SEARCH · PubMed Health

Results for “Antibiotic Prophylaxis”

Explore indexed PubMed citations for clinical trials, systematic reviews and public health research. Read source abstracts and follow each citation to its original PubMed record.

Quote a phrase for an exact phrase match. Source license links do not imply unrestricted reuse.

At least 145 records · Page 8Linked to original sources

PubMed2002

A survey of vaccine coverage and antibiotic prophylaxis in splenectomised patients in Scotland.

AIMS: To determine the coverage of vaccine and antibiotic prophylaxis in splenectomised patients in Scotland. METHODS: Patients who had undergone splenectomy between 1 January 1988 and 31 December 1998 were identified. A questionnaire was sent to general practitioners to validate vaccine and antibiotic status for these patients. RESULTS: A total of 974 living splenectomised patients were identified during the study period. Information on vaccine and antibiotic status was available for 708 (73%) and 770 (79%) of living patients, respectively. Coverage of pneumococcal vaccine (88%) was higher than that of Haemophilus influenza type b (Hib) conjugate vaccine (70%) or meningococcal vaccine (51%). Only 47% of patients received all three vaccines. A higher coverage was also documented for pneumococcal vaccine (28%) than Hib (19%) and meningococcal vaccine (14%) before elective splenectomy. Only 13% received all three vaccines before splenectomy. Coverage of influenza vaccine increased significantly, from 76% in the 1997/1998 season to 96% in the 2000/2001 season. Antibiotic prophylaxis was received by 67% of all patients. The current recommendation, comprising pneumococcal and Hib vaccination and antibiotic prophylaxis, was received by only 52% of the patients. There was no association between the coverage of vaccine and socioeconomic status. CONCLUSION: Further improvement in coverage of recommended vaccines and antibiotic prophylaxis is still needed to reduce the risk of serious infection in this high risk group.

Adult↗

PubMed1990

Antibiotic prophylaxis: the who, when, where, why, and with what!

In our daily routines in the endoscopy suite antibiotic prophylaxis is often discussed, debated and provided to our patients. Review of the literature provides little data on the safety and efficacy of antibiotic prophylaxis and on the patient population who should receive this form of therapy. The purpose of this review is to try to put into perspective the rationale and potential protocols for provision of antibiotic prophylaxis in our patients.

Anti-Bacterial Agents↗

PubMedDate not supplied

[Antibiotic prophylaxis in surgery for colorectal cancer].

The prophylactic use of antibiotics in the purpose of decreasing the frequency and severity of surgical infections is still controversial. The practical need of defining the concept of antibiotic prophylaxis gave rise to numerous polemics in the literature. This paper presents a retrospective study on 103 cases whom diagnostics were colon and rectum cancer, that were operated in the IV-th Surgical Clinic in 1993-2002 period; at these patients was done antibiotic prophylaxis local and systemic before, during and after operating. This method made possible the registration of a minimum number of cases with surgical infection (7 cases, representing only 7% of the operated patients): a case (1%) with peritoneal collection (needing the surgical evacuation of this collection) and in 6 cases, parietal superficial infections, which imposed the prolong of drainage for almost 7 days. Starting from the basic principles of antibiotic therapy, this paper aims at outlining practical guidelines for a judicious antibiotic prophylaxis.

Anti-Bacterial Agents↗

PubMed2006

Antibiotic prophylaxis in surgery: an observational prospective study conducted in a large teaching hospital in Naples.

This was a 9-month observational prospective study conducted in two steps to evaluate surgical prophylaxis procedures used by surgeons in several departments of the Second University of Naples (SUN). In step 1 (4 months), we collected and analyzed data on surgical interventions and antibiotic prophylaxis. Surgeons were informed of the analysis outcome and were given an antibiotic prophylaxis protocol based on international guidelines. In step 2 (5 months), we collected data on surgical interventions and antibiotic prophylaxis, and compared them with step 1 data. The analysis of 354 forms (step 1) showed that third-generation cephalosporins were the preferred prophylactic antibiotics. The analysis of 369 forms (step 2) showed that ceftriaxone and ampicillin were the most frequently used antibiotics. Surgeons did not comply with guidelines for antibiotic prophylaxis as regards type of antibiotic and treatment duration but implementation of antibiotic prophylaxis protocols resulted in more appropriate and better timing of antibiotic prophylaxis.

Anti-Bacterial Agents↗

PubMed2000

[Evidence-based recommendations for perioperative antibiotic prophylaxis].

The aim of perioperative antibiotic prophylaxis (PAP) is to reduce postoperative complications. In 1994 specialist American companies developed a PAP quality standard, whereby individual recommendations were divided into categories according to the degree of evidence. These recommendations have been tabulated and supplemented with the results of new, randomized, controlled studies.

Antibiotic Prophylaxis↗

PubMed1996

Efficacy of antibiotic prophylaxis for prevention of Lyme disease.

OBJECTIVE: To determine if antibiotic prophylaxis following a dear tick bite is effective in reducing the risk of developing Lyme disease. DESIGN: Meta-analysis of published trials. DATA IDENTIFICATION: Clinical trials were identified by a computerised literature search of MEDLINE and by an assessment of the bibliographies of published studies. STUDY SELECTION: Trials were included in the analysis if their patients were randomly allocated to a treatment or control group, enrolled within 72 hours following an Ixodes tick bite, and had no clinical evidence of Lyme disease at enrollment. Three trials were selected for review after inclusion criteria were applied. DATA EXTRACTION: Data were extracted for details of study design, patient characteristics, interventions, duration of therapy, and number of adverse events in each arm of therapy. RESULTS OF DATA SYNTHESIS: Among the 600 patients with Ixodes tick bites, the rate of infection in the placebo group was 1.4%. In contrast, patients who received antibiotic prophylaxis had a 0% infection rate. The pooled odds ratio, comparing prophylaxis to placebo, was 0.0 (95% confidence interval 0.0, 1.5) (p = .12). CONCLUSIONS: The available evidence to date suggests that the routine use of antibiotic prophylaxis for the prevention of Lyme disease remains uncertain. Meta-analysis of the controlled trials failed to establish definitive treatment efficacy owing to the small sample size of the combined trials and the low rates of infection following a deer tick bite. A larger randomized trial is needed to demonstrate definitively that prophylaxis is more effective than placebo in reducing the risk of early Lyme disease in endemic areas.

Amoxicillin↗

PubMed2006

Short-course postexposure antibiotic prophylaxis combined with vaccination protects against experimental inhalational anthrax.

Prevention of inhalational anthrax after Bacillus anthracis spore exposure requires a prolonged course of antibiotic prophylaxis. In response to the 2001 anthrax attack in the United States, approximately 10,000 people were offered 60 days of antibiotic prophylaxis to prevent inhalational anthrax, but adherence to this regimen was poor. We sought to determine whether a short course of antibiotic prophylaxis after exposure could protect non-human primates from a high-dose spore challenge if vaccination was combined with antibiotics. Two groups of 10 rhesus macaques were exposed to approximately 1,600 LD50 of spores by aerosol. Both groups were given ciprofloxacin by orogastric tube twice daily for 14 days, beginning 1-2 h after exposure. One group also received three doses of the licensed human anthrax vaccine (anthrax vaccine adsorbed) after exposure. In the ciprofloxacin-only group, four of nine monkeys (44%) survived the challenge. In contrast, all 10 monkeys that received 14 days of antibiotic plus anthrax vaccine adsorbed survived (P = 0.011). Thus postexposure vaccination enhanced the protection afforded by 14 days of antibiotic prophylaxis alone and completely protected animals against inhalational anthrax. These data provide evidence that postexposure vaccination can shorten the duration of antibiotic prophylaxis required to protect against inhalational anthrax and may impact public health management of a bioterrorism event.

Administration, Inhalation↗

PubMed1994

Antibiotic prophylaxis in permanent pacemaker implantation: a prospective randomised trial.

BACKGROUND: Pacemaker pocket infection is a potentially serious problem after permanent pacemaker implantation. Antibiotic prophylaxis is commonly prescribed to reduce the incidence of this complication, but current trial evidence of its efficacy is conflicting. A large prospective randomised trial was therefore performed of antibiotic prophylaxis in permanent pacemaker implantation. The intention was firstly to determine whether antibiotic prophylaxis is efficacious in these patients and secondly to identify which patients are at the highest risk of infection. METHODS: A prospective randomised open trial of flucloxacillin (clindamycin if the patient was allergic to penicillin) v no antibiotic was performed in a cohort of patients undergoing first implantation of a permanent pacing system over a 17 month period. Intravenous antibiotics were started at the time of implantation and continued for 48 hours. The trial endpoint was a repeat operation for an infective complication. RESULTS: 473 patients were entered into a randomised trial. 224 received antibiotic prophylaxis and 249 received no antibiotics. A further 183 patients were not randomised but were treated according to the operator's preference (64 antibiotics, 119 no antibiotics); these patients are included only in the analysis of predictors of infection. Patients were followed up for a mean (SD) of 19(5) months. Among the patients in the randomised group there were nine infections requiring a repeat operation, all in the group not receiving antibiotic (P = 0.003). In the total patient cohort there were 13 infections, all but one in the non-antibiotic group (P = 0.006). Nine of the infections presented as erosion of the pulse generator or electrode, three as septicaemia secondary to Staphylococcus aureus, and one as a pocket abscess secondary to Staphylococcus epidermidis. Infections were significantly more common when the operator was inexperienced (< or = 100 previous patients), the operation was prolonged, or after a repeat operation for non-infective complications (principally lead displacement). Infection was not significantly more common in patients identified preoperatively as being at high risk (for example patients with diabetes mellitus, patients receiving long term steroid treatment), although there was a trend in this direction. CONCLUSIONS: Antibiotic prophylaxis significantly reduced the incidence of infective complications requiring a repeat operation after permanent pacemaker implantation. It is suggested that antibiotics should be used routinely.

Aged↗

PubMed2006

[A study of non-antibiotic versus antibiotic prophylaxis for recurrent urinary-tract infections in women (the NAPRUTI study)].

Patient enrolment in the 'Non-antibiotic versus antibiotic prophylaxis for recurrent urinary-tract infections' (NAPRUTI) study was started in September 2005. In this study of women with recurrent urinary-tract infections we aim to investigate the effect of 12 months of non-antibiotic prophylaxis in comparison with antibiotic prophylaxis on the rate of recurrence of urinary-tract infections and the development of antibiotic resistance. The study consists of two interlinked, randomised, clinical non-inferiority trials. In one trial, 280 premenopausal women will receive either cranberry capsules (twice daily 500 mg) or standardised antibiotic therapy (once daily 480 mg trimethoprim-sulfamethoxazole). In the other trial, 280 postmenopausal women will receive either oral lactobacilli (twice daily a capsule with > 10(9) colony-forming units of Lactobacillus rhamnosus GR-1 and Lactobacillus reuteri RC-14) or standardised antibiotic therapy. Non-inferiority of non-antibiotic prophylaxis would be attractive given its potential to reduce the prevalence of microbial resistance to antibiotics significantly.

Anti-Infective Agents↗

PubMedDate not supplied

Short-term (48 hours) versus long-term (7 days) antibiotic prophylaxis for permanent pacemaker implantation.

BACKGROUND: Infection following permanent pacemaker implantation is a dreaded complication. Antibiotic prophylaxis for 1-10 days at the time of implant has been used in the past but there is no consensus regarding its duration. We carried out a prospective, randomized study of two durations of antibiotic prophylaxis to determine which one was more effective. METHODS AND RESULTS: One hundred and seventy-eight patients undergoing permanent pacemaker implantation for the first time were randomized to receive short duration (group A, n = 8 8) or longer duration (group B, n = 90) antibiotic prophylaxis for 2 days and 7 days, respectively. Patients in both groups received cloxacillin 2 g 2 hours prior to the procedure followed by ampicillin and cloxacillin (50 mg/kg/day in 4 divided doses) and gentamicin (3 mg/kg/day in 2 divided doses) for the respective duration. Patients were followed up for 1-17.3 months (9.3 +/- 1.8 months) in group A and 1-16.5 months (8.9 +/- 2 months) in group B. One patient in group B had an infection at the pacemaker site and two patients in each group had to undergo reimplantation due to pus in the pocket. There was no significant difference in the primary end-point in both groups. CONCLUSIONS: A short course (48 hours) of antibiotic prophylaxis following permanent pacemaker implantation is as effective as a longer course (7 days).

Anti-Bacterial Agents↗

PubMed2005

Clinical evaluation of antibiotic prophylaxis before endodontic treatment of necrotic teeth.

AIM: The efficacy of antibiotic prophylaxis before endodontic treatment of necrotic teeth in the prevention of post-treatment flare-up pain and swelling was evaluated. METHODS: A total of 47 teeth with diagnosis of pulpal necrosis were selected in 39 patients, independently from the pre-operative symptomatology (painful or asymptomatic). Teeth were randomly divided into 2 groups. The first group (n=23) was given an antibiotic prophylaxis with 2 g amoxicillin 1 h before every appointment; the second group (n=24) did not receive any treatment (control group). The endodontic therapy was performed by shaping canals using the crown-down technique with hand devices, 5% sodium hypochlorite irrigations and 2 intermediate medications with Ca(OH)(2). Obturation was performed using randomly the vertical obturation technique or the no-stop wave technique. At the end of each appointment a questionnaire was given to each patient. The patient had to indicate if pain (absent, light, mild, severe) or swelling were present at 4, 8, 12, 24 h after every appointment. Data were statistically analysed with the Mann-Whitney, Wilcoxon and chi2 test. RESULTS: Only a case of flare-up pain and swelling was found in a patient of the study group. The statistical analysis showed that there were no significant differences between the 2 groups. CONCLUSIONS: An accurate endodontic treatment of necrotic canals is sufficient to guarantee an adequate control of post-treatment pain, with no need of antibiotic prophylaxis.

Adult↗

PubMed2001

[Antibiotic prophylaxis and surgery. Prescription compliance in Franche-Comté with the national reference system].

AIM OF THE STUDY: To evaluate the practice of antibiotic prophylaxis for surgery in the Franche-Comté region of France. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A total of 36 surgical teams (72 pairs surgeons/anaesthesists) participated in data collection. Five variables describing practices concerning antibiotic prophylaxis for surgery were compared to national recommendations: did the surgical procedure require antibiotic prophylaxis and was it carried out? Was the antibiotic used appropriately? Was the timing of the first injection optimal? Was the total duration of the treatment correct? Was the dose correct? RESULTS: Among the 687 operations for which data were collected, 513 (74.7%) that corresponded to class 1 or 2 Altemeier operations for which the Société Française d'Anesthésie et Réanimation (SFAR) had drawn up recommendations were analysed in order to answer these questions. The overall frequency of conformity with the regulations was 40% for these 513 operations. Of the 156 patients who did not receive the recommended antibiotic, 133 (85.5%) received an antibiotic with an activity range wider than that of the recommended antibiotic. The duration of prophylaxis was longer than recommended in 80 (87.9%) out of the 91 patients for whom the duration of antibiotic prophylaxis did not respect the recommendations. CONCLUSIONS: This prospective surveillance showed that less than 50% of patients received an antibiotic prophylaxis that was conformed to the regulations. To ensure the efficiency of prophylaxis and to prevent deleterious effects, such as the emergence of antibiotic-resistant bacteria, the recommendations must be regularly respected. Frequent audits of practices should be carried out by the teams responsible for fighting nosocomial infections.

Adult↗

PubMed2006

Antibiotic prophylaxis in Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery.

Antibiotic prophylaxis in oral and maxillofacial surgery aims the prevention of the infection of the surgical wound, either due to the characteristics of the surgery or the general state of the patient. This risk increases with the contamination of the surgical operation area, making it necessary to imply a prophylactic treatment of the infection in clean-contaminated and contaminated surgeries and treatment of the infection in dirty surgeries. Moreover, a proper surgical technique helps to reduce the development of the postsurgical infection. The elective antibiotic chemotherapy ranges from penicillin-derivates with betalactamase inhibitors (amoxycillin-clavulanate, ampicilin-sulbactam) to second or third generation cephalosporins, quinolones or clindamycin. The indication for the use of these antibiotics depends on the type of surgery in oral and maxillofacial surgery, according to the degree of contamination. Thus in oral surgery and surgery of the salivary glands the literature demonstrates that there is not a better prognosis when using prophylactic antibiotherapy instead of not using it in healthy patients. In traumatology this prophylaxis is justified in compound fractures and those communicating with paranasal sinuses. En orthognatic surgery there is disagreement according to the criteria of using antibiotic prophylaxis, but short term treatment is preferred in case of using it. In oncological surgery it has been demonstrated the reduce in incidence of postsurgical infection using prophylactic peroperative antibiotherapy, mostly in those cases in which oral mucosa and cervical area contact.

Antibiotic Prophylaxis↗

PubMed2006

Issues of antimicrobial resistance in group B streptococcus in the era of intrapartum antibiotic prophylaxis.

The implementation of a culture screening-based approach to intrapartum antibiotic prophylaxis has been associated with substantial reduction in the incidence of early-onset group B streptococcal disease. Antibiotic prophylaxis is recognized as an interim strategy awaiting the licensure of a safe and effective conjugate vaccine for prevention of group B streptococcal infections in all susceptible populations. This article addresses concerns relating to antimicrobial resistance among group B streptococci that have arisen from use of intrapartum antibiotic prophylaxis and from increases in resistance in other gram-positive bacteria related genetically to group B streptococci.

Antibiotic Prophylaxis↗

PubMed2004

Short-term versus long-term antibiotic prophylaxis in cochlear implant surgery.

OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study to evaluate antibiotic prophylaxis options for cochlear implant surgery. Does long-term antibiotic prophylaxis have any advantage over a single perioperative dose in preventing postoperative infection? STUDY DESIGN: We conducted a retrospective case review. PATIENTS: A total of 292 adult and pediatric patients who underwent cochlear implantation during a 15-year period (1988-2003) were reviewed. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE: Minor and major postoperative wound infections in first 4 weeks. RESULTS: There were four major and eight minor complication among 292 patients (complication rate 4.1%). The infection rate was higher in patients who had either C incision (11.1%) or extended endaural incision (7.5%) and in patients with a preexisting medical condition. The infection rate was also higher in patients who had long-term antibiotics (5.6% and 13% in the 5-d and 7-d regimes) compared with short-term (single-dose) group. CONCLUSION: Long-term antibiotic prophylaxis did not have any advantage over single perioperative dose. Predisposing medical conditions and extensive surgical incisions were associated with a greater severity of infections and higher risk of wound complications.

Adolescent↗

PubMedDate not supplied

[Antibiotic prophylaxis in orthopedics with special reference to spinal operations].

We report about our experience was the perioperative prophylaxis with antibiotics. We use a prophylaxis only in operations of the spinal column. In our opinion the prevention with antibiotics in other orthopaedic operations is not necessary. As an example we show our hip arthroplasties with a rate of infection under 0,5 percent.

Anti-Bacterial Agents↗

PubMed2003

Antibiotic prophylaxis of bacterial infections in cirrhotic inpatients: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.

BACKGROUND: Antibiotic prophylaxis has been reported to decrease bacterial infections and fatality rates in inpatients with cirrhosis. We performed a systematic review to evaluate the efficacy of antibiotic prophylaxis in inpatients with cirrhosis, regardless of the underlying risk factors that led to hospital admission. METHODS: A comprehensive literature search strategy was performed including the Cochrane Library, Embase, Medline, a manual search of bibliographic references, and contacting the authors of each included trial. We included any randomized clinical trial comparing different types of antibiotic prophylaxis with placebo or no intervention in inpatients with cirrhosis. Two reviewers independently applied the selection criteria to all identified references, appraised the methodological quality of each trial and extracted the relevant data. Relative risks and 95% confidence intervals were estimated using the fixed effect model. A test of heterogeneity and a funnel plot were performed and an intention-to-treat approach was used for the outcome measures. RESULTS: Nineteen randomized trials were identified, 13 of which were included in the review. A significant beneficial effect on mortality (RR: 0.70; 95% CI: 0.56, 0.89) and prevention of bacterial infections (RR: 0.39; 95% CI: 0.32, 0.48) was observed, regardless of the underlying risk factors. Few adverse events were reported and there was no heterogeneity between studies. We identified a funnel plot asymmetry for the included trials. CONCLUSIONS: Antibiotic prophylaxis for inpatients with cirrhosis is efficacious in reducing the number of deaths and bacterial infections regardless of the underlying risk factors.

Antibiotic Prophylaxis↗

PubMed1987

[Bacteriological, clinical, and pharmacokinetic studies of perioperative antibiotic prophylaxis in head and neck surgery].

The point of this study was to analyze the possible benefits of perioperative antibiotic prophylaxis in patients from whom oral cavity or throat tumors are removed. The criteria used to judge the efficacy of each treatment included the clinical course of the treatment, the bacterial colonization of the surgical area as well as the growth of bacteria during the postoperative phase. 50 patients were chosen and grouped according to their surgical treatment: laryngectomy (n = 20), partial laryngectomy (n = 22) or tongue, floor of the mouth, soft palate, gum or base of the tongue partial resection (n = 8). Within each surgical group, patients were randomly chosen for antibiotic prophylaxis; others constituted the untreated control group. The antibiotic prophylaxis consisted of 5 g Mezlocillin administered at the time of narcosis for 20 min followed by 0.5 g Metronidazol for 10 min. These medications were given in 8-hour intervals for three days following surgery. Investigation of the first 20 patients (prophylaxis group n = 7, control group n = 13) revealed that the combination of Mezlocillin and Metronidazol positively influenced post-operative recovery (no complications) while the patients without prophylactic antibiotic treatment suffered general or local complication leading to, in 10 cases, the necessity of postoperative therapy. On the basis of these results, the random grouping of the patients was ended and all 30 remaining patients were given the antibiotic prophylaxis. Regardless of antibiotic treatment, the great majority of microbes isolated from throat swabs and tracheal secretions were gram-negative, aerobic bacteria. A prerequisite for efficacious prophylaxis is that the antibiotics be applied before the operation, so that a sufficient concentration is present at the time of pharyngotomy. On the basis of pharmacokinetic investigations, administration of the antibiotic 30 min preoperatively fulfills this requirement. Further, our recommendation, based on our measurement of the spectrum of bacteria present and their growth is that the antibiotics be applied over a period of three days postoperatively. This recommendation is also based on the fact that some patients (those having undergone partial laryngectomy or tongue, floor of the mouth, base of the tongue partial resections) have suffered loss of the swallowing reflex so that there exists a continuous contamination of the surgical area with pathogens or facultative pathogens coming from the nasal or oral cavities.

Adult↗