search icon
  • Print
  • ShareThis
  • Text Size

In order to contribute to the discussion forum you need to be an IDSA member. If you are not an IDSA member and wish to post to the forum, please register to become a member now. If you are an IDSA member, please login now. Please read our Discussion Forum Guidelines and Terms of Use before joining.

RSS Feed Print
Practice Guideline for the Diagnosis and Treatment of Diabetic Foot Infections
Jeanna Ray
Posted: Tuesday, August 28, 2012 3:29 PM
Joined: 6/6/2011
Posts: 4

Foot infections are a common and serious problem in persons with diabetes. Diabetic foot infections (DFIs) typically begin in a wound, most often a neuropathic ulceration. While all wounds are colonized with microorganisms, the presence of infection is defined by ≥2 classic findings of inflammation or purulence. Infections are then classified into mild (superficial and limited in size and depth), moderate (deeper or more extensive), or severe (accompanied by systemic signs or metabolic perturbations). This classification system, along with a vascular assessment, helps determine which patients should be hospitalized, which may require special imaging procedures or surgical interventions, and which will require amputation. Read full text guideline  


Posted: Tuesday, February 19, 2013 4:06 PM
Joined: 6/15/2012
Posts: 1

These guidelines have been viewed 560 times but to date there are no comments or questions. The guideline panel members would like to hear what you think about what we've written, especially if you think we're left out something important or you disagree with one of our recommendations. Perhaps we can get a discussion going. Thanks!
Łukasz Strzeszyński
Posted: Monday, February 25, 2013 7:22 PM
Joined: 2/25/2013
Posts: 1

 Dr Lipsky, could you provide some clarification on empiric antiobiotic choice?

In table 8, under moderate or severe DFIs, we have the following probable pathogens groups:

1) MSSA; Streptococcus spp; Enterobacteriaceae; obligate anaerobes

So far, everything clear; these are the pts with no risk for MRSA or Pseudomonas; treat them with “usual” antibiotics

2) MRSA – treat with linezolid, daptomycin, or vancomycin


3) Pseudomonas - piperacillin-tazobactam


4) MRSA, Enterobacteriacae, Pseudomonas, and obligate anaerobes; suggested antibiotics: vancomycin, ceftazidime, cefepime, piperacillin-tazobactam, aztreonam, or a carbapenem.

Now I have trouble – what clinical scenario is it? Did you mean patients with risk factors for both MRSA and Pseudomonas, and hence the need for very broad-spectrum antibiotics? If so, then we should probably use vancomycin (linezolid, daptomycin) AND one of the remaining (or, maybe more specifically, vancomycin plus piperacillin-tazobactam, because the latter is preferred for Pseudomonas). Why this list is longer, if required spectrum is broader?

Thank you.


hossam Shehata
Posted: Tuesday, September 30, 2014 4:54 AM
Joined: 9/30/2014
Posts: 1

I think combining the recommended antibiotics of both moderate & severe infecrions made no simplification , in the contrary it made it harder for a clinical decision to be made . Thanks for your effort
Posted: Tuesday, October 27, 2015 2:10 PM
Joined: 8/24/2011
Posts: 1

This is a reply to the last post

| HIVMA | Contact Us

© Copyright IDSA 2016 Infectious Diseases Society of America

Full Site Mobile Site