Meta-Analysis of Clinical Trials Comparing Cefazolin to Cefuroxime, Ceftriaxone, and Cefamandole for Surgical Site Infection Prevention

被引:19
作者
Ahmed, Nehad J. [1 ,2 ]
Haseeb, Abdul [3 ]
Alamer, Ahmad [1 ]
Almalki, Ziyad S. [1 ]
Alahmari, Abdullah K. [1 ]
Khan, Amer H. [2 ]
机构
[1] Prince Sattam Bin Abdulaziz Univ, Coll Pharm, Dept Clin Pharm, Alkharj 11942, Saudi Arabia
[2] Univ Sains Malaysia, Sch Pharmaceut Sci, Discipline Clin Pharm, George Town 11800, Malaysia
[3] Umm Al Qura Univ, Coll Pharm, Clin Pharm Dept, Mecca 13174, Saudi Arabia
来源
ANTIBIOTICS-BASEL | 2022年 / 11卷 / 11期
关键词
cefamandole; cefazolin; ceftriaxone; cefuroxime; clinical trials; prophylaxis; surgical site infections; PERIOPERATIVE ANTIBIOTIC-PROPHYLAXIS; DOSE ANTIMICROBIAL PROPHYLAXIS; RANDOMIZED COMPARATIVE TRIAL; CARDIOVASCULAR-SURGERY; CARDIAC-SURGERY; EFFICACY; CEPHALOSPORINS; OPERATIONS;
D O I
10.3390/antibiotics11111543
中图分类号
R51 [传染病];
学科分类号
100401 ;
摘要
Surgical site infections are among the most prevalent and costly healthcare-associated infections, resulting in poor patient outcomes and even death. Cefazolin is a first-generation cephalosporin antibiotic that is widely used for surgical prophylaxis in a variety of surgical disciplines. Although previous studies showed that cefazolin is effective in preventing surgical site infections, other agents, such as cefuroxime and ceftriaxone, were used excessively for surgical patients. The present analysis included only clinical trials comparing the efficacy of cefazolin to cefuroxime, ceftriaxone, and cefamandole in lowering SSIs using PubMed, Google Scholar, and ClinicalTrials.gov. Review Manager software (RevMan version 5.4) was used to conduct the meta-analyses. A total of 12,446 patients were included in the study. Among these patients, 6327 patients received cefazolin and 6119 patients received cefamandole, cefuroxime, or ceftriaxone. Our analysis showed that cefazolin is as effective as cefuroxime, cefamandole, and ceftriaxone in preventing surgical site infections. Hence, our findings have provided evidence for the use of cefazolin before surgeries because of its efficacy, as previous studies showed that it is inexpensive and safer than other agents.
引用
收藏
页数:10
相关论文
共 57 条
[11]   COMPARISON OF CEFUROXIME AND CEFAZOLIN - PROPHYLAXIS AGAINST INFECTION IN ARTERIAL RECONSTRUCTIVE SURGERY [J].
BORRERO, E ;
ROSENTHAL, D .
VASCULAR SURGERY, 1991, 25 (01) :54-59
[12]   Clinical Practice Guidelines for Antimicrobial Prophylaxis in Surgery [J].
Bratzler, Dale W. ;
Dellinger, E. Patchen ;
Olsen, Keith M. ;
Perl, Trish M. ;
Auwaerter, Paul G. ;
Bolon, Maureen K. ;
Fish, Douglas N. ;
Napolitano, Lena M. ;
Sawyer, Robert G. ;
Slain, Douglas ;
Steinberg, James P. ;
Weinstein, Robert A. .
SURGICAL INFECTIONS, 2013, 14 (01) :73-156
[13]  
BRYAN CS, 1988, CLIN ORTHOP RELAT R, P117
[14]  
[陈崴 CHEN Wei], 2006, [中华肾脏病杂志, Chinese Journal of Nephrology], V22, P601
[15]   DETERMINANTS OF WOUND-INFECTION INCIDENCE AFTER ISOLATED CORONARY-ARTERY BYPASS-SURGERY IN PATIENTS RANDOMIZED TO RECEIVE PROPHYLACTIC CEFUROXIME OR CEFAZOLIN [J].
CONKLIN, CM ;
GRAY, RJ ;
NEILSON, D ;
WONG, P ;
TOMITA, DK ;
MATLOFF, JM .
ANNALS OF THORACIC SURGERY, 1988, 46 (02) :172-177
[16]  
Crader M.F., PREOPERATIVE ANTIBIO
[17]   RANDOMIZED, PROSPECTIVE COMPARISON OF FIRST-GENERATION AND 2ND-GENERATION CEPHALOSPORINS AS INFECTION PROPHYLAXIS FOR CARDIAC-SURGERY [J].
CURTIS, JJ ;
BOLEY, TM ;
WALLS, JT ;
HAMORY, B ;
SCHMALTZ, RA .
AMERICAN JOURNAL OF SURGERY, 1993, 166 (06) :734-737
[18]  
Dehne MG, 2001, ORTHOPEDICS, V24, P665
[19]  
DOEBBELING BN, 1990, J THORAC CARDIOV SUR, V99, P981
[20]   CEFUROXIME VERSUS CEFAZOLIN AS PROPHYLAXIS IN VASCULAR-SURGERY [J].
EDWARDS, WH ;
KAISER, AB ;
KERNODLE, DS ;
APPLEBY, TC ;
EDWARDS, WH ;
MARTIN, RS ;
MULHERIN, JL ;
WOOD, CA .
JOURNAL OF VASCULAR SURGERY, 1992, 15 (01) :35-42