<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><OAI-PMH xmlns="http://www.openarchives.org/OAI/2.0/" xmlns:xsi="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema-instance" xsi:schemaLocation="http://www.openarchives.org/OAI/2.0/ http://www.openarchives.org/OAI/2.0/OAI-PMH.xsd"><responseDate>2026-10-19T00:37:41Z</responseDate><request verb="GetRecord" identifier="oai:ebyu-rdlopen.rawdatalibrary.net:ebyu/18203" metadataPrefix="oai_dc">https://ebyu-rdlopen.rawdatalibrary.net/oai/request</request><GetRecord><record><header><identifier>oai:ebyu-rdlopen.rawdatalibrary.net:ebyu/18203</identifier><datestamp>2026-10-18T20:56:26Z</datestamp><setSpec>openaire</setSpec><setSpec>driver</setSpec><setSpec>com_ebyu_10000</setSpec><setSpec>col_ebyu_10001</setSpec></header><metadata><oai_dc:dc xmlns:oai_dc="http://www.openarchives.org/OAI/2.0/oai_dc/" xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/" xmlns:xsi="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema-instance" xsi:schemaLocation="http://www.openarchives.org/OAI/2.0/oai_dc/ http://www.openarchives.org/OAI/2.0/oai_dc.xsd"><dc:title>Topical Rifamycin Prophylaxis in Gynecological and Obstetric Surgery</dc:title><dc:creator>Turkler, Can</dc:creator><dc:creator>bilgi, ahmet</dc:creator><dc:creator>kulhan, mehmet</dc:creator><dc:creator>Ata, Nahit</dc:creator><dc:creator>kulhan, nur gözde</dc:creator><dc:creator>Çelik, Çetin</dc:creator><dc:subject>Kadın Hastalıkları ve Doğum</dc:subject><dc:subject>Mikrobiyoloji</dc:subject><dc:subject>Sağlık Bilimleri ve Hizmetleri</dc:subject><dc:subject>Cerrahi</dc:subject><dc:description>OBJECTIVE: Antibiotic prophylaxis is one of the most important steps to reduce surgical site infections. \rFirst-generation cephalosporin (cefazolin) is used prophylactically in the majority of operations. \rRifamycin is a broad-spectrum semisynthetic antibiotic that is bactericidal against gram (+) and gram (˗) \rmicroorganisms. To the best of our knowledge, there are no studies on the use of rifamycin in antibiotic \rprophylaxis. In this study, we aimed to analyze whether there is a difference between the use of only cefazolin and only rifamycin in terms of surgical site infections. \rSTUDY DESIGN: One hundred patients were included in this case-control study during the last quarter \rperiod of 2017. These patients (n=100) were divided into two groups according to their antibiotic use; 50 \rpatients who received only 1 g cefazolin constituted Group 1, 50 patients who received only 250 mg topical rifamycin over the incision line based on surgeon’s preference constituted Group 2. \rRESULTS: The use of prophylactic topical rifamycin reduced the incidence of wound infection. compared with cefazolin. Surgical site infection was detected in 5 (10%) of the patients who received cefazolin, whereas surgical site infection was not observed in patients who received rifamycin (p=0.022). \rCONCLUSIONS: The use of topical rifamycin is effective but does not imply that systemic antibiotics \rshould replace prophylaxis. The use of rifamycin would aid in systemic antibiotic prophylaxis.</dc:description><dc:date>2022</dc:date><dc:type>Article</dc:type><dc:identifier>https://rdlopen.rawdatalibrary.net/r/ebyu/18203</dc:identifier><dc:identifier>https://doi.org/10.21613/gorm.2021.1193</dc:identifier><dc:identifier>1300-4751</dc:identifier><dc:language>en</dc:language><dc:relation>GORM:Gynecology Obstetrics &amp; Reproductive Medicine</dc:relation><dc:rights>info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess</dc:rights><dc:type>info:eu-repo/semantics/article</dc:type><dc:identifier>https://ebyu-rdlopen.rawdatalibrary.net/tr/items/ebyu/18203</dc:identifier></oai_dc:dc></metadata></record></GetRecord></OAI-PMH>