Antibiotic prophylaxis in cardiothoracic surgery in the United Kingdom: current practice.

A survey was conducted of the current practice of antibiotic prophylaxis in cardiac surgery throughout the United Kingdom. Most surgeons (84%) use a regimen covering a broad spectrum of bacterial species that is continued for two to three days after the operation. The most used regimens are a combination of beta lactamase resistant penicillin with an aminoglycoside (44%) or a single broad spectrum cephalosporin (30%). Just 16% of surgeons preferred a narrow spectrum regimen effective against only the Gram positive organisms commonly responsible for postoperative infection in these patients. Antibiotic prophylaxis has been adopted by all cardiac surgeons in the United Kingdom but is sometimes continued longer than is indicated by the clinical or experimental evidence.     

Antibiotic prophylaxis in allo-arthroplastic hip joint surgery

Summary The indication and the efficacy of antibiotic prophylaxis in endoprosthetic operations are discussed with reference to prospective studies.After parenteral administration of 80 mg gentamicin the antibiotic concentrations in the serum and in the wound exudate were studied for 2 to 6 hrs after administration. During this observation period the gentamicin concentrations in the wound exudate were about equal to those in the serum.A comparison of the concentrations after parenteral and after local administration of gentamicin showed much higher concentrations in the wound exudate when gentamicin was administered with the bone cement.

---

Antibiotische Prophylaxe bei allo-arthroplastischen HüfteingriffenKonzentrationsbestimmungen im Wundsekret nach parenteraler Verabreichung von Gentamycin

Zusammenfassung Anhand prospektiver Untersuchungen werden die Indikation und Wirksamkeit einer Antibioticumprophylaxe bei Endoprothesenoperationen erörtert.Nach parenteraler Gabe von 80 mg Gentamycin wurden für 2–6 Std nach der Applikation die Wirkstoffkonzentrationen im Serum und Redonsekret untersucht. Während des Beobachtungszeitraumes entsprachen die Gentamycinkonzentrationen im Wundsekret in etwa den Serumkonzentrationen.Ein Vergleich der Konzentrationen nach parenteraler und lokaler Gentamycinapplikation zeigte wesentlich höhere Wundsekretkonzentrationen, wenn Gentamycin mit dem Knochenzement verabreicht wurde.

     

Antibiotic prophylaxis for total joint replacement surgery: results of a survey of Canadian orthopedic surgeons

Background

The role of perioperative antibiotic prophylaxis in total joint replacement (TJR) surgery is well established. Whereas guidelines have been published in some countries, in Canada controversy persists concerning the best clinical practice for perioperative antibiotic prophylaxis in TJR.

Methods

We conducted a survey of 590 practising orthopedic surgeons performing TJR in Canada to assess current antibiotic prophylaxis practice. The survey included questions pertaining to antibiotic prophylaxis indications, antibiotic choice, dosing, route and timing of administration in the primary and revision arthroplasty setting, as well as postoperative wound drainage evaluation and management.

Results

The response rate after 2 mail-outs was 410 of 590 (69.5%). Current antibiotic prophylaxis regimens varied widely among surgeons, underscoring the controversy that exists regarding what constitutes best clinical practice.

Conclusion

Opinions regarding use of perioperative antibiotic prophylaxis in TJR vary widely among orthopedic surgeons in Canada, illustrating the controversy as to what constitutes best clinical practice. This survey also points to a lack of consensus about the current management of postoperative wound drainage.     

Antibiotic prophylaxis in surgery for hip fractures

Totally, 185 patients, operated on for a fresh hip fracture, were randomly allocated to either methicillin antibiotic prophylaxis or no prophylaxis and followed for 1 month. Two superficial wound infections were recorded in the prophylaxis group and one in the control group. Prophylactic use of antibiotics in surgery for hip fractures seems unnecessary provided strict aseptic routines in the operating room are followed.     

Antibiotic prophylaxis in surgery for colorectal cancer

The prophylactic use of antibiotics in the purpose of decreasing the frequency and severity of surgical infections is still controversial. The practical need of defining the concept of antibiotic prophylaxis gave rise to numerous polemics in the literature. This paper presents a retrospective study on 103 cases whom diagnostics were colon and rectum cancer, that were operated in the IV-th Surgical Clinic in 1993-2002 period; at these patients was done antibiotic prophylaxis local and systemic before, during and after operating. This method made possible the registration of a minimum number of cases with surgical infection (7 cases, representing only 7% of the operated patients): a case (1%) with peritoneal collection (needing the surgical evacuation of this collection) and in 6 cases, parietal superficial infections, which imposed the prolong of drainage for almost 7 days. Starting from the basic principles of antibiotic therapy, this paper aims at outlining practical guidelines for a judicious antibiotic prophylaxis.     

Antibiotic prophylaxis in surgery for hip fractures

Totally, 185 patients, operated on for a fresh hip fracture, were randomly allocated to either methicillin antibiotic prophylaxis or no prophylaxis and followed for 1 month. Two superficial wound infections were recorded in the prophylaxis group and one in the control group. Prophylactic use of antibiotics in surgery for hip fractures seems unnecessary provided strict aseptic routines in the operating room are followed.     

Antibiotic prophylaxis for surgery in morbidly obese patients

The rate of wound infections in morbidly obese patients who underwent gastroplasty surgery at our institution was 16.5% compared with a rate of 2.5% in normal-weight patients who underwent clean-contaminated surgery. Both groups received 1 gm of cefazolin intramuscularly before surgery was performed. We hypothesized that this regimen of prophylaxis did not provide adequate tissue levels in the morbidly obese. Morbidly obese patients who were undergoing gastroplasty were randomly selected to receive 1 gm cefazolin in the buttock fat, buttock muscle, or by intravenous injection. A fourth group of morbidly obese patients received 2 gm of cefazolin intravenously. Normal-weight patients who were undergoing upper abdominal surgery received 1 gm of cefazolin intravenously. At incision and closure, both blood and tissue levels of cefazolin were significantly (p less than 0.001) lower for all morbidly obese patients who received 1 gm cefazolin when compared with the blood and tissue levels of the drug found in normal-weight patients. The cefazolin levels obtained were below the minimal inhibitory concentrations of greater than 2 micrograms/ml for gram-positive cocci and of greater than 4 micrograms/ml for gram-negative rods. Only when the morbidly obese patient received 2 gm cefazolin were both the serum and adipose tissue levels adequate. For a 4-month period, all morbidly obese patients received 2 gm cefazolin prophylaxis, and the wound infection rate dropped to 5.6% compared with the previous rate of 16.5% (p less than 0.03). We conclude that antibiotic prophylaxis must be specially tailored to the needs of these obese patients.     

Antibiotic prophylaxis in elective colorectal surgery

Background : Antibiotics are often administered in elective colorectal surgery to prevent wound infection. The tendency for surgeons to prolong the administration of prophylactic antibiotic therapy in the postoperative period is a well‐known fact. The aim of this study was to elucidate the pattern of prophylactic antibiotic utilization in elective colorectal surgery and to determine if evidence‐based medicine is employed in relation to this practice. Methods : A cross‐sectional study encompassing general surgeons performing elective colorectal surgery was performed. Questionnaires were distributed to 144 surgeons (national, academic and private health care). Questions pertaining to the type, timing and duration of antibiotic administration were asked. The prevalence of wound infection audit rate and whether or not there were specific guidelines related to antibiotic administration were also determined. Results : The response rate obtained was 67% (n = 96). Although evidence from the current medical literature and recommended national guidelines support the use of single‐dose prophylactic antibiotics, 72% of the respondents used more than a single dose. Forty surgeons (42%) claimed that their prescribing practice was supported by the medical literature, 31 respondents (32%) based their practice on hospital guidelines and personal preference was cited as a reason by 21 surgeons (22%). The remaining four respondents (4%) used a similar scheduling policy to that practiced by their colleagues in relation to antibiotic administration. There was no significant difference in antibiotic dose scheduling between national, private and university academic institutions (P = 0.85). Conclusions : These results suggest that a significant proportion of surgeons administer excessive and unnecessary doses of antibiotics in elective colorectal surgery. Further studies are required to uncover the reasons but lack of appropriate guidelines and failure to exercise evidence‐based medicine are major factors that account for this practice.     

Antibiotic prophylaxis in hip fracture surgery: a metaanalysis

A metaanalysis was done to identify the most effective prophylactic antibiotic regimen in hip fracture surgery. Specific comparisons addressed were antibiotics at any dose versus placebo, multiple doses (>24 hours coverage) versus one dose of antibiotics, and multiple doses versus 24 hours antibiotic coverage. Outcomes measured included overall wound infections, deep wound infection, superficial wound infection, urinary tract infection, and mortality. A computer search of the Medline and EMBASE databases (English language literature from 1966 to 2000 and 1988 to 2000, respectively) retrieved 15 randomized controlled trials which addressed the specific aims. Most studies evaluated antibiotics from the cephalosporin group. Antibiotic prophylaxis significantly reduced overall wound infections when compared with placebo and was equally effective for deep and superficial infections. One dose of intravenous antibiotics seemed no different than multiple doses. Antibiotic use also was associated with a significant reduction in the incidence of urinary tract infection but had no significant effect on mortality.     

Anaesthesia for joint replacement surgery

Joint replacement surgery, especially hip and knee, demand is increasing globally. Many patients are elderly, frail and have significant comorbidity requiring careful perioperative management. Patient prehabilitation and enhanced recovery protocols have been successfully introduced. Multimodal analgesia including regional nerve blocks, deep venous thromboembolism prophylaxis, blood management and bone cement implantation syndrome are some important perioperative aspects to be considered.     

Anaesthesia for joint replacement surgery

Joint replacement, especially hip and knee, are increasingly common elective orthopaedic procedures. Patients who undergo these operations are usually elderly and may have multiple comorbidities requiring careful perioperative management. Specific issues include deep venous thromboembolism (DVT) prophylaxis and use of regional anaesthesia, potential blood loss and hypothermia, application of pneumatic tourniquet and use of bone cement, and postoperative mobilization. There is a trend for developing clinical pathways or protocols from preoperative assessment through postoperative pain management to improve outcomes and enhance recovery in these patients.     

Antibiotic prophylaxis for wound infections in total joint arthroplasty: a systematic review

We reviewed systematically the published evidence on the effectiveness of antibiotic prophylaxis for the reduction of wound infection in patients undergoing total hip and total knee replacement. Publications were identified using the Cochrane Library, MEDLINE, EMBASE and CINAHL databases. We also contacted authors to identify unpublished trials. We included randomised controlled trials which compared any prophylaxis with none, the administration of systemic antibiotics with that of those in cement, cephalosporins with glycopeptides, cephalosporins with penicillin-derivatives, and second-generation with first-generation cephalosporins. A total of 26 studies (11 343 participants) met the inclusion criteria. Methodological quality was variable. In a meta-analysis of seven studies (3065 participants) antibiotic prophylaxis reduced the absolute risk of wound infection by 8% and the relative risk by 81% compared with no prophylaxis (p < 0.00001). No other comparison showed a significant difference in clinical effect. Antibiotic prophylaxis should be routine in joint replacement but the choice of agent should be made on the basis of cost and local availability.     

Antibiotic treatment for prevention of infectious complications in joint replacement

Prophylactic antibiotic treatment is mandatory in every operation involving an orthopedic implant. Carefully selected and correctly administered antibiotics can provide effective protection of the implant from bacterial colonization. The prevention of deep wound infection in joint replacement includes several procedures and measures which constitute three basic groups: 1) Promotion of patient's ability to resist infection (careful pre-operative preparation, elimination of potential infectious loci, good nutritional status, etc). 2) Optimal conditions for the operative wound (surgical technique, prophylactic antibiotics). 3) Reduction of the number of bacteria brought in the wound (control measures, super-sterile operating theatres). Clear rules for the system of prophylactic antibiotic treatment should be adopted. A program in which responsibility for antibiotic administration was shifted from the nursing staff to the anesthesiologist in the operating theatre showed improved outcomes and reduced costs. Poor timing of prophylactic antibiotic administration is one of the basic mistakes. If the wound happened to be contaminated during surgery, the first three post-operative hours would be most decisive for the development of infection. An effective bactericidal concentration of antibiotic should be present in tissues and serum immediately after surgery has begun. Therefore the appropriate time for antibiotic application is before a skin incision is made, and not after the operation has started; the highest serum and bone tissue levels appear 20 to 30 min. after intravenous antibiotic injection. To allow antibiotics to reach target tissues, they should be introduced at least 10 min. before tourniquet application. For long surgical procedures or when blood loss is high, an additional dose of antibiotics is recommended during the operation. If a sample for bacterial cultivation is required, antibiotic administration is postponed until during surgery. However, this is used only in indicated cases when deep infection is suspected and no assessment of the causative agent is available. Otherwise this approach carries a high risk of infectious complications in aseptic revision arthroplasty. Long-term, unjustified administration of antibiotics leads to an increase in resistance to the antibiotic involved. Some studies show that a day's course is as effective as a seven-day one. A shorter antibiotic course decreases the costs, reduces side-effects and minimizes the development of resistance. An optimal duration of antibiotic treatment has not been defined yet, and is still a hot issue for discussion. Many authors recommend one pre-operative antibiotic dose and, according to the kind of antibiotic, agree to its 24-hour administration in order to lower the toxic effect of antibiotic and to prevent selection of resistant microorganisms. The choice of suitable antibiotics for prophylactic treatment should be based on the range of agents causing joint replacement infections and the pharmacological properties of the drug. This should have minimal toxicity, should be well tolerated by the patient and, from the epidemiological point of view, should have a low risk of inducing resistance because of frequent use. Naturally, it is not possible to include all antibiotics against all causative agents and therefore attention should be paid, in the first place, to Gram-positive bacteria, i. e., staphylococci and streptococci, which are the most common causes of infectious complications associated with joint replacement. Because of difficulties related to the right choice of antibiotic, it is recommended to keep a record of complications in each patient in order to provide feedback and to facilitate the establishment of reliable antibiotic-based prevention. The prevention of infection in orthopedics is a comprehensive issue. It cannot be expected that prophylactic antibiotic treatment will compensate for mistakes made in operative protocols, for inadequate operative techniques, for shortcomings in operating theatre equipment or insufficient preparation of patients.     

Antibiotic-loaded bone cement for infection prophylaxis in total joint replacement

Use of antibiotic-loaded bone cement for prophylaxis against infection is not indicated for patients not at high risk for infection who are undergoing routine primary or revision joint replacement with cement. The mechanical and elution properties of commercially available premixed antibiotic-loaded bone-cement products are superior to those of hand-mixed preparations. Use of commercially available antibiotic-loaded bone-cement products has been cleared by the United States Food and Drug Administration only for use in the second stage of a two-stage total joint revision following removal of the original prosthesis and elimination of active periprosthetic infection. Use of antibiotic-loaded bone cement for prophylaxis against infection in the second stage of a two-stage total joint revision involves low doses of antibiotics. Active infection cannot be treated with commercially available antibiotic-loaded bone cement as such treatment requires higher doses of antibiotics.