Use Of Antibiotic Prophylaxis Research Articles

New evidence calls into question NICE's endocarditis prevention guidance

In 2008, National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) guidelines recommended against the use of antibiotic prophylaxis (AP) before invasive dental procedures (IDPs) to prevent infective endocarditis (IE). They did so because of lack of AP efficacy evidence and adverse reaction concerns. Consequently, NICE concluded AP was not cost-effective and should not be recommended. In 2015, NICE reviewed its guidance and continued to recommend against AP. However, it subsequently changed its wording to ‘antibiotic prophylaxis against infective endocarditis is not routinely recommended'. The lack of explanation of what constituted routinely (and not routinely), or how to manage non-routine patients, caused enormous confusion and NICE remained out of step with all major international guideline committees who continued to recommend AP for those at high risk.Since the 2015 guideline review, new data have confirmed an association between IDPs and subsequent IE and demonstrated AP efficacy in reducing IE risk following IDPs in high-risk patients. New evidence also shows that in high-risk patients, the IE risk following IDPs substantially exceeds any adverse reaction risk, and that AP is therefore highly cost-effective. Given the new evidence, a NICE guideline review would seem appropriate so that UK high-risk patients can receive the same protection afforded high-risk patients in the rest of the world.

Laparoscopic cholecystectomy in calculous cholecystitis: are antibiotics necessary?

Laparoscopic cholecystectomy in patients with cholecystitis is considered the best, appropriate and safe method of treatment for gallstone disease. However, the role of antibiotic administration before or after cholecystectomy to reduce infectious complications, particularly surgical site infections, or mortality is less clear. Many patients receive empiric antibiotics, but the feasibility of their use has not been proven. Some guidelines suggest the use of antibiotic prophylaxis for all cholecystectomies, although current evidence does not indicate any benefit to this practice in the absence of risk factors. This review examines the results of antibiotic use in laparoscopic cholecystectomy for chronic and acute calculous cholecystitis. Most studies argue against the need to use prophylactic antibiotics during elective surgery in low-risk patients. In cases of mild and moderate acute cholecystitis, the use of antibiotics to prevent postoperative infectious complications has no evidence of effectiveness, although these recommendations are also ambiguous. It is not recommended to use postoperative antibiotics after elective laparoscopic cholecystectomy, as well as for mild or moderate acute cholecystitis. However, additional studies with well-defined patient populations and comparable outcomes are needed to better assess the most appropriate timing and duration of antibiotic use in patients undergoing laparoscopic cholecystectomy. We used MedLine database on the PubMed platform and the Cochrane library to search for literature sources.

The use of triple antibiotic prophylaxis during total knee replacement surgeries in Awka, Nigeria

Introduction: Total knee arthroplasty periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) poses a significant challenge in orthopaedic surgery, often resulting in early failure and associated with high morbidity and mortality rates. Various treatment strategies exist, including debridement, antibiotic therapy, and prosthesis retention, with preventive measures such as antibiotic-impregnated cement and prophylactic antibiotics administration recommended by the American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons (AAOS). Methodology: This prospective cohort study was conducted in an orthopaedic hospital in Awka, Southeast Nigeria, spanning seven years (2014-2021). A total of 134 patients who underwent primary and revision knee arthroplasty were included. The hospital's antibiotic prophylaxis protocol for implant surgeries, including arthroplasties, involved a triple combination of ceftriaxone, ciprofloxacin, and metronidazole administered pre-, intra-, and postoperatively for a minimum of 7 days. Results: The study population had a mean age of 63.6 years, predominantly female (77.7%), and of Christian faith (100%). Most participants were of Igbo ethnicity (99.3%), married (90.7%), and engaged in business (37.7%). Severe osteoarthritis was the primary diagnosis in 97.0% of cases, while rheumatoid arthritis accounted for 3.0%. The triple antibiotic prophylaxis regimen resulted in only one case of superficial infection, with no instances of deep infection recorded. Conclusion: Triple antibiotics prophylaxis, comprising ceftriaxone, ciprofloxacin, and metronidazole, demonstrated effectiveness in preventing infections associated with total knee arthroplasty. This regimen maintained surgical site infection prevalence within acceptable limits for clean surgeries, without observable antibiotic resistance in the study population.

E018 Prophylactic co-trimoxazole prescribing practice in patients who received rituximab therapy: comparison across indications and specialties

Abstract Background/Aims Rituximab is a chimeric anti-CD20 monoclonal antibody targeting B-cells used as part of treatment algorithms for malignancy and autoimmune diseases. As is the case of other immunosuppressive agents, rituximab increases the risk of infections. Primary prophylaxis with co-trimoxazole may be considered in high-risk cohort of patients to prevent opportunistic infection, particuarly Pneumocystis jerovecii pneumonia (PJP). To investigate the prescribing practice for prophylactic co-trimoxazole in patients who received rituximab infusion in a large tertiary referral centre. To compare practices between rheumatology and nephrology department. To compare the incidence of hospitalisation for infection (particularly PJP) between those prescribed prophylactic co-trimoxazole and those who did not. Methods This was a single centre retrospective observational study over a 3 year period assessing prophylactic co-trimoxazole prescribing practice in 185 patients attending rheumatology or renal services in Cork University Hospital (CUH) and receiving rituximab. Co-trimoxazole prophylactic treatment was defined as prophylaxis dose of co-trimoxazole (either 480mg daily or 960mg three times per week) received during rituximab treatment and at least 6 months post completion of treatment. Results 185 patients’ medical charts were reviewed. Only 28 patients received prophylaxis with co-trimoxazole. The majority of patients (n = 24, 85%) who received prophylaxis with co-trimoxazole had an underlying diagnosis of small vessel vasculitis (SVV). Co-trimoxazole was more commonly prescribed by nephrologists (n = 17, 71% primarily for SVV) as compared to rheumatologist (n = 7, 29% primarily for SVV). 156 patients were not prescribed prophylactic co-trimoxazole. The primary indication for rituximab in these patients was inflammatory arthropathy (IA) (n = 72,46%), SVV (n = 26, 16%), systemic lupus erythematosus (n = 19, 12%), with the remainder accounted for by scleroderma, undifferentiated connective tissue disease, membranous nephropathy (MN), myositis, focal segmental glomerulosclerosis and amyloid renal disease. No patient was admitted over the course of the study period with PJP. 59 patients required hospital admissions due to other infections, most commonly patients with SVV. The most common infections were respiratory tract and urinary tract infections. Overall infections requiring hospitalization were more common in the group receiving prophylaxis, perhaps highlighting the vulnerable nature and greater prednisolone prescribing in the SVV cohort. No difference was seen between groups in the prevalence of UTIs. Conclusion In this cohort co-trimoxazole prophylaxis was more commonly prescribed for patient with small vessel vasculitis and differences in prescribing patterns were seen between nephrologists and rheumatologists. With greater awareness of the heightened risk of PJP in patents receiving rituximab consideration should be given to use of antibiotic prophylaxis for other indications. Disclosure S. Tio: None. J. Morrow: None. S. Cowley: None. M. Clarkson: None. G. Murphy: None.

Efficacy of antibiotic prophylaxis to preventing brucellosis in accidental exposure: A systematic review.

Antibiotic prophylaxis to prevent brucellosis after accidental exposure to Brucella is an important topic in public health. This study aimed to systematically review the efficacy of antibiotic prophylaxis following accidental exposure to Brucella in preventing human brucellosis disease. The study protocol was registered in PROSPERO (CRD42023456812). The outcomes included the incidence of brucellosis disease, adverse events rate, and antibiotic prophylaxis adherence. A comprehensive literature search, conducted until 20 November, 2023, involved Medline, Embase, Cochrane Library, and LILACS databases. Descriptive analysis and meta-analysis using R software were performed, risk of bias was assessed using JBI Critical appraisal tools, and certainty of evidence was assessed using the GRADE tool. Among 3102 initially identified records, eight studies involving 97 individuals accidentally exposed, all focused on high-risk accidental exposure to Brucella in laboratory settings, were included in the review. All studies reported the prophylactic treatment comprising doxycycline at a dosage of 100 mg twice daily, combined with rifampicin at 600 mg, both administered over 21 days. Prophylaxis adherence was reported in 86% of cases, and incidence of brucellosis post-treatment was 0.01. Adverse events, mainly gastrointestinal, occurred in 26% of cases. Critical appraisal revealed limitations in reporting demographics and clinical information. The certainty of evidence was rated as 'very low,' emphasising the need for caution in interpreting the observed outcomes due to study design constraints and the absence of comparative groups. PEP is an alternative practice reported in the literature, used in accidents with high-risk exposure to Brucella. The currently available evidence of the efficacy of antibiotic prophylaxis is insufficient to support a recommendation for or against the widespread use of antibiotic prophylaxis, so caution is needed in interpreting results due to the very low certainty of evidence, primarily stemming from case series and lack of comparative groups.

Antibiotic Prophylaxis and Infective Endocarditis Incidence Following Invasive Dental Procedures

The association between antibiotic prophylaxis and infective endocarditis after invasive dental procedures is still unclear. Indications for antibiotic prophylaxis were restricted by guidelines beginning in 2007. To systematically review and analyze existing evidence on the association between antibiotic prophylaxis and infective endocarditis following invasive dental procedures. PubMed, Cochrane-CENTRAL, Scopus, Web of Science, Proquest, Embase, Dentistry and Oral Sciences Source, and ClinicalTrials.gov were systematically searched from inception to May 2023. Studies on the association between antibiotic prophylaxis and infective endocarditis following invasive dental procedures or time-trend analyses of infective endocarditis incidence before and after current antibiotic prophylaxis guidelines were included. Study quality was evaluated using structured tools. Data were extracted by independent observers. A pooled relative risk (RR) of developing infective endocarditis following invasive dental procedures in individuals who were receiving antibiotic prophylaxis vs those who were not was computed by random-effects meta-analysis. The outcome of interest was the incidence of infective endocarditis following invasive dental procedures in relation to antibiotic prophylaxis. Of 11 217 records identified, 30 were included (1 152 345 infective endocarditis cases). Of them, 8 (including 12 substudies) were either case-control/crossover or cohort studies or self-controlled case series, while 22 were time-trend studies; all were of good quality. Eight of the 12 substudies with case-control/crossover, cohort, or self-controlled case series designs performed a formal statistical analysis; 5 supported a protective role of antibiotic prophylaxis, especially among individuals at high risk, while 3 did not. By meta-analysis, antibiotic prophylaxis was associated with a significantly lower risk of infective endocarditis after invasive dental procedures in individuals at high risk (pooled RR, 0.41; 95% CI, 0.29-0.57; P for heterogeneity = .51; I2, 0%). Nineteen of the 22 time-trend studies performed a formal pre-post statistical analysis; 9 found no significant changes in infective endocarditis incidence, 7 demonstrated a significant increase for the overall population or subpopulations (individuals at high and moderate risk, streptococcus-infective endocarditis, and viridans group streptococci-infective endocarditis), whereas 3 found a significant decrease for the overall population and among oral streptococcus-infective endocarditis. While results from time-trend studies were inconsistent, data from case-control/crossover, cohort, and self-controlled case series studies showed that use of antibiotic prophylaxis is associated with reduced risk of infective endocarditis following invasive dental procedures in individuals at high risk, while no association was proven for those at low/unknown risk, thereby supporting current American Heart Association and European Society of Cardiology recommendations. Currently, there is insufficient data to support any benefit of antibiotic prophylaxis in individuals at moderate risk.

Postoperative antibiotic prophylaxis for percutaneous nephrolithotomy and risk of infection: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

The aim of this study is to perform a high-quality meta-analysis using only randomized controlled trials (RCT) to better define the role of postoperative antibiotics in patients undergoing percutaneous nephrolithotomy (PCNL). A literature search for RCTs in EMBASE, PubMed, and Web of Science up to May 2023 was conducted following the PICO framework: Population-adult patients who underwent PCNL; Intervention-postoperative antibiotic prophylaxis until nephrostomy tube withdrawal; Control-single dose of antibiotic during the induction of anesthesia; and Outcome-systemic inflammatory response syndrome (SIRS) or sepsis and fever after PCNL. The protocol was registered on the PROSPERO database (CRD42022361579). We calculated odds ratios (OR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI). A random-effects model was employed, and the alpha risk was defined as < 0.05. Seven articles, encompassing a total of 629 patients, were included in the analysis. The outcome of SIRS or sepsis was extracted from six of the included studies, while the outcome of postoperative fever was extracted from four studies. The analysis revealed no statistical association between the use of postoperative antibiotic prophylaxis until nephrostomy tube withdrawal and the occurrence of SIRS/sepsis (OR 1.236, 95% CI 0.731 - 2.089, p=0.429) or fever (OR 2.049, 95% CI 0.790 - 5.316, p=0.140). Our findings suggest that there is no benefit associated with the use of postoperative antibiotic prophylaxis until nephrostomy tube withdrawal in patients undergoing percutaneous nephrolithotomy (PCNL). We recommend that antibiotic prophylaxis should be administered only until the induction of anesthesia in PCNL.

Comparative study of elective cholecystectomy with and without antimicrobial prophylaxis: A prospective randomized study

Background: Cholecystectomy is one of the most common, clean, and contaminated surgery operations performed by surgeons worldwide. Antibiotic prophylaxis in elective cholecystectomy is a controversial issue and our study was undertaken to evaluate the rate of infection and the usefulness and efficacy of antibiotic prophylaxis in elective cholecystectomies. Aims and Objectives: The aims and objectives are to study antimicrobial prophylaxis on elective laparoscopic cholecystectomy and to compare surgical site infections (SSI) between the two groups after laparoscopic cholecystectomy with respect to (a) duration of surgery, (b) post-operative pain, (c) complications encountered, and (d) post-operative hospital stay. Materials and Methods: Patients were randomly divided into the study group (Group A) and the control group (Group B). Antibiotic dose of ceftriaxone + sulbactam 1.5 g will be administered intravenously 2 h before induction of anesthesia for the patients in the study Group A (n=30), and no antibiotic will be administered prophylactically to the control Group B (n=30). Results: In the study group, one patient developed fever, and in the control Group, 4 patients developed fever. In this study, SSIs were considered. In the study group, two patients (6.67%) developed pus discharge from the port site which was considered superficial infection, and in the control group, five patients (16.67%) developed pus discharge. Conclusion: Based on our study, in elective cholecystectomy, a single dose of intravenous ceftriaxone + salbactam 1.5 g given before the operative procedure does not lead to a higher SSI rate as compared to the conventionally given antibiotics which are continued postoperatively for a variable length of time.

Candida spp. Deep Sternal Wound Infections: A Consequence of Antibiotic use?

A cluster of deep sternal wound infections caused by Candida spp. occurred at our institution. Investigation did not disclose a common environmental source. We postulate that broad-spectrum antibiotic surgical prophylaxis and liberal use of antibiotics contributed to these infections.

The effect of Bacillus in the composition of the probiotic Natupro® against bacterial pathogenic strains in vitro

Relevance. The use of probiotics for health benefits is becoming popular because of the quest for safer products with protective and therapeutic effects against diseases and infectious agents. The emergence and spread of antimicrobial resistance among pathogens had prompted restrictions over the nontherapeutic use of antibiotics for prophylaxis and growth promotion, especially in animal husbandry. While single-strain probiotics are beneficial to health, multi-strain probiotics might be more helpful because of synergy and additive effects among the individual isolates.Methods. In this study, the effectiveness of the multi-strain probiotic Natupro on pathogenic bacterial strains (Escherichia coli 320, Salmonella typhimurium 415, Staphylococcus aureus 12600, Streptococcus uberis 700407, Klebsiella pneumoniae 13883, Listeria monocitogenes 766/20) in vitro was studied.Results. According to the results of the work carried out, it was found that the bacterial strains in Natupro® exhibit lytic activity against pathogenic strains of Salmonella typhimurium 415 and Klebsiella pneumoniae 13883 and have a bacteriostatic effect on Escherichia coli strain 320 and Salmonella typhimurium 415.

O162: A Surgically Led Quality Improvement Initiative in Surgical Antibiotic Prophylaxis (SAP): A One-year Review of Practice and Change in an Irish Context

Abstract Introduction Amongst growing concerns of antimicrobial resistance, surgical site infection (SSI) remains one of the most common healthcare associated infections. Optimal use of Surgical Antibiotic Prophylaxis (SAP) is critical. Quality Improvement (QI) in this area is often led by pharmacists or infection specialists. Methods A two-year, surgically led QI initiative was established in two Irish hospitals in July 2022. Baseline level of compliance with local guidelines with regard four aspects of SAP (indication, agent, timing, and duration) was audited. Change interventions aimed at specific aspects of compliance were trialled. Interventions included; guideline education for prescribers, process changes (editing the sign in/time out sheet) and the application of prescribing nudges (antibiotic duration sticker in post-operative drug chart). Results A total of 620 patient records were audited over one year. Pre-intervention compliance with all four aspects of SAP was observed in only 72/303 patients (23.7%). Educational interventions with surgical prescribers led to improved compliance with agent choice (43.5% (71/165) to 65.3% (94/144)). Education of anaesthetists showed improved timing of administration with 10.8% (14/129) of SAP administered post-incision post-intervention compared to 18.9% (21/111) pre-intervention. Application of the SAP duration sticker showed an overall decrease in mean SAP duration from 70.4 hours to 28.2 hours in those patients requiring more than a single SAP dose. Overall compliance levels have improved, thus far, from 23.7% to 39.8%. Conclusion Increasing compliance with SAP guidance is a challenge. A multi-faceted, institution specific, surgically led approach grounded in QI methodology shows promise.

Peroral endoscopic myotomy: a two-center retrospective study of practice and adverse events.

Peroral endoscopic myotomy (POEM) is the preferred technique for the treatment of esophageal motility disorders and is less invasive than surgery. This study was performed to compare two university centers in the practice of POEM, in terms of efficacy and adverse events, for the treatment of esophageal motility disorder. Retrospective comparative study of patients undergoing a POEM between September 2020 and December 2022 from the University Hospital of Liège (Belgium) and Besançon (France). The clinical success was defined by an Eckardt score ≤ 3 after the procedure. Fifty-five patients were included. In both centers, 87,3% of the patients had achalasia (mostly type II), and 12,7% had another esophageal motility disorder. The use of antibiotic prophylaxis was systematic in Liège center but not in Besançon center (100% and 9.1% respectively). The mean value of the post-operative Eckardt score was 1.55± 2.48 in both center with 93.2% of patients with a score ≤ 3 (92% in Besançon and 94.74% in Liège). The rate of adverse event was generally low. There were two minor adverse events more frequent in Liège, clinical capnomediastinum and pain at day one, but they were managed with conservative treatment. Only 7.3% of the total patients had an infectious phenomenon that did not correlate with the use of antibiotic prophylaxis. The post-operative Eckardt score and the adverse event rate were comparable between the university centers. This study confirmed that POEM is a safe and effective technique. It also showed that using an antibiotic prophylaxis does not influence the development of infectious adverse events.

Antibiotic prophylaxis in alloplastic temporomandibular joint replacement surgery: A multi-national survey of temporomandibular joint surgeons

Temporomandibular disorders include a wide spectrum of extra-articular and intra-articular conditions affecting the temporomandibular joint (TMJ). In salvage cases involving intra-articular end-stage disease, alloplastic temporomandibular joint replacement (TMJR) is a management option which can be utilised to rehabilitate a disabled joint’s function and form. Whilst post-TMJR infection is rare, it is one of the most serious complications. The principles governing TMJR surgery antibiotic prophylaxis have been based on those established in orthopaedic surgery literature. Antibiotic resistance due to antibiotic over-use is a significant concern, therefore antibiotic stewardship has been developed to deal with this world-wide public health concern. The TMJ’s anatomical proximity to the external auditory canal and oral cavity creates the potential for bacterial contamination. The aim of this study was to explore the views of 39 sub-specialist TMJ surgeons across nine nations usual approach to antibiotic prophylaxis and their management of TMJR infection. To accomplish this, an international survey was developed and conducted using Google Forms. The results demonstrated that 97.4% of the respondents employ prophylactic antibiotics at TMJR surgery, 83.8% on discharge. Variability in antibiotic choice with additional antimicrobial perioperative practices were also reported. Opinions on the management of a TMJR infection also varied. This survey establishes there is an agreement on the use of antibiotic prophylaxis, However the variability in choice, timing, course, duration of antibiotic use as well as the management of a postoperative TMJR infection demonstrates the need for further study leading to development of standardised antibiotic prophylaxis and infection management protocols for TMJR surgery.

Cefazolin as the mainstay for antibiotic prophylaxis in patients with a penicillin allergy in obstetrics and gynecology

Cefazolin is the most common antibiotic used for prophylaxis in obstetrics and gynecology. Among those with a penicillin allergy, alternative antibiotics are often chosen for prophylaxis given fears of cross-reactivity between penicillin and cefazolin. Alternative antibiotics in this setting are associated with adverse sequalae including surgical site infection, induction of bacterial resistance, higher costs to the healthcare system, and possible Clostridium difficile infection. Given the difference in R1 side chains between the penicillin and cefazolin, cefazolin use is safe and should be recommended for penicillin allergic patients including those who experience IgE-mediated reactions such as anaphylaxis. Cefazolin should only be avoided in those who experience a history of a severe, life-threatening delayed hypersensivity reaction manifested as severe cutaneous adverse reactions (Steven-Johnson Syndrome), hepatitis, nephritis, serum sickness, and hemolytic anemia in response to penicillin administration. Additionally, over 90% of those with a documented penicillin allergy do not have true allergy on skin testing. Increased referral for penicillin allergy testing should be incorporated into routine obstetric care and preoperative assessment to reduce suboptimal antibiotic prophylaxis use. More education is needed among providers surrounding penicillin allergy assessment and cross-reactivity among penicillins and cephalosporins to optimize antibiotic prophylaxis in obstetrics and gynecology.

Influence of antibiotic prophylaxis on wound infection incidence after elective laparoscopic cholecystectomy.

There have been controversies about whether prophylactic antibiotics are necessary in elective laparoscopic cholecystectomy. The aim of this study is to analyse the effect of different risk factors and antibiotic prophylaxis on the rate of wound infection following elective laparoscopic cholecystectomy. This is a retrospective study of patients with elective laparoscopic cholecystectomy from January 2021 to December 2022. The evaluated factors were: gender, age, diabetes, smoking, body mass index, haemoglobin level, American Society of Anesthesiologists physical status classification, surgery duration, intraoperative bile spillage and use of antibiotic prophylaxis. This study included 243 patients. The incidence of wound infection was significantly higher in male patients (p = 0.021). There was no statistically significant correlation between other risk factors and postoperative wound infection. Elective laparoscopic cholecystectomy patients do not benefit from antibiotic prophylaxis, which should be limited to complicated and acute cases.

How are Oral Antibiotics Being Used in Total Joint Arthroplasty? A Review of the Literature.

While the role and benefit of perioperative intravenous (IV) antibiotics in patients undergoing total joint arthroplasty (TJA) is well-established, oral antibiotic use in TJA remains a controversial topic with wide variations in practice patterns. With this review, we aimed to better educate the orthopedic surgeon on when and how oral antibiotics may be used most effectively in TJA patients, and to identify gaps in the literature that could be clarified with targeted research. Extended oral antibiotic prophylaxis (EOAP) use in high-risk primary, aseptic revision, and exchange TJA for infection may be useful in decreasing periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) rates. When prescribing oral antibiotics either as EOAP or for draining wounds, patient factors, type of surgery, and type of infectious organisms should be considered in order to optimally prevent and treat PJI. It is important to maintain antibiotic stewardship by administering the proper duration, dose, and type of antibiotics and by consulting infectious disease when necessary.

Tailored Pre-Operative Antibiotic Prophylaxis to Prevent Post-Operative Surgical Site Infections in General Surgery.

The average American today undergoes three inpatient and two outpatient surgical procedures during one's life, each of which carries with it a risk of post-operative infection. It has long been known that post-operative infections cause significant morbidity in the immediate peri-operative period, but recent evidence suggests that they can have long-term consequences as well, increasing a patient's risk of infectious complications in unrelated surgeries performed months or even years later. While there are several theories on the origin of this association, including bacterial colonization of a post-operative infectious wound site, antimicrobial resistance from curative courses of antibiotics, subclinical immunosuppression, or the creation of an inflammatory "pathobiome" following an infectious insult, it is ultimately still unclear why patients who experience a single post-operative infection seem to be at a significantly higher risk of experiencing subsequent ones. Regardless, this association has significant implications for the routine use of pre-operative antibiotic prophylaxis. Indeed, while the prescription of antibiotics pre-operatively has dramatically reduced the rate of post-operative infections, the chosen prophylaxis regimens are typically standardized according to national guidelines, are facing increasing antimicrobial resistance patterns, and have been unable to reduce the risk of post-operative infection to acceptably low levels for certain surgeries. As a result, some clinicians have speculated that tailoring pre-operative antibiotic prophylaxis according to a patient's prior infectious and operative history could improve efficacy and further reduce the rate of post-operative infections. The purpose of this review is to describe the evidence for the link between multiple post-operative infections and explore the efficacy of individualized pre-operative prophylaxis.

Surgical Site Infections in Single-dose versus Multiple-dose Broad-spectrum Intravenous Antibiotic Prophylaxis in Clean Surgeries: A Quasi-experimental Study

Introduction: Surgical Site Infections (SSIs) constitute a prevalent nosocomial concern among surgical patients. The incidence of SSIs typically ranges from 1-2% in the context of clean surgeries, irrespective of the use of antibiotic prophylaxis. Frequently, a single preoperative dose of antibiotics administered up to 60 minutes before surgery suffices. Aim: To compare the rates of postoperative infections following a single preoperative dose of prophylactic antibiotics with those receiving multiple postoperative doses. Materials and Methods: This quasi-experimental study was conducted at the Surgery Department of Kumareshwara Hospital in Bagalkot, Karnataka, India. Participants included individuals aged over 18 years undergoing elective clean surgeries, with their informed consent. Patients with co-morbidities or pre-existing infections at the surgical site were excluded from the study. A total of 161 cases were enrolled, divided into two groups: Group A (single dose of broad-spectrum i.v. antibiotic with 70 patients) and Group B (multiple doses of the same broad-spectrum antibiotic with 91 patients). Independent parameters of outcome variables were analysed using the Chi-square test and Student’s t-test. Results: The mean age of study participants was 41.25±13.47 years. The incidence of SSI in Group A was 1.42%, while in Group B, it was 2.20%. The mean duration of hospital stay was shorter in Group A (6.11±3.87 days) compared to Group B (7.60±4.08 days). Conclusion: In conclusion, the study suggests that the incidence of SSIs in both groups is similar and statistically insignificant for clean surgeries. Importantly, the hospital stay was shorter in the group receiving a single preoperative dose of antibiotics compared to multiple doses of antibiotics.

Impact of long-term vs. short-term and single day vs. single dose of antibiotic prophylaxis in reducing infection rates after orthognathic surgery: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

This review was designed to examine the effect of long-term (≥2 days) vs. short-term (1 day) and single-day vs. single preoperative doses of antibiotic prophylaxis on surgical site infection (SSI) rates after orthognathic surgery. PubMed, Web of Science, Embase, and Scopus were searched for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) without any date or language restriction till 1st September 2023. SSI rates were pooled to generate risk ratio (RR). Eight RCTs comparing long-term vs. short-term and three RCTs comparing single day vs. single preoperative dose of antibiotic prophylaxis were included. Meta-analysis showed that the use of long-term antibiotic prophylaxis significantly reduced the risk of SSI after orthognathic surgery as compared to short-term antibiotics [RR:0.42 (95% CI: 0.23, 0.76) I2=0%]. Meta-analysis also noted that patients receiving a single day of antibiotic prophylaxis had significantly reduced risk of SSI as compared to those receiving only a preoperative single dose of antibiotics [RR:0.28 (95%: 0.09, 0.82) I2=0%]. Evidence from a limited number of RCTs with moderate to high risk of bias shows that two to seven days of long-term antibiotic prophylaxis reduces the risk of SSI as compared to single-day antibiotic therapy. Also, a single day of antibiotics may be more beneficial than a single pre-operative dose of antibiotic.

Antibiotic prophylaxis in trauma: Global Alliance for Infection in Surgery, Surgical Infection Society Europe, World Surgical Infection Society, American Association for the Surgery of Trauma, and World Society of Emergency Surgery guidelines.

Trauma is a complex disease, and the use of antibiotic prophylaxis (AP) in trauma patients is common practice. However, considering the increasing rates of antibiotic resistance, AP use should be questioned and limited only to specific cases. Antibiotic stewardship is of paramount importance in fighting resistance spread. Definitive rules or precise indications about AP in trauma remain unclear. The present article describes the indications of AP in traumatic lesions to the head, brain, torso, maxillofacial, extremities, skin, and soft tissues endorsed by the Global Alliance for Infection in Surgery, Surgical Infection Society Europe, World Surgical Infection Society, American Association for the Surgery of Trauma, and World Society of Emergency Surgery.