Suppr超能文献

拉各斯大学教学医院系统性抗生素预防在烧伤创面感染控制中的作用评估

An evaluation of the role of systemic antibiotic prophylaxis in the control of burn wound infection at the Lagos University Teaching Hospital.

作者信息

Ugburo A O, Atoyebi O A, Oyeneyin J O, Sowemimo G O A

机构信息

Department of Surgery, Lagos University Teaching Hospital, P.M.B. 12003, Lagos, Nigeria.

出版信息

Burns. 2004 Feb;30(1):43-8. doi: 10.1016/j.burns.2003.09.016.

Abstract

A prospective study was carried out on 61 patients to evaluate the role of systemic antibiotic prophylaxis in the control of burn wound infection. The patients were randomised into three groups: group 1 (n=21) received ampicillin and cloxacillin; group 2 (n=20) received erythromycin and genticin and a control group (n=20) received no systemic chemo prophylaxis. The burn wounds were similarly managed. Wound colonisation was determined from surface wound swab cultures and wound infection was determined from wound biopsy cultures and histopathology. The colonisation time (days) for the groups was 2.90+/-0.92, 3.15+/-0.77 and 3.05+/-0.83 for groups 1 and 2 and the control, respectively. The commonest organism isolated from contaminated wounds was Staphylococcus aureus. Wound infection was established in 5.70+/-1.70, 5.75+/-1.62 and 5.6+/-1.90 days for group 1, group 2 and the control group, respectively. There was no significant difference between wound infection time of control and group 1 nor was there such difference between the control and group 2 (P>0.05). The commonest organism infecting burn wounds in all the groups was Pseudomonas aeruginosa followed by S. aureus. There was however a significant difference between the treatment groups and the control (P<0.05) with regard to the percentage of infected wounds that grew P. aeruginosa, compared to those that grew S. aureus. It was concluded that systemic antibiotic prophylaxis is of no value in controlling burn wound sepsis, and might even favour the growth of P. aeruginosa in the burn wounds.

摘要

对61例患者进行了一项前瞻性研究,以评估全身应用抗生素预防在控制烧伤创面感染中的作用。患者被随机分为三组:第一组(n = 21)接受氨苄西林和氯唑西林;第二组(n = 20)接受红霉素和庆大霉素,对照组(n = 20)不进行全身化疗预防。烧伤创面采用相似的处理方法。通过创面表面拭子培养确定创面定植情况,通过创面活检培养和组织病理学确定创面感染情况。第一组、第二组和对照组的定植时间(天)分别为2.90±0.92、3.15±0.77和3.05±0.83。从污染创面分离出的最常见微生物是金黄色葡萄球菌。第一组、第二组和对照组的创面感染分别在5.70±1.70天、5.75±1.62天和5.6±1.90天确定。对照组与第一组的创面感染时间无显著差异,对照组与第二组之间也无显著差异(P>0.05)。所有组中感染烧伤创面的最常见微生物是铜绿假单胞菌,其次是金黄色葡萄球菌。然而,在感染创面中,铜绿假单胞菌生长的百分比与金黄色葡萄球菌生长的百分比相比,治疗组与对照组之间存在显著差异(P<0.05)。得出的结论是,全身应用抗生素预防在控制烧伤创面脓毒症方面没有价值,甚至可能有利于铜绿假单胞菌在烧伤创面的生长。

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验