Zubairu Usman Danjuma, Abdul Mohammed A, Bawa Umma Suleiman, Madugu Nana Hauwa
Family Planning and General Gynaecology Unit, Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Faculty of Clinical Sciences, College of Medical Sciences, Ahmadu Bello University, Zaria, Kaduna State, Nigeria.
J West Afr Coll Surg. 2023 Apr-Jun;13(2):100-104. doi: 10.4103/jwas.jwas_279_22. Epub 2023 Mar 20.
Single dose antibiotic prophylaxis has been established as the standard for prevention of post-caesarean wound infection in most developed centers across the world. However, this is not the case in most developing countries including Nigeria where various multiple dose regimens are still being used due to paucity of locally generated evidence, and anecdotal suggestions of a higher risk of infectious morbidity in our environment.
This study was aimed to determine whether there was a significant difference in the incidence of post-caesarean section wound infection between a single dose and a 72-hour course of intravenous ceftriazone for antibiotic prophylaxis in selected patients undergoing both elective and emergency caesarean section.
A randomized controlled trial was carried out among 170 consenting parturients scheduled for elective or emergency caesarean section who met a set out selection criteria, between January and June 2016. They were divided randomly into two equal groups, A and B, of 85 each using the Windows WINPEPI software version 11.65 (Copyright J.H. Abrahamson, 22 Aug 2016) for randomization. Group A patients received a single dose of 1 g, whereas Group B patients were given a 72-hour course (1 g daily) of intravenous ceftriazone. The primary outcome measure was the incidence of clinical wound infection. The secondary outcome measures were the incidences of clinical endometritis and febrile morbidity. Data were collected using a structured proforma and analyzed using Statistical Package for Social Sciences version 21.
The overall incidence of wound infection was 11.2%; Group A had 11.8%, and Group B had 10.6%. Endometritis was 20.6%; Group A had 20% and Group B had 21.2%. Febrile morbidity was 4.1%; Group A had 3.5% and Group B had 4.7%. There was no statistically significant difference in the incidence of wound infection (relative risk [RR] = 1.113; 95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.433, 2.927; = 0.808), endometritis (RR = 0.943; 95% CI = 0.442, 1.953; = 0.850), and febrile morbidity (RR = 0.745, 95% CI = 0.161, 3.415; = 0.700) between the two groups. Group A showed similar risk of developing wound infection compared to Group B ( > 0.05).
There was no significant difference in post-caesarean wound infection and other infectious morbidity between patients that received a single dose, and those that received a 72-hour course of ceftriazone for antibiotic prophylaxis. This suggests that single dose antibiotic prophylaxis with ceftriazone is similar to multiple dose regimens in efficacy with likely cost-effective advantage.
在全球大多数发达地区,单剂量抗生素预防已成为预防剖宫产术后伤口感染的标准做法。然而,在包括尼日利亚在内的大多数发展中国家并非如此,由于缺乏本地生成的证据,以及有传闻称在我们的环境中感染性发病风险更高,各种多剂量方案仍在使用。
本研究旨在确定在接受择期和急诊剖宫产的选定患者中,单剂量与72小时静脉注射头孢曲松抗生素预防方案在剖宫产术后伤口感染发生率上是否存在显著差异。
2016年1月至6月,在170名符合既定入选标准、同意参与的择期或急诊剖宫产产妇中进行了一项随机对照试验。使用Windows WINPEPI软件版本11.65(版权所有J.H.亚伯拉罕森,2016年8月22日)将她们随机分为两组,A组和B组,每组85人。A组患者接受1克单剂量注射,而B组患者接受72小时疗程(每日1克)的静脉注射头孢曲松。主要结局指标是临床伤口感染的发生率。次要结局指标是临床子宫内膜炎和发热性疾病的发生率。使用结构化表格收集数据,并使用社会科学统计软件包第21版进行分析。
伤口感染的总体发生率为11.2%;A组为11.8%,B组为10.6%。子宫内膜炎发生率为20.6%;A组为20%,B组为21.2%。发热性疾病发生率为4.1%;A组为3.5%,B组为4.7%。两组在伤口感染发生率(相对风险[RR]=1.113;95%置信区间[CI]=0.433,2.927;P=0.808)、子宫内膜炎发生率(RR=0.943;95%CI=0.442,1.953;P=0.850)和发热性疾病发生率(RR=0.745,95%CI=0.161,3.415;P=0.700)方面无统计学显著差异。与B组相比,A组发生伤口感染的风险相似(P>0.05)。
接受单剂量头孢曲松抗生素预防的患者与接受72小时疗程头孢曲松抗生素预防的患者在剖宫产术后伤口感染和其他感染性发病方面无显著差异。这表明单剂量头孢曲松抗生素预防在疗效上与多剂量方案相似,且可能具有成本效益优势。