BACKGROUND: Although laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LC) is a common and widely applied technique, the use of antibiotics during the perioperative period in infection prevention remains controversial. In our study, a meta-analysis was performed to assess the impact of antibiotic prophylaxis on the postoperative infection rate in LC. METHODS: A literature search was conducted on studies published between January 1966 and March 2010 that involved LC and prophylactic administration of antibiotics. Only randomized trials that compared perioperative antibiotic prophylaxis with placebo or no treatment in low-risk patients undergoing LC were selected. Eighteen studies qualified according to the inclusion criteria, but only 12 were of adequate quality according to the Jadad scale to be included for the meta-analysis. Data were analyzed via the Peto odds ratio (OR) method and run using RevMan 4.2 software. The precision of the estimation of OR by individual studies was used to calculate their contribution (or weighting) to the pooled OR. RESULTS: The results of the 12 studies did not have significant heterogeneity, and thus, the fixed effect model was used for data analysis. Compared with placebo or no treatment, there was no significant risk reduction in the antibiotic prophylaxis group with regard to overall infections (OR=1.11; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.68-1.82; P=.67), wound infections (OR=1.07; 95% CI, 0.59-1.94; P=.99), major infections (OR=2.88; 95% CI, 0.3-28.09; P=.36), distant infections (OR=1.01; 95% CI, 0.43-2.36; P=.99), or positive bile cultures (OR=0.76; 95% CI, 0.54-1.08; P=.12). However, prophylactic antibiotics did shorten length of hospital stay (weighted mean difference=-0.16; 95% CI, -0.22 to -0.09; P<.01). CONCLUSION: Prophylactic antibiotics are not necessary for elective LC in low-risk patients.
BACKGROUND: Although laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LC) is a common and widely applied technique, the use of antibiotics during the perioperative period in infection prevention remains controversial. In our study, a meta-analysis was performed to assess the impact of antibiotic prophylaxis on the postoperative infection rate in LC. METHODS: A literature search was conducted on studies published between January 1966 and March 2010 that involved LC and prophylactic administration of antibiotics. Only randomized trials that compared perioperative antibiotic prophylaxis with placebo or no treatment in low-risk patients undergoing LC were selected. Eighteen studies qualified according to the inclusion criteria, but only 12 were of adequate quality according to the Jadad scale to be included for the meta-analysis. Data were analyzed via the Peto odds ratio (OR) method and run using RevMan 4.2 software. The precision of the estimation of OR by individual studies was used to calculate their contribution (or weighting) to the pooled OR. RESULTS: The results of the 12 studies did not have significant heterogeneity, and thus, the fixed effect model was used for data analysis. Compared with placebo or no treatment, there was no significant risk reduction in the antibiotic prophylaxis group with regard to overall infections (OR=1.11; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.68-1.82; P=.67), wound infections (OR=1.07; 95% CI, 0.59-1.94; P=.99), major infections (OR=2.88; 95% CI, 0.3-28.09; P=.36), distant infections (OR=1.01; 95% CI, 0.43-2.36; P=.99), or positive bile cultures (OR=0.76; 95% CI, 0.54-1.08; P=.12). However, prophylactic antibiotics did shorten length of hospital stay (weighted mean difference=-0.16; 95% CI, -0.22 to -0.09; P<.01). CONCLUSION: Prophylactic antibiotics are not necessary for elective LC in low-risk patients.