Kaiser A B, Petracek M R, Lea J W, Kernodle D S, Roach A C, Alford W C, Burrus G R, Glassford D M, Thomas C S, Stoney W S
Department of Medicine, Saint Thomas Hospital, Nashville, TN 37202.
Ann Surg. 1987 Dec;206(6):791-7. doi: 10.1097/00000658-198712000-00018.
In an effort to develop an improved regimen of antibiotic prophylaxis in cardiac surgery, 1030 patients who were to have elective cardiothoracic surgery involving a median sternotomy were selected at random to receive cefamandole or cefazolin, with or without gentamicin, in a prospective double-blind study. Cefazolin was significantly less effective than cefamandole at both the sternal (1.8% vs. 0.4%, respectively, p less than 0.05) and donor sites (1.3% vs. 0%, respectively, p less than 0.02). Seven Staphylococcus aureus infections occurred among cefazolin recipients as compared with no such infections among the patients receiving cefamandole (p less than 0.01). All five wound infections yielding fungi or gentamicin-resistant gram-negative rods occurred in patients who had received gentamicin as a second prophylactic agent. These data suggest that gentamicin has no role as a prophylactic antibiotic in cardiac surgery and that, compared with cefamandole, cefazolin offers unreliable prophylaxis against deep infection at both the sternal and donor sites.
为了制定一种改进的心脏手术抗生素预防方案,在一项前瞻性双盲研究中,随机选择了1030例计划接受涉及正中胸骨切开术的择期心胸外科手术的患者,给予头孢孟多或头孢唑林,加或不加庆大霉素。在胸骨部位(分别为1.8%对0.4%,p<0.05)和供体部位(分别为1.3%对0%,p<0.02),头孢唑林的效果明显不如头孢孟多。头孢唑林接受者中发生了7例金黄色葡萄球菌感染,而接受头孢孟多的患者中未发生此类感染(p<0.01)。所有5例产生真菌或耐庆大霉素革兰氏阴性杆菌的伤口感染均发生在接受庆大霉素作为第二种预防药物的患者中。这些数据表明,庆大霉素在心脏手术中不作为预防性抗生素,并且与头孢孟多相比,头孢唑林对胸骨和供体部位的深部感染预防效果不可靠。