Antibiotic prophylaxis with cefotaxime in gastroduodenal and biliary surgery

Systematic review of the cost-effectiveness of preoperative antibiotic prophylaxis in reducing surgical-site infection

BACKGROUND

Surgical-site infections (SSIs) increase the length of hospital admission and costs. SSI prevention guidelines include preoperative antibiotic prophylaxis. This review assessed the reporting quality and cost-effectiveness of preoperative antibiotics used to prevent SSI.

METHODS

PubMed, Web of Science, Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature, Index of Economic Articles (EconLit), Database of Abstracts of Reviews of Effect (including the National Health Service Economic Evaluation Database) and Cochrane Central databases were searched systematically from 1970 to 2017 for articles that included costs, preoperative antibiotic prophylaxis and SSI. Included were RCTs and quasi-experimental studies conducted in Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development countries with participants aged at least 18 years and published in English. Two reviewers assessed eligibility, with inter-rater reliability determined by Cohen's κ statistic. The Consolidated Health Economic Evaluation and Reporting Standards (CHEERS) and modified Drummond checklists were used to assess reporting and economic quality. Study outcomes and characteristics were extracted, and incremental cost-effectiveness ratios were calculated, with costs adjusted to euros (2016) (€1 = US $1·25; £1 sterling = €1·28).

RESULTS

Twelve studies published between 1988 and 2014 were included from 646 records identified; nine were RCTs, two were nested within RCTs and one was a retrospective chart review. Study quality was highest in the nested studies. Cephalosporins (first, second and third generation) were the most frequent prophylactic interventions. Eleven studies demonstrated clinically effective interventions; ten were cost-effective (the intervention was dominant); in one the intervention was dominated by the control; and in one the intervention was more effective and more expensive than the control.

CONCLUSION

Preoperative antibiotic prophylaxis does reduce SSI, costs to hospitals and health providers, but the reporting of economic methods in RCTs is not standardized. Routinely nesting economic methods in RCTs would improve economic evaluations and ensure appropriate selection of prophylactic antibiotics.

Surgical antibiotic prophylaxis: effect in postoperative infections

OBJECTIVE

to assess the risk of surgical wound infection and hospital acquired infections among patients with and without adequate antibiotic prophylaxis. Also, to provide models to predict the contributing factors of hospital infection and surgical wound infection.

DESIGN

survey study. Prospective cohort study over 14 months, with data collected by a nurse and a epidemiologist through visits to the surgical areas, a review of the medical record and consultation with the medical doctor and nurses attending the patients.

SETTING

Two hundred and fifty bed, general hospital serving Puertollano (Ciudad Real), population--50,000.

RESULTS

between February 1998 and April 1999, 754 patients underwent surgery, 263 (34.88%) received appropriate perioperative prophylaxis while 491 (65.12%) received inadequate prophylaxis. For those who received adequate antibiotic prophylaxis, the percentage of nosocomial infection was 10.65% compared with the group who received inadequate prophylaxis in which the percentage of nosocomial infection was 33.40%. The relative risk of nosocomial infection was, therefore, 4.21 times higher in the latter group (confidence intervals 95%: 2.71-6.51). A patient in the inadequate prophylaxis group had a 14.87% chance of wound infection while a patient in the adequate prophylaxis group had a 4.56% chance of wound infection. The relative risk of wound infection was 3.65 times higher in the group that received inadequate prophylaxis (confidence intervals 95%: 1.95-6.86). The final regression logistic model to assess nosocomial infection incorporated seven prognostic factors: age, length of venous periferic route, vesicle catheter, duration of operation, obesity, metabolic or neoplasm diseases and adequate or inadequate prophylaxis. When we incorporated these variables in the multi-factorial analysis we found that the relative risk of developing nosocomial infection was 2.33 times higher in the group which received inadequate prophylaxis. When we applied the second logistic multiple regression model (wound infection), we discovered that the probability of developing surgical wound infection was 2.32 times higher in the group which received inadequate prophylaxis as opposed to the group, which received adequate prophylaxis. The goodness of fit (Hosmer-Lemeshow test) showed a correct significance in all models.

CONCLUSIONS

a multi-factorial analysis was applied to identify the high-risk patients and the risk factors for postoperative infections. Through the application of these multiple regression logistic models, we conclude that the correct antibiotic prophylaxis is effective and will subsequently reduce postoperative infection rates, especially in high-risk patients. Therefore, the choice of antimicrobial agent should be made on the basis of the criteria of hospital committee.

Ten rules for reading clinical research reports

This was not a scientific assessment of the scientific quality of the papers published by The American Journal of Surgery. It was an informal audit of the adequacy of the data analysis in the clinical research reports appearing in the 1987-1988 issues. As one who has devoted more than three decades to helping a great variety of people make sense of scientific data, I found the overall quality of data analysis in these papers to be above average for the medical literature; and yet, I found many instances of errors so serious as to render invalid the conclusions of the authors. My 10 proposed rules for reading clinical research reports constitute only an interim solution to a very worrisome problem. The real solution must come from the producers of and the gatekeepers for the medical literature.

Comparison of cefotaxime plus metronidazole versus cefoxitin for prevention of wound infection after abdominal surgery

In a randomized prospective stratified trial consisting of 1010 patients undergoing abdominal surgery involving the viscera, the efficacy of cefotaxime plus metronidazole was compared to cefoxitin for preventing wound infection. The efficacy of a single dose of antibiotics versus three doses over 24 hours was also evaluated. This study demonstrated that a single-dose antibiotic regimen was as effective as a multiple-dose regimen in the prophylaxis of wound infections following abdominal surgery. In addition it demonstrated that the cefotaxime plus metronidazole regimen is comparable to that of cefoxitin and is more cost-effective. It is concluded that a single dose of cefotaxime plus metronidazole provides effective prophylaxis against postoperative wound infections following abdominal surgery.

Prophylactic use of cefuroxime in biliary tract surgery: randomized controlled trial of single versus multiple dose in high-risk patients. Galant Trial Study Group

To assess the efficacy of a single-dose short-acting antibiotic in the prevention of septic complications after biliary surgery, a randomized controlled double-blind multicentre trial was conducted. One dose of cefuroxime before operation (1.5 g intravenously) was compared with a three-dose regimen of the drug as control (1.5 g before and two doses of 0.75 g after operation). The study group comprised 1004 patients with risk factors for infection, who were followed for 4-6 weeks after surgery. The characteristics of both treatment groups were comparable. No significant difference was found between the one- and three-dose antibiotic regimens in preventing postoperative wound infection: 6.6 versus 6.2 per cent for minor wound infection (P = 0.78) and 4.6 versus 3.8 per cent for major wound infection (P = 0.52). The estimated difference in major wound infection rate between the two groups was 0.8 per cent (95 per cent confidence interval -1.7 to 3.3 per cent).

[Complications in pre- versus intraoperative one-time prophylaxis with cefuroxime after biliary surgery]

The trial was conducted with 66 patients undergoing cholecystectomy. At random, 33 patients received 1.5 g cefuroxime i.v. as a single bolus 20 minutes before surgical incision and 33 patients were injected 20 minutes after incision. The overall incidence of wound infections was 1.51%. In the preoperative group, there was the one wound infection and two patients developed urinary tract infections (incidence of infectious complications 9.1%). In the intraoperative group, one patient developed pneumonia and urinary tract infection and another had urinary tract infection. Wound infections did not occur in this group (incidence of infectious complications 6.1%). Patients with infectious complications had a longer operation time and a longer hospital stay. In conclusion, there was no statistically significant difference in infectious complications when cefuroxime prophylaxis was given preoperatively compared to intraoperative administration.

Cefotaxime is extensively used for surgical prophylaxis

Cefotaxime, a broad-spectrum third-generation cephalosporin, has been extensively used worldwide for chemotherapy of serious infections. Based on the characteristics of its antimicrobial spectrum, low incidence of allergy, and lack of adverse effects, cefotaxime has been used successfully for prophylaxis of a number of different surgical procedures. Extensive data have been accumulated for single-dose or short-course cefotaxime prophylaxis regimens. These cefotaxime regimens have been demonstrated to be very effective and inexpensive. For this article, over 11,500 published cefotaxime prophylaxis cases are reviewed (10,500 control cases) and 98 references are cited. Single-dose cefotaxime was clearly indicated for hysterectomies, cesarean sections, upper gastrointestinal cases, bone and joint operations, biliary tract procedures, transurethral resections, open urologic surgeries, and some vascular procedures. Short-course (3-4 doses) may be required for colorectal resections, cardiac surgeries, head and neck surgeries, organ transplants, specific pediatric surgical cases, and for some patients with compromised immune function, regardless of origin. Cefotaxime has reduced wound morbidity of contaminated abdominal operations to < 10%. This change from multiple-dose regimens to the single-dose or short-course regimens, enabled by cefotaxime use, decreases the risk of inducing or selecting bacterial resistance; the change would generate a significant reduction in hospital costs. Surgeons should not hesitate to employ cefotaxime and other third-generation cephalosporins with proven limited-dose indications to greatly benefit their patients and the hospital environment.

A randomized trial of one versus three doses of Augmentin as wound prophylaxis in at-risk abdominal surgery

In a randomized prospective trial of prophylactic antibiotics in at-risk abdominal surgery, one dose of intravenous Augmentin (amoxycillin 250 mg and clavulanic acid 125 mg) on induction has been compared with three 8 hourly doses in 900 patients. Wound infection rates which included minor and delayed infections were very similar in those given one dose: 48/449 (10.7%) compared with those given three doses: 49/451 (10.9%) 95% confidence limits - 4.25% + 3.9%. There were more septic and sepsis-related deaths in those patients given one dose (14 deaths) than in those given three doses (7 deaths) P > 0.1 95% CL - 0.4% + 3.0%. However, there were more very elderly patients in the one dose group: 64% of the deaths were aged over 80 and all but one had an emergency operation. There was no difference in the other outcome measures studied which included non-fatal deep sepsis, length of postoperative hospital stay, duration of postoperative fever or the use of antibiotics for postoperative infection. One dose of a suitable intravenous antibiotic gives prophylaxis against wound infection in at-risk abdominal surgery which is at least as effective as multiple doses. However, there may be a risk of overwhelming systemic sepsis in very elderly patients having emergency surgery.

New clinical data on the prophylaxis of infections in abdominal, gynecologic, and urologic surgery. Multicenter Study Group

Two dose schedules of the antibiotic cefotaxime were compared in a prospective, randomized 226-center study of 3,670 patients undergoing abdominal, gynecologic, and urologic surgery. Schedule A consisted of a single preoperative dose and schedule B consisted of one preoperative dose followed by two postoperative doses. There was no significant difference in the frequency of wound infection or bacteriuria between the two schedules. Schedule B was associated with a significantly higher incidence of postoperative pyrexia, further antibiotic therapy, local side effects, and extended hospital stay. One dose probably has less impact on the intestinal flora. Therefore, single-dose cefotaxime is as effective and less costly when compared with multiple-dose cefotaxime for common surgical procedures lasting less than 3 hours.

Antibiotic prophylaxis in biliary surgery

Early studies in which a higher incidence of wound infection and septic complications in biliary surgery was found demonstrated the need for antibiotic prophylaxis. In two studies, one retrospective and one prospective, the role of prophylactic antibiotics in biliary surgery was studied in "at risk" and "no risk" groups of patients. Twenty-eight percent of "no risk" patients had a positive bile culture. It was concluded that a single dose of 1 g cefotaxime, administered upon induction of anaesthesia, is a safe and effective prophylactic regimen in biliary surgery.

Prophylaxis of postoperative infections

The antibiotic most appropriate for prophylaxis of postoperative infections depends on the nature of the operation. In aseptic (clean) operations, gram-positive postoperative infections are the primary concern, and cefazolin is recommended because of its excellent pharmacokinetics and good activity against gram-positive pathogens, including staphylococci. In those operations where violation of the digestive tract creates a contaminated field, a cefotaxime-generation cephalosporin is the agent of choice because of the excellent safety profiles and the capability of agents of this class to kill essentially all pathogenic gram-negative aerobes as well as a substantial portion of anaerobes. Selection of resistant bacteria has not been significant and is unlikely to become so with single-dose prophylaxis. Occasionally, if there is a high probability that the operative field may be heavily contaminated by anaerobes, metronidazole should be added. Dosing should be sufficient to cover the operative period. Only a single prophylactic dose is necessary, given at the time of induction of anesthesia. For particularly long operations, a second dose of those antibiotics with half-lives shorter than 60 min is required two hours after the first. Single-injection prophylaxis is effective, inexpensive, has no side effects and does not induce bacterial resistance.

Review of cefotaxime sodium for surgical prophylaxis. A model for the evolution toward single-dose or short-course cost-effective regimens

Cefotaxime is a parenteral broad-spectrum cephalosporin, used extensively worldwide for chemotherapy of serious infections. Since its release in 1979, cefotaxime has also been studied to minimize surgery-related infections and, more than any other new compound, has been used in a volume of evaluable cases. Because of the current cost-containment medical practice environment, most cefotaxime prophylaxis studies have established single-dose or short-course regimens. Over 9000 published cefotaxime prophylaxis cases were reviewed, and 81 references were cited. Single-dose cefotaxime was clearly indicated for a wide variety of operations, including hysterectomy, cesarean sections, bone and joint procedures, upper gastrointestinal cases, biliary tract procedures, transurethral resections, open urologic procedures, and some vascular cases. Approximately 24 hr of prophylaxis (cefotaxime X 4 doses) may be required for colorectal resections, cardiac surgery, head and neck surgery, transplants, and some pediatric surgical cases. Although contaminated abdominal cases and trauma surgery were not a true prophylaxis use, cefotaxime regimens have reduced wound morbidity to less than or equal to 10%. Changing to one- to four-dose schedules will have very favorable clinical impact by reducing prophylaxis cost, pharmacy preparation time, adverse reactions, and antimicrobic-resistance pressures. Surgeons should not hesitate to employ new cephalosporins (cefotaxime and others) with proved limited dose indications that would greatly benefit their patients and the hospital environment.

Ten rules for reading clinical research reports

This was not a scientific assessment of the scientific quality of the papers published by The American Journal of Surgery. It was an informal audit of the adequacy of the data analysis in the clinical research reports appearing in the 1987-1988 issues. As one who has devoted more than three decades to helping a great variety of people make sense of scientific data, I found the overall quality of data analysis in these papers to be above average for the medical literature; and yet, I found many instances of errors so serious as to render invalid the conclusions of the authors. My 10 proposed rules for reading clinical research reports constitute only an interim solution to a very worrisome problem. The real solution must come from the producers of and the gatekeepers for the medical literature.