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.

Effect of Prophylactic Antibiotics in Orthopaedic Surgery

2021 ◽  
Vol 15 (11) ◽  
pp. 2969-2970
Author(s):  
Muhammad Siraj ◽  
Abbas Ali ◽  
Mudir Khan
Keyword(s):  
Surgical Site Infection ◽  
Antibiotic Prophylaxis ◽  
Orthopaedic Surgery ◽  
Prophylactic Antibiotics ◽  
Implant Removal ◽  
Diabetic Patients ◽  
Site Infection ◽  
Post Surgery ◽  
Group 2 ◽  
Group 1

Background: Orthopaedic surgeries require sensitive protocol for prevention of infection pre and post-surgery. Antibiotic-prophylaxis has been reported for reducing risk of infection in orthopaedic surgeries such as removal of implants. Aim: To assess the effect of prophylactic antibiotics in orthopaedic surgery. Study design: Retrospective study Place and duration of study: Dept. of Orthopaedics, Khyber Teaching Hospital, Peshawar from 1-1-2020 to 31-12- 2020. Methodology: One hundred and ten patients within 18-75 years were divided into two groups. Each group had 55 patients. Group 1 were given prophylactic antibiotics pre-operative as a single dose while group 2 were given only saline. All patients were admitted for removal of orthopaedic implants in foot, ankle or leg. Patients 30 days record was observed for any surgical-site infection. Results: The mean age of patient was 42.95±10.8 years. Group 1 and Group 2 had more males than females. There were 10.9% and 9.09% diabetic patients within group 1 and group 2. The 30 days assessment of post implant removal orthopaedic surgery showed a decrease of surgical-site infection in group 1. Surgical-site infection decreased by a rate of 5.4% among patients who were given cefazolin antibiotic. Conclusion: The effect of prophylactic antibiotic reduces chance of surgical-site infection in orthopaedic surgery. Keywords: Antibiotic-prophylaxis, Orthopaedic surgery, Implant-removal, Surgical-site infection

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.

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 Role of Single Dose Preoperative Ceftriaxone in the Control of Surgical Site Infection in a Tertiary Level Hospital

2016 ◽  
Vol 11 (1) ◽  
pp. 6-10
Author(s):  
Mohammad Mushfiqur Rahman ◽  
Md Mazedur Rahman ◽  
Mamun Ibn Munim ◽  
Md Shariful Haque
Keyword(s):  
Single Dose ◽  
Surgical Site Infection ◽  
Financial Burden ◽  
Cross Sectional Study ◽  
Site Infection ◽  
College Hospital ◽  
Cross Sectional ◽  
Group I ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Clean Contaminated

Post-surgical wou  infection is a crucial factor in surgical practice. Prolong use of postoperative antibiotic is common practice in our surgical world. This causes financial burden to our patients a antibiotic resistance. But international journals a  literatures suggest using antibiotics as prophylaxis only at the time of operation a  no further postoperative antibiotic is needed in clean contaminated surgery. This comparative cross-sectional study was done at the department of surgery, Sylhet MAG Osmani Medical College Hospital from 1st July 2007 to 30th June 2008. A total number of 100 patients of clean-contaminated elective laparotomy were selected. Patients were ra omly divided into two groups, in Group-I (got single dose preoperative Inj. Ceftriaxone) a  in group-II (got single dose preoperative Inj. Ceftriaxone followed by Inj. Ceftriaxone for 2 days a  then Cap. Cefxime for next 5 days). There is no statistically significant difference in outcome between two groups. So, single dose preoperative Inj. Ceftriaxone (1gm) is sufficient as a prophylaxis of surgical site infection in clean-contaminated elective surgery.Faridpur Med. Coll. J. Jan 2016;11(1): 6-10

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 The Incidence of Surgical Site Infection in Acute Non Perforated Appendicitis

2019 ◽  
Vol 9 (2) ◽  
pp. 11-14
Author(s):  
Suraj Raj Bhattarai ◽  
Kishor Kumar Tamrakar
Keyword(s):  
Single Dose ◽  
Surgical Site Infection ◽  
Perforated Appendicitis ◽  
College Teaching ◽  
Cross Sectional Study ◽  
Age Group ◽  
Site Infection ◽  
Cross Sectional ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Group Sex

Background: Appendectomy is the most commonly performed emergency  surgical procedure and has significant morbidity of surgical site infection (SSIs). Regarding this, there are conflicting reports and dilemma on use of optimal duration of antibiotics. The aim of this study was to evaluate the incidence of SSIs after three doses of perioperative prophylactic antibiot­ics (single dose before surgery and two doses postoperatively) after ap­pendectomy in acute non- perforated appendicitis (NPA). Methods: This cross sectional study was conducted in the department of General surgery, Chitwan Medical College Teaching Hospital, from May 2018 to April 2019. All the cases received single dose of antibiotics (cef­triaxone and metronidazole) during the induction of anesthesia and two doses of the same antibiotics postoperatively within 24 hours. SSIs was assessed on 2nd and followed up till 7th postoperative day. The data col­lected was analyzed using SPSS version 16. Results: In the study of 100 patients, who received perioperative three doses of antibiotics, the overall frequency of SSIs on 2nd and 3rd post-operative day were 2% (p=.840) and 6% (p=.539) respectively, which was statistically not significant. In follow up after 3rd postoperative day, there was no evidence of SSIs. Statistically there was no significant difference in the incidence and grade of SSIs between age group, sex and duration of operation. Conclusions: A combined three doses of perioperative antibiotics was ad­equate for SSIs prevention in patients of any age group and sex with acute NPA after appendectomy in usual operative time.

scholarly journals Pharmacokinetics of a New Pharmaceutical Form of Vitamin D3 100,000 IU in Soft Capsule

Nutrients ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 11 (3) ◽  
pp. 703 ◽  
Author(s):  
Romuald Mentaverri ◽  
Jean-Claude Souberbielle ◽  
Gilles Brami ◽  
Christelle Daniel ◽  
Patrice Fardellone
Keyword(s):  
Single Dose ◽  
Vitamin D3 ◽  
Oral Solution ◽  
Wilcoxon Test ◽  
Late Winter ◽  
Reference Drug ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Group 2 ◽  
New Formulation ◽  
Group 1

Vitamin D deficiency is frequent in the general population and both subjects and health professionals could benefit from a broader range of vitamin D3 formulations. We conducted a single-dose, open-label, parallel-group, randomized bioequivalence study to compare a single dose of a newly developed vitamin D3 100,000 IU in a soft capsule (Group 1) with the reference drug vitamin D3 100,000 IU oral solution in ampoule (Group 2) in healthy volunteers over a four-month period. The primary endpoint was the area under the curve (AUC) of serum 25-hydroxyvitamin-D (25(OH)D) concentrations on Day 112. This study was conducted in France from February to June 2014 in 53 young adults with a mean age of 26.9 years. At baseline, low mean serum 25(OH)D levels were observed in both groups (10.6 ng/mL in Group 1 and 9.0 ng/mL in Group 2). On Day 112, the AUC of serum 25(OH)D concentration was 2499.4 ± 463.8 nmol/mL (7.8 ± 0.2 for LogAUC) for Group 1 and 2152.3 ± 479.8 nmol/mL (7.6 ± 0.2 for LogAUC) for Group 2. Bioequivalence of the two treatments was not demonstrated. Superiority of vitamin D3 100,000 IU soft capsule was observed with p = 0.029 for AUC and p = 0.03 for LogAUC using a non-parametric Wilcoxon test. The profile of the serum 25(OH)D concentration showed a significant difference in favor of Group 1 on Days 1, 3, 7, 14 and 90. Mean serum 25(OH)D concentrations in Group 1 were between 20 and 30 ng/mL during the four-month period and under 20 ng/mL throughout the study in Group 2, except on Day 112. Mean Cmax for Group 1 was significantly higher (p = 0.002). Fourteen days were needed to reach Tmax by more than half the subjects in Group 1 compared to 45 days in Group 2. Both treatments were well tolerated, with no severe or related adverse events reported. In conclusion, the pharmacokinetic profile of the new formulation of vitamin D3 100,000 IU soft capsule is superior to that of the oral solution in ampoule. The new formulation increased serum 25(OH)D levels to above 20 ng/mL and maintained levels from 20 ng/mL to 30 ng/mL for four months in late winter and spring.

scholarly journals A Randomized Control Trial Comparing Transparent Film Dressings and Conventional Occlusive Dressings for Elective Surgical Procedures

2019 ◽  
Vol 7 (17) ◽  
pp. 2844-2850 ◽  
Author(s):  
Moushira Hosny Ezzelarab ◽  
Omar Nouh ◽  
Ahmed Nabil Ahmed ◽  
Mervat Gaber Anany ◽  
Nevine Gamal El Rachidi ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Surgical Site Infection ◽  
Infection Rate ◽  
Financial Burden ◽  
P Value ◽  
Diabetic Patients ◽  
Site Infection ◽  
Surgical Site Infection Rate ◽  
Gauze Dressing ◽  
Clean Contaminated ◽  
The Impact

BACKGROUND: Surgical site infection is one of the major health-care-associated problems causing substantial morbidity and mortality and constituting a financial burden on hospitals as well. The wound management is one of the crucial evidence-based strategies in the reduction of surgical site infection rates AIM: To study the impact of standardisation of transparent semipermeable dressing procedure on the rate of surgical site infection in comparison with conventional dressing in clean and clean-contaminated surgeries. METHODS: The study included 100 patients who were admitted to surgical wards in Cairo university hospitals, for clean and clean-contaminated operations, in the period from February 2017 to August 2017. Immunocompromised and uncontrolled diabetic patients were excluded. Patients were randomly allocated into two groups; in the first group, patients wounds were covered using transparent semipermeable dressing, while the second group patients’ wounds were covered using conventional occlusive gauze dressing. Patients were followed up for criteria of infection every other day during the first week then at two weeks, three weeks and four weeks. RESULTS: In clean and clean-contaminated operations, the transparent dressing group showed a significantly lesser rate of surgical site infection at (2%), compared with the conventional occlusive gauze dressing group with a surgical site infection rate of (14%) (p-value of 0.02). CONCLUSION: The transparent semipermeable dressing is effective in reducing surgical site infection rate in clean and clean-contaminated operations.

scholarly journals Antibiotic Prophylaxis against Surgical Site Infection after Open Hernia Surgery: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

2021 ◽  
pp. 1-13
Author(s):  
Lolwah Al Riyees ◽  
Wedad Al Madani ◽  
Nistren Firwana ◽  
Hanan H. Balkhy ◽  
Mazen Ferwana ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Hernia Repair ◽  
Surgical Site Infection ◽  
Antibiotic Prophylaxis ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Prophylactic Antibiotics ◽  
Site Infection ◽  
Hernia Surgery ◽  
Significant Difference

<b><i>Objective:</i></b> The role of antibiotic prophylaxis (AP) in the prevention of surgical site infection (SSI) after hernia repair is debated. We conducted this systematic review and meta-analysis to assess the evidence on the value of prophylactic antibiotics in reducing the risks of SSI after open hernia surgery. <b><i>Methods:</i></b> We ran an online and manual search to identify relevant randomized controlled trials that compared prophylactic antibiotics to nonantibiotic controls in patients undergoing open surgical hernia repair. Data on SSI risk were extracted and pooled as risk ratios (RRs) with 95% confidence intervals (95% CIs), using RevMan software. We further used the Cochrane risk of bias tool and GRADE assessment to evaluate the quality of generated evidence. <b><i>Results:</i></b> Twenty-nine studies (<i>N</i> = 8,616 patients) were included in the current analysis. Antibiotic prophylaxis reduced the risk of SSI in open hernia repair patients (RR = 0.65, 95% CI = 0.53, 0.79). Subgroup analysis showed a significant benefit for antibiotics in mesh repair patients (RR = 0.60, 95% CI = 0.48, 0.76) yet no significant difference in SSI risk after herniorrhaphy (RR = 0.86, 95% CI = 0.54, 1.36). In addition, AP was associated with a significant reduction in superficial SSI risk (RR = 0.56, 95% CI = 0.43, 0.72) but not deep SSI (RR = 0.70, 95% CI = 0.30, 1.62). Further analysis showed a significant reduction in SSI risk with amoxicillin/clavulanic acid and cefazolin but not with cefuroxime. <b><i>Conclusion:</i></b> The present meta-analysis suggests that AP is beneficial prior to open mesh hernia repair. However, the quality of evidence was low, and further well-designed trials are needed.

scholarly journals Comparative study of single dose preoperative antibiotics versus both preoperative and postoperative antibiotics in laparoscopic appendicectomy for nonperforated appendicitis

2017 ◽  
Vol 4 (9) ◽  
pp. 3092
Author(s):  
Himabindu Bangaru ◽  
Varun V. Gaiki ◽  
M. V. Ranga Reddy
Keyword(s):  
Single Dose ◽  
Surgical Site Infection ◽  
Hospital Stay ◽  
Prophylactic Antibiotics ◽  
Postoperative Hospital Stay ◽  
Laparoscopic Appendicectomy ◽  
Site Infection ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Group A ◽  
Preoperative Antibiotics

Background: Antibiotics are being administered both preoperatively and postoperatively even in uncomplicated nonperforated appendicitis. Studies regarding role of postoperative antibiotics in laparoscopic appendicectomy for nonperforated appendicitis are sparse. The aim of the study is therefore to study the efficacy of single dose preoperative antibiotics versus both preoperative and postoperative antibiotics in reducing surgical site infection in laparoscopic appendicectomy for uncomplicated nonperforated acute appendicitis.Methods: This is a prospective study done in general surgery department at Malla Reddy institute of medical sciences from September to April 2016.162 patients with nonperforated appendicitis were randomly allocated into two groups. 80 patients in Group A were given single dose of preoperative prophylactic antibiotics. No further antibiotics were given. 82 patients in Group B were given both preoperative and postoperative antibiotics. Postoperative surgical site infection and duration of postoperative hospital stay were compared between both groups. Statistical analysis was done using ANOVA, Fisher’s Exact test and Chi-square test wherever necessary.Results: There was no significant difference in the rate of surgical site infection in both groups. The mean duration of postoperative hospital stay was shorter in preoperative antibiotics only group (Group A). Age and gender had no significant association with surgical site infection. There was no deep incisional or organ space infection in this study.Conclusions: Single dose prophylactic antibiotics would be sufficient in cases of laparoscopic appendicectomy for simple uncomplicated nonperforated acute appendicitis. Postoperative antibiotic administration would not be necessary in these cases.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document