ABSTRACT
PURPOSE: The use of prophylactic antibiotics in elective colorectal surgery is essential. Although postoperative prophylactic antibiotics are recommended within 24 hr, the optimal duration of the use of prophylactic antibiotics after colorectal surgery has not yet been fully proven in Korea. The aim of this study was to compare infectious outcomes in elective colorectal cancer surgery between postoperative 3-day antibiotic therapy and 5-day therapy. METHODS: We conducted a multicenter, randomized trial of a 3-day use vs. a 5-day use of the second-generation cephalosporin cefotetan after elective colorectal surgery. The main outcome measures were the incidences of surgical site infection and all other infectious complications within 21 days after surgery. RESULTS: A total of 306 patients were enrolled. Fifty-one patients were excluded because they received additional surgery or dropped out during the study. Two-hundred fifty-five patients were analyzed in this study. The two groups were similar in terms of demographics, ASA score, tumor location, tumor stage, surgical approach (conventional open vs. laparoscopy-assisted vs. robotic-assisted), and type of operation. The incidences of surgical site infection were not significantly different between the 3-day use group (4/130 or 3.1%) and the 5-day use group (3/125 or 2.4%) (P=1.000). Incidences of overall infectious diseases did not differ significantly between the two groups. Postoperatively, both groups had similar values in their white blood cell count, absolute neutrophil count, and C-reactive protein levels. However, the number of patients is small to draw a definite conclusion in this study. CONCLUSION: Three-day cefotetan administration may be not inferior in preventing surgical site infection compared to 5-day antibiotic administration. However, further studies with a large number of patients are needed before a definite conclusion can be drawn.
Subject(s)
Humans , Anti-Bacterial Agents , C-Reactive Protein , Cefotetan , Colorectal Neoplasms , Colorectal Surgery , Communicable Diseases , Demography , Incidence , Korea , Leukocyte Count , Neutrophils , Outcome Assessment, Health Care , Prospective StudiesABSTRACT
Se estudiaron retrospectivamente los expedientes clínicos de 155 pacientes a las que se les realizó histerectomía por vía abdominal o vaginal, en el Servicio de Cirugía General durante un período de 30 meses. Las pacientes se dividieron en 3 grupos según: a) recibieron antibioticoterapia perioperatoria, b) recibieron antibioticoterapia en el posoperatorio inmediato y c) no recibieron tratamiento antibiótico. Se analizó la tasa de infección de la herida quirúrgica, además de la relación de ésta con algunos factores, entre ellos el tiempo quirúrgico y la antisepsia vaginal. Se llevaron los resultados a tratamiento estadístico (chi cuadrado y test de Fisher) y se concluyó en que existe diferencia significativa entre la tasa de infección de la herida cuando se utiliza profilaxis perioperatoria (4,7 %) si se compara con las pacientes que no recibieron tratamiento antibiótico.
A retrospective study of the medical histories of 155 patients who underwent vaginal of abdominal hysterectomy at the General Surgery Service during 30 months was conducted. Patients were divided into 3 groups: a) patients who received perioperative antibiotic therapy, b) patients that were administered antibiotics theraphy in the immediate postoperative and c) those under no antibiotics treatment. The surgical wound infection rate was analyzed as well as its relation with some factors, such as surgical time and vaginal antisepsis. The results were statistically treated (chi square and Fishers test) and it was concluded that there is a significant difference between the wound infection rate of patients receiving perioperative prophylaxis (4.7 %) and those without antibiotics treatment.
ABSTRACT
Se realizó un estudio prospectivo de 96 pacientes operados por fracturas de cadera a los cuales se les aplicó profilaxis antimicrobiana perioperatoria. Se usó cefazolina en dosis única de 1 g durante la inducción anestésica (30 min antes de la intervención quirúrgica). Los resultados se compararon con los de otro Hospital Clinicoquirúrgico con características similares al nuestro donde no se aplicó la profilaxis perioperatoria y su tasa de infección fue de 36,8 %, mientras la nuestra fue de sólo el 2 %. Se analizaron los resultados económicos de la aplicación de este método profiláctico, que reduce evidentemente los costos hospitalarios.
A prospective study of 96 patients operated on of hip fractures and who received perioperative antimicrobial prophylaxis was conducted. Cefazolin was used in a unique dose of 1 g during anesthetic induction (30 minutes before the surgical procedure). The results were compared with those of another clinical and surgical hospital with similar characteristics to ours and where no perioperative prophylaxis was applied. Its infection rate was 36.8 % while ours was just 2 %.