| Literature DB >> 21267126 |
Abstract
Four hundred and twenty patients with one or more open dog bite wounds were studied. Cephradine or no antibiotic was used for treatment. The wounds were debrided, irrigated, and dressed; 3.6% required suturing. Six patients treated prophylactically with cephradine developed wound infections and three of these had to be hospitalized in order to receive parenteral antibiotics. Five of the wounds grew Enterobacter species, and the sixth grew Pseudomonas aeruginosa. In the control group, only two patients developed infections, one with Staphylococcus aureus, and the other with Bacillus subtilis. Both were treated as outpatients with oral antibiotics after wound treatment. Although there is no statistically significant difference between the prophylactic and control groups, there was a trend toward more serious infections in those treated with cephradine. This investigation demonstrates that prophylactic cephradine is not useful in cases of uninfected dog bite wounds.Entities:
Year: 1986 PMID: 21267126 PMCID: PMC2327620
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Can Fam Physician ISSN: 0008-350X Impact factor: 3.275