Cargando…

A randomized controlled trial to compare antibiotic prophylaxis in elective gynecological surgeries: Single dose of cefazolin versus single dose of cefazolin and tinidazole

OBJECTIVES: To evaluate if addition of an anti-anaerobic agent to standard drug-cefazolin for antimicrobial prophylaxis would further decrease postoperative infectious morbidity or not. This is relevant as most of the infections in gynecological surgeries are anaerobic but cefazolin does not protect...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Garg, Shivani, Chopra, Seema, Gainder, Shalini, Bagga, Rashmi, Shafiq, Nusrat, Aggarwal, Neelam
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Wolters Kluwer - Medknow 2021
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9020251/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35465275
http://dx.doi.org/10.4103/tcmj.tcmj_176_21
_version_ 1784689498014089216
author Garg, Shivani
Chopra, Seema
Gainder, Shalini
Bagga, Rashmi
Shafiq, Nusrat
Aggarwal, Neelam
author_facet Garg, Shivani
Chopra, Seema
Gainder, Shalini
Bagga, Rashmi
Shafiq, Nusrat
Aggarwal, Neelam
author_sort Garg, Shivani
collection PubMed
description OBJECTIVES: To evaluate if addition of an anti-anaerobic agent to standard drug-cefazolin for antimicrobial prophylaxis would further decrease postoperative infectious morbidity or not. This is relevant as most of the infections in gynecological surgeries are anaerobic but cefazolin does not protect against anaerobes. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The study design was a parallel randomized controlled trial. Two hundred patients undergoing benign gynecological surgeries were divided into two groups of 100 each. Group A received 2 g cefazolin 30–60 min before incision and Group B received 2 g cefazolin 30–60 min and 1.6 g tinidazole 60–120 min before incision. The patients were followed for any infectious morbidity for 1 month postoperatively. The analysis was done separately for abdominal, laparoscopic, and vaginal surgeries. The analysis was also done for surgeries according to the wound category, i.e. clean and clean-contaminated. RESULTS: The two groups were comparable for age and body mass index (BMI). The two groups were comparable for the factors affecting infectious morbidity such as duration of surgery, blood loss, blood transfusions, duration of hospital stay, and need for additional antibiotics. The postoperative infectious morbidity was analyzed in terms of fever, surgical site infection (SSI), and urinary tract infection (UTI). No patient in vaginal and laparoscopic groups suffered from infectious morbidity. In abdominal surgeries group, postoperative fever occurred in 6/74 (8.1%) and 11/74 patients (14.8%) in Groups A and B, respectively (P = 0.38). SSI occurred in 1/74 (1.3%) and 2/74 (2.7%) patients in Groups A and B, respectively (P = 1.0). UTI occurred in 5/74 patients (6.7%) and 2/74 patients (2.7%) in Groups A and B, respectively (P = 0.44). The data were also analyzed for infectious morbidity for clean and clean-contaminated wound categories, and the results were nonsignificant between both groups for each type of wound category (P > 0.05). CONCLUSION: Cefazolin alone is a sufficient antibiotic prophylaxis for benign gynecological procedures.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-9020251
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2021
publisher Wolters Kluwer - Medknow
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-90202512022-04-21 A randomized controlled trial to compare antibiotic prophylaxis in elective gynecological surgeries: Single dose of cefazolin versus single dose of cefazolin and tinidazole Garg, Shivani Chopra, Seema Gainder, Shalini Bagga, Rashmi Shafiq, Nusrat Aggarwal, Neelam Tzu Chi Med J Original Article OBJECTIVES: To evaluate if addition of an anti-anaerobic agent to standard drug-cefazolin for antimicrobial prophylaxis would further decrease postoperative infectious morbidity or not. This is relevant as most of the infections in gynecological surgeries are anaerobic but cefazolin does not protect against anaerobes. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The study design was a parallel randomized controlled trial. Two hundred patients undergoing benign gynecological surgeries were divided into two groups of 100 each. Group A received 2 g cefazolin 30–60 min before incision and Group B received 2 g cefazolin 30–60 min and 1.6 g tinidazole 60–120 min before incision. The patients were followed for any infectious morbidity for 1 month postoperatively. The analysis was done separately for abdominal, laparoscopic, and vaginal surgeries. The analysis was also done for surgeries according to the wound category, i.e. clean and clean-contaminated. RESULTS: The two groups were comparable for age and body mass index (BMI). The two groups were comparable for the factors affecting infectious morbidity such as duration of surgery, blood loss, blood transfusions, duration of hospital stay, and need for additional antibiotics. The postoperative infectious morbidity was analyzed in terms of fever, surgical site infection (SSI), and urinary tract infection (UTI). No patient in vaginal and laparoscopic groups suffered from infectious morbidity. In abdominal surgeries group, postoperative fever occurred in 6/74 (8.1%) and 11/74 patients (14.8%) in Groups A and B, respectively (P = 0.38). SSI occurred in 1/74 (1.3%) and 2/74 (2.7%) patients in Groups A and B, respectively (P = 1.0). UTI occurred in 5/74 patients (6.7%) and 2/74 patients (2.7%) in Groups A and B, respectively (P = 0.44). The data were also analyzed for infectious morbidity for clean and clean-contaminated wound categories, and the results were nonsignificant between both groups for each type of wound category (P > 0.05). CONCLUSION: Cefazolin alone is a sufficient antibiotic prophylaxis for benign gynecological procedures. Wolters Kluwer - Medknow 2021-10-05 /pmc/articles/PMC9020251/ /pubmed/35465275 http://dx.doi.org/10.4103/tcmj.tcmj_176_21 Text en Copyright: © 2021 Tzu Chi Medical Journal https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/4.0/This is an open access journal, and articles are distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 License, which allows others to remix, tweak, and build upon the work non-commercially, as long as appropriate credit is given and the new creations are licensed under the identical terms.
spellingShingle Original Article
Garg, Shivani
Chopra, Seema
Gainder, Shalini
Bagga, Rashmi
Shafiq, Nusrat
Aggarwal, Neelam
A randomized controlled trial to compare antibiotic prophylaxis in elective gynecological surgeries: Single dose of cefazolin versus single dose of cefazolin and tinidazole
title A randomized controlled trial to compare antibiotic prophylaxis in elective gynecological surgeries: Single dose of cefazolin versus single dose of cefazolin and tinidazole
title_full A randomized controlled trial to compare antibiotic prophylaxis in elective gynecological surgeries: Single dose of cefazolin versus single dose of cefazolin and tinidazole
title_fullStr A randomized controlled trial to compare antibiotic prophylaxis in elective gynecological surgeries: Single dose of cefazolin versus single dose of cefazolin and tinidazole
title_full_unstemmed A randomized controlled trial to compare antibiotic prophylaxis in elective gynecological surgeries: Single dose of cefazolin versus single dose of cefazolin and tinidazole
title_short A randomized controlled trial to compare antibiotic prophylaxis in elective gynecological surgeries: Single dose of cefazolin versus single dose of cefazolin and tinidazole
title_sort randomized controlled trial to compare antibiotic prophylaxis in elective gynecological surgeries: single dose of cefazolin versus single dose of cefazolin and tinidazole
topic Original Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9020251/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35465275
http://dx.doi.org/10.4103/tcmj.tcmj_176_21
work_keys_str_mv AT gargshivani arandomizedcontrolledtrialtocompareantibioticprophylaxisinelectivegynecologicalsurgeriessingledoseofcefazolinversussingledoseofcefazolinandtinidazole
AT chopraseema arandomizedcontrolledtrialtocompareantibioticprophylaxisinelectivegynecologicalsurgeriessingledoseofcefazolinversussingledoseofcefazolinandtinidazole
AT gaindershalini arandomizedcontrolledtrialtocompareantibioticprophylaxisinelectivegynecologicalsurgeriessingledoseofcefazolinversussingledoseofcefazolinandtinidazole
AT baggarashmi arandomizedcontrolledtrialtocompareantibioticprophylaxisinelectivegynecologicalsurgeriessingledoseofcefazolinversussingledoseofcefazolinandtinidazole
AT shafiqnusrat arandomizedcontrolledtrialtocompareantibioticprophylaxisinelectivegynecologicalsurgeriessingledoseofcefazolinversussingledoseofcefazolinandtinidazole
AT aggarwalneelam arandomizedcontrolledtrialtocompareantibioticprophylaxisinelectivegynecologicalsurgeriessingledoseofcefazolinversussingledoseofcefazolinandtinidazole
AT gargshivani randomizedcontrolledtrialtocompareantibioticprophylaxisinelectivegynecologicalsurgeriessingledoseofcefazolinversussingledoseofcefazolinandtinidazole
AT chopraseema randomizedcontrolledtrialtocompareantibioticprophylaxisinelectivegynecologicalsurgeriessingledoseofcefazolinversussingledoseofcefazolinandtinidazole
AT gaindershalini randomizedcontrolledtrialtocompareantibioticprophylaxisinelectivegynecologicalsurgeriessingledoseofcefazolinversussingledoseofcefazolinandtinidazole
AT baggarashmi randomizedcontrolledtrialtocompareantibioticprophylaxisinelectivegynecologicalsurgeriessingledoseofcefazolinversussingledoseofcefazolinandtinidazole
AT shafiqnusrat randomizedcontrolledtrialtocompareantibioticprophylaxisinelectivegynecologicalsurgeriessingledoseofcefazolinversussingledoseofcefazolinandtinidazole
AT aggarwalneelam randomizedcontrolledtrialtocompareantibioticprophylaxisinelectivegynecologicalsurgeriessingledoseofcefazolinversussingledoseofcefazolinandtinidazole