Hostname: page-component-745bb68f8f-b6zl4 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-01-16T11:02:48.423Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

A Prospective Study of Postoperative Fever in a General Surgery Department

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  02 January 2015

C. Galicier  and
Herve Richet
C. Galicier*
Affiliation:
Labaratoire Central de Microbiologie, Hotel Dien, Paris, France
Herve Richet
Affiliation:
Labaratoire Central de Microbiologie, Hotel Dien, Paris, France
*
Laboratoire Central de Microbiologie, Hotel Dien I, Place du Parvis Notre Dame, 75181 Paris Cedex 04—, France
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

During a 4-month period, 693 patients undergoing surgical procedures were prospectively studied to investigate the etiology of postoperative fever (≥38°C during 48 hours or more). The overall rate of fever was similar for the three categories of surgical procedures studied (14%, 13.4% and 13.1% respectively after clean, clean contaminated and contaminated surgical procedures). No cause of fever was found in 5%, 2.7% and 1.7% of patients who underwent clean, clean contaminated and contaminated surgical procedures. Several episodes of fever were observed for 12 patients after clean surgery; for 11 of them this was due to infection. The mean interval between febrile episodes was 4.7 days. After clean wound surgery, fever documented as infectious began significantly later (2.7 vs 1.6 days) and lasted significantly longer (5.4 vs 3.5 days) than fever for which no source was determined. Only half of the infections were associated with fever.

Type
Original Articles
Information
Infection Control & Hospital Epidemiology , Volume 6 , Issue 12 , December 1985 , pp. 487 - 490
Copyright
Copyright © The Society for Healthcare Epidemiology of America 1985

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1.Filker, R, Monif, GRG: The significance of temperature during the first 24 hours post partum. Obstet Gynecol 1979; 53:358–361.Google Scholar
2.Haljis, CG, Polin, JI: An unusual cause of postoperative fever. A case report. Reprod Med 1979; 22:161–164.Google Scholar
3.Mikaeloff, PH, Fleurette, J, Louisgrand, Y, et al: Analyse des facteurs be fièvre dans les suites précoces des C.E.C. chez l'adulte. Corrélations avec les données bactériologiques. Etude statistique de 518 dossiers traités par informatique. Arch Mal Coeur 1979; 11:1211–1217.Google Scholar
4.Swartz, WH, Pongsak, T: Suction drainage as an alternative to prophylactic antibiotics for hysterectomy. Obstet Gynecol 1975; 45:305.Google ScholarPubMed
5.Yeung, RSW, Buck, JR, Filler, RM: The significance of fever following operations in children. J Pediatr Surg 1982; 17:347–349.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
6.Centers for Disease Control: Outline for surveillance and control of nosocomial infections. CDC, Atlanta, Georgia, 1974.Google Scholar
7.American College of Surgeons: Manual on control of infection in surgical patients. Altemeier, WA (ed). Philadelphia, J.B. Lippincott Company, 1976.Google Scholar
8.Ledger, WJ, Child, MA: The hospital care of patients undergoing hysterectomy: An analysis of 12,026 patients from the professional activity study. Am J Obstet Gynecol 1973; 117:423.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
9.White, SG, Wartell, LJ, Wade, MD: Comparison of abdominal and vaginal hysterectomies: A review of 600 operations. Obstet Gynecol 1971; 37:530.Google ScholarPubMed
10.Freeman, J, McGowan, JE Jr: Methodologie issues in hospital epidemiology. I. Rates, case finding and interpretation. Rev Infect Dis 1981; 3:658–667.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
11.Klimek, JJ, Ajemian, ER, Gracewski, J. et al: A prospective analysis of hospital acquired fever in obstetric and gynecologic patients. JAMA 1982:247:3340–3343.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
12.Bernheim, MA, Block, LH, Atkins, E: Fever: Pathogenesis, pathophysiology, and purpose. Ann Intern Med 1979; 91:261–270.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed