Title of article :
A comparison of the prophylactic efficacy of ceftriaxone and cefotaxime in abdominal surgery
Author/Authors :
John C. Woodfield، نويسنده , , Andre M. van Rij، نويسنده , , Ross A. Pettigrew، نويسنده , , Antje J. van der Linden، نويسنده , , Clive Solomon، نويسنده , , Donna Bolt، نويسنده ,
Issue Information :
روزنامه با شماره پیاپی سال 2003
Abstract :
Background
Although ceftriaxone (R) and cefotaxime (C) are highly effective antibiotics, few studies have directly compared their prophylactic efficacy.
Methods
In a prospective, randomized, double blind study of 1,013 patients undergoing abdominal surgery, the prophylactic use of ceftriaxone and cefotaxime were compared. Intravenous cephalosporin, 1 g, was given at induction of anesthesia, with intravenous metronidazole, 500 mg, also being given for colorectal surgery.
Results
The difference in wound infection (R 8%, C 12%, P <0.05) was due to appendicectomies not receiving metronidazole, (R 6%, C 18%, P <0.03) and was no longer present when these cases were excluded from analysis (R 8%, C 10%). Of note chest and urinary tract infection (R 6%, C 11%, P <0.02) and “any” infection (R 20%, C 27%, P <0.05) were reduced with ceftriaxone.
Conclusions
Both antibiotics provide comparable wound prophylaxis as long as metronidazole is added for colorectal and appendiceal surgery. Ceftriaxone may be more versatile having the additional apparent benefits of reducing other postoperative infections, being less dependent on metronidazole as an adjunct and providing a more effective prophylactic cover against Staphylococcus aureus.
Keywords :
Cefotaxime , Ceftriaxone , Prophylaxis , Wound infection , Chest infection , urinary infection , Staphylococcus aureus
Journal title :
The American Journal of Surgery
Journal title :
The American Journal of Surgery