Luke M, Iversen J, Søndergaard J, Kvist E, Lund P, Andersen F, Naver L, Larsen P N, Clausen B, Prag J
Department of Surgery, Sundby Hospital, Copenhagen, Denmark.
Eur J Surg. 1991 Jan;157(1):45-9.
In a prospective, controlled, double-blind study, 496 patients undergoing abdominal surgery were given antibiotic prophylaxis with a single dose of either ceftriaxone or ampicillin + metronidazole. No significant intergroup difference was found between the respective overall rates of infectious complications (3.2% and 4.9%). Analysis of the microbiologic findings showed incisional wound infections, mainly caused by gram-negative rods, to be more common in the ampicillin-metronidazole group, whereas deep wound infections were more frequent in the ceftriaxone group. It is concluded that ceftriaxone seems to be more efficient than ampicillin-metronidazole as prophylaxis against incisional wound infection, but should preferably be supplemented with an antianaerobic agent to prevent deep wound infections.
在一项前瞻性、对照、双盲研究中,496例接受腹部手术的患者接受了单剂量头孢曲松或氨苄西林+甲硝唑的抗生素预防治疗。在各自的感染并发症总发生率(分别为3.2%和4.9%)之间未发现显著的组间差异。微生物学检查结果分析显示,氨苄西林-甲硝唑组切口感染更为常见,主要由革兰氏阴性杆菌引起,而头孢曲松组深部伤口感染更为频繁。得出的结论是,作为预防切口感染的药物,头孢曲松似乎比氨苄西林-甲硝唑更有效,但最好补充一种抗厌氧菌药物以预防深部伤口感染。