Sugerencias
Idioma
Información de la revista
Visitas
203
Review article
Acceso a texto completo
Pruebas no corregidas. Disponible online el 22 de mayo de 2026

Narrative Review on Perioperative Management in Dermatologic Surgery

Visitas
203
A. Prados-Carmonaa,b, F.M. Almazán-Fernándeza,1, R. Ruiz Villaverdea,b,1,
Autor para correspondencia
ismenios@hotmail.com

Corresponding author.
a Department of Dermatology, Hospital Universitario San Cecilio, Granada, Spain
b Instituto Biosanitario de Granada, IBS, Granada, Spain
Este artículo ha recibido
Información del artículo
Resumen
Texto completo
Bibliografía
Descargar PDF
Estadísticas
Tablas (7)
Table 1. Preoperative BR stratification.
Tablas
Table 2. Preoperative TER stratification.
Tablas
Table 3. Discontinuation of DOACs or antiplatelet agents before surgery.
Tablas
Table 4. Examples of LMWH as bridging therapy in patients treated with VKAs with high non-deferrable thromboembolic risk.
Tablas
Table 5. Special situations related to IcD.
Tablas
Table 6. Indications for antibiotic prophylaxis of SSI in dermatology.
Tablas
Table 7. Patients at high risk of systemic infectious complications in dermatologic surgery.
Tablas
Figuras (1)
fig0005
Abstract

Dermatologic surgery is increasingly performed in patients with comorbidities and chronic treatments, requiring rigorous assessment to ensure appropriate perioperative management. The lack of specific guidelines addressing the heterogeneity of surgical procedures in our specialty is challenging. This study integrates a literature review with the experience accumulated at our institution in the form of practical management guidance for the dermatologic surgeon. Recommendations are provided on the management of drugs affecting platelet aggregation and coagulation, implantable cardiac devices, antibiotic prophylaxis, and diabetes-related complications in the context of dermatologic surgery. This manuscript aims to serve as a practical review to guide perioperative management in our specialty, bridging gaps in the literature and aligning with evidence-based practices from other surgical fields.

Keywords:
Dermatologic surgery
Perioperative management
Practical guideline
Antithrombotic therapies
Implantable cardiac devices
Chronic medication
Infection prophylaxis
Diabetes
Evidence-based medicine
Patient safety
Perioperative complications
Abbreviations:
TIA
ASA
CrCl
DOACs
NIT
VKAs
PH
AVB
CV
ICDs
DM
IcDs
BE
TED
RF
AF
LMWH
UFH
HTN
INR
SSI
PJI
P2Y12i
BTKi
IS
PM
VP
PT
HR
TER
BT
PT
aPTT
ACT
IU
IV
PO
SC
Resumen gráfico
Texto completo
Introduction: context and justification

Perioperative management in dermatologic surgery requires careful and individualized planning to minimize risks and optimize clinical outcomes. Although most procedures involve low surgical risk, the complexity of certain procedures and the prevalence of comorbidities in the general population justify the need for specific protocols that enable safe and effective perioperative patient management.

One of the main challenges lies in the variability of the procedures performed, which complicates the application of standard perioperative management guidelines developed for other specialties.1 Similarly, this variability in dermatologic surgery practice also results in discrepancies among institutional protocols,2–5 prescribing habits, and publications available in scientific journals.6–13 This same lack of consensus has also been discussed regarding postoperative wound management.14

The aim of this document is to provide a practical review of the available evidence regarding perioperative management in dermatologic surgery in our setting, also drawing upon the experience and protocols of our center.2,5,15 Key areas such as the management of anticoagulants, antiplatelet agents, implantable cardiac devices (ICDs), antidiabetic drugs, and antibiotic prophylaxis will be addressed. Ultimately, the objective is to support decision-making during dermatologic surgical planning and execution, facilitating the dermatologist's work and promoting safe practices.

Importance of preoperative assessment in consultation

Beyond determining whether surgery is indicated, outpatient evaluation is essential in terms of preoperative preparation. Not only drug-related and health care-product allergies should be assessed, but also comorbidities, chronic drugs, and risk factors (RF) (related to the patient, the lesion, the area to be treated, or associated with the different surgical solutions available) to determine the surgical setting, technique, timing, anesthetic modality, and, when appropriate, estimate the maximum recommended doses of local anesthetics.

Normally, this outpatient evaluation will be brief and limited to verifying the suitability of direct surgical treatment. However, in more complex cases, standard surgical scheduling should be considered, including specific monitoring, drug adjustments, or prior evaluation by other specialists. It is precisely for these situations that this work is intended. Processing the surgical request will involve deciding the setting in which the intervention should be performed. Dermatologic surgery is usually scheduled as minor ambulatory surgery or major ambulatory surgery (MAS), under local or locoregional anesthesia without the need for an anesthesiologist to be present. It is precisely in these situations, in which no preanesthesia consultation exists, that the planning established during outpatient consultation becomes crucial. This is even more relevant in centers where the dermatologist responsible for the outpatient evaluation is not the same professional performing the surgery. In cases scheduled for the operating room with anesthesiology support, participation of the anesthesiologist in the preoperative evaluation through a subsequent preanesthesia consultation following surgical scheduling will be essential, while the dermatologist's outpatient assessment will focus on planning the surgical procedure per se.

Perioperative management of anticoagulants and antiplatelet agents

Perioperative management of anticoagulants and antiplatelet agents is crucial to balance the risk of perioperative bleeding with the risk of thromboembolic events. Approximately 50% of patients undergoing cutaneous surgery are on anticoagulants, antiplatelet drugs, over-the-counter supplements, or other drugs that affect coagulation.16 In these situations, in addition to adequate intraoperative hemostasis,17,18 preoperative stratification of hemorrhagic risk (HR) (Table 1) and thromboembolic risk (TER) (Table 2) is essential to individualize adjustments to antithrombotic therapy in collaboration with the prescribing physician.6,10,12,16,19–25

Table 1.

Preoperative BR stratification.

BR
  Low  Moderate–high 
Surgery RF  - Absence of risk criteria.  - Surgery of the head (especially the anatomical subunits corresponding to the temporal region, periorificial areas and nasal pyramid, and scalp), neck, genital area, folds, or mucosae.- Surgery in the subcutaneous plane with restricted visual access (uncommon, e.g., SLNB).- Extension over an area >4cm in surgical defect diameter.- Extension in depth reaching fascia or muscular plane. 
Patient RF  - Absence of alterations in primary hemostasis (aggregation) or secondary hemostasis (coagulation).  - Patients with platelet aggregation defects (primary hemostasis):a) Due to deficiency (<50,000 platelets):- Central thrombocytopenias (pharmacologic, decreased megakaryocytes, ineffective thrombopoiesis)- Peripheral thrombocytopenias (destruction, consumption, or sequestration)b) Due to functional defect (acquired or congenital)- Patients with coagulopathies (secondary hemostasis) 

Abbreviations not specified within the table content: SLNB: sentinel lymph node biopsy; RF: risk factor(s); BR: bleeding risk. In each patient, the characteristic stratified as the highest risk will determine the overall risk.

Table 2.

Preoperative TER stratification.

Risk factors  TER
  Low  Moderate  High 
Valve prosthesis (VP)  - Absence of VP- Mechanical aortic prosthesis without other RFs  - Bileaflet mechanical aortic prosthesis +1 of:• AF• Stroke/TIA>6 months ago• DM, HF, HTN, or >75 years  - Single-disk/ball mechanical aortic prostheses (old type)a- Mechanicala or biologic mitral prosthesis- Mechanicala or biologic tricuspid prosthesis- VP and stroke/TIA<6 months ago 
Atrial fibrillation (AF)  - Absence of AF- AF with CHA2DS2-VASc score 1–4 without other RFs  - AF with CHA2DS2-VASc score 5–6- AF with stroke/TIA >3 months ago  - AF with CHA2DS2-VASc score 7–9- AF with rheumatic mitral valvular heart disease 
Thromboembolic disease (TED)  - Absence of TED- Previous TED>12 months ago without other RFs  - Previous TED between 3–12 months ago- Recurrent TED- TED in patients with active cancer- Non-severe thrombophilia:• Heterozygous Factor V Leiden• Heterozygous 20210A PT gene  - Recent TED <3 months agoa- Severe thrombophiliaa:• Homozygous Factor V Leiden• Homozygous 20210A PT gene• Protein C, S, or AT deficiency• Antiphospholipid syndrome• Multiple coagulation defects 

Abbreviations not specified within the table content: Stroke/TIA: stroke/transient ischemic attack; CHA2DS2-VASc: risk score in the context of atrial fibrillation; DM: diabetes mellitus; RF: risk factor(s); HTN: hypertension; HF: heart failure; PT: prothrombin; TER: thromboembolic risk. In each patient, the characteristic stratified as the highest risk will determine the overall risk.

a

Scenarios in which, if bridging therapy with heparin is required, therapeutic doses are recommended (see below).

Management of anticoagulants

In patients on anticoagulant treatment (ACT), anticoagulation should not be discontinued if preoperative HR is low (provided the ACT is not above the target therapeutic range).18,19 This applies to all procedures performed immediately in outpatient consultation settings and, to a variable extent, also to some procedures scheduled for the operating room. In cases of moderate-to-high HR, discontinuation of ACT should be considered. In such circumstances, the duration of discontinuation and the need for bridging therapy will depend on the anticoagulant drug and the TER. In patients on direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs), it may even be decided not to discontinue the drug; however, if interruption is necessary, it should be performed according to creatinine clearance (CrCl), without the need for monitoring or bridging therapy.7,9,10,19 Conversely, patients on classic vitamin K antagonist (VKA) anticoagulants should discontinue the drug according to their INR (Table 3).10,25 The need for bridging therapy in patients on VKAs should be restricted to those with high TER (Table 2).6,7,9,11,19 Reintroduction of anticoagulation, in cases of adequate hemostasis and low postoperative bleeding risk, should occur 8h after surgery in the case of DOACs or 24h after surgery in the case of VKAs, although this should be delayed until 48–72h in cases of incomplete hemostasis or high bleeding risk.9,16,17

Table 3.

Discontinuation of DOACs or antiplatelet agents before surgery.

Novel direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs)
Discontinuation according to CrCl  Rivaroxaban, Apixaban, Edoxaban  Dabigatran
CrCl>80mL/min  2424h
CrCl 50–79mL/min  2424–48h
CrCl 30–49mL/min  2448–72h
CrCl<30mL/min  48Drug not indicated
Discontinuation according to INRa  Acenocoumarol  Warfarin
Classic vitamin K antagonist anticoagulants (VKAs)
<2  3 days  5 days
2–3  4 days  6 days
>3  5 days  7 days
Antiplatelet agents
ASA 100mg  ASA 300mg  Clopidogrel  Prasugrel  Ticagrelor 
5–7 days  7–10 days  5 days  7 days  3–5 days 

Abbreviations not specified within the table content: ASA: acetylsalicylic acid; CrCl: creatinine clearance; INR: international normalized ratio.

a

INR calculation should be performed 7 days before surgery to allow the necessary adjustment.

When bridging therapy has been initiated due to persistent high TER in patients chronically treated with VKAs, this should be performed using low-molecular-weight heparin (LMWH) or, alternatively, unfractionated heparin (UFH) in patients with CrCl<30mL/min. It should be initiated 36–48h after the last anticoagulant dose—once the INR has fallen below the patient's target threshold (usually between 2 and 3.5 depending on the underlying condition indicating anticoagulation). Heparin should be administered, adjusted according to body weight and CrCl, at prophylactic doses if ACT is indicated for primary or secondary prevention, but at therapeutic doses if the patient's regular ACT is considered active treatment and surgery cannot be delayed until its completion (Table 4). Whenever possible, if the patient's usual ACT is therapeutic rather than preventive due to one of the high-TER scenarios (Table 2), surgery should be postponed if the TER is transient, depending on the urgency of the dermatologic intervention. The last dose of heparin used as bridging therapy should be administered 4–6h before surgery in the case of UFH, 12h before surgery if LMWH is administered at prophylactic doses (usually every 24h), or 24h before surgery if LMWH is administered at therapeutic doses (every 12 or 24h). These intervals may, depending on the case, be doubled if CrCl<30mL/min.23,26 If monitoring is required, LMWH should be monitored using activated anti-factor Xa levels, whereas UFH is monitored using activated partial thromboplastin time (aPTT).23,27,28 Protamine sulfate is the antidote for both types of heparin, although it is more effective in the case of UFH.29,30 After surgery, heparin administration should be resumed using the same regimen as before surgery once 12h have passed after the procedure, overlapping with the patient's regular VKA treatment starting at 24h or 48–72h depending on postoperative bleeding risk, as previously established.31 Both treatments should be administered concomitantly until the target INR is reached on subsequent monitoring, at which point heparin may be discontinued.

Table 4.

Examples of LMWH as bridging therapy in patients treated with VKAs with high non-deferrable thromboembolic risk.

Indications  Prophylactic doses  Therapeutic doses 
  - Mitral biologic VP   
  - Tricuspid biologic VP   
  - Mechanical VP in aortic position  - Mechanical VP in non-aortic position 
  - AF +1 high TER factor:  - Single-disk/ball mechanical VP (old type) in aortic position 
  • CHA2DS2-VASc 7–9  - TED<3 months agoa 
  • Stroke/TIA<3 months  - Severe thrombophilia 
  • Rheumatic mitral Valvular heart disease   
  CrCl>30mL/min  CrCl<30mL/min  CrCl>30mL/min  CrCl<30mL/min 
Bemiparin  3500IU/243500IU/24115IU/kg/2485IU/kg/24
Enoxaparin<80kg: 4000IU/24<80kg: 2000IU/24150–200IU/kg/24h100IU/kg/24h
80–100kg: 6000IU/24>80kg: 2000–4000IU/kg/24h
>100kg: 4000IU/12

Abbreviations not specified within the table content: CHA2DS2-VASc: risk score in the context of atrial fibrillation; CrCl: creatinine clearance; TED: thromboembolic disease; AF: atrial fibrillation; VP: valve prosthesis; TER: thromboembolic risk; IU: international units.

a

In cases of non-emergency surgery, consider postponement until 3 months after the TED and consequent reduction in TER.

Management of antiplatelet agents

For patients on antiplatelet therapy, it is necessary to distinguish whether the prescription is for primary or secondary prevention. In cases of primary prevention, the antiplatelet agent may be discontinued and resumed up to 1 week after surgery. As in the case of anticoagulants, this will not be necessary for most routinely performed minor procedures, but it should be considered in patients whose surgery will be performed as MAS or in the operating room under sedation or general anesthesia.

If administration is for secondary prevention, treatment with acetylsalicylic acid (ASA) at a dose of 100mg/day should be maintained throughout the perioperative period.16 Higher doses of ASA or other drugs such as thienopyridines and P2Y12 inhibitors (P2Y12i) (clopidogrel, prasugrel, and ticagrelor) should be discontinued in the days prior to surgery and replaced with ASA 100mg/day (Table 3).21–23,25,31 The use of heparin as bridging therapy in cases of antiplatelet discontinuation is not recommended. Only in cases of secondary prevention with moderate or high TER and low HR may continuation of P2Y12i therapy be considered.16,18 Similarly, in cases of dual antiplatelet therapy during early secondary prevention of cerebrovascular and cardiovascular events, the possibility of postponing surgery until the critical risk period has passed should be evaluated (e.g., 6 weeks after implantation of a bare-metal stent or 6 months after placement of a drug-eluting stent) due to the increased HR associated with dual therapy. If dermatologic surgery cannot be postponed or TER is not transient, it is recommended to assess HR and maintain both antiplatelet agents only in cases of low HR, while considering changes to the antiplatelet regimen in other cases (discontinuation of the P2Y12i while maintaining ASA at 100mg/day).6,16,18 After surgery, regular antiplatelet therapy should be resumed 12–24h after surgery in the presence of low postoperative bleeding risk, or 48–72h later if postoperative bleeding risk is high.31

Other situations affecting hemostasis

Regarding patient medication, patients on simultaneous anticoagulant and antiplatelet therapy have a higher bleeding risk. They should be independently evaluated for each medication according to the recommendations previously described. In any case, if continuation of both therapies is decided (e.g., ASA and VKA), INR should be confirmed to be <3.5 in the days prior to surgery.16 Anticoagulant drugs that potentiate antithrombin III (UFH, LMWH, heparinoids such as danaparoid, and oligosaccharides such as fondaparinux) are rare as chronic drugs in patients undergoing dermatologic surgery. In the case of UFH and LMWH, they are more frequently used as bridging therapy in patients on VKAs. In cases of primary treatment with any of these agents, it is important to consider their necessity and potential impact if emergency surgery is required, as they are generally prescribed transiently and may eventually transition permanently to VKAs. A similar situation applies to intravenous thrombin inhibitors such as bivalirudin and lepirudin. Less commonly used antiplatelet agents acting through the ADP pathway, including phosphodiesterase inhibitors (dipyridamole), thienopyridines (ticlopidine), and glycoprotein IIb/IIIa inhibitors (abciximab, tirofiban, eptifibatide), also require special precautions and should be individually evaluated together with the prescribing physician. Bruton tyrosine kinase inhibitors (BTKi) such as ibrutinib and acalabrutinib, used for chronic hematologic disorders including chronic lymphocytic leukemia, have been associated with bleeding episodes following dermatologic surgery. Any decision regarding temporary discontinuation of these inhibitors should be made jointly with the prescribing physician, particularly because prolonged interruption of these medications may result in progression of the underlying disease.16 Finally, several dietary supplements have been associated with increased bleeding risk, including vitamin E, fish oil, feverfew, garlic, ginger, ginkgo, ginseng, and glucosamine. Discontinuation of supplements associated with increased bleeding risk before surgery may be considered.16

Similarly, comorbidities such as hypertension (HTN) may condition increased HR and hinder adequate intra- and postoperative hemostasis. Proper control of HTN before and during surgery is necessary, and numerous pharmacologic alternatives exist that should be individualized according to the patient's comorbidities and the urgency of blood pressure control depending on hemodynamic stability.32–34

Regarding surgical characteristics, although every procedure is unique, in surgical procedures with high HR and risk of postoperative hematoma formation, placement of a capillary drain (Penrose) or vacuum drain (Redon) may be considered (e.g., surgical procedures involving extensive undermining or generating spaces that cannot be completely obliterated). Similarly, compressive dressing of the operated area plays an essential role in controlling postoperative bleeding risk or hematoma formation. This is routinely recommended in most dermatologic surgeries, although there are anatomical areas that are more difficult to compress (folds, abdomen, etc.) and therefore carry higher postoperative risk.35–37 Finally, factors such as potential complications during the procedure, type of anesthesia used (with or without vasoconstrictor), and type of hemostasis performed (e.g., ligation or electrocautery) should be considered when assessing postoperative bleeding risk.

Perioperative management of implantable cardiac devices

Implantable cardiac devices (IcDs), such as pacemakers (PMs), cardiac resynchronization devices, and implantable cardioverter-defibrillators (ICDs), require special consideration to minimize the risk of electromagnetic interference and perioperative complications.38–41 Precautions should be particularly emphasized in patients considered dependent on IcD function, such as PM-dependent patients with complete atrioventricular block (AVB) or ICD carriers. In all patients with IcDs, the distance between the device and the surgical field should be evaluated, and the use of bipolar electrosurgery in short (<5s), irregular, low-energy bursts should be considered to reduce the risk of interference.18,42 If bipolar electrosurgery is not used and monopolar electrosurgery is employed instead, the grounding plate should be positioned as close as possible to the surgical field, at least 10–15cm away from the IcD, while always making sure that the electrical current pathway between the electrosurgical unit and the grounding plate does not pass directly through the IcD.42 In such cases, adequate skin contact must be maintained throughout the procedure.

Additionally, in certain situations, consultation with cardiology or anesthesiology is recommended for specialized evaluation and perioperative management before surgery (Table 5). In these cases, pacemaker reprogramming to safer modes (VOO or VVI) or temporary deactivation of the ICD may be considered. These changes are mandatory if monopolar electrosurgery is planned in supraumbilical surgery. Of note, some ICDs cannot be deactivated if they have recently delivered shocks. The use of an adhesive magnet for temporary ICD deactivation may be acceptable when deactivation is not feasible and surgery cannot be postponed or dependence on defibrillation is not transient, provided that appropriate supervision and safety measures are ensured.41 Continuous cardiac rhythm monitoring is essential during surgical procedures in patients with IcDs.39 Patients carrying deactivated ICDs should ideally be scheduled in operating rooms equipped with anesthesiology support and facilities allowing continuous monitoring and rapid response to arrhythmic events.

Table 5.

Special situations related to IcD.

Special situations related to cardiac implantable devices
PM  - Dependent patients and surgical area located at a distance<15cm (if electrosurgery use is anticipated)- Supraumbilical surgical area if electrosurgery is required but a bipolar unit is unavailable. 
ICD  - Supraumbilical surgery 
Regardless of device  - History of malfunction- Prolonged surgeries under general anesthesia (require preoperative assessment) 

Abbreviations not specified within the table content: ICD: implantable cardioverter-defibrillator; IcD: implantable cardiac device; PM: pacemaker.

Perioperative management of diabetes mellitus

Diabetes mellitus (DM) is a common comorbidity that may pose a challenge in cases of inadequate control and alterations in glucose levels during the perioperative period. Capillary blood glucose does not have the same relevance in procedures performed in outpatient consultation settings, where patients attend having taken their usual medication and diet. However, in the context of scheduled surgery, many patients attend after having modified their food intake or the medications they usually take on the morning or even the day before surgery. Consequently, it is common for admission monitoring to reveal abnormally high or low glucose levels, potentially compromising patient stability.

The objective on the day of surgery is to maintain glycemic control within the range of 140–180mg/dL, with serial measurements from the patient's arrival and every 3–4h thereafter.43 Regular medication should be documented during surgical planning in consultation, and the necessary adjustments for surgery should be established. These adjustments are independent of the type of DM and vary according to the patient's usual medication.44–47 When the patient is not fasting, regular medication should be administered to prevent hyperglycemia. Conversely, if fasting is required, prescribed antidiabetic drugs should be reduced to prevent perioperative hypoglycemia. Thus, non-insulin therapies (NITs), also referred to as oral antidiabetic drugs, and rapid-acting (correctional) insulin should not be taken on the day of surgery. Only 80% of the usual dose of long-acting (basal) insulin should be administered at the scheduled time. In patients treated with premixed insulin, only 50% of the usual dose should be administered. Blood glucose levels on arrival, together with subsequent measurements if performed, will determine the need for correction using rapid-acting insulin analogs.43,48 If persistent hyperglycemia is detected (>250mg/dL on several occasions) or signs of ketoacidosis are present (nausea, tachycardia, abdominal pain, etc.), intravenous treatment should be initiated and blood gas analysis obtained.47–50 Similarly, in patients with perioperative hemodynamic instability, subcutaneous treatment should be discontinued and a continuous intravenous rapid-acting insulin infusion protocol initiated. If hospitalization exceeds 24–48h, a hospital subcutaneous insulinization protocol should be initiated, replacing the patient's regular medication.45,47,49–51

Antibiotic prophylaxis

Antibiotic prophylaxis in dermatologic surgery is mainly indicated to reduce the risk of surgical site infection (SSI) in selected patients and procedures.52,53 The incidence rate of SSI in dermatologic surgery is approximately 5%. More than 90% of resident flora is composed of Staphylococcus epidermidis; however, the key pathogen in SSIs is Staphylococcus aureus.13,54,55 SSIs related to S. aureus are usually caused by the patient's own mucocutaneous flora.52 Routine prophylaxis is not recommended.13 When determining the need for antibiotic prophylaxis, multiple factors must be considered. Antibiotic prophylaxis for SSI should be indicated in dermatologic surgery involving high-tension closures, large flaps, and skin grafts when additional risk factors related to the technique, anatomical location, or patient are present (Table 6).13,52,56–62

Table 6.

Indications for antibiotic prophylaxis of SSI in dermatology.

Surgical technique RF (Sufficient criterion)  Placement of prosthetic or exogenous material (excluding drains). 
Area to be treated RF (Sufficient criterion)Intact or ulcerated skin (chronic ulcers) with signs of infection. 
Nose (in cases of flap reconstruction or sebaceous hypertrophy). 
Auricle (especially in flap reconstruction). 
Skin of the groin, perineum, or below the knee. 
Oral, nasal, or genital mucosa. 
± Patient RF (Accessory criterion)Non-modifiable factors: advanced age… 
Modifiable factors: obesity, smoking, MRSA colonization… 
Comorbidities: Immunosuppression, DM, peripheral vascular disease… 

Abbreviations not specified within the table content: DM: diabetes mellitus; RF: risk factor; MRSA: methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus.

The choice of antibiotic and the optimal timing of administration are determined by the desired antimicrobial spectrum, which should be restricted as much as possible to microorganisms colonizing or responsible for complications according to the surgical area, and by the pharmacokinetics of the active agent in terms of absorption, distribution, and bioavailability at the target site.57,60,61,63–66 Administration should ideally occur 5–30min before the first incision if given intravenously (IV), or 40–60min beforehand if administered orally, as a single dose.13,52,57,60 The preferred option is cefazolin 2g IV in skin surgery or amoxicillin 2g IV/PO in oral mucosal surgery.57 As an alternative in patients allergic to beta-lactams, clindamycin 600mg PO is recommended.67 In mucosal procedures with clinical signs of active infection, mixed infection, or suspected involvement of β-lactamase-producing S. aureus, combination with clavulanic acid (125–200mg) should be considered.57,68,69 In high-risk auricular surgery in immunocompromised patients or in those with a history or suspicion of locoregional colonization by Pseudomonas, ciprofloxacin may be considered to provide extended coverage against this microorganism, although this indication lacks consensus and the routine use of quinolones is not currently recommended.60,64,70,71 Similarly, in the presence of evidence or high preoperative risk of methicillin-resistant S. aureus (MRSA) colonization, if preoperative decolonization cannot be performed, clindamycin 600mg PO or cotrimoxazole (trimethoprim/sulfamethoxazole) 160mg/800mg should be considered.57,60,61,72 Emerging strategies, such as the use of incisional/local microdoses of antibiotics, have shown promising results in reducing SSI with lower systemic exposure, although additional validation is required.73 In cases of inappropriate omission, intraoperative complications, or need for postoperative antibiotic coverage, prescription of longer antibiotic regimens at discharge should be individualized.57,60,65

Another potential infectious risk is that of severe systemic infections, endocarditis, and prosthetic joint infections in the context of bacteremia.56 Therefore, antibiotic prophylaxis may also be necessary in patients at high risk of bacterial endocarditis (BE) or prosthetic joint infection (PJI) (Table 7).26,56,59,64,65,74,75 In these patients, prophylaxis is required for mucosal surgery, interventions on chronic ulcers, procedures with local signs of infection, or significant risk of bacteremia (not for routine procedures on healthy skin).56 Additionally, prophylaxis may be considered in centrofacial surgery, non-mucosal genital surgery, or Mohs surgery. Again, the regimen of choice should be individualized according to the specific case and administered 30–60min before the first incision.56,57,59,61,76,77 Redosing is only recommended in prolonged procedures (>4h) or in cases of excessive bleeding.57

Table 7.

Patients at high risk of systemic infectious complications in dermatologic surgery.

Bacterial endocarditis (BE) prophylaxis  Prosthetic joint infection (PJI) prophylaxis 
- Valve prostheses or prosthetic material used for valve repair- Personal history of infective endocarditis- Personal history of unrepaired cyanotic congenital heart disease- Personal history of repaired congenital heart disease with implantation of prosthetic material (6 months after correction, or lifelong in cases of persistent residual shunt or regurgitation)- Cardiac transplant recipients with structural valvular heart disease  - First 2 years after replacement- Regardless of replacement time if:• Personal history of previous PJI• Comorbidities: immunosuppression, severe malnutrition, T1DM, inflammatory joint disease, hemophilia 
±Other patient RFs that increase infection risk (accessory criterion)

Abbreviations not specified within the table content: PH: personal history; T1DM: type 1 diabetes mellitus; RF: risk factor; R: risk.

Additional considerations

Although beyond the scope of this work due to space limitations, it should be emphasized that less common but relevant drugs in dermatology, including immunosuppressants and biologic agents, also require special attention when planning complex dermatologic surgery. Each drug has specific discontinuation intervals if interruption is necessary.78

Conclusions

Perioperative management in dermatologic surgery presents specific challenges due to the diversity of procedures and the individual characteristics of patients, particularly those requiring adjustments to chronic therapies or carrying implantable devices. This narrative review provides practical recommendations based on current evidence and cumulative experience to optimize the safety and efficacy profile in the management of anticoagulants, antiplatelet agents, antibiotic prophylaxis, and control of common comorbidities such as diabetes in the context of dermatologic surgery.

Acknowledgments

The authors would like to express their gratitude to the professionals who contributed to previous versions of related protocols, provided reference materials, or participated in prior discussions of the topics addressed herein, especially (alphabetical order): Andrea Albás-Sorrosal (Internal Medicine), Beatriz Alejandre-Ovejero (General Surgery), Carlos Llamas-Segura (Dermatology), José María Llamas-Molina (Dermatology), Lorién Blasco-Pérez (Anesthesiology and Resuscitation), María Martínez-Pérez (Hospital Pharmacy), Marta Cebolla-Verdugo (Dermatology), Pablo Velasco-Amador (Dermatology), and Sara Corpas-Pérez (Cardiology).

References
[1]
J. Han, S. von Csiky-Sessoms, S. Owji, et al.
Distinct approaches to perioperative management of anticoagulation and antiplatelet therapy among providers performing cutaneous surgery.
J Drugs Dermatol, 21 (2022), pp. 766-772
[2]
C. Gomez Peña, I. Casas Hidalgo, M. Valle Corpas, M.S. Caparrós Romero, J.F. Guillén Perales.
Guía práctica para el manejo perioperatorio de la medicación crónica en el paciente quirúrgico.
(2019),
[3]
I. Cuevas Asencio, A. Delgado Martínez, A. Galán Cabezas, et al.
Manejo perioperatorio de la terapia antitrombóticaen pacientes que precisan intervenciones quirúrgicas.
(2017),
[4]
Osakidetza.
Departamento de salud.
Manejo de la medicación crónica en el periodo perioperatorio, (2017),
[5]
E. Cuéllar Obispo, E. Alvaro Sanz, V. Faus Felipe, et al.
Manejo Perioperatorio de Medicación Crónica.
(2015),
[6]
H. Shah, F.S. Frech, I. Dreyfuss, L. Hernandez, K. Nouri.
Perioperative anticoagulation recommendations for cutaneous oncologic surgery: a review of the literature.
J Dermatol Treatment, 33 (2022), pp. 2940-2945
[7]
Q. Samaran, M. Lacombe, O. Cogrel, M. Chapalain, A. Le Guern, F. Habib.
Peri-operative management of direct Xa and IIa inhibitors for dermatologic surgery: a survey of current practice among French dermatologists.
J Eur Acad Dermatol Venereol, 37 (2023), pp. e1144-e1146
[8]
A. López-Álvarez, A. Román-Fernández, M.B. Fernández-Vieitez, S. Fossati-Puertas.
Medicación crónica durante el preoperatorio: ¿suspender o no suspender?.
[9]
V. Cabezas-Calderon, P. Bassas Freixas, V. García-Patos Briones.
Direct-acting oral anticoagulants in dermatologic surgery.
Actas Dermosifiliogr, 111 (2020), pp. 357-363
[10]
E. Rao, W. Andrasik, B. Michalski, K. Tarakji, M. Militello, J. Lucas.
A review of antithrombotic agents in dermatologic surgery and context for a practical approach, with cardiology and pharmacologic input.
J Drugs Dermatol, 22 (2023), pp. 496-501
[11]
E. Butt, W. Hunt, C. Defty, W. Hussain, A. Bray, A. Wernham.
A national clinician survey on the British Society for Dermatological Surgery guidelines on antithrombotic agent use in skin surgery.
Clin Exp Dermatol, 49 (2024), pp. 143-145
[12]
D. Vivas, I. Roldán, R. Ferrandis, et al.
Perioperative and periprocedural management of antithrombotic therapy: consensus document of SEC, SEDAR, SEACV, SECTCV, AEC, SECPRE, SEPD, SEGO, SEHH, SETH, SEMERGEN, SEMFYC, SEMG, SEMICYUC, SEMI, SEMES, SEPAR, SENEC, SEO, SEPA, SERVEI, SECOT and AEU.
Rev Esp Cardiol, 71 (2018), pp. 553-564
[13]
G. Schwartzman, A. Khachemoune.
Surgical site infection after dermatologic procedures: critical reassessment of risk factors and reappraisal of rates and causes.
Am J Clin Dermatol, 22 (2021), pp. 503-510
[14]
A. Sanchez-Puigdollers, A. Toll, D. Morgado-Carrasco.
Postoperative wound care in dermatologic surgery: update and narrative review.
Actas Dermosifiliogr, (2024),
[15]
J.P. Velasco Amador, C. Llamas Segura, J.M. Llamas Molina, R. Ruiz Villaverde.
Manejo perioperatorio de fármacos antitrombóticos en cirugía dermatológica.
(2023),
[16]
M.H. Trager, E.R. Gordon, T.R. Humphreys, F.H. Samie.
Part 1: Management of antithrombotic medications in dermatologic surgery.
[17]
E.R. Gordon, M.H. Trager, F.H. Samie, T.R. Humphreys.
Part 2: Management of intraoperative and perioperative bleeding.
[18]
M.E. Iglesias Zamora, J. Aróstegui Aguilar.
Safety in dermatologic procedures: how to prevent, recognize, and treat bleeding complications in dermatologic surgery.
Actas Dermosifiliogr, 113 (2022), pp. 67-71
[19]
P.A. Ireland, L. Borruso, S.K.R. Spencer, R. Rosen, R. Rosen.
Direct oral anticoagulants in skin surgery: a systematic review of their complications and recommendations for perioperative management.
Int J Dermatol, 63 (2024), pp. 413-421
[20]
J.D. Douketis, A.C. Spyropoulos.
Perioperative management of patients taking direct oral anticoagulants.
[21]
J.A. Joglar, M.K. Chung, A.L. Armbruster, et al.
2023 ACC/AHA/ACCP/HRS guideline for the diagnosis and management of atrial fibrillation: a report of the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Joint Committee on Clinical Practice Guidelines.
[22]
N.R. Smilowitz, J.S. Berger.
Perioperative cardiovascular risk assessment and management for noncardiac surgery.
[23]
J.D. Douketis, A.C. Spyropoulos, M.H. Murad, et al.
Perioperative management of antithrombotic therapy.
Chest, 162 (2022), pp. e207-e243
[24]
C. Benesch, L.G. Glance, C.P. Derdeyn, et al.
Perioperative neurological evaluation and management to lower the risk of acute stroke in patients undergoing noncardiac, nonneurological surgery: a scientific statement from the American Heart Association/American Stroke Association.
[25]
A. Thompson, K.E. Fleischmann, N.R. Smilowitz, et al.
2024 AHA/ACC/ACS/ASNC/HRS/SCA/SCCT/SCMR/SVM guideline for perioperative cardiovascular management for noncardiac surgery.
J Am Coll Cardiol, 84 (2024), pp. 1869-1969
[26]
C.M. Otto, R.A. Nishimura, R.O. Bonow, et al.
2020 ACC/AHA guideline for the management of patients with valvular heart disease.
J Am Coll Cardiol, 77 (2021), pp. e25-e197
[27]
J.U. Doherty, T.J. Gluckman, W.J. Hucker, et al.
2017 ACC expert consensus decision pathway for periprocedural management of anticoagulation in patients with nonvalvular atrial fibrillation.
J Am Coll Cardiol, 69 (2017), pp. 871-898
[28]
P. Toulon, M. Smahi, N. De Pooter.
APTT therapeutic range for monitoring unfractionated heparin therapy. Significant impact of the anti-Xa reagent used for correlation.
J Thromb Haemost, 19 (2021), pp. 2002-2006
[29]
T.H. Baron, P.S. Kamath, R.D. McBane.
Management of antithrombotic therapy in patients undergoing invasive procedures.
N Engl J Med, 368 (2013), pp. 2113-2124
[30]
J.H. Levy, K. Ghadimi, J.N. Kizhakkedathu, T. Iba.
What's fishy about protamine? Clinical use, adverse reactions, and potential alternatives.
J Thromb Haemost, 21 (2023), pp. 1714-1723
[31]
Llamas Segura C, Llamas Molina JM, Velasco Amador P. Manejo perioperatorio de fármacos antitrombóticos en cirugía dermatológica.
[32]
S.A. Bezalel, J.D. Brewer, C.L. Baum, C.J. Arpey, R.K. Roenigk, C.C. Otley.
Safety of oral midazolam as a perioperative anxiolytic for outpatient dermatologic procedures.
Dermatol Surg, 46 (2020), pp. 1588-1592
[33]
C.J. Ensslin, C.R. Razavi, J.M. Lewin, F.H. Samie.
A cross-sectional survey of practice patterns among Mohs micrographic surgeons in the assessment and management of perioperative hypertension.
Dermatol Surg, 47 (2021), pp. 829-831
[34]
D. Guo, D.M. Zloty, I. Kossintseva.
Efficacy and safety of anxiolytics in mohs micrographic surgery: a randomized, double-blinded, placebo-controlled trial.
Dermatol Surg, 49 (2023), pp. 989-994
[35]
A.G. Strickler, P. Shah, S. Bajaj, et al.
Preventing and managing complications in dermatologic surgery: procedural and postsurgical concerns.
J Am Acad Dermatol, 84 (2021), pp. 895-903
[36]
E. Axibal, M. Brown.
Surgical dressings and novel skin substitutes.
Dermatol Clin, 37 (2019), pp. 349-366
[37]
S. Iyengar, D.G. Yeager, J.L. Cohen, D.M. Ozog.
Update and review of bleeding considerations in dermatologic surgery: hemostatic techniques and treatment strategies for bleeding complications.
Dermatol Surg, 46 (2020), pp. 203-212
[38]
B. García Bracamonte, J. Rodriguez, R. Casado, F. Vanaclocha.
Electrocirugía y dispositivos electrónicos cardiacos implantables (marcapasos y desfibriladores).
Actas Dermosifiliogr, 104 (2013), pp. 128-132
[39]
A.B.S. Khoo, V. Madan.
Dermatological surgery in patients with cardiac implantable electronic devices: a new paradigm.
J Cutan Aesthet Surg, 11 (2018), pp. 100-101
[40]
T. Özkartal, A. Demarchi, M.L. Caputo, E. Baldi, G. Conte, A. Auricchio.
Perioperative management of patients with cardiac implantable electronic devices and utility of magnet application.
J Clin Med, 11 (2022), pp. 691
[41]
M.L. James, B. Wright, H.E. Thomas, A.J. Turley, A.P.J.J. Bray.
Management of cardiac implantable electronic devices around the time of dermatological procedures requiring electrosurgery: an important guidance update.
Clin Exp Dermatol, 49 (2024), pp. 403-405
[42]
Practice Advisory for the Perioperative Management of Patients with Cardiac Implantable Electronic Devices: Pacemakers and Implantable Cardioverter – Defibrillators 2020.
Anesthesiology, 132 (2020), pp. 225-252
[43]
V. Cañada Sutil, C. Maldonado Araque.
Manejo perioperatorio de la diabetes.
(2024),
[44]
N.A. ElSayed, R.G. McCoy, G. Aleppo, et al.
Facilitating positive health behaviors and well-being to improve health outcomes: standards of care in diabetes—2025.
Diabetes Care, 48 (2025), pp. S86-S127
[45]
K. Crowley, P.Ó. Scanaill, J. Hermanides, D.J. Buggy.
Current practice in the perioperative management of patients with diabetes mellitus: a narrative review.
Br J Anaesth, 131 (2023), pp. 242-252
[46]
D. Kuzulugil, G. Papeix, J. Luu, R.K. Kerridge.
Recent advances in diabetes treatments and their perioperative implications.
Curr Opin Anaesthesiol, 32 (2019), pp. 398-404
[47]
N.A. ElSayed, R.G. McCoy, G. Aleppo, et al.
Diabetes care in the hospital: standards of care in diabetes—2025.
Diabetes Care, 48 (2025), pp. S321-S334
[48]
E. Duggan, Y. Chen.
Glycemic management in the operating room: screening, monitoring, oral hypoglycemics, and insulin therapy.
Curr Diab Rep, 19 (2019), pp. 134
[49]
L.M. Wilson, S.J. Herzig, E.R. Marcantonio, et al.
Management of diabetes and hyperglycemia in the hospital: a systematic review of clinical practice guidelines.
Diabetes Care, 48 (2025), pp. 655-664
[50]
F.J. Pasquel, M.C. Lansang, K. Dhatariya, G.E. Umpierrez.
Management of diabetes and hyperglycaemia in the hospital.
Lancet Diabetes Endocrinol, 9 (2021), pp. 174-188
[51]
M.T. Korytkowski, R. Muniyappa, K. Antinori-Lent, et al.
Management of hyperglycemia in hospitalized adult patients in non-critical care settings: an endocrine society clinical practice guideline.
J Clin Endocrinol Metab, 107 (2022), pp. 2101-2128
[52]
C.R. Löser, S.L. Becker, D. Hartmann, et al.
Perioperative antibiotic prophylaxis in skin surgery – Position paper of the Antibiotic Stewardship working group of the German Society for Dermatologic Surgery (DGDC), Part 1: Procedure- and patient-related risk factors.
J German Soc Dermatol, 21 (2023), pp. 949-956
[53]
C.S.L. Müller, W. Hubner, S. Thieme-Ruffing, et al.
Pre- and perioperative aspects of dermatosurgery.
Journal der Deutschen Dermatologischen Gesellschaft, 15 (2017), pp. 117-146
[54]
K.M. Ken, M.M. Johnson, J.J. Leitenberger, et al.
Postoperative infections in dermatologic surgery: the role of wound cultures.
Dermatol Surg, 46 (2020), pp. 1294-1299
[55]
M.F. Goh, C.E. Hollewand, S. McBride, J.A. Mathy.
Microbiology of surgical site infections following skin cancer surgery.
ANZ J Surg, 92 (2022), pp. 2269-2273
[56]
G. Balakirski, S.L. Becker, D. Hartmann, et al.
Perioperative antibiotic prophylaxis in skin surgery – Position paper of the Antibiotic Stewardship working group of the German Society for Dermatologic Surgery (DGDC), Part 2: Special indications and situations.
J German Soc Dermatol, 21 (2023), pp. 1109-1117
[57]
J.L. Seidelman, C.R. Mantyh, D.J. Anderson.
Surgical site infection prevention.
[58]
K.M. Klifto, A.C. Rydz, S. Biswas, C.S. Hultman, D. Erdmann, B.T. Phillips.
Evidence-based medicine: systemic perioperative antibiotic prophylaxis for prevention of surgical-site infections in plastic and reconstructive surgery.
Plast Reconstr Surg, 152 (2023), pp. 1154e-1182e
[59]
J.S. Barbieri, J.R. Etzkorn, D.J. Margolis.
Use of antibiotics for dermatologic procedures from 2008 to 2016.
JAMA Dermatol, 155 (2019), pp. 465
[60]
D.W. Bratzler, E.P. Dellinger, K.M. Olsen, et al.
Clinical practice guidelines for antimicrobial prophylaxis in surgery.
Am J Health Syst Pharm, 70 (2013), pp. 195-283
[61]
D.R. Long, A. Cifu, S.J. Salipante, R.G. Sawyer, K. Machutta, J.C. Alverdy.
Preventing surgical site infections in the era of escalating antibiotic resistance and antibiotic stewardship.
JAMA Surg, 159 (2024), pp. 949
[62]
M. Delpachitra, C. Heal, J. Banks, D. Charles, S. Sriharan, P. Buttner.
Risk factors for surgical site infection after minor dermatologic surgery.
Adv Skin Wound Care, 34 (2021), pp. 43-48
[63]
H. Johnson-Jahangir, N. Agrawal.
Perioperative antibiotic use in cutaneous surgery.
Dermatol Clin, 37 (2019), pp. 329-340
[64]
C. Moorhead, A. Torres.
I PREVENT bacterial resistance. An update on the use of antibiotics in dermatologic surgery.
Dermatol Surg, 35 (2009), pp. 1532-1538
[65]
A.M. Rossi, K. Mariwalla.
Prophylactic and empiric use of antibiotics in dermatologic surgery: a review of the literature and practical considerations.
Dermatol Surg, 38 (2012), pp. 1898-1921
[66]
S.P. Erickson, S.L. Schneider, J.L. Cohen, M. Alam, M.L. Council.
Perioperative practices in dermatologic surgery.
Dermatol Surg, 48 (2022), pp. 924-926
[67]
E.S. Shenoy, E. Macy, T. Rowe, K.G. Blumenthal.
Evaluation and management of penicillin allergy.
[68]
A. Huttner, J. Bielicki, M.N. Clements, et al.
Oral amoxicillin and amoxicillin–clavulanic acid: properties, indications and usage.
Clin Microbiol Infect, 26 (2020), pp. 871-879
[69]
A.P.R. Wilson, S. Shrimpton, M. Jaderberg.
A meta-analysis of the use of amoxycillin–clavulanic acid in surgical prophylaxis.
J Hosp Infect, 22 (1992), pp. 9-21
[70]
S. Wahood, O. Alani, I. Draw, et al.
Fluoroquinolones for dermatologists: a practical guide to clinical use and risk management.
Pharmaceuticals, 18 (2025), pp. 800
[71]
T.I. Wright, L.M. Baddour, E.F. Berbari, et al.
Antibiotic prophylaxis in dermatologic surgery: advisory statement 2008.
J Am Acad Dermatol, 59 (2008), pp. 464-473
[72]
K.S. Gurusamy, R. Koti, P. Wilson, B.R. Davidson.
Antibiotic prophylaxis for the prevention of methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) related complications in surgical patients.
Cochrane Database Syst Rev, 2013 (2013),
[73]
M. Goh, C. Hollewand, S. McBride, N. Ryan, B. van der Werf, J.A. Mathy.
Effect of microdoses of incisional antibiotics on the rate of surgical site infections in skin cancer surgery.
JAMA Surg, 158 (2023), pp. 718
[74]
J. McKesey, M. Mazhar, M. Alam, D. Srivastava, R.I. Nijhawan.
Incidence of bacteremia, infective endocarditis, or prosthetic joint infection in dermatologic surgery: a systematic review.
Dermatol Surg, 50 (2024), pp. 428-433
[75]
W.R. Wilson, M. Gewitz, P.B. Lockhart, et al.
Prevention of viridans group streptococcal infective endocarditis: a scientific statement from the American Heart Association.
[76]
S.W. de Jonge, Q.J.J. Boldingh, A.H. Koch, et al.
Timing of preoperative antibiotic prophylaxis and surgical site infection.
Ann Surg, 274 (2021), pp. e308-e314
[77]
W.P. Weber, W.R. Marti, M. Zwahlen, et al.
The timing of surgical antimicrobial prophylaxis.
Ann Surg, 247 (2008), pp. 918-926
[78]
C. Capilla Montes, M. Casellas Gibert, C.M. González Ponce, et al.
Guía sobre el manejo del tratamiento con inmunosupresores y terapias biológicas en el perioperatorio.
(2024),

These authors contributed equally and share senior co-authorship.

Copyright © 2026. AEDV
Descargar PDF
Idiomas
Actas Dermo-Sifiliográficas
Opciones de artículo
Herramientas