Wall R, Klenerman L, McCullough C, Fyfe I
Department of Microbiology, Northwick Park Hospital, Harrow, Middlesex, UK.
J Antimicrob Chemother. 1988 Jan;21 Suppl A:141-6. doi: 10.1093/jac/21.suppl_a.141.
The relative merits of different antibiotic regimens for prophylaxis in orthopaedic implant surgery are difficult to evaluate because of the low frequency of infection. Factors other than infection prevention may influence choice. We have compared 400 mg teicoplanin given intravenously on induction of anaesthesia with three perioperative injections of cefuroxime, in 146 patients undergoing total hip or total knee replacement. These interim results suggest that cefuroxime selects for increased extraintestinal carriage of faecal streptococci and teicoplanin for Proteus species. There were no significant differences between the regimen in the acquisition of coagulase-negative staphylococci or Clostridium difficile, post-operative diarrhoea, wound healing or wound infection. Both regimens were equally safe.
由于骨科植入手术感染发生率较低,很难评估不同抗生素预防方案的相对优点。除了预防感染外,其他因素可能会影响选择。我们对146例行全髋关节或全膝关节置换术的患者进行了研究,比较了麻醉诱导时静脉注射400mg替考拉宁与围手术期三次注射头孢呋辛的效果。这些中期结果表明,头孢呋辛会使粪链球菌的肠道外携带增加,而替考拉宁会使变形杆菌属增加。在获得凝固酶阴性葡萄球菌或艰难梭菌、术后腹泻、伤口愈合或伤口感染方面,两种方案之间没有显著差异。两种方案同样安全。