Evan Johnson1, James Babb2, Divya Sridhar2. 1. Department of Radiology, Center for Biomedical Imaging, NYU Langone Medical Center, 660 First Avenue, New York, NY 10016. Electronic address: Evan.Johnson@nyumc.org. 2. Department of Radiology, Center for Biomedical Imaging, NYU Langone Medical Center, 660 First Avenue, New York, NY 10016.
Abstract
PURPOSE: To provide a meta-analysis of currently available literature on the topic of antibiotic prophylaxis for totally implanted venous access device (TIVAD) placement. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A systematic review of MEDLINE/PubMed was performed to identify studies that met Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) criteria reviewing antibiotic prophylaxis in TIVAD placement. Four studies were identified that met criteria. The analysis included 2,154 patients undergoing TIVAD placement; 360 (16.7%) received antibiotic prophylaxis, and 1,794 (83.3%) received no periprocedural antibiotics. RESULTS: In the period after TIVAD placement, 27 (1.25%) infections were identified. Of infections, five occurred in the antibiotic prophylaxis group (1.39%), and 22 occurred in the nonprophylaxis group (1.23%) with an odds ratio of 0.84 (CI = 0.29-2.35). CONCLUSIONS: The odds ratio of infection was 0.85 with antibiotic use but one was contained within the confidence interval suggesting no significant difference in infection rate when antibiotics were used.
PURPOSE: To provide a meta-analysis of currently available literature on the topic of antibiotic prophylaxis for totally implanted venous access device (TIVAD) placement. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A systematic review of MEDLINE/PubMed was performed to identify studies that met Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) criteria reviewing antibiotic prophylaxis in TIVAD placement. Four studies were identified that met criteria. The analysis included 2,154 patients undergoing TIVAD placement; 360 (16.7%) received antibiotic prophylaxis, and 1,794 (83.3%) received no periprocedural antibiotics. RESULTS: In the period after TIVAD placement, 27 (1.25%) infections were identified. Of infections, five occurred in the antibiotic prophylaxis group (1.39%), and 22 occurred in the nonprophylaxis group (1.23%) with an odds ratio of 0.84 (CI = 0.29-2.35). CONCLUSIONS: The odds ratio of infection was 0.85 with antibiotic use but one was contained within the confidence interval suggesting no significant difference in infection rate when antibiotics were used.
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