Literature DB >> 12531444

A comparison of the prophylactic efficacy of ceftriaxone and cefotaxime in abdominal surgery.

John C Woodfield1, Andre M Van Rij, Ross A Pettigrew, Antje J van der Linden, Clive Solomon, Donna Bolt.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Although ceftriaxone (R) and cefotaxime (C) are highly effective antibiotics, few studies have directly compared their prophylactic efficacy.
METHODS: In a prospective, randomized, double blind study of 1,013 patients undergoing abdominal surgery, the prophylactic use of ceftriaxone and cefotaxime were compared. Intravenous cephalosporin, 1 g, was given at induction of anesthesia, with intravenous metronidazole, 500 mg, also being given for colorectal surgery.
RESULTS: The difference in wound infection (R 8%, C 12%, P <0.05) was due to appendicectomies not receiving metronidazole, (R 6%, C 18%, P <0.03) and was no longer present when these cases were excluded from analysis (R 8%, C 10%). Of note chest and urinary tract infection (R 6%, C 11%, P <0.02) and "any" infection (R 20%, C 27%, P <0.05) were reduced with ceftriaxone.
CONCLUSIONS: Both antibiotics provide comparable wound prophylaxis as long as metronidazole is added for colorectal and appendiceal surgery. Ceftriaxone may be more versatile having the additional apparent benefits of reducing other postoperative infections, being less dependent on metronidazole as an adjunct and providing a more effective prophylactic cover against Staphylococcus aureus.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2003        PMID: 12531444     DOI: 10.1016/s0002-9610(02)01125-x

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Am J Surg        ISSN: 0002-9610            Impact factor:   2.565


  6 in total

1.  Pre-emptive antibiotic treatment vs 'standard' treatment in patients with elevated serum procalcitonin levels after elective colorectal surgery: a prospective randomised pilot study.

Authors:  Ansgar Michael Chromik; Frank Endter; Waldemar Uhl; Arnulf Thiede; Hans Bernd Reith; Ulrich Mittelkötter
Journal:  Langenbecks Arch Surg       Date:  2005-12-21       Impact factor: 3.445

2.  Using cost of infection as a tool to demonstrate a difference in prophylactic antibiotic efficacy: a prospective randomized comparison of the pharmacoeconomic effectiveness of ceftriaxone and cefotaxime prophylaxis in abdominal surgery.

Authors:  John C Woodfield; Andre M Van Rij; Ross A Pettigrew; Antje van der Linden; Donna Bolt
Journal:  World J Surg       Date:  2005-01       Impact factor: 3.352

3.  A meta-analysis of randomized, controlled trials assessing the prophylactic use of ceftriaxone. A study of wound, chest, and urinary infections.

Authors:  J C Woodfield; N Beshay; A M van Rij
Journal:  World J Surg       Date:  2009-12       Impact factor: 3.352

4.  Ceftriaxone versus Other Antibiotics for Surgical Prophylaxis : A Meta-Analysis.

Authors:  Silvano Esposito; Silvana Noviello; Alessandro Vanasia; Paola Venturino
Journal:  Clin Drug Investig       Date:  2004       Impact factor: 2.859

5.  Accuracy of the surgeons' clinical prediction of perioperative complications using a visual analog scale.

Authors:  John C Woodfield; Ross A Pettigrew; Lindsay D Plank; Michael Landmann; Andre M van Rij
Journal:  World J Surg       Date:  2007-10       Impact factor: 3.282

Review 6.  Oral and Parenteral vs. Parenteral Antibiotic Prophylaxis for Patients Undergoing Laparoscopic Colorectal Resection: An Intervention Review with Meta-Analysis.

Authors:  Giuseppe Sangiorgio; Marco Vacante; Francesco Basile; Antonio Biondi
Journal:  Antibiotics (Basel)       Date:  2021-12-24
  6 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.