M T Fallon1, W Shafer, E Jacob. 1. Atlanta VA Medical Center Research Service, Emory University, Atlanta, Georgia, USA.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: In a previous study, the topical administration of biodegradable, controlled-release poly-(dl-lactide-co-glycolide) cefazolin microspheres could effectively prevent surgical wound infections with a sensitive strain of Staphylococcus aureus in an experimental animal model. The objective of the current study was to evaluate and compare the efficacy of topical antibiotic therapy with cefazolin microspheres to systemic cefazolin therapy for the treatment of experimental rat surgical wounds contaminated with a methicillin-resistant strain of S. aureus (MRSA). METHODS: A local infection model in rats was used. MRSA was used to infect pockets surgically produced in the paraspinous muscles. Groups of rats received either topical cefazolin microspheres, topical cefazolin powder, parenteral cefazolin, or no treatment. Feces were cultured to evaluate the effect of antibiotic therapy on gut flora. RESULTS: The rate of clinical wound infection following topical application of cefazolin microspheres (13%) was significantly lower than the 53% infection rate observed in rats who had received a 2-week course of systemic cefazolin therapy (P = 0.046). Moreover, single-dose topical antibiotic therapy with cefazolin microspheres completely eradicated MRSA from the wounds of 7 of 15 (47%) animals. There was no statistically significant difference, however, in the rate of clinical wound infection between rats whose wounds were treated topically with free cefazolin powder and those treated with systemic cefazolin (P = 0.12). Importantly, selection of antibiotic-resistant bacteria was associated with systemic but not local cefazolin therapy. CONCLUSION: The results of this study suggest that topical antibiotic therapy with controlled-release cefazolin microspheres may be effective for the prevention of wound infection with both methicillin-sensitive and methicillin-resistant strains of S. aureus in selected surgical procedures that are at high risk of developing postoperative wound infection.
BACKGROUND: In a previous study, the topical administration of biodegradable, controlled-release poly-(dl-lactide-co-glycolide) cefazolin microspheres could effectively prevent surgical wound infections with a sensitive strain of Staphylococcus aureus in an experimental animal model. The objective of the current study was to evaluate and compare the efficacy of topical antibiotic therapy with cefazolin microspheres to systemic cefazolin therapy for the treatment of experimental rat surgical wounds contaminated with a methicillin-resistant strain of S. aureus (MRSA). METHODS: A local infection model in rats was used. MRSA was used to infect pockets surgically produced in the paraspinous muscles. Groups of rats received either topical cefazolin microspheres, topical cefazolin powder, parenteral cefazolin, or no treatment. Feces were cultured to evaluate the effect of antibiotic therapy on gut flora. RESULTS: The rate of clinical wound infection following topical application of cefazolin microspheres (13%) was significantly lower than the 53% infection rate observed in rats who had received a 2-week course of systemic cefazolin therapy (P = 0.046). Moreover, single-dose topical antibiotic therapy with cefazolin microspheres completely eradicated MRSA from the wounds of 7 of 15 (47%) animals. There was no statistically significant difference, however, in the rate of clinical wound infection between rats whose wounds were treated topically with free cefazolin powder and those treated with systemic cefazolin (P = 0.12). Importantly, selection of antibiotic-resistant bacteria was associated with systemic but not local cefazolin therapy. CONCLUSION: The results of this study suggest that topical antibiotic therapy with controlled-release cefazolin microspheres may be effective for the prevention of wound infection with both methicillin-sensitive and methicillin-resistant strains of S. aureus in selected surgical procedures that are at high risk of developing postoperative wound infection.
Authors: Tianhong Dai; Gitika B Kharkwal; Masamitsu Tanaka; Ying-Ying Huang; Vida J Bil de Arce; Michael R Hamblin Journal: Virulence Date: 2011-07-01 Impact factor: 5.882
Authors: R A Cetinkaya; S Yilmaz; A Ünlü; P Petrone; C Marini; E Karabulut; M Urkan; E Kaya; K Karabacak; M Uyanik; I Eker; A Kilic; A Gunal Journal: Eur J Trauma Emerg Surg Date: 2017-09-30 Impact factor: 3.693
Authors: Regis P Kowalski; Tyler A Kowalski; Robert M Q Shanks; Eric G Romanowski; Lisa M Karenchak; Francis S Mah Journal: Cornea Date: 2013-06 Impact factor: 2.651