Prophylactic antibiotics in vascular surgery. Topical, systemic, or both?

A prospective, randomized, blinded study was performed to determine whether prophylactic antibiotics would reduce the incidence of infection in peripheral vascular surgery and whether the route of antibiotic administration was important. Patients undergoing a vascular procedure with a groin incision were allocated to one of four groups with respect to prophylactic antibiotics. Group I received no antibiotic. Group II had topical cephradine instilled in their incisions prior to closure. Group III received a 24-hour perioperative course of intravenous cephradine, and Group IV received both topical and intravenous cephradine. Groin and abdominal incisional infections were significantly reduced (p < 0.01) among patients who received prophylactic antibiotics by either the topical, systemic, or combined routes of administration. No significant differences were noted among the three antibiotic groups. Profundoplasty, femoral embolectomy, and femoral aneurysm repair were each associated with an increased incidence of infection (p < 0.01). Other risk factors were only important in patients not receiving antibiotics. Either intraoperative topical antibiotics or perioperative systemic antibiotics prevent infection in peripheral vascular surgery, but antibiotic administration by both routes is unnecessary.     

Extended Antibiotic Prophylaxis Confers No Benefit Following Aseptic Revision Total Hip Arthroplasty: A Matched Case-Controlled Study

BackgroundAdministration of perioperative antibiotic prophylaxis is one of the most important practices for prevention of periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) in patients undergoing total hip arthroplasty (THA). It is common to continue perioperative antibiotic prophylaxis for 48 hours or longer in patients undergoing revision arthroplasty, until results of intraoperative culture samples become available. However, the utility of this practice remains unclear. We examined whether extended antibiotic prophylaxis following aseptic revision THA reduces the risk of subsequent PJI.MethodsWe retrospectively reviewed records of patients undergoing aseptic revision THA between January 2000 and December 2015. At our institution, some surgeons administer prophylactic antibiotics to revision patients for only 24 hours while others prefer to extend until intraoperative culture results become available. We matched 209 patients undergoing revision THA who received extended antibiotic prophylaxis (>24 hours) in a 1:1 ratio with 209 patients receiving standard antibiotic prophylaxis (≤24 hours). The matching criteria were age, sex, body mass index, Charlson comorbidity index, and operative time.ResultsThe incidence of subsequent PJI was 4.8% in patients receiving extended antibiotic prophylaxis vs 2.4% in patients receiving standard. After adjusting for all cofounders and using multivariate logistic regression, the administration of extended prophylactic antibiotics did not reduce the incidence of subsequent infection. When stratified by postoperative antibiotic regimens, the 2 groups had similar infection-free implant survival rate (95.2% in extended and 97.6% in standard).ConclusionIt appears that extending perioperative prophylactic antibiotics until intraoperative culture results become available in patients undergoing revision THA for aseptic failures does not provide any additional benefit in terms of reducing the risk of subsequent PJI.     

腹膜透析置管术预防性抗生素用药的前瞻性随机对照临床研究

目的 比较新置腹膜透析管患者预防性抗生素用药的疗效，为国内腹膜透析置管术预防性使用抗生素的时机、途径和种类的共识提供依据。 方法 选择腹膜透析的患者78例，其中男性33例，女性45例，平均年龄(48.2±15.7)岁。进行为期1年的前瞻性随机对照临床研究。患者被随机分为两组，每组39例。A组：在腹膜透析置管术前30 min静脉注射头孢曲松1.0 g。B组:在术后3 d内使用0.25 g/L头孢唑啉的腹透液。术后每日检查患者伤口情况，记录体温，检查血白细胞计数和分类情况及透出液常规。 结果 两组患者在置管术后10 d内，都没有发生手术切口感染、隧道感染及腹膜炎。A组39例中有1例出现出口处感染，占2.5%；B组39例中有2例出现出口处感染，占5.1%，两组间差异无统计学意义。两组患者术后体温、血WBC数及分类、透出液WBC计数均在正常范围，两组间差异没有统计学意义。 结论 在新置腹膜透析管患者伤口感染和腹膜炎的发生率方面，术前一次性给予抗生素的方式与传统的术后腹腔内给予抗生素方式差异无统计学意义，但前者在临床使用上更为简便。     

One-dose cefuroxime i.v. and i.p. reduces microbial growth in PD patients after catheter insertion

Background. When a peritoneal dialysis catheter is inserted intra-abdominally in a patient starting peritoneal dialysis (PD) there is always a risk for postoperative wound infection and peritonitis. At our centre, PD is started immediately after the dialysis catheter is inserted. This may increase the postoperative risk for peritonitis and wound infection. The aim of this prospective, randomized, study was to evaluate whether the incidence of microbial growth postoperatively (within 10 days) after catheter insertion could be reduced by prophylactic antibiotic therapy. Subjects and methods. During a period of 27 months, 38 patients, who consecutively entered the PD programme, (11 women and 27 men, mean age 57 years) were included in the study. Eighteen patients were given cefuroxime 1.5 g i.v. preoperatively and 350 mg i.p. in the first dialysis bag (containing 1 litre fluid) as prophylaxis. Twenty patients were not given prophylactic antibiotics (control group). All catheter insertions were performed in an operating theatre by the same surgeons using the same technique. Results. In the test group, none of the patients showed microbial growth in the dialysis fluid during the post-operative period, while in the control group six of 20 patients (30%) suffered from such growth (P=0.021) Conclusions. Prophylactic treatment by cefuroxime i.v. pre- an i.p. perioperatively may reduce the risk for microbial growth and peritonitis after insertion of a Tenckhoff catheter.     

Clinical significance of exit-site infections due to Xanthomonas in CAPD patients: a comparison with Pseudomonas infection

We have assessed the clinical significance of exit-site infectionssecondary to Xanthomonas maltophilia in continuous ambulatoryperitoneal dialysis (CAPD) patients, and compared them withepisodes due to Pseudomonas. The study was a retrospective surveyof all episodes of Xanthomonas and Pseudomonas-related exit-siteinfections (ESI) in all patients treated in our unit between1984 and 1992. Thirteen episodes of Xanthomonas-related ESIwere observed in eight patients and 17 episodes of Pseudomonas-relatedESI were seen in 15 patients. Xanthomonas-related ESI was frequently associated with othermicroorganisms, while Pseudomonas related ESI was not (66% versus5%, P<0.02). Only one episode of Xanthomonas-related ESIresulted in peritonitis and subsequent catheter removal, after15 months of resistant colonization. Another case was consideredto be chronic and indolent, as the Xanthomonas-related ESI continuedafter 23 months of local treatment. The other 11 episodes wereresolved either without treatment or with an antibiotic creamafter 7–120 days. However, all but two episodes of Pseudomonas-relatedESI required intravenous antibiotics (usually ceftazidime);seven patients developed peritonitis, and 11 required surgicalcatheter manipulation (five external cuff extrusion, and sixcatheter removal) (1/13 Xanthomonas-related versus 11/17 Pseudomonas-relatedESI, P<0.03) Most Xanthomonas-related ESI do not lead to peritonitis, andconstitute a mild condition, easily treatable without parenteralantibiotics or catheter replacement. The appearance of otherassociated organisms and the favourable evolution with localtreatment suggest a saprophytic behaviour for Xanthomonas inour CAPD patients. On the contrary, Pseudomonas-related ESIis usually severe, requires parenteral antibiotics, frequentlyleads to peritonitis, and requires catheter replacement.     

Do topical antibiotics reduce exit site infection rates and peritonitis episodes in peritoneal dialysis patients? The Pan Thames Renal Audit

Background and objectives: Peritonitis is the major cause of peritoneal dialysis (PD) technique failure. Prophylactic topical antibiotics have been reported to reduce peritoneal dialysis catheter exit site infections (ESI) and peritonitis rates. Methods: We audited the effect of different exit site practices in the 12 Pan Thames and South East England PD centres, on ESIs and peritonitis between 2005 and 2008. Results: PD patients used prophylactic mupirocin (n=1,270), gentamicin (n=502) and no prophylactic antibiotics (n=1,203); annualised ESI rates were reduced with mupirocin (median 0.18, interquartile range [IQR] 0.13-0.23, patient episodes per year, vs. median 0.32, IQR 0.24-0.69, for no antibiotic prophylaxis, p<0.01). Gentamicin treatment was not significantly lower (median 0.29, IQR 0.21-0.47). Staphylococcal ESIs accounted for 39.6% in the no antibiotic group and fell to 25.7% with mupirocin and 28.2% with gentamicin. Despite the reduction in ESIs, there was no significant reduction in peritonitis rates (no antibiotics: median 0.56, IQR 0.5-0.65; mupirocin: median 0.55, IQR 0.53-0.75; and gentamicin: median 0.47, IQR 0.32-0.65). In particular, mupirocin did not reduce Staphylococcus aureus peritonitis rates. Conclusions: Topical antibiotics have been reported to reduce both ESI and peritonitis rates in controlled trials, and although in this audit of routine clinical practice, topical mupirocin did reduce overall ESI rates and both mupirocin and gentamicin reduced S. aureus ESIs, neither reduced overall peritonitis rates.     

Clinical course of peritonitis due to Pseudomonas species complicating peritoneal dialysis: a review of 104 cases

BACKGROUND: Peritonitis due to Pseudomonas species is a serious complication in continuous ambulatory peritoneal dialysis (CAPD) patients. The clinical course of peritonitis due to Pseudomonas complicating CAPD remains unclear. METHODS: All of the Pseudomonas species episodes of peritonitis in our dialysis unit were studied from 1995 to 1999. During this period, there were 859 episodes of peritonitis recorded, 113 of which were caused by the Pseudomonas species. Nine episodes were excluded because they were mixed growth. The remaining 104 episodes in 68 patients were reviewed. RESULTS: The underlying renal diagnosis and prevalence of comorbid conditions of the 68 patients were similar to those found in our entire dialysis population. There was a history of antibiotic therapy within 30 days of the onset of peritonitis due to the Pseudomonas species in 69 episodes (66.3%). In 47 episodes (45.2%) there was a concomitant exit site infection. The overall primary response rate was 60.6% and the complete cure rate was 22.1%. The presence of exit site infection was associated with a lower primary response rate (22 in 47 vs. 41 in 57 episodes, P < 0.01) and a lower complete cure rate (5 in 47 vs. 18 in 57 episodes, P < 0.02). The episodes that had received recent antibiotic therapy had a significantly lower complete cure rate than the de novo cases (8 in 69 vs. 15 in 35 episodes, P < 0.001). Episodes receiving third-generation cephalosporin as part of the initial antibiotic regimen had a significantly higher primary response rate than the ones that initially received aminoglycoside (54 in 81 episodes vs. 8 in 22 episodes, P < 0.05), but their complete cure rates were similar. Twenty-four cases failed to respond to antibiotics and the Tenckhoff catheter was removed. The chance of returning to CAPD was higher when the Tenckhoff catheter was removed on day 10 than on day 15 (9 in 14 cases vs. 5 in 10 cases), although the result was not statistically significant. The Tenckhoff catheter was removed and replaced at another site simultaneously in another 14 cases after the effluent cleared up. None of these patients had a relapse of peritonitis within three months. CONCLUSIONS: Recent antibiotic therapy is the major risk factor for peritonitis due to the Pseudomonas species. Exit site infection and recent antibiotic therapy are associated with poor therapeutic response to antibiotics. When the therapeutic response is suboptimal, early Tenckhoff catheter removal may help preserve the peritoneum for further peritoneal dialysis. Elective Tenckhoff catheter exchange after clearing up the peritoneal dialysis effluent may also reduce the likelihood of relapse. It is desirable to use third-generation cephalosporin in the initial antibiotic regimen for peritonitis treatment in localities with a high incidence of peritonitis due to the Pseudomonas species.     

Routine perioperative antibiotic prophylaxis in renal transplantation

Background: Perioperative antibiotic prophylaxis may prevent infection following renal transplantation but it also contributes to development of resistant microorganisms. With refined surgical techniques, improved graft preservation, and immunosuppressive monitoring during recent decades one can question the present use of perioperative antibiotic prophylaxis. We retrospectively evaluated the incidence of infection in our renal transplant centre where antibiotic prophylaxis is not routinely used in renal recipients. Concurrently we performed a survey of perioperative antibiotic use to establish the current world-wide practice. Methods: Infection episodes were evaluated from records of 448 adult renal transplant recipients (January 1994 to August 1996) at our centre. A questionnaire was mailed to 103 centres addressing the number of kidney transplantations in 1995, donor source (living vs cadaveric) and details on use of perioperative antibiotic prophylaxis. Results: Single-centre study. Renal transplantation was performed without antibiotic prophylaxis in 377 patients (84%). Thirteen patients (3.4%) had early postoperative infections, nine with urinary-tract infection tended to have urinary catheter for a longer period than those without infection (5.0±2.7 vs 3.4±1.4 days, P-0.27) and cadaveric kidney recipients to have higher incidence of infections (4.5 vs 1.5% P=0.14). All infection episodes were successfully treated. The infection incidence in 71 (16%) 'high-risk' patients selected for antibiotic treatment was 4.2%. World-wide survey. Data were obtained from 101 centres in five continents representing 10 532 renal transplants. Ninety centres (89%) used perioperative antibiotic prophylaxis. Conclusion: The infection incidence in patients who did not receive perioperative antibiotic prophylaxis was the same as in a small group of selected patients who received prophylaxis. The incidence was lower than usually reported in the literature. In contrast perioperative antibiotic prophylaxis is given to all patients in almost 90% of transplant centres world-wide. A reduction of prophylactic antibiotic use is encouraged.     

Preoperative transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt (TIPS) for cirrhotic patients undergoing abdominal and pelvic surgeries

Background  Surgery for patients with cirrhosis is associated with increased morbidity and mortality. Perioperative complications including hemorrhage, wound dehiscence, and peritonitis result from underlying portal hypertension. Perioperative control of portal hypertension could decrease the risk of such complications. This study aimed to describe the authors’ experience with the placement of transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunts (TIPS) in patients with cirrhosis to improve surgical outcomes. Methods  A retrospective chart review was performed for seven patients who underwent TIPS placement before elective abdominal or pelvic surgery at the University of Colorado Health Sciences Center from 1998 to 2006. The TIPS indication for each patient was to minimize perioperative complications. Results  The seven patients in this study underwent their planned surgical procedure within a mean of 13 days from the time of TIPS placement. Two patients required a blood transfusion of two units or less. Three patients experienced a total of four postoperative complications including wound infection, peritonitis, pneumonia, and new ascites. One patient died of liver failure 14 months after surgery. Conclusions  The preparation of patients with cirrhosis and portal hypertension for elective surgery using preoperative portal decompression may decrease the risk of perioperative morbidity and mortality.     

Prevention of Peritonitis in Peritoneal Dialysis

Reducing the frequency of peritonitis for patients undergoing peritoneal dialysis (PD) continues to be a challenge. This review focuses on recent updates in catheter care and other patient factors that influence infection rates. An experienced nursing staff plays an important role in teaching proper PD technique to new patients, but nursing staff must be cognizant of each patient's unique educational needs. Over time, many patients become less adherent to proper dialysis technique, such as washing hands or wearing a mask. This behavior is associated with higher risk of peritonitis and is modifiable with re‐training. Prophylactic antibiotics before PD catheter placement can decrease the infection risk immediately after catheter placement. In addition, some studies suggest that prophylaxis against fungal superinfection after antibiotic exposure is effective in reducing fungal peritonitis, although larger randomized studies are needed before this practice can be recommended for all patients. Over time, exit site and nasal colonization with pathogenic organisms can lead to exit‐site infections and peritonitis. For patients with Staphylococcus aureus colonization, exit‐site prophylaxis with either mupirocin or gentamicin cream reduces clinical infection with this organism. Although there are limited data for support, antibiotic prophylaxis before gastrointestinal, gynecologic, or dental procedures may also help reduce the risk of peritonitis.     

Prolonged antibiotic prophylaxis in tissue reconstruction using autologous fat grafting: Is there a benefit for wound healing?

Fat grafting is a well‐established method in plastic surgery. Despite many technical advances, standardised recommendations for the use of prophylactic antibiotics in fat grafting are not available. This retrospective multicentre study aims to analyse the use of prophylactic antibiotics in fat grafting and to compare complication rates for different protocols. A retrospective medical chart review of 340 patients treated with fat grafting of the breast from January 2007 to March 2019 was performed in three plastic surgery centres. Complications, outcomes, and antibiotic regimes were analysed. The Clavien‐Dindo classification was applied. All patients received perioperative antibiotic prophylaxis: 33.8% (n = 115) were treated with a single shot (group 1), 66.2% (n = 225) received a prolonged antibiotic scheme (group 2). There was no significant difference in the number of sessions (P = .475). The overall complication rate was 21.6% (n = 75), including graft resorption, fat necrosis, infection, and wound healing problems. Complication rates were not significantly different between groups. Risk factors for elevated complication rates in this specific patient group are smoking, chemotherapy, and irradiation therapy. The complication rate for lipografting of the breast is low, and it is not correlated to the antibiotic protocol. The use of prolonged prophylactic antibiotics does not lower the complication rate.     

Treatment of resistant peritonitis in continuous ambulatory peritoneal dialysis with intraperitoneal urokinase: a double-blind clinical trial

Resistant peritonitis in continuous ambulatory peritoneal dialysis(CAPD) is an indication for catheter removal, followed by interimhaemodialysis and subsequent catheter replacement. This involvestwo surgical procedures using general anaesthetic and the availabilityof adequate hospital haemodialysis facilities. Urokinase isan alternative therapy but evidence of its effect is anecdotaland it has not been studied in a double-blind manner. Patients with resistant peritonitis (either no resolution ofperitonitis within 4 days of appropriate antibiotic therapyor a third episode of peritonitis within 6 months) were randomizedto receive intraperi toneal urokinase or placebo (saline) followedby 14 days of antibiotics in this double-blind prospective study.Treatment success was resolution of peritonitis within 4 daysof giving urokinase/placebo (persistent infection) and no recurrencewith the same organism for 6 months (recurrent infection). Twelvepatients received urokinase and 12 placebo. Treatment was successfulin 8/12 in the urokinase group and 1/12 in the placebo group(Fisher's exact test; P=0.0047). Urokinase was successful in 8/12 patients with resist ant peritonitisand significantly better than placebo. Urokinase is an effectiveand simple treatment that may avoid the need for catheter removaland interim haemodialysis in patients with resistant CAPD peritonitis.     

Prophylactic single-dose prulifloxacin for catheter-associated urinary tract infection after tension-free vaginal tape procedure

The purpose of the study was to evaluate whether antibiotic prophylaxis with a single dose of prulifloxacin after tension-free vaginal tape (TVT) procedure decreases catheter-associated urinary tract infections (UTIs). Patients undergoing TVT procedure receiving a single dose of prulifloxacin (600 mg) 10 h before catheter removal (n = 54) were compared with historical controls who have had no treatment (n = 60). All patients had an indwelling urethral catheter in situ for 24 h. Urine specimens for culture were collected preoperatively, before Foley removal, and 7 days postoperatively in both groups. Main outcome measures were significant bacteriuria and symptomatic UTI at catheter removal and 1 week postoperatively. No patient had a positive urine culture in the prulifloxacin group compared with 14 (23.3%) in the control group at catheter removal (P = 0.0001). Ten out of 14 (71.4%) women with a positive catheter urine culture had a symptomatic UTI. One week after surgery no difference was found in the rate of significant bacteriuria between groups. Our data suggest that a prophylactic single dose of prulifloxacin could help to reduce the rate of symptomatic and asymptomatic UTIs after short-term urethral catheterization in women undergoing TVT procedure.     

Efficacy of protocol implementation on incidence of wound infection in colorectal operations

BACKGROUND: We reported previously a 26% incidence of surgical site infection (SSI) in patients undergoing elective colorectal resection. Multiple risk factors have been identified, including obesity, improper administration of prophylactic antibiotics, hypothermia, and poor glycemic control. We hypothesized that implementation of a multidisciplinary wound management protocol targeting these risk factors would reduce the incidence of SSI. STUDY DESIGN: Previously reported baseline data were collected from February 2000 to January 2002. Beginning September 2004, the protocol was implemented, including appropriate administration of prophylactic antibiotics 0 to 60 minutes before incision, continued antibiotic administration for < or = 24 hours postoperatively, maintenance of intraoperative normothermia (> 36 degrees C), improved glycemic control (goal <200 mg/dL 48 hours postoperatively) in diabetic patients, and placement of penrose drains in the subcutaneous space of patients with a body mass index > or = 25. Data were collected on patients undergoing elective colorectal resection from January 2005 to August 2005 and compared with baseline. RESULTS: One hundred seventy-five and 132 patients during the baseline and study periods, respectively, met criteria for inclusion. Compliance with administration of prophylactic antibiotics increased from 68% to 91% (p < or = 0.0001), and compliance with cessation within 24 hours increased from 71% to 93% (p < or = 0.0001). Compliance with normothermia increased from 64% to 71% (p = 0.25). Incidence of SSI fell from 25.6% to 15.9% (p < or = 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: After implementation of a multidisciplinary wound-management protocol, incidence of SSI improved 39%. These results demonstrate that compliance with a prospectively designed protocol for perioperative care can effectively reduce operative morbidity in patients undergoing colorectal operations.     

Cost-effectiveness of prophylactic antibiotics in head and neck surgery

Studies undertaken at the Eye and Ear Hospital of Pittsburgh indicate that antibiotic prophylaxis can reduce the incidence of patient morbidity. In this article we will demonstrate the effect of antibiotic prophylaxis on the economics of major head and neck surgery. One hundred and one patients were assigned to one of four treatment protocols, three of which entailed 1 day of a perioperative prophylactic antibiotic and the fourth a placebo. The study was conducted in a double-blind, randomized fashion. Patients receiving a placebo experienced an infection rate of 78%. Patients receiving cefazolin experienced an infection rate of 33%. Ten percent of patients treated with cefoperazone or cefotaxime developed postoperative wound infection. Postoperative hospitalization averaged 17.9 days for patients who did not develop postoperative wound infection, in contrast to an average of 32.6 days for patients with postoperative would infection. The added cost of postoperative infection justifies the added use of the newer, more expensive antibiotics in view of the reduced postoperative morbidity and postoperative hospitalization.     

Acute dialysis-associated peritonitis in children with D+ hemolytic uremic syndrome

Acute peritoneal dialysis (PD) is the preferred therapy for renal replacement in children with post-diarrheal hemolytic uremic syndrome (D+ HUS), but peritonitis remains a frequent complication of this procedure. We reviewed data from 149 patients with D+ HUS who had undergone acute PD with the aim of determining the prevalence and risk factors for the development of peritonitis. A total of 36 patients (24.2%) presented peritonitis. The median onset of peritonitis manifestations was 6 (range 2–18) days after the initiation of dialysis treatment, and Gram-positive microorganisms were the predominant bacterial type isolated (15/36 patients). The patients were divided into two groups: with or without peritonitis, respectively. Univariate analysis revealed that a longer duration of the oligoanuric period, more days of dialysis, catheter replacement, stay in the intensive care unit, and hypoalbuminemia were significantly associated to the development of peritonitis. The multivariate analysis, controlled by duration of PD, identified the following independent risk factors for peritonitis: catheter replacement [p = 0.037, odds ratio (OR) 1.33, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.02–1.73], stay in intensive care unit (p = 0.0001, OR 2.62, 95% CI 1.65–4.19), and hypoalbuminemia (p = 0.0076, OR 1.45, 95% CI 1.10–1.91). Based on these findings, we conclude that the optimization of the aseptic technique during catheter manipulation and early nutritional support are targets for the prevention of peritonitis, especially in critically ill patients.     

Prophylactic and Preventive Antibiotic Therapy: Timing, Duration and Economics

Previous studies have demonstrated that administered antibiotics must be active against major anticipated pathogens and must have reached sufficient concentrations in the tissue or body fluid at risk by the time of bacterial challenge if prophylactic therapy is to be maximally effective in reducing the infection rate of potentially contaminated surgery. The need for continuing antibiotic prophylaxis beyond the day of operation, however, has been uncertain. In a prospective, randomized, double-blind study of 220 patients undergoing elective gastric, biliary or colonic surgery, perioperative administration of cefamandole plus five days of placebo was compared to perioperative plus five days of postoperative antibiotic therapy; no significant difference was found between the groups in the rate of infection of wound (6 and 5%, respectively), peritoneum (2% each) and elsewhere (6% and 5%). In another prospective, randomized, nonblind study of 451 determinant cases of 1,624 patients undergoing emergency laparotomy, cephalothin was instituted preoperatively but after peritoneal contamination had occurred (i.e., abdominal trauma, etc.); continued postoperative antibiotic again failed to reduce further the wound and peritoneal infection rates, as noted on comparing perioperative therapy alone (infection rates 8 and 4%, respectively) with perioperative plus 5-7 days of postoperative treatment (10% and 5%, respectively). Analysis of these data, as well as of the extra expenses incurred by 463 patients because of infection in a previous prophylactic antibiotic study, revealed an average additional expenditure of $2,686.00 for each instance of postoperative infection of the wound and/or peritoneum; whereas savings of $300.00 per patient at risk were obtained whenever appropriate prophylactic antibiotic had been given.     

890例全髋关节置换术围手术期抗生素使用情况的分析

目的回顾分析2003～2008全髋关节置换(THA)患者围手术期抗生素的使用情况,为防治THA术后感染以及预防性抗生素的临床应用提供借鉴。方法全部病例来源于广州市三间三等甲级医院。调查资料包括患者的基本情况、住院时间、疾病诊断、合并疾病、院内感染、转科情况、围手术期抗生素使用情况。对抗生素的种类、使用时间、是否联合用药等进行一般统计学描述。结果患者住院天数为(22.42±7.98)d,总费用为(43127.87±15178.59)元。全部病例中,关节置换术后近期低毒性感染2例,3例为迟发性深部感染,2例为浅部感染,2例为晚期深部感染,感染率为0.8%。2.7%的患者术前3天开始使用抗生素,6.97%术前1天开始静脉使用抗生素,98.65%患者手术前1小时内使用抗生素。术后全部患者静脉使用抗生素预防感染,17.64%患者采用静脉联合用药,1.12%的患者使用了两种以上的抗生素联合用药。25.84%患者第一种抗生素停用后静脉使用了第二种抗生素,还有5.28%患者静脉使用了三种抗生素,22.81%静脉后改口服,20.45%患者出院继续口服抗生素。患者静脉抗生素使用时间为(8.91±4.42)d,抗生素使用总时间为(12.65±9.83)d。结论根据患者的具体身体状况以及手术创伤情况,使用抗生素预防THA是一种得到骨科医师认可的有效方法。由于比较严重的抗生素滥用,建议完善THA围手术期抗生素应用指南,明确抗生素的选择指征及使用方法,而临床医师则应该严格遵守指南选择应用抗生素。     

Drainage vs no drainage in secondary peritonitis with sepsis following complicated appendicitis in adults in the modern era of antibiotics

AIM: To compare the profile of postoperative outcome in secondary peritonitis with sepsis due to complicated appendicitis in two cohorts (drainage vs no-drainage) after appendicectomy in adults in the modern era of effective antibiotics.METHODS: A retrospective review of all adult patients who were operated for secondary peritonitis with sepsis due to complicated appendicitis was carried out. Total of 209 patients were identified from May 2005 to April 2009 with operative findings of gangrenous or perforated appendix. The patients were divided into two cohorts, those where prophylactic drainage was established (n = 88) and those where no drain was used (n = 121). Abdominal drain was removed once the drainage ceased or decreased (< 10-20 mL/d in closed system of drainage or when once daily dressing was minimally soaked in open system). Broad spectrum antibiotics to cover the gut flora were started in both cohorts at diagnosis and were stopped once septic features resolved. Peritoneal fluid for aerobic culture and sensitivity were routinely obtained intra operatively; however antibiotic regimens were not changed unless patient failed to respond to the antibiotics based on the institutional protocol. The co-morbidities and their influence on primary end points were noted. Immunocompromised patients, appendicitis complicated by inflammatory bowel disorder and tumors were excluded from the study.RESULTS: Disease stratification and other demographic features were comparable in both cohorts. There was zero mortality in drainage group while as one patient (0.82%) died in the non-drainage group. The median duration (in days) of hospital stay (6.5 vs 4); antibiotic use (5 vs 3.5); regular parental analgesic use (5 vs 3.5) and paralytic ileus (2.5 vs 2) was more common in the drainage group. Incidence of major wound infection in patients 14 (15.9%) vs 22 (18.18%) and residual intra-abdominal sepsis (inter loop collection/abscess) -7 (8%) vs 13 (10.74%) requiring secondary intervention was not significantly different in drainage and non-drainage cohorts respectively. One patient in the drainage cohort had faecal fistula (1.1%).CONCLUSION: The complicated appendicitis in the modern era of antibiotics does not necessitate the use of prophylactic drain placement which at times may even prove counterproductive.     

Prophylactic antibiotics in the insertion of Tenckhoff catheters.

We assessed the efficacy of preoperative antibiotic prophylaxis in a prospective trial for patients undergoing insertion of Tenckhoff catheters for continuous ambulatory peritoneal dialysis (CAPD). The prophylactic regimen was a single dose of cefazolin (500 mg) and gentamicin (80 mg) given intravenously half an hour before surgery. There was no significant difference in the number of exit site infections (8 in the antibiotic group vs. 8 in the controls) and the number of episodes of peritonitis (5 in the antibiotic group vs. 2 in the controls). Our study showed that prophylactic preoperative antibiotics did not reduce the number of exit site infections and peritonitis after the insertion of Tenckhoff catheters.