BACKGROUND: This study evaluated whether prophylactic treatment with a cefazolin could prevent infections in patients who had a surgically inserted totally implantable venous access device (TIVAD). METHODS: We conducted a prospective, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial comparing wound infection rates in 404 patients (203 receivedprophylactic cefazolin, 201 received a placebo) undergoing TIVAD insertion. Infections were evaluated 3, 7, 14, and 30 days after discharge and outcomes were compared and analyzed. RESULTS: Groups were well matched for all preoperative variables studied, including comorbid conditions. Superficial surgical site infection developed in 5 patients (2.5%) from the antibiotic group and 6 (3%) from the placebo group (P = .75). One from each group developed deep surgical site infection. Both patients were readmitted and underwent repeated debridement, which eventually resulted in port loss in 1 patient. CONCLUSIONS: We do not recommend the use of prophylactic antibiotics in TIVAD insertion because they will not decrease the already low rate of postoperative infectious complications. Registration number NCT00867295 (http://www.clinicaltrials.gov).
RCT Entities:
BACKGROUND: This study evaluated whether prophylactic treatment with a cefazolin could prevent infections in patients who had a surgically inserted totally implantable venous access device (TIVAD). METHODS: We conducted a prospective, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial comparing wound infection rates in 404 patients (203 received prophylactic cefazolin, 201 received a placebo) undergoing TIVAD insertion. Infections were evaluated 3, 7, 14, and 30 days after discharge and outcomes were compared and analyzed. RESULTS: Groups were well matched for all preoperative variables studied, including comorbid conditions. Superficial surgical site infection developed in 5 patients (2.5%) from the antibiotic group and 6 (3%) from the placebo group (P = .75). One from each group developed deep surgical site infection. Both patients were readmitted and underwent repeated debridement, which eventually resulted in port loss in 1 patient. CONCLUSIONS: We do not recommend the use of prophylactic antibiotics in TIVAD insertion because they will not decrease the already low rate of postoperative infectious complications. Registration number NCT00867295 (http://www.clinicaltrials.gov).
Authors: Anne M Covey; Franz W Toro-Pape; Raymond H Thornton; Crystal Son; Joseph Erinjeri; Constantinos T Sofocleous; Lynn A Brody; Karen T Brown; Kent A Sepkowitz; Kent A Septkowitz; George I Getrajdman Journal: J Vasc Interv Radiol Date: 2012-03 Impact factor: 3.464
Authors: Cullen Grable; Syed W Yusuf; Juhee Song; George M Viola; Owais Ulhaq; Jose Banchs; Corey T Jensen; Harsh Goel; Saamir A Hassan Journal: Open Heart Date: 2021-08