首页> 外文OA文献 >Cefepime Versus Ceftriaxone for Perioperative Systemic Antibiotic Prophylaxis in Elective orthopedic surgery at Bugando Medical Centre Mwanza, Tanzania: a randomized clinical study.
【2h】

Cefepime Versus Ceftriaxone for Perioperative Systemic Antibiotic Prophylaxis in Elective orthopedic surgery at Bugando Medical Centre Mwanza, Tanzania: a randomized clinical study.

机译:头孢吡肟与头孢曲松钠在坦桑尼亚布旺多医疗中心的选择性骨科手术中的围手术期全身抗生素预防:一项随机临床研究。

代理获取
本网站仅为用户提供外文OA文献查询和代理获取服务,本网站没有原文。下单后我们将采用程序或人工为您竭诚获取高质量的原文,但由于OA文献来源多样且变更频繁,仍可能出现获取不到、文献不完整或与标题不符等情况,如果获取不到我们将提供退款服务。请知悉。

摘要

Antimicrobial prophylaxis reduces the incidence of postoperative wound infections especially among patients undergoing orthopedics surgery. However, there is dearth of information on the clinical effectiveness, spectrum limitations and practical contextual information on third and fourth generation cephalosporins. The aim of this study was to evaluate the efficacy and safety of cefepime and ceftriaxone as peri-operative systemic antimicrobial prophylaxis in elective orthopedic surgery in our center. This study was a prospective, randomized, open label comparative clinical study of patients undergoing elective orthopedic procedures at the Bugando Medical Centre (BMC) between June 2014 and February 2015. Two hundred thirty participants were enrolled in the study and randomly assigned into Ceftriaxone regimen (group A) or Cefepime regimen (group B). Participants in ceftriaxone or cefepime group received 50 mg/kg up to 2 g single dose perioperative intravenous infusion at least 30 min before incision. Both groups were followed for 30 days using a Center for Disease Control superficial surgical site infection criterion for the outcome. A two-tailed margin of equivalence was set at 5% analyzed on the intent to treat. All 230 participants were subjected to final analysis with no patient being lost to follow-up. Superficial surgical site infection occurred in 5 out of 117 (4.3%, 0.6 to 7.9 at 95% CI) patients receiving cefepime compared to 3 out of 113 (2.7%, 0.3 to 5.6 at 95% CI) among patients receiving ceftriaxone regimen. The absolute difference of 1.6% (95% Confidence Interval: -6.3 to 3.1), equivocally lies outside the 5% statistically significant margin of presumed clinical equivalence. The difference between cefepime and ceftriaxone in preventing SSIs following elective clean orthopedic surgery was not statistically significant.
机译:抗菌药物的预防降低了术后伤口感染的发生率,尤其是在骨科手术患者中。然而,关于第三代和第四代头孢菌素的临床有效性,频谱局限性和实用的背景信息尚缺乏信息。这项研究的目的是评估在我们中心的选择性骨科手术中头孢吡肟和头孢曲松作为围手术期全身抗菌药物预防的有效性和安全性。这项研究是2014年6月至2015年2月间在Bugando医学中心(BMC)对接受择期整形外科手术的患者进行的前瞻性,随机,开放标签比较临床研究。该研究招募了230名参与者,并将其随机分配到头孢曲松钠方案中( A组)或头孢吡肟方案(B组)。头孢曲松或头孢吡肟组的参与者在手术前至少30分钟接受围手术期静脉输注50 mg / kg至2 g单剂量。两组均使用疾病控制中心浅表外科手术部位感染标准随访30天,以评估结局。根据治疗意图分析,将两尾的等效裕度设定为5%。所有230名参与者均接受了最终分析,没有患者失去随访。接受头孢吡肟治疗的117例患者中有5例(4.3%,0.6-7.9,95%CI)发生浅部手术部位感染,而接受头孢曲松治疗的患者中113例中有3例(2.7%,0.3-5.6,95%CI)。 1.6%(95%置信区间:-6.3到3.1)的绝对差值显然超出了假定的临床等效值的5%统计显着性范围。头孢哌肟和头孢曲松在预防清洁整形外科手术后预防SSI方面的差异无统计学意义。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
代理获取

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号