Stone H H, Haney B B, Kolb L D, Geheber C E, Hooper C A
Ann Surg. 1979 Jun;189(6):691-9. doi: 10.1097/00000658-197906000-00004.
Previous studies have demonstrated that administered antibiotics must be active against major anticipated pathogens and must have reached sufficient concentrations in the tissue or body fluid at risk by the time of bacterial challenge if prophylactic therapy is to be maximally effective in reducing the infection rate of potentially contaminated surgery. The need for continuing antibiotic prophylaxis beyond the day of operation, however, has been uncertain. In a prospective, randomized, double-blind study of 220 patients undergoing elective gastric, biliary or colonic surgery, perioperative administration of cefamandole plus five days of placebo was compared to perioperative plus five days of postoperative antibiotic therapy; no significant difference was found between the groups in the rate of infection of wound (6 and 5%, respectively), peritoneum (2% each) and elsewhere (6% and 5%). In another prospective, randomized, nonblind study of 451 determinant cases of 1,624 patients undergoing emergency laparotomy, cephalothin was instituted preoperatively but after peritoneal contamination had occurred (i.e., abdominal trauma, etc.); continued postoperative antibiotic again failed to reduce further the wound and peritoneal infection rates, as noted on comparing perioperative therapy alone (infection rates 8 and 4%, respectively) with perioperative plus 5-7 days of postoperative treatment (10% and 5%, respectively). Analysis of these data, as well as of the extra expenses incurred by 463 patients because of infection in a previous prophylactic antibiotic study, revealed an average additional expenditure of $2,686.00 for each instance of postoperative infection of the wound and/or peritoneum; whereas savings of $300.00 per patient at risk were obtained whenever appropriate prophylactic antibiotic had been given.
先前的研究表明,如果预防性治疗要在最大程度上有效降低潜在污染手术的感染率,所使用的抗生素必须对主要预期病原体具有活性,并且在细菌感染发生时,必须在有感染风险的组织或体液中达到足够的浓度。然而,术后继续使用抗生素进行预防的必要性尚不确定。在一项对220例接受择期胃、胆道或结肠手术患者的前瞻性、随机、双盲研究中,比较了头孢孟多围手术期给药加5天安慰剂与围手术期加术后5天抗生素治疗的效果;两组在伤口感染率(分别为6%和5%)、腹膜感染率(均为2%)和其他部位感染率(分别为6%和5%)方面没有显著差异。在另一项对1624例接受急诊剖腹手术患者中的451例决定性病例进行的前瞻性、随机、非盲研究中,术前在腹膜污染发生后(即腹部创伤等情况)开始使用头孢噻吩;继续术后抗生素治疗同样未能进一步降低伤口和腹膜感染率,将单纯围手术期治疗(感染率分别为8%和4%)与围手术期加术后5 - 7天治疗(分别为10%和5%)进行比较时可以看出。对这些数据以及先前一项预防性抗生素研究中463例患者因感染产生的额外费用进行分析发现,伤口和/或腹膜术后每发生一例感染,平均额外支出2686.00美元;而每当给予适当的预防性抗生素时,每位有感染风险的患者可节省300.00美元。