Multiple-dose Antibiotic Prophylaxis Research Articles

Single-Dose Antibiotic Prophylaxis with Ertapenem Increases Compliance with Recommendations for Surgical Antibiotic Prophylaxis in Elective Colorectal Surgery: A Retrospective, Single-Center Analysis.

Background: Compliance with guideline recommendations for surgical antibiotic prophylaxis (SAP) in colorectal surgery, particularly redosing, has been suboptimal at many institutions including ours. This study aimed to evaluate if single-dose antibiotic prophylaxis with ertapenem improves compliance with guideline recommendations for SAP versus multiple-dose antibiotic prophylaxis in elective colorectal surgery. Methods: A retrospective, cohort study of the use of ertapenem compared with standard of care antibiotic agents was performed in adult patients undergoing elective colorectal surgery at an academic medical center between January 2020 and February 2022. The primary outcome was compliance with guideline-recommended SAP for colorectal surgery. The secondary outcome was surgical site infections (SSIs) within 30 days after surgery. Results: A total of 135 patients were included in this study. Fifty-eight patients received single-dose antibiotic prophylaxis with ertapenem and 77 patients received multiple-dose antibiotic prophylaxis. Cefazolin plus metronidazole was the most common multiple-dose regimen (65 of 77). Single-dose antibiotic prophylaxis with ertapenem increased overall SAP compliance (96.6% vs. 64.9%; p < 0.001) as well as compliance with antibiotic administration within the recommended time period before incision (96.6% vs. 84.4%; p = 0.022), compliance with intra-operative antibiotic redosing when warranted (100% vs. 83.1%; p < 0.001), and compliance with guideline-recommended dosing (100% vs. 92.2%; p = 0.037). Surgical site infection rates were not statistically different between the groups (12.1% vs. 19.4%; p = 0.248). Conclusions: Single-dose antibiotic prophylaxis with ertapenem increased compliance with guideline-recommended SAP for elective colorectal surgeries. No statistically significant difference was observed in SSI rates regardless of the antibiotic regimen used.

Effectiveness of Single vs Multiple Doses of Prophylactic Intravenous Antibiotics in Implant-Based Breast Reconstruction

Multiple-dose antibiotic prophylaxis is widely used to prevent infection after implant-based breast reconstruction despite the lack of high-level evidence regarding its clinical benefit. To determine whether multiple-dose antibiotic prophylaxis is superior to single-dose antibiotic prophylaxis in preventing surgical site infection (SSI) after implant-based breast reconstruction. This prospective, multicenter, randomized clinical superiority trial was conducted at 7 hospitals (8 departments) in Sweden from April 25, 2013, to October 31, 2018. Eligible participants were women aged 18 years or older who were planned to undergo immediate or delayed implant-based breast reconstruction. Follow-up time was 12 months. Data analysis was performed from May to October 2021. Multiple-dose intravenous antibiotic prophylaxis extending over 24 hours following surgery, compared with single-dose intravenous antibiotic. The first-choice drug was cloxacillin (2 g per dose). Clindamycin was used (600 mg per dose) for patients with penicillin allergy. The primary outcome was SSI leading to surgical removal of the implant within 6 months after surgery. Secondary outcomes were the rate of SSIs necessitating readmission and administration of intravenous antibiotics, and clinically suspected SSIs not necessitating readmission but oral antibiotics. A total of 711 women were assessed for eligibility, and 698 were randomized (345 to single-dose and 353 to multiple-dose antibiotics). The median (range) age was 47 (19-78) years for those in the multiple-dose group and 46 (25-76) years for those in the single-dose group. The median (range) body mass index was 23 (18-38) for the single-dose group and 23 (17-37) for the multiple-dose group. Within 6 months of follow-up, 30 patients (4.3%) had their implant removed because of SSI. Readmission for intravenous antibiotics because of SSI occurred in 47 patients (7.0%), and 190 women (27.7%) received oral antibiotics because of clinically suspected SSI. There was no significant difference between the randomization groups for the primary outcome implant removal (odds ratio [OR], 1.26; 95% CI, 0.69-2.65; P = .53), or for the secondary outcomes readmission for intravenous antibiotics (OR, 1.18; 95% CI, 0.65-2.15; P = .58) and prescription of oral antibiotics (OR, 0.72; 95% CI, 0.51-1.02; P = .07). Adverse events associated with antibiotic treatment were more common in the multiple-dose group than in the single-dose group (16.4% [58 patients] vs 10.7% [37 patients]; OR, 1.64; 95% CI, 1.05-2.55; P = .03). The findings of this randomized clinical trial suggest that multiple-dose antibiotic prophylaxis is not superior to a single-dose regimen in preventing SSI and implant removal after implant-based breast reconstruction but comes with a higher risk of adverse events associated with antibiotic treatment. EudraCT 2012-004878-26.

Antimicrobial Prophylaxis Reduces the Rate of Surgical Site Infection in Upper Gastrointestinal Surgery: A Systematic Review.

Surgical site infection occurs with high frequency in gastrointestinal surgery, contributing to the high incidence of morbidity and mortality. The accepted practice worldwide for the prevention of surgical site infection is providing single- or multiple-dose antimicrobial prophylaxis. However, most suitable antibiotic and optimal duration of prophylaxis are still debated. The aim of the systematic review is to assess the efficacy of antimicrobial prophylaxis in controlling surgical site infection rate following esophagogastric surgery. PubMed and Cochrane databases were systematically searched until 31 October 2021, for randomized controlled trials comparing different antimicrobial regimens in prevention surgical site infections. Risk of bias of studies was assessed with standard methods. Overall, eight studies concerning gastric surgery and one study about esophageal surgery met inclusion criteria. No significant differences were detected between single- and multiple-dose antibiotic prophylaxis. Most trials assessed the performance of cephalosporins or inhibitor of bacterial beta-lactamase. Antimicrobial prophylaxis (AMP) is effective in reducing the incidence of surgical site infection. Multiple-dose antimicrobial prophylaxis is not recommended for patients undergoing gastric surgery. Further randomized controlled trials are needed to determine the efficacy and safety of antimicrobial prophylaxis in esophageal cancer patients.

Single-dose versus multiple-dose antibiotics prophylaxis for preventing caesarean section postpartum infections: A randomized controlled trial.

Background:Caesarean section, a common obstetric surgical procedure, is a major predisposing factor for puerperal infections, requiring the need for antibiotic prophylaxis. Evidence suggests that single-dose antibiotic prophylaxis has comparable efficacy to multiple-dose antibiotic prophylaxis, but with a lower cost and risk of antibiotic resistance. However, single-dose antibiotic prophylaxis after caesarean section is not generally used in many centres in sub-Saharan Africa.Objective:This study aimed to compare the effectiveness of single- versus multiple-dose antibiotic prophylaxis to prevent post-caesarean section infections.Methodology:This open-label, randomized controlled trial involved 162 consenting patients admitted for caesarean section (elective or emergency) at the Federal Medical Centre Keffi. They were distributed randomly into treatment arm A or B. Subjects in both arms received intravenous ceftriaxone (1 g) and metronidazole (500 mg) 30–60 min before incision; subjects in arm B received additional parenteral doses for 48 h and then cefuroxime 500 mg tablets every 12 h and metronidazole 400 mg tablets every 8 h for 5 days. The patients were monitored for 2 weeks for evidence of wound infection, febrile morbidity and clinical endometritis.Result:There was no statistical difference in the incidence of wound infection (6.6% versus 7.4%; p = .882) and febrile morbidity (11.8% versus 11.1%, p = .807). However, clinical endometritis (0.0% versus 6.1%, p = .028) was statistically significant with none reported in the single-dose arm.Conclusion:Single-dose ceftriaxone and metronidazole is as effective as multiple doses for antibiotic prophylaxis to prevent post-caesarean section infections. Adoption of this approach in low-risk patients would reduce the cost of prophylactic antibiotics, workload for staff and antibiotic resistance.

A Comparative Study of Single Dose and Multiple Dose Antibiotic Prophylaxis In Caesarean Section

Background: Rampant antibiotic use brought about its own set of problems like the rise in incidence of antibiotic resistant strains, allergies and other complications of antibiotic use. Unfortunately in many of our set ups we are still stuck in prolonged post-operative antibiotic regimes. This study aims to fill that lacunae and thereby aid our gradual shift away from over reliance on prolonged antibiotic usage in prevention of SSI. Hence we decided to investigate the efficacy of the use of a single prophylactic intravenous dose of antibiotic vis a vis multiple doses in reducing post-operative infective morbidity in caesarean sections. Methods: The study included 200 patients at term, satisfying the inclusion and exclusion criteria, reporting to the labour room and undergoing caesarean section. The patients were then divided into two groups of 100 each by simple randomization. Patients in Group A were given a single dose of Inj. Cefotaxime 1gm IV + Inj. Metronidazole 500 mg IV infusion 30 minutes before the skin incision. Group B cases were given the first dose of Inj. cefotaxime 1g IV + Inj. metronidazole 500 mg IV 30 minutes before the skin incision followed by injectables for 2 days: Inj. cefotaxime 1g IV BD and Inj. metronidazole 500mg IV TDS. Subsequently for the next 3 days Tablet Cefixime 200mg BD and Tablet Metronidazole 400mg TDS were administered orally. Results: The present study did not show any significant difference in the post operative infection incidence between the single dose and multiple dose schedule. Conclusion: our study makes an important observation regarding use of antibiotic prophylaxis and its duration for prevention of post operative infections in mothers without compromising any safety aspects of either the mother or the child. As noted in our study, there was no difference in the outcome as regards post operative infectious morbidity in patients of both the groups. Hence, based on the findings of our study we conclude that single dose prophylactic antibiotic should be the norm for caesarean sections.

Single vs. extended antibiotic for prevention of surgical infection in emergent cesarean delivery

Objective: Emergency Cesarean Section (ECS) improves maternal and neonatal outcomes but can be associated with complications including Surgical Site Infections (SSI). Prophylactic antibiotics reduce SSIs but inappropriate use increases antibiotic resistance. The study aim was to assess single versus multiple-dose antibiotic prophylaxis for SSI prevention in a limited-resource setting. Methods: All patients undergoing ECS in a rural district hospital were assessed for eligibility from 2015 to 2016. Participants were randomized, Group A received one dose of 2 g Ampicillin 15 to 60 minutes before skin incision and Group B received 2 g prior to skin incision with additional 1g every 8 hours over 72 hours. Participants were followed for 30 days, Demographic and clinical data were collected by chart review and patient phone interviews were performed on Days 3, 7, 15 and 30. Results: Three hundred and one participants were analyzed (147 in Group A; 154 in Group B). There were 8 surgical site infections in Group A and 4 in Group B (p=0.089). The overall prevalence of surgical site infections was lower than expected (4.00%). Most of SSIs cases were diagnosed on day 7 (66.6% of all cases of SSI) and only 22.2% of cases were diagnosed at discharge (day 3). Only 1 additional case was diagnosed at day 15. Conclusion: Compliance to infection control measures can reduce the rate of SSIs. There was no significant difference between the use of a single vs multiple doses of prophylactic antibiotics in our study but the SSI rate was low.

Similar risk of complete revision for infection with single-dose versus multiple-dose antibiotic prophylaxis in primary arthroplasty of the hip and knee: results of an observational cohort study in the Dutch Arthroplasty Register in 242,179 patients

Background and purpose — The optimal type and duration of antibiotic prophylaxis for primary arthroplasty of the hip and knee are subject to debate. We compared the risk of complete revision (obtained by a 1- or 2-stage procedure) for periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) after primary total hip or knee arthroplasty between patients receiving a single dose of prophylactic antibiotics and patients receiving multiple doses of antibiotics for prevention of PJI. Patients and methods — A cohort of 130,712 primary total hip and 111,467 knee arthroplasties performed between 2011 and 2015 in the Netherlands was analyzed. We linked data from the Dutch arthroplasty register to a survey collected across all Dutch institutions on hospital-level antibiotic prophylaxis policy. We used restricted cubic spline Poisson models adjusted for hospital clustering to compare the risk of revision for infection according to type and duration of antibiotic prophylaxis received. Results — For total hip arthroplasties, the rates of revision for infection were 31/10,000 person-years (95% CI 28–35), 39 (25–59), and 23 (15–34) in the groups that received multiple doses of cefazolin, multiple doses of cefuroxime, and a single dose of cefazolin, respectively. The rates for knee arthroplasties were 27/10,000 person-years (95% CI 24–31), 40 (24–62), and 24 (16–36). Similar risk of complete revision for infection among antibiotic prophylaxis regimens was found when adjusting for confounders. Interpretation — In a large observational cohort we found no apparent association between the type or duration of antibiotic prophylaxis and the risk of complete revision for infection. This does question whether there is any advantage to the use of prolonged antibiotic prophylaxis beyond a single dose.

Current practice of antibiotic prophylaxis for surgical fixation of closed long bone fractures: a survey of 297 members of the Orthopaedic Trauma Association

BackgroundThe risk of postoperative surgical site infection after long bone fracture fixation can be decreased with appropriate antibiotic use. However, there is no agreement on the superiority of a single- or multiple-dose perioperative regimen of antibiotic prophylaxis. The purpose of this study is to determine the following: 1) What are the current practice patterns of orthopaedic trauma surgeons in using perioperative antibiotics for closed long bone fractures? 2) What is the current knowledge of published antibiotic prophylaxis guidelines among orthopaedic trauma surgeons? 3) Are orthopaedic surgeons willing to change their current practices?MethodsA questionnaire was distributed via email between September and December 2015 to 955 Orthopaedic Trauma Association members, of whom 297 (31%) responded.ResultsMost surgeons (96%) use cefazolin as first-line infection prophylaxis. Fifty-nine percent used a multiple-dose antibiotic regimen, 39% used a single-dose regimen, and 2% varied this decision according to patient factors. Thirty-six percent said they were unfamiliar with Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) antibiotic prophylaxis guidelines; only 30% were able to select the correct CDC recommendation from a multiple-choice list. However, 44% of surgeons said they followed CDC recommendations. Fifty-six percent answered that a single-dose antibiotic prophylaxis regimen was not inferior to a multiple-dose regimen. If a level-I study comparing a single preoperative dose versus multiple perioperative antibiotic dosing regimen for treatment of closed long bone fractures were published, most respondents (64%) said they would fully follow these guidelines, and 22% said they would partially change their practice to follow these guidelines.ConclusionThere is heterogeneity in the use of single- versus multiple-dose antibiotic prophylaxis for surgical repair of closed long bone fractures. Many surgeons were unsure of current evidence-based recommendations regarding perioperative antibiotic use. Most respondents indicated they would be receptive to high-level evidence regarding the single- versus multiple-dose perioperative prophylactic antibiotics for the treatment of closed long bone fractures.

Single dose versus multiple dose of antibiotic prophylaxis in caesarean section: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Prophylactic antibiotics are traditionally given as a single dose for caesarean section. However, inconsistent application of recommendations and recent evidence prompted a literature review. To assess the optimal regimen for antibiotic prophylaxis in caesarean section by comparing single versus multiple doses of the same intervention. MEDLINE, Web of Knowledge, SCOPUS, CENTRAL and ongoing trials databases were searched. Reference lists were reviewed and international groups contacted. Randomised controlled trials (RCT) comparing single with multiple dose regimens of the same antibiotic prophylaxis. Quasi-RCT and abstracts were suitable for inclusion. Reviewers independently extracted data and assessed quality of evidence. A random-effects model was used and results presented as risk ratio (RR) with 95% confidence intervals (CI). Sixteen studies were included, involving 2695 women. Nonsignificant differences were observed between single dose and multiple dose antibiotic prophylaxis in the incidence of postpartum infectious morbidity (RR 0.95, 95% CI 0.75-1.20, I2 = 25%), endometritis (RR 1.03, 95% CI 0.74-1.42, I2 = 0%) and wound infection (RR 1.22, 95% CI 0.72-2.08, I2 = 0%). A trend towards lower risk of urinary tract infection was seen with multiple dose (RR 0.65, 95% CI 0.34-1.24, I2 = 0%). There was insufficient evidence to determine whether there is a difference between single and multiple dose regimens in reducing the incidence of infectious morbidity after caesarean section. The quality of evidence was very low and well-designed RCTs are needed. Insufficient evidence of difference between dosage regimens of antibiotic prophylaxis in caesarean section.

Evaluation of the efficiency of antibiotic prophylaxis in cesarean cases

Background: In recent years the rate of cesarean section has significantly increased.To determine the efficacy of prophylactic antibiotics in reducing infectious morbidity after cesarean section. Objectives: In our study, we aimed to evaluate the efficiency of prophylactic antibiotic administration by comparing three groups using single, multiple and no prophylactic antibiotic therapy. Materials and Methods: Our study is a prospective, randomized controlled study including emergent cases, that developed cesarean indication while in active labor, and elective cesarean cases. A total of 90 patients were included in the study, including 30 patients who underwent cesarean delivery and did not undergo an antibiotic prophylaxis (Group 1), 30 patients who underwent a single dose antibiotic prophylaxis (Group II) and 30 patients who underwent multiple dose antibiotic prophylaxis (Group III). Results: The incidence of wound infection was significantly higher in cases that were not using antibiotics at postoperative days 3, 5 and 7 compared to the cases using single and multiple antibiotics. There was not a significant difference between groups in terms of endometritis. Conclusion: Administration of prophylactic antibiotics prevent wound infection but does not prevent development of endometritis.

Single versus multiple doses of antibiotic prophylaxis in limb fracture surgery

There is no consensus with regard to optimum prophylactic antibiotic regimen in orthopaedic fracture surgery. A systematic review and meta-analysis were performed to determine if multiple-dose perioperative antibiotic prophylaxis is more effective than a single preoperative dose in the prevention of surgical wound infection in patients undergoing operative treatment of low-energy closed fractures. Medline, Medline in Process and other non-indexed citations, Embase, Cochrane database of systematic reviews and conference proceedings were searched. Studies were included if they were randomized or quasi-randomized trials comparing the results of a single antibiotic prophylaxis versus multiple doses of the same antibiotic in patients undergoing surgical fixation of closed fractures. Four studies were found to meet the searching criteria. The mean score for quality assessment of these studies was 16 (8-24 points). Only two out of four studies had detailed analysable data and therefore were included in the final analysis. 921 patients were pooled using a random-effects model. Compared to multiple-dose prophylaxis, administration of a single preoperative dose demonstrated no significant difference regarding the overall surgical site infection rate (risk ratio (RR) = 0.3, 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.07-1.25). Multiple-dose antibiotic prophylaxis is marginally more effective than single dose in reducing the incidence of deep surgical wound infection (risk ratio: 0.13, 95% CI: 0.02 to 0.99). There is lack of definite evidence that multiple-dose antibiotic prophylaxis is superior to single preoperative dose in low-energy closed fracture surgery.

Single-dose versus multiple-dose antibiotic prophylaxis for the surgical treatment of closed fractures

Background and purpose Recent meta-analyses have suggested similar wound infection rates when using single- or multiple-dose antibiotic prophylaxis in the operative management of closed long bone fractures. In order to assist clinicians in choosing the optimal prophylaxis strategy, we performed a cost-effectiveness analysis comparing single- and multiple-dose prophylaxis.Methods A cost-effectiveness analysis comparing the two prophylactic strategies was performed using time horizons of 60 days and 1 year. Infection probabilities, costs, and quality-adjusted life days (QALD) for each strategy were estimated from the literature. All costs were reported in 2007 US dollars. A base case analysis was performed for the surgical treatment of a closed ankle fracture. Sensitivity analysis was performed for all variables, including probabilistic sensitivity analysis using Monte Carlo simulation.Results Single-dose prophylaxis results in lower cost and a similar amount of quality-adjusted life days gained. The single-dose strategy had an average cost of $2,576 for an average gain of 272 QALD. Multiple doses had an average cost of $2,596 for 272 QALD gained. These results are sensitive to the incidence of surgical site infection and deep wound infection for the single-dose treatment arm. Probabilistic sensitivity analysis using all model variables also demonstrated preference for the single-dose strategy.Interpretation Assuming similar infection rates between the prophylactic groups, our results suggest that single-dose prophylaxis is slightly more cost-effective than multiple-dose regimens for the treatment of closed fractures. Extensive sensitivity analysis demonstrates these results to be stable using published meta-analysis infection rates.

Comparative study of single-dose and 24-hour multiple-dose antibiotic prophylaxis for cardiac surgery

Use of single-dose antibiotic prophylaxis is associated with reduced antibiotic resistance, lower costs, and fewer problems with drug toxicity and superinfections. We tested the hypothesis that single doses of cefazolin are as effective as a 24-hour regimen of cefazolin in preventing surgical site infections in adults undergoing cardiac procedures. This random, prospective, clinical study included 838 adult patients undergoing elective coronary artery bypass grafting, valve operations, or both. These patients were randomly given a single dose of cefazolin (2 g) or a 24-hour treatment (2-g initial dose, followed by 1 g every 8 hours). Investigators blinded to the drug regimen diagnosed wound infections according to Centers for Disease Control and Prevention criteria. Patient clinical and demographic characteristics were noted, with follow-up for 12 postoperative months. The primary objective was to compare the incidence of surgical infections between groups up to 12 months postoperatively. A total of 419 patients received single-dose cefazolin, and another 419 received the 24-hour treatment. Surgical site infection occurred in 35 (8.3%) patients receiving single doses and 15 (3.6%) patients administered the 24-hour treatment (P = .004). We identified no differences between groups for mortality or duration of hospitalization (preoperative hospitalization, intensive care unit stay, and hospitalization after surgical intervention). The microorganisms isolated showed a similar distribution in both groups. The germs isolated were gram-positive cocci in 86% of the surgical site infections. Single-dose cefazolin used as antibiotic prophylaxis in cardiac surgery is associated with a higher surgical site infection rate than the 24-hour, multiple-dose cefazolin regimen.

Single- Versus Multiple-Dose Antibiotic Prophylaxis in the Surgical Treatment of Closed Fractures: A Meta-Analysis

The use of prophylactic antibiotics in the surgical treatment of closed long bone fractures is well established. The duration and dosage of prophylaxis, however, vary significantly among surgeons. A systematic review and meta-analysis were performed to determine if multiple-dose perioperative antibiotic prophylaxis is more effective than a single preoperative dose in the prevention of surgical wound infections during the treatment of closed long bone fractures. Articles were identified by searching the following medical databases: Medline, Medline In Process & Other Non-indexed Citations, Embase, CENTRAL, and the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews. Relevant conference proceedings and the reference section of selected manuscripts were also searched for additional studies. Studies were included if they were prospective randomized controlled trials of patients with closed fractures treated with surgical fixation or arthroplasty. The interventions must have directly compared a single preoperative prophylactic dose to a multiple-dose perioperative strategy. Studies were excluded if they involved open fractures. The demographic information, prophylaxis strategy, wound infection rate, and risk ratio were extracted from each article. Seven trials and 3,808 patients were pooled using a random effects model. When compared to a regimen of multiple doses of prophylactic antibiotics, administration of a single preoperative dose has a risk ratio of 1.24 (95% CI 0.60-2.60). The pooled risk difference between the 2 strategies is 0.005 (95% CI -0.011-0.021). Neither result is significant. In the setting of closed long bone fractures, the pooled results failed to demonstrate superiority of multiple-dose prophylaxis over a single-dose strategy. The pooled estimates suggest that surgical wound infections are relatively rare events and that any potential difference in infection rates between prophylaxis strategies is likely quite small. However, because the confidence interval surrounding the pooled risk ratio spans 1.0 by such a large amount, we are unable to definitively recommend a preferred dosing regimen to prevent surgical wound infections. Although future research is required to ensure our prophylaxis decisions continue to be evidence based and cost-effective, it is unlikely that a single clinical trial will be able to provide the answer. The use of other quantitative methods, such as cost-effectiveness analysis, may be helpful in modeling an optimal prophylaxis strategy.

A Prospective, Randomised Comparison of Single- vs. Multiple-Dose Antibiotic Prophylaxis in Penetrating Trauma

This study was designed to compare the clinical efficacy of a single dose of ceftriaxone with cefoxitin given 3 times a day for 3 days. Methods: Patients had to have a penetrating injury to only one part of the body, reach the hospital within 2 h and be operated on within 16 h after the trauma. Patients were excluded if it appeared likely that they would require mechanical ventilation for more than 24 h. The same applies to open or grade II/III craniocerebral trauma. The end point was the occurrence of infections within 10 days. The costs of antibiotic treatment were also calculated. Results: 96% of the ceftriaxone patients (n = 97) and 95% of the cefoxitin group (n = 98) remained infection-free. In neither treatment group was deep infection, abscess, phlegmon or sepsis seen. No additional surgery or intensive care due to infection was required. At $41.83 vs. $172.16, the average total cost of delivering antibiotic treatment was significantly lower in the ceftriaxone group (p < 0.001). Conclusion: Prophylaxis in penetrating trauma with a single dose of ceftriaxone is safe and has considerable practical and economic advantages.