scholarly journals Prophylactic use of antibiotics as per SIGN 104 guidelines versus routine antibiotic prophylaxis for prevention of surgical site infection in clean and clean contaminated ENT surgical procedures: a comparative study

2019 ◽  
Vol 6 (1) ◽  
pp. 106
Author(s):  
M. Bharath ◽  
J. R. Galagali ◽  
Awadhesh Kumar Mishra ◽  
Ajay Mallick ◽  
E. Nikhilesh
Keyword(s):  
Surgical Site Infection ◽  
Antibiotic Prophylaxis ◽  
Surgical Procedures ◽  
Antibiotic Use ◽  
Site Infection ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Group A ◽  
Prophylactic Use ◽  
Group B ◽  
Clean Contaminated

<p class="abstract"><strong>Background:</strong> Many clinicians continue to use antibiotic prophylaxis routinely in all surgical procedures, ignoring the guidelines issued by policy makers. In this prospective study we compared the rate of surgical site infection (SSI) in patients who received prophylactic antibiotics as a routine; with the rate of SSI in patients getting antibiotics strictly as per SIGN 104 Guidelines, for clean and clean contaminated procedures.</p><p class="abstract"><strong>Methods:</strong> The study population comprised 235 patients. Group A consisted of 119 patients having 77 (65%) males and 42 (35%) females while Group B had 116 patients - 71 (61%) males and 45 (39%) females. Group A received routine antibiotic prophylaxis in all cases, while Group B received antibiotic prophylaxis as per SIGN 104 guidelines only. Both the groups were followed up for one month post-operatively for SSI and complications.</p><p class="abstract"><strong>Results:</strong> SSI occurred in 2 patients (1.68%) in Group A and in 3 (2.59%) patients in Group B. There was no significant difference in the rate of SSI between the two groups (p=0.68). Procedure wise maximum SSI occurred in tympanoplasty and laryngectomy. Due to infection one case of tympanoplasty had graft failure and one case of laryngectomy had delayed wound healing. No major complications related to infection or antibiotic use occurred in either group.</p><p class="abstract"><strong>Conclusions:</strong> Selective use of antibiotic prophylaxis as per SIGN 104 Guidelines does not lead to increase in SSI in clean and clean contaminated ENT procedures.</p>

scholarly journals Comparison of single dose versus multiple doses of antibiotic prophylaxis for prevention of surgical site infection

2021 ◽  
Vol 9 (1) ◽  
pp. 129
Author(s):  
Swapan Das ◽  
Rajib Kundu ◽  
Bani Prasad Chattopadhyay
Keyword(s):  
Single Dose ◽  
Surgical Site Infection ◽  
Antibiotic Prophylaxis ◽  
Multiple Dose ◽  
Cost Effective ◽  
Site Infection ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Group A ◽  
Group B ◽  
Clean Contaminated

Background: Surgical site infection is a common problem following general surgical procedures. Despite major improvement in antibiotics, improved antiseptic measures SSI continues to present a big challenge. In this study we will compare single dose versus multiple dose antibiotic prophylaxis for prevention of SSI in clean and clean contaminated surgical wound.Methods: This is an institution based prospective, comparative study, with total 60 patients as study population. Clinical finding, wound swab culture and routine haematological reports were taken as study variables. Patients receiving single dose antibiotic and multiple dose antibiotic were included in ‘Group A’ and ‘Group B’ respectively. The surgical sites were examined from post-operative days 3 to 8 for signs of infection.Results: In This study, 46.7% patients were female, and 53.3% patients were male. In Group-A, patients having post operative fever, tachycardia and leucocytosis were 16.7%, 13.3% and 20.0% respectively. 6.7% patients had purulent and 10.0% patients had seropurulent discharge from wound. In Group-B, patients having post operative fever, tachycardia, and leucocytosis were 13.3%, 16.7% and 13.3% respectively. 6.7% patients had purulent and seropurulent discharge from wound. There is no statistically significant difference between two groups regarding post operative fever, tachycardia, leucocytosis and wound discharge.Conclusions: There is no significant difference between single dose and multiple dose antibiotic prophylaxis to prevent SSI in patients for elective clean and clean contaminated surgery however single dose is more cost effective.

Infection rates in surgical procedures: a comparison of cefalexin vs. a placebo

2001 ◽  
Vol 14 (03) ◽  
pp. 146-150 ◽  
Author(s):  
P. Fayolle ◽  
E. Yiguier ◽  
Y. Viateau ◽  
P. Moissonnier ◽  
A. Daude-Lagravei ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Antibiotic Prophylaxis ◽  
Infection Rate ◽  
Surgical Procedures ◽  
Small Animal ◽  
Infection Rates ◽  
Group A ◽  
Prophylactic Use ◽  
Animal Surgery ◽  
Group B ◽  
Clean Contaminated

SummaryThe aim of this study was to evaluate the efficacy of antibiotic prophylaxis in small animal surgery. Three hundred and twenty-nine dogs and 544 cats were included in a prospective, randomised, blind trial to determine the frequency of wound infection after clean and cleancontaminated surgical procedures. The animals were allocated to one of two groups: group A received a placebo and group B received cefalexin. The infection rate was measured in each group and correlated with different criteria (age, duration and type of the operation, anaesthetic and Altemeier’s class, surgeon’s experience). Globally, seventyeight cases of infection were noted (8.9%). The infection rates in the two groups were not significantly different (9.4% in group A and 8.5% in group B). Infection rate was not affected by the different criteria studied. However, the percentage of animals infected in group B tended to be lower than that of group A as the surgeons’ experience increased.The results of a study to evaluate the efficacy of the prophylactic use of antibiotics are described. The infection rates in animals that received the placebo and in those that received cefalexin were not significantly different (9.4% vs. 8.5%, p <0.05, respectively). We conclude that the antibiotic prophylaxis is not recommended for clean and clean-contaminated surgical procedures.

scholarly journals Comparative study of single dose preoperative antibiotic versus five days antibiotic course in preventing surgical site infection for pediatric inguinal herniotomy

2021 ◽  
Vol 7 (3) ◽  
pp. 134-139
Author(s):  
Pinaki Ranjan Debnath ◽  
Arnab Kumar Saha ◽  
Rashmi D ◽  
Vasu Gautam ◽  
Chetna Khanna ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Single Dose ◽  
Surgical Site Infection ◽  
Wound Care ◽  
Oral Antibiotic ◽  
Site Infection ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Group A ◽  
Group B ◽  
Inguinal Herniotomy

To compare single dose preoperative antibiotic versus five days antibiotic course in preventing surgical site infection for the pediatric inguinal herniotomy.The present study was conducted on 100 patients of elective inguinal herniotomy from January 2019 to April 2020 and compared on the basis of single dose preoperative antibiotic versus five days antibiotic course. All the patients were evaluated on the 3rd, 7th and 28th post-operative period and instructions were given to the guardians about wound care and to attend for early follow up if any signs & symptoms of wound infection appear.50% of the patients were treated with prophylactic single dose antibiotic, i.e. inj. Ceftriaxone (30 mg/kg/dose) at the time of induction only and rest 50% were treated with inj. Ceftriaxone(30mg/kg/dose) at the time of induction as well as postoperatively at night followed by four days of oral antibiotic with Syr/Tablet. Cephalexin (25mg/kg/day) three times daily for another 4 days.Surgical Site Infection (SSI) in Group-B (4.0%) was higher than that of Group-A (2.0%) on day 3 but it was not significant (p=0.40). There was no significant difference in health status of the patients of the two groups when compared on post-operative day 7 and day 28 (p=0.99, p=0.99 respectively).Implementation of single dose antibiotic prophylaxis regimes tailored to the prevalent organisms in the institution can result in enormous savings, as the study shows significant reduction in hospital stay with no significant increase in incidence of SSI.

scholarly journals A single-dose antibiotic prophylaxis to prevent surgical site infection in clean-contaminated surgery among diabetic patients

2015 ◽  
Vol 1 (2) ◽  
pp. 8-10
Author(s):  
Kamal Koirala ◽  
Rupesh Mukhia ◽  
Suman Sharma ◽  
Sujan Manandhar ◽  
Niroj Banepali ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Single Dose ◽  
Surgical Site Infection ◽  
Antibiotic Prophylaxis ◽  
Diabetic Patients ◽  
Outpatient Basis ◽  
Site Infection ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Group 2 ◽  
Clean Contaminated ◽  
Group 1

Introductions: Guidelines on antibiotics use in surgical patients recommends a single dose prophylaxis for clean-contaminated cases and therapeutic course for contaminated and dirty cases. Compliance to this guideline is poor among diabetic patients. The aim of this study was to test the efficacy of single dose antibiotic prophylaxis on the occurrence of postoperative surgical site infection (SSI) in clean-contaminated surgery in diabetic patients.Methods: Retrospective cross-sectional study was carried out at KIST Medical College and Teaching Hospital from September 2008 to August 2012 involving 144 diabetic patients who underwent major clean-contaminated surgery. Forty eight patients received one gram of ceftriaxone intravenously as prophylactic antibiotic within 30 minutes prior to incision (group 1) and 96 patients received three doses of ceftriaxone (group 2). One dose was given within 30 minutes prior to incision and other two doses were given postoperatively. All patients were followed up for 30 postoperative days on outpatient basis. The SSI rates were compared in two groups. Pus from the infected wound was tested for culture and sensitivity.Results: The SSI rates in group 1 and group 2 were of 5/48 (10.42%) and of 9/96 (9.37%) respectively. There was no significant difference in SSI rates between group 1 and group 2 (p=0.322).Conclusions: Single dose of Ceftriaxone shows the similar effect as three doses in clean-contaminated surgery in diabetic patients.

scholarly journals A study of surgical site infections with and without the use of pre-operative antibiotics

2019 ◽  
Vol 6 (10) ◽  
pp. 3806
Author(s):  
Arun Kumar Gupta ◽  
Seema Mittal ◽  
Tejinder Singh Dall ◽  
Darpan Bansal
Keyword(s):  
Surgical Site Infection ◽  
Surgical Site Infections ◽  
Site Infection ◽  
Medical Sciences ◽  
Gram Positive ◽  
Gram Negative ◽  
Gram Positive Bacteria ◽  
Group A ◽  
Group B ◽  
Clean Contaminated

Background: In spite of advances in infection control, infection still remains the major limitor of surgical horizons. After urinary tract infection, surgical site infection is a main factor contributing to morbidity and mortality.Methods: The present study was carried out in the department of General Surgery and Microbiology at Shri Guru Ram Das Institute of Medical Sciences and Research, Vallah, Sri Amritsar. In this study 100 patients were selected undergoing clean or clean contaminated surgeries out of which 50 patients were not given pre-operative antibiotics (first group) and remaining 50 patients (second group) were given preoperative antibiotics.Results: Sample consisted of 100 patients with mean age of patients was 36.97 years. Total number of males was 57 and females were 43. 25 (50%) of patients who had not received prophylaxis developed SSI (group A) and 28 (56%) patients who received prophylaxis developed SSI (group B). Most common bacteria isolated from SSI was Staphylococcus aureus for both the groups. 10 (52.63%) Gram positive bacteria were isolated from microscopic examination of infected sample (A) and 25 (73.52%) were gram negative bacteria. 25 (73.52%) were Gram positive bacteria in group (b) and 9 (26.47%) were Gram negative isolates.Conclusions: It can be concluded from the present study that there is no need to give antibiotic prophylaxis prior to surgery in order to reduce the incidence of surgical site infection.

scholarly journals The Use of Oral Antibiotics to Prevent Surgical Site Infection on Postoperative Modified Radical Mastectomy Patients in Dr. Soetomo General Hospital, Surabaya

2021 ◽  
Vol 56 (1) ◽  
pp. 36
Author(s):  
Norman Hadi ◽  
Hantoro Ishardyanto
Keyword(s):  
Single Dose ◽  
Surgical Site Infection ◽  
General Hospital ◽  
Radical Mastectomy ◽  
Antibiotic Use ◽  
Prophylactic Antibiotics ◽  
Site Infection ◽  
Oral Antibiotics ◽  
Modified Radical Mastectomy ◽  
Significant Difference

Surgical operations on modified radical mastectomy are considered clean procedures by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) wound classification system. Despite this, higher than expected Surgical Site Infection (SSI) rates are reported, varying from 1 % to 26 % across the literature. Some surgeons also prescribe postoperative prophylaxis for postoperative modified radical mastectomy patients to prevent infection despite its lack of proven efficacy. The aim of this study is to analyze the use of oral antibiotics to prevent Surgical Site Infection (SSI) on postoperative modified radical mastectomy patients in Dr. Soetomo General Hospital. This study was double-blinded randomized control trial of 60 postoperative modified radical mastectomy patients (2 groups) during the period of December 2017 to March 2018. Samples were prospectively divided into two groups (random sampling), in group A (n=30) patients received single dose prophylactic antibiotics and continued with oral antibiotics postoperative (Cefadroxil 2 x 500 mg) during 7 days and in group B (n=30) patients received single dose prophylactic antibiotics and continued without postoperative antibiotics (placebo). Both groups were evaluated clinically for surgical site infection up to 30 days. There was no statistically significant difference in both groups {p=1 (p>0.05)}. There was no incidence of surgical site infection in both groups during the 30-day follow-up period (days 3, 7, 14 and 30). There was no difference in the surgical site infection rate among those who received oral postoperative antibiotics prophylactic and without antibiotics (placebo) on postoperative modified radical mastectomy patients in Dr. Soetomo General Hospital. Because of the potential adverse events associated with antibiotic use, further evaluation of this practice is required.

scholarly journals Intra-incisional versus intravenous route of antibiotic administration in preventing surgical site infections: a randomized controlled trial

2018 ◽  
Vol 5 (4) ◽  
pp. 1438
Author(s):  
Aditya N. Patil ◽  
Veerendra M. Uppin
Keyword(s):  
Single Dose ◽  
Surgical Site Infection ◽  
Tertiary Care ◽  
Surgical Site Infections ◽  
Intravenous Route ◽  
Antibiotic Administration ◽  
Site Infection ◽  
Open Appendicectomy ◽  
Group A ◽  
Group B

Background: Surgical site infection (SSI) is one of the most common postoperative complications following abdominal surgeries. Whilst the use of prophylactic antibiotics has been shown to reduce postoperative wound infection, controversy still remains as to the optimum route of administration and the duration of treatment. This study aims to compare the efficacy of a preoperative single dose of a cephalosporin antibiotic (cefotaxime) administered intraincisionally versus that administered intravenously, in preventing postoperative surgical site infections following appendicectomy.Methods: Sixty consecutive cases diagnosed as uncomplicated appendicitis who consented for open appendicectomy at a tertiary care institute were included in the study. Cases were randomized to 2 comparable groups of 30 patients each. Preoperatively, patients in Group A received a single dose of Inj. Cefotaxime 1g intraincisionally while those in Group B received the same intravenously. Incision sites were examined every alternative day starting on postoperative day 3 until removal of sutures. Signs of surgical site infection, if any, were recorded and outcomes were statistically tested for significance.Results: One patient in Group A (3.3%) and 4 patients in Group B (13.3%) showed signs of postoperative surgical site infection (p >0.05) during the follow up period which prolonged their hospital stay.Conclusions: This study showed that a single dose preoperative intraincisional administration of cefotaxime was as effective as intravenous administration for prevention of postoperative surgical site infection after open appendicectomy. Although the difference was not statistically significant, there was a reduced incidence of SSI in individuals who received intraincisional antibiotic. These results are encouraging for a way forward in reducing unnecessary burdening of systemic antibiotics in patients undergoing abdominal surgeries. 

scholarly journals Abdominal Wound Closure in Gynaecological or Obstetrical Surgery with Vicryl® (Polyglactin910) Versus Vicryl Plus® (Polyglactin910 with Triclosan Added): A Comparative Study

2019 ◽  
Vol 17 (1) ◽  
pp. 10-12
Author(s):  
Binod Kumar Mahaseth
Keyword(s):  
Surgical Site Infection ◽  
Surgical Complication ◽  
College Teaching ◽  
Controlled Study ◽  
Skin Closure ◽  
Site Infection ◽  
Comparative Efficacy ◽  
Group A ◽  
Group B ◽  
Johnson Company

Background: Surgical site infection is the most common post-surgical complication in surgical patients. The incidence of surgical site infection varies from 3-20% (or even more) in different part of the world. To date, the best method and material for skin closure has not been recommended by anybody. Triclosan is an antiseptic agent used for coating a suture material to prevent the infections. This case-controlled study was carried out to determine the comparative efficacy of sutures; Objective: This case-controlled study was carried out to determine the comparative efficacy of sutures: vicryl® and vicryl plus® (triclosan, an antiseptic incorporated with suture), in reducing surgical site infection in laparotomy for clean Gyn/Obs operations. Material and method: This case-controlled study was carried out in Dept. Of Gynae/Obs at Nepalgunj Medical College Teaching Hospital, Kohalpur. The period of the study was from Jan 2018 to January 2019. A total of 50 participants were enrolled in the study, who met the inclusion criteria. The patients were divided into two groups A and B, each consisting of 25 patients. The patients were allocated in the groups alternately to remove bias. The Group A consisted of patients where Vicrylplus® (Ethicon, Johnson & Johnson Company, Ahmadabad, India) polyglactin910 with triclosan) was used and Group B consisted of patients where vicryl ® (Ethicon, Johnson & Johnson Company, Ahmadabad, India) polyglactin910 alone) was used. Patients whose abdominal wounds were found infected, pus swab for culture were taken and sent for aerobic culture and sensitivity. All patients received ceftriaxone and metronidazole single dose before operations prophylactically. Result: Surgical site infection ingroup A was 3 cases out of 25 (12%) and in group B it was 6 cases out of 25(24%). Triclosan added polyglactin910 suture found to be statistically non significant concerning prevention of SSI as compared to polyglactin910 (p=0.472). The mean age of the study population was in group A was (29.76±7.47) and in group B was (27.12±7.42).

scholarly journals ANTIBIOTIC PROPHYLAXIS IN LAPAROSCOPIC CHOLECISTECTOMY: IS IT WORTH DOING?

2016 ◽  
Vol 29 (3) ◽  
pp. 170-172 ◽  
Author(s):  
Márcio Alexandre Terra PASSOS ◽  
Pedro Eder PORTARI-FILHO
Keyword(s):  
Laparoscopic Cholecystectomy ◽  
Antibiotic Prophylaxis ◽  
Infectious Complications ◽  
Low Risk ◽  
Double Blind Study ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Risk Patients ◽  
Group A ◽  
Elective Laparoscopic Cholecystectomy ◽  
Group B

ABSTRACT Background: Elective laparoscopic cholecystectomy has very low risk for infectious complications, ranging the infection rate from 0.4% to 1.1%. Many surgeons still use routine antibiotic prophylaxis Aim: Evaluate the real impact of antibiotic prophylaxis in elective laparoscopic cholecystectomies in low risk patients. Method: Prospective, randomized and double-blind study. Were evaluated 100 patients that underwent elective laparoscopic cholecystectomy divided in two groups: group A (n=50), patients that received prophylaxis using intravenous Cephazolin (2 g) during anesthetic induction and group B (n=50), patients that didn't receive any antibiotic prophylaxis. The outcome evaluated were infeccious complications at surgical site. The patients were reviewed seven and 30 days after surgery. Results: There was incidence of 2% in infection complications in group A and 2% in group B. There was no statistical significant difference of infectious complications (p=0,05) between the groups. The groups were homogeneous and comparable. Conclusion: The use of the antibiotic prophylaxis in laparoscopic cholecystectomy in low risk patients doesn't provide any significant benefit in the decrease of surgical wound infection.

scholarly journals A comparative study of open cholecystectomy and laparoscopic cholecystectomy in patients with cholelithiasis

2017 ◽  
Vol 5 (1) ◽  
pp. 253 ◽  
Author(s):  
Pramod Singh ◽  
Sumit Kumar Gupta ◽  
Mukesh Kumar
Keyword(s):  
Laparoscopic Cholecystectomy ◽  
Surgical Site Infection ◽  
Hospital Stay ◽  
Open Cholecystectomy ◽  
City Hospital ◽  
Site Infection ◽  
First Choice ◽  
Duration Of Surgery ◽  
Group A ◽  
Group B

Background: Cholelithiasis is a major cause of morbidity among Indians with a female preponderance. Most of the cases of gallstones are asymptomatic. For a long time, open cholecystectomy (OC) used to be the surgical treatment for cholelithiasis. But with the advent of laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LC) there has been a gradual shift in the treatment with most surgeons preferring LC over OC. Apart from the benefits of decreased hospital stay, lesser postoperative pain and earlier return to normal activity LC are also cosmetically better as compared to OC. Longer operative time and increased incidence of biliary leakage are some pitfalls of LC in initial phase of surgical practice.Methods: A prospective study of 100 patients was carried out in the department of surgery in IQ city medical college and Durgapur city hospital, Durgapur between January 2017 and August 2017 with the aim of comparing open cholecystectomy with laparoscopic cholecystectomy. The patients were randomly assigned into two groups. Group A consisted of patients who underwent laparoscopic surgery while Group B patients underwent open surgery for cholelithiasis.Results: Duration of surgery was longer in OC than LC (72.4min versus 44.7min.). Mean duration of post-operative pain was 18.3hrs in group A as compared to mean duration of 30.7hrs in group B patients. The mean period of post-operative hospital stay was 1.8 days in group A and 4.8 days in group B. Post-operative resumption of normal diet was possible in 2.1 days in OC while it took lesser time (1.2 days) in LC. The rate of surgical site infection was higher in OC as compared to LC.Conclusions: Laparoscopic cholecystectomy can be recommended as first choice operative treatment for patients with cholelithiasis as it provides better cosmetic results, lesser pain, lesser post-operative hospital stay and fewer incidence of surgical site infection.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document