Brett T Phillips1, Eric G Halvorson. 1. Durham, N.C.; and Boston, Mass. From the Division of Plastic, Maxillofacial, and Oral Surgery, Duke University Medical Center; and the Division of Plastic Surgery, Brigham & Women's Hospital, Harvard Medical School.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Although data from other surgical disciplines do not support the use of prolonged postoperative prophylactic antibiotics, implant-based breast reconstruction is one area of plastic surgery where this may be warranted. The purpose of this study was to review the literature on antibiotic prophylaxis in prosthetic breast reconstruction, summarize findings, and provide recommendations. METHODS: A literature review was performed to identify studies that compared different perioperative prophylactic antibiotic regimens with respect to infectious outcomes in prosthetic breast reconstruction. RESULTS: Five studies and five systematic reviews were identified. One prospective randomized trial showed that a single preoperative dose was better than placebo, and another showed no difference between 24 hours versus until drain removal. Three studies were retrospective, one showing no difference between a single preoperative dose and prolonged antibiotic use, and two showing significant reduction in infectious complications with prolonged antibiotic use. One systematic review suggested an increased rate of infection with prolonged antibiotic use, and the other showed no difference between less than 24 hours and greater than 24 hours, but showed a reduction in infections compared to no treatment. CONCLUSIONS: The literature contains conflicting data regarding the optimal duration for perioperative antibiotic prophylaxis following prosthetic breast reconstruction. The authors' opinion is that 24 hours of antibiotic prophylaxis is warranted. Further studies are needed. Patient-centered antibiotic prophylaxis based on a risk-assessment model may be a more effective alternative to the current indiscriminate model of surgical-site infection control.
BACKGROUND: Although data from other surgical disciplines do not support the use of prolonged postoperative prophylactic antibiotics, implant-based breast reconstruction is one area of plastic surgery where this may be warranted. The purpose of this study was to review the literature on antibiotic prophylaxis in prosthetic breast reconstruction, summarize findings, and provide recommendations. METHODS: A literature review was performed to identify studies that compared different perioperative prophylactic antibiotic regimens with respect to infectious outcomes in prosthetic breast reconstruction. RESULTS: Five studies and five systematic reviews were identified. One prospective randomized trial showed that a single preoperative dose was better than placebo, and another showed no difference between 24 hours versus until drain removal. Three studies were retrospective, one showing no difference between a single preoperative dose and prolonged antibiotic use, and two showing significant reduction in infectious complications with prolonged antibiotic use. One systematic review suggested an increased rate of infection with prolonged antibiotic use, and the other showed no difference between less than 24 hours and greater than 24 hours, but showed a reduction in infections compared to no treatment. CONCLUSIONS: The literature contains conflicting data regarding the optimal duration for perioperative antibiotic prophylaxis following prosthetic breast reconstruction. The authors' opinion is that 24 hours of antibiotic prophylaxis is warranted. Further studies are needed. Patient-centered antibiotic prophylaxis based on a risk-assessment model may be a more effective alternative to the current indiscriminate model of surgical-site infection control.
Authors: Louis H Poppler; Minh-Bao Mundschenk; Andrew Linkugel; Ema Zubovic; Utku C Dolen; Terence M Myckatyn Journal: Plast Reconstr Surg Date: 2019-01 Impact factor: 4.730
Authors: Fak Mazari; G M Wattoo; N H Kazzazi; K M Kolar; O O Olubowale; C E Rogers; I A Azmy Journal: Ann R Coll Surg Engl Date: 2021-03 Impact factor: 1.951
Authors: Frederike M J Reischies; Robert Krause; Judith Holzer; Fabian Tiefenbacher; Raimund Winter; Gertraud Eylert; Tobias Meikl; Alexandru Tuca; Martin J Köfer; Lars P Kamolz; David B Lumenta Journal: PLoS One Date: 2017-08-10 Impact factor: 3.240