Local cover image
Local cover image
Image from Google Jackets

Cefepime versus Ceftriaxone for perioperative systemic antibiotic prophylaxis in elective orthopedic surgery at Bugando Medical Centre Mwanza, Tanzania a randomized clinical study

By: Contributor(s): Material type: TextTextPublisher number: Phone: +255 28 298 3384 Fax: +255 28 298 3386 Email: vc@bugando.ac.tz Language: English Series: ; BMC Pharmacology and Toxicology Volume 16 Issue 1 Publication details: Mwanza, Tanzania: BioMed Central & Catholic University of Health and Allied Sciences [CUHAS – Bugando] 23 December 2015Description: Pages 1-9ISSN:
  • 2050-6511
Online resources: Summary: Abstract Background: 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. Methods: 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. Results: 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. Conclusion: The difference between cefepime and ceftriaxone in preventing SSIs following elective clean orthopedic surgery was not statistically significant.
Item type: RESEARCH ARTICLES
Tags from this library: No tags from this library for this title. Log in to add tags.
Star ratings
    Average rating: 0.0 (0 votes)
Holdings
Item type Current library Collection Status Barcode
RESEARCH ARTICLES MWALIMU NYERERE LEARNING RESOURCES CENTRE-CUHAS BUGANDO NFIC -1 RA0634
Total holds: 0

Abstract

Background: 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.

Methods: 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.

Results: 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.

Conclusion: The difference between cefepime and ceftriaxone in preventing SSIs following elective clean orthopedic surgery was not statistically significant.

There are no comments on this title.

to post a comment.

Click on an image to view it in the image viewer

Local cover image
Share
Catholic University of  Health and Allied Sciences - CUHAS
Directorate of ICT @ 2024