You are seeing this message because your Web browser does not support basic Web standards. Find out more about why this message is appearing and what you can do to make your experience on this site better.


ABOUT JAMA
Advanced Search

Welcome   | My Account | E-mail Alerts | Access Rights | Sign In


  Vol. 295 No. 14, April 12, 2006 TABLE OF CONTENTS
  JAMA
  •  Online Features
  Letters
 This Article
 •Full text
 •PDF
 •Send to a friend
 • Save in My Folder
 •Save to citation manager
 •Permissions
 Citing Articles
 •Contact me when this article is cited
 Related Content
 •Related articles
 •Similar articles in JAMA
 Topic Collections
 •Surgery
 •Surgical Physiology
 •Surgical Infections
 •Alert me on articles by topic
 Social Bookmarking
  Add to CiteULike Add to Connotea Add to Del.icio.us Add to Digg Add to Reddit Add to Technorati Add to Twitter What's this?

Supplemental Oxygen and Risk of Surgical Wound Infection

Since this article does not have an abstract, we have provided the first 150 words of the full text and any section headings.

To the Editor: In their study of hyperoxia and infection, Dr Belda and colleagues1 critique a similar study2 in which we urged caution before universal adoption of elective hyperoxia. We are concerned about their representation of our results.

The infection rate in our study was described by Akça and Sessler (one of the authors of the present study) as "far exceed[ing] those reported in any large study of comparable operations."3 Although a similar rate was found by Belda et al, it is now described as "well within values reported in recent series." The authors claim that our infection evaluation was "apparently conducted by unblinded investigators." However, our article stated that "[a]n investigator blinded to the randomization performed the evaluation for evidence of infection."2

Although Belda et al criticize heterogeneity between our study groups, at issue is whether statistically significant differences had clinical significance. The difference in blood loss between the . . . [Full Text of this Article]

Kane O. Pryor, MD
kap9009@med.cornell.edu

Cynthia A. Lien, MD; Thomas J. Fahey III, MD; Peter A. Goldstein, MD
Weill Medical College of Cornell University
New York, NY



Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati   Add to Twitter Twitter     What's this?

RELATED ARTICLES

Supplemental Oxygen and Risk of Surgical Wound Infection
Ritesh Agarwal
JAMA. 2006;295(14):1641.
EXTRACT | FULL TEXT  

Supplemental Oxygen and Risk of Surgical Wound Infection
Stefan Suttner, Joachim Boldt, and Swen Piper
JAMA. 2006;295(14):1641-1642.
EXTRACT | FULL TEXT  

Supplemental Oxygen and Risk of Surgical Wound Infection—Reply
F. Javier Belda and Daniel I. Sessler
JAMA. 2006;295(14):1642-1643.
EXTRACT | FULL TEXT  

Supplemental Perioperative Oxygen and the Risk of Surgical Wound Infection: A Randomized Controlled Trial
F. Javier Belda, Luciano Aguilera, José García de la Asunción, Javier Alberti, Rosario Vicente, Lucía Ferrándiz, Rafael Rodríguez, Roque Company, Daniel I. Sessler, Gerardo Aguilar, Stephanie García Botello, Rafael Ortí, and for the Spanish Reduccion de la Tasa de Infeccion Quirurgica Group
JAMA. 2005;294(16):2035-2042.
ABSTRACT | FULL TEXT  






HOME | CURRENT ISSUE | PAST ISSUES | TOPIC COLLECTIONS | CME | SUBMIT | SUBSCRIBE | HELP
CONDITIONS OF USE | PRIVACY POLICY | CONTACT US | SITE MAP
 
© 2006 American Medical Association. All Rights Reserved.