Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 1 de 1
Filtrar
Más filtros

Banco de datos
Tipo del documento
Asunto de la revista
País de afiliación
Intervalo de año de publicación
1.
J Clin Neurosci ; 45: 24-32, 2017 Nov.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-28802796

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: Perioperative antibiotic prophylaxis against gram positive and gram negative infections is considered standard of care in the perioperative management of patients undergoing cranial surgery. The antibiotic regimen which best reduces the risk of surgical site infections (SSIs) remains controversial. OBJECTIVES: A systematic literature review and meta-analysis were conducted to examine the effect of various prophylactic antibiotics on infection incidence among patients undergoing cranial surgeries. METHODS: A comprehensive search was conducted on Pubmed, EMBASE and Cochrane databases through October 2014 for studies that evaluated the efficacy of antibiotic prophylaxis among patients undergoing cranial surgeries. Pooled effect estimates using both fixed- and random-effect models were calculated. RESULTS: Eight articles were included in the meta-analysis, with a combined total of 1655 cranial procedures. Among these, 74 cases of SSIs were reported after patients received a single antibiotic or a combination of 2 or more antibiotics (pooled incidence of SSIs=6.00%; 95% CI=4.80%, 7.50%; fixed-effects model; I2=73.7%; P-heterogeneity<0.01). Incidence of SSI was 1.00% (95% CI=0.40%, 2.60%) for non-MRSA gram-positive bacterial infections; 2.70% (95% CI=0.90%, 8.00%) for gram-negative bacterial infections; 6.00% (95% CI=4.50%, 7.80%) for gram negative, and non-MRSA gram-positive bacterial infections; and 11.3% (95% CI=7.20%, 17.4%) for gram negative and MRSA gram-positive bacterial infections. Subgroup analysis revealed an effect modification by drug class (P=0.05) and infection type (P-interaction=0.01). More specifically, lincosamides (2.70%; n=1 group), glycopeptides (2.80%; n=1), third generation cephalosporins (5.30%; n=2), antibiotics combination (4.90%; n=4), and penicillin-family antibiotics (5.90%, n=1) offered better coverage against infections than first generation cephalosporins (22.0%; n=2). A meta-regression analysis on study length was not significant (P=0.13). Random-effect models were not materially different form fixed-effects. No evidence of publication bias was found. CONCLUSION: Lincosamides, glycopeptides, third generation cephalosporins, other combinations of prophylactic antibiotics, or penicillin-family antibiotics alone offer better coverage against SSIs than first generation cephalosporin among cranial surgery patients.


Asunto(s)
Profilaxis Antibiótica/métodos , Craneotomía/efectos adversos , Infecciones por Bacterias Gramnegativas/prevención & control , Infecciones por Bacterias Grampositivas/prevención & control , Infección de la Herida Quirúrgica/prevención & control , Antibacterianos/administración & dosificación , Antibacterianos/uso terapéutico , Profilaxis Antibiótica/normas , Infecciones por Bacterias Gramnegativas/tratamiento farmacológico , Infecciones por Bacterias Gramnegativas/epidemiología , Infecciones por Bacterias Gramnegativas/etiología , Infecciones por Bacterias Grampositivas/tratamiento farmacológico , Infecciones por Bacterias Grampositivas/epidemiología , Infecciones por Bacterias Grampositivas/etiología , Humanos , Penicilinas/administración & dosificación , Penicilinas/uso terapéutico , Infección de la Herida Quirúrgica/tratamiento farmacológico , Infección de la Herida Quirúrgica/epidemiología
SELECCIÓN DE REFERENCIAS
DETALLE DE LA BÚSQUEDA