lastname: Buchan
authors.affiliation: 3 Infection Prevention Consultants , Boston, Massachusetts.
authors.forename: Maureen
authors.initials: M
authors.lastname: Spencer
authors.affiliation: 1 Departments of Surgery (Vascular), Medical College of Wisconsin , Milwaukee, Wisconsin.
authors.forename: Gary R
authors.initials: GR
authors.lastname: Seabrook
authors.affiliation: 3 Infection Prevention Consultants , Boston, Massachusetts.|4 Institute of Skin Integrity and Infection Prevention, University of Huddersfield , Huddersfield, United Kingdom .
authors.forename: David
authors.initials: D
authors.lastname: Leaper
mesh_terms: D000900:Anti-Bacterial Agents / Q000627:therapeutic use*; D002353:Carrier State / Q000175:diagnosis* / Q000188:drug therapy / Q000517:prevention & control; D006801:Humans; D008403:Mass Screening / Q000379:methods* / Q000706:statistics & numerical data; D013203:Staphylococcal Infections / Q000175:diagnosis* / Q000188:drug therapy / Q000517:prevention & control; D013530:Surgical Wound Infection / Q000453:epidemiology* / Q000517:prevention & control*
chemical_list: D000900:Anti-Bacterial Agents