Cargando…

Carbapenems versus Cephalosporin or Piperacillin-Tazobactam as Perioperative Antibiotic Prophylaxis in Liver Transplant Recipients with Model for End-Stage Liver Disease Scores of ≥30: A Retrospective Study in a Chinese Population

OBJECTIVE: Perioperative prophylaxis, commonly with a third-generation cephalosporin plus ampicillin or piperacillin-tazobactam, is usually employed to prevent infections in liver transplantation (LT) recipients. Patients with a high Model for End-Stage Liver Disease (MELD) score have an increased i...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Zhang, Wei, Chen, Ying, Zhang, Yuntao, Wang, Rongrong, Wang, Weili, Bai, Xueli, Liang, Tingbo
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Dove 2022
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9380821/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35983301
http://dx.doi.org/10.2147/IDR.S373773
Descripción
Sumario:OBJECTIVE: Perioperative prophylaxis, commonly with a third-generation cephalosporin plus ampicillin or piperacillin-tazobactam, is usually employed to prevent infections in liver transplantation (LT) recipients. Patients with a high Model for End-Stage Liver Disease (MELD) score have an increased infection risk after LT. However, whether carbapenems could be used as surgical prophylaxis in these high-risk patients remains unclear. Therefore, this study aimed at comparing the effectiveness of carbapenems with that of cephalosporin or piperacillin-tazobactam for surgical prophylaxis in high-risk LT recipients with a MELD score ≥30. DESIGN OR METHODS: This retrospective study included adult patients with a MELD score ≥30 who underwent LT between May 2018 and September 2020. We comparatively analyzed the infection rate and outcome between patients using cefoperazone-sulbactam or piperacillin-tazobactam and those using carbapenems as surgical prophylaxis. RESULTS: This study included 105 LT recipients. Seventy-eight and 27 patients used non-carbapenem and carbapenem antibiotics, respectively, as surgical prophylaxis. The corresponding infection incidence rates within 30 days were 38.5% and 66.7% (p = 0.011). Multivariate analysis revealed that reoperation and the Child–Pugh score were independent risk factors for infections within 30 days after LT. The following four risk factors were associated with the 180-day post-LT survival: MELD score, vascular complication, intra-abdominal bleeding, and infection with carbapenem-resistant organisms (CROs). There was no significant difference in CRO infection incidence between the carbapenem and non-carbapenem groups (18.5% vs 11.5%; p = 0.345). CONCLUSION: Carbapenem use as surgical prophylaxis was not associated with infection incidence within 30 days after LT, 180-day post-LT survival or CRO infection. Therefore, carbapenems are not superior to cephalosporin or piperacillin-tazobactam for perioperative antibiotic prophylaxis in LT recipients with a MELD score ≥30.