Surgical Antibiotic Prophylaxis After Renal Transplantation: Time to Reconsider

被引:6
作者
Orlando, G. [1 ]
Di Cocco, P. [2 ]
D'Angelo, M. [2 ]
Clemente, K. [2 ]
Manzia, T. M. [3 ]
Angelico, R. [3 ]
Tisone, G. [3 ]
Romagnoli, J. [4 ]
Citterio, F. [4 ]
Famulari, A. [2 ]
Pisani, F. [2 ]
机构
[1] Univ Oxford, John Radcliffe Hosp, Nuffield Dept Surg, Oxford OX3 9DU, England
[2] Univ Aquila, Transplant & Renal Failure Unit, I-67100 Laquila, Italy
[3] Univ Roma Tor Vergata, Transplant & Hepatobiliary Unit, Rome, Italy
[4] Univ Cattolica Sacro Cuore, Rome, Italy
关键词
RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED-TRIAL; WOUND-INFECTION; BENEFIT;
D O I
10.1016/j.transproceed.2010.03.055
中图分类号
R392 [医学免疫学]; Q939.91 [免疫学];
学科分类号
100102 ;
摘要
The optimal regimen for perioperative antibiotic prophylaxis after renal transplantation remains to be determined. Worldwide, it seems there is a trend toward decreased use of prophylaxis from the first 48 hours to several days after surgery. However, bacterial strains resistant to common antibiotic agents arise even if only a single dose of a molecule is administered at any time. Inasmuch as infections currently are the primary cause of hospitalization after renal transplantation, it is desirable to not favor selection of resistant strains that may not be treated appropriately in the event of onset of infection. Therefore, antibiotic therapy, whether for therapeutic or prophylactic purposes, should be administered based exclusively on clinical evidence. Because systemic antibiotic prophylaxis is not effective against infections of the urinary tract, the objective of perioperative antibiotic prophylaxis should be to prevent infection of the surgical wound. In this case, administration of a single dose of an antibiotic agent (1-shot regimen) at the induction of anesthesia is effective and safe. For these reasons, it is urgent that new guidelines be defined for perioperative antibiotic prophylaxis. Multicenter prospective randomized trials comparing 1-shot vs multiple-dose regimens should be performed to establish the optimal regimen.
引用
收藏
页码:1118 / 1119
页数:2
相关论文
共 14 条
  • [1] [Anonymous], WHO SCI WORK GROUP M
  • [2] The role of antibiotic prophylaxis in prevention of wound infection after lichtenstein open mesh repair of primary inguinal hernia - A multicenter double-blind randomized controlled trial
    Aufenacker, TJ
    van Geldere, D
    van Mesdag, T
    Bossers, AN
    Dekker, B
    Scheijde, E
    van Nieuwenhuizen, R
    Hiemstra, E
    Maduro, JH
    Juttmann, JW
    Hofstede, D
    van Der Linden, CTM
    Gouma, DJ
    Simons, MP
    [J]. ANNALS OF SURGERY, 2004, 240 (06) : 955 - 961
  • [3] Bengmark S., 2004, TRANSPLANT REV-ORLAN, V18, P38
  • [4] A PROSPECTIVE RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIAL OF PERIOPERATIVE ANTIBIOTIC-PROPHYLAXIS IN RENAL-TRANSPLANTATION
    COHEN, J
    REES, AJ
    WILLIAMS, G
    [J]. JOURNAL OF HOSPITAL INFECTION, 1988, 11 (04) : 357 - 363
  • [5] de Oliveira L C, 2001, Sao Paulo Med J, V119, P165
  • [6] DELRIO G, 1993, EUR UROL, V24, P305
  • [7] Post-transplant infections now exceed acute rejection as cause for hospitalization: A report of the NAPRTCS
    Dharnidharka, VR
    Stablein, DM
    Harmon, WE
    [J]. AMERICAN JOURNAL OF TRANSPLANTATION, 2004, 4 (03) : 384 - 389
  • [8] Incidence of urinary tract infections caused by germs resistant to antibiotics commonly used after renal transplantation
    Di Cocco, P.
    Orlando, G.
    Mazzotta, C.
    Rizza, V.
    D'Angelo, M.
    Clemente, K.
    Greco, S.
    Famulari, A.
    Pisani, F.
    [J]. TRANSPLANTATION PROCEEDINGS, 2008, 40 (06) : 1881 - 1884
  • [9] Is single-dose antibiotic prophylaxis sufficient for any surgical procedure?
    Esposito, S
    [J]. JOURNAL OF CHEMOTHERAPY, 1999, 11 (06) : 556 - 564
  • [10] A PROSPECTIVE, RANDOMIZED, DOUBLE-BLIND-STUDY OF TRIMETHOPRIM-SULFAMETHOXAZOLE FOR PROPHYLAXIS OF INFECTION IN RENAL-TRANSPLANTATION - CLINICAL EFFICACY, ABSORPTION OF TRIMETHOPRIM-SULFAMETHOXAZOLE, EFFECTS ON THE MICROFLORA, AND THE COST-BENEFIT OF PROPHYLAXIS
    FOX, BC
    SOLLINGER, HW
    BELZER, FO
    MAKI, DG
    [J]. AMERICAN JOURNAL OF MEDICINE, 1990, 89 (03) : 255 - 274