Taoka Rikiya, Matsuoka Takashi, Kita Yuki, Makino Yuki, Iha Kei, Soda Takeshi, Inoue Koji, Takenawa Jun, Terai Akito
The Department of Urology, Kurashiki Central Hospital, Japan.
Hinyokika Kiyo. 2010 Oct;56(10):559-63.
An adequate protocol for antimicrobial prophylaxis (AMP) in radical prostatectomy (RP) has not been established. We retrospectively compared the occurrence of perioperative infection following RP between two different AMP protocols. This study included 340 cases with prostate cancer who underwent RP at our institution between January 2005 and December 2008. The 1-day group consisting of 93 cases received a second generation cephem, cefotiam, intravenously during and after the operation on the operative day. The single dose group consisting of 247 cases received cefotiam during the operation only. The incidence of surgical site infection (SSI) and remote infection (RI) was retrospectively investigated. There was no significant difference in the rate of SSI and RI occurrence between the 1-day group (2.2, 0%) and single dose group (3.6, 0.4%) (p = 0.52). The single dose protocol of AMP seems sufficient for prevention of perioperative infection in RP.
根治性前列腺切除术（RP）中尚未建立充分的抗菌预防（AMP）方案。我们回顾性比较了两种不同AMP方案下RP术后围手术期感染的发生情况。本研究纳入了2005年1月至2008年12月在我院接受RP的340例前列腺癌患者。93例组成的1天组在手术日手术期间及术后静脉注射第二代头孢菌素头孢替安。247例组成的单剂量组仅在手术期间接受头孢替安。回顾性调查手术部位感染（SSI）和远处感染（RI）的发生率。1天组（2.2%，0%）和单剂量组（3.6%，0.4%）之间的SSI和RI发生率无显著差异（p = 0.52）。AMP的单剂量方案似乎足以预防RP中的围手术期感染。
