Should we review our prophylaxis approach for increased antibiotic resistance in transrectal prostate biopsy?

INTRODUCTION: This study aims to show the bacteriologic picture of acute prostatitis and bacteremia caused by infective agent after transrectal ultrasound-guided prostate biopsy (TRUSBx) and to determine the resistance rates of the infections in patients undergoing transrectal biopsy and to guide prophylaxis approach before biopsy. METHODOLOGY: The retrospective data of 935 patients who underwent TRUSBx between January 2010 to January 2019 were reviewed. Pre-biopsy urine cultures and antimicrobial susceptibility were obtained. Subsequently, patients admitted to the hospital with any complaint after biopsy were examined for severe infection complications. RESULTS: Of the 430 (61.7%) patients who underwent urine culture before the procedure, 45 (10.5%) had growth; 30 (66.7%) of the growing microorganisms were Escherichia coli. Twenty (44.4%) of all Gram-negative agents in pre-biopsy urine culture were susceptible to quinolone. Post TRUSBx bacteremia was present in 18.2%, urinary system infection in 83.6%, and hospitalization in 61.8% of 55 patients who were admitted to the hospital. In the isolated gram-negative microorganisms, fluoroquinolones resistance in urinary system infections was seen in 40% and bacteremia was seen in 70% of the cases. ESBL-producing Gram-negative bacteria were determined in 40% of infections in blood and 38.5% of urinary system infections in the post biopsy period in the current study. CONCLUSIONS: These high antibiotic resistance rates suggest that we better review our pre-procedure prophylaxis approaches.

Antibiotic impregnated catheters and intrathecal antibiotics for CSF shunt infection prevention in children undergoing low-risk CSF shunt surgery.

BACKGROUND: Cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) shunts allow children with hydrocephalus to survive and avoid brain injury (J Neurosurg 107:345-57, 2007; Childs Nerv Syst 12:192-9, 1996). The Hydrocephalus Clinical Research Network implemented non-randomized quality improvement protocols that were shown to decrease infection rates compared to pre-operative prophylactic intravenous antibiotics alone (standard care): initially with intrathecal (IT) antibiotics between 2007-2009 (J Neurosurg Pediatr 8:22-9, 2011), followed by antibiotic impregnated catheters (AIC) in 2012-2013 (J Neurosurg Pediatr 17:391-6, 2016). No large scale studies have compared infection prevention between the techniques in children. Our objectives were to compare the risk of infection following the use of IT antibiotics, AIC, and standard care during low-risk CSF shunt surgery (i.e., initial CSF shunt placement and revisions) in children. METHODS: A retrospective observational cohort study at 6 tertiary care children's hospitals was conducted using Pediatric Health Information System + (PHIS +) data augmented with manual chart review. The study population included children ≤ 18 years who underwent initial shunt placement between 01/2007 and 12/2012. Infection and subsequent CSF shunt surgery data were collected through 12/2015. Propensity score adjustment for regression analysis was developed based on site, procedure type, and year; surgeon was treated as a random effect. RESULTS: A total of 1723 children underwent initial shunt placement between 2007-2012, with 1371 subsequent shunt revisions and 138 shunt infections. Propensity adjusted regression demonstrated no statistically significant difference in odds of shunt infection between IT antibiotics (OR 1.22, 95% CI 0.82-1.81, p = 0.3) and AICs (OR 0.91, 95% CI 0.56-1.49, p = 0.7) compared to standard care. CONCLUSION: In a large, observational multicenter cohort, IT antibiotics and AICs do not confer a statistically significant risk reduction compared to standard care for pediatric patients undergoing low-risk (i.e., initial or revision) shunt surgeries.

Cost-effectiveness of methenamine hippurate compared with antibiotic prophylaxis for the management of recurrent urinary tract infections in secondary care: a multicentre, open-label, randomised, non-inferiority trial.

OBJECTIVES: To estimate the cost-effectiveness of methenamine hippurate compared with antibiotic prophylaxis in the management of recurrent urinary tract infections. DESIGN: Multicentre, open-label, randomised, non-inferiority trial. SETTING: Eight centres in the UK, recruiting from June 2016 to June 2018. PARTICIPANTS: Women aged ≥18 years with recurrent urinary tract infections, requiring prophylactic treatment. INTERVENTIONS: Women were randomised to receive once-daily antibiotic prophylaxis or twice-daily methenamine hippurate for 12 months. Treatment allocation was not masked and crossover between arms was allowed. PRIMARY AND SECONDARY OUTCOME MEASURES: The primary economic outcome was the incremental cost per quality-adjusted life year (QALY) gained at 18 months. All costs were collected from a UK National Health Service perspective. QALYs were estimated based on responses to the EQ-5D-5L administered at baseline, 3, 6, 9, 12 and 18 months. Incremental costs and QALYs were estimated using an adjusted analysis which controlled for observed and unobserved characteristics. Stochastic sensitivity analysis was used to illustrate uncertainty on a cost-effectiveness plane and a cost-effectiveness acceptability curve. A sensitivity analysis, not specified in the protocol, considered the costs associated with antibiotic resistance. RESULTS: Data on 205 participants were included in the economic analysis. On average, methenamine hippurate was less costly (-£40; 95% CI: -684 to 603) and more effective (0.014 QALYs; 95% CI: -0.05 to 0.07) than antibiotic prophylaxis. Over the range of values considered for an additional QALY, the probability of methenamine hippurate being considered cost-effective ranged from 51% to 67%. CONCLUSIONS: On average, methenamine hippurate was less costly and more effective than antibiotic prophylaxis but these results are subject to uncertainty. Methenamine hippurate is more likely to be considered cost-effective when the benefits of reduced antibiotic use were included in the analysis. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: ISRCTN70219762.

Infection risk reduction with povidone-iodine rectal disinfection prior to transrectal prostate biopsy: an updated systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: To prevent infectious complications after transrectal ultrasound-guided prostate biopsy (TRUS-PB), some studies have investigated the efficacy of rectal disinfection using povidone-iodine (PI) and antibiotic prophylaxis (AP). OBJECTIVE: To summarize available data and compare the efficacy of rectal disinfection using PI with non-PI methods prior to TRUS-PB. EVIDENCE ACQUISITION: Three databases were queried through November 2023 for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) analyzing patients who underwent TRUS-PB. We compared the effectiveness of rectal disinfection between PI groups and non-PI groups with or without AP. The primary outcomes of interest were the rates of overall infectious complications, fever, and sepsis. Subgroups analyses were conducted to assess the differential outcomes in patients using fluoroquinolone groups compared to those using other antibiotics groups. EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS: We included ten RCTs in the meta-analyses. The overall rates of infectious complications were significantly lower when rectal disinfection with PI was performed (RR 0.56, 95% CI 0.42-0.74, p < 0.001). Compared to AP monotherapy, the combination of AP and PI was associated with significantly lower risk of infectious complications (RR 0.54, 95% CI 0.40-0.73, p < 0.001) and fever (RR 0.47, 95% CI 0.30-0.75, p = 0.001), but not with sepsis (RR 0.49, 95% CI 0.23-1.04, p = 0.06). The use of fluoroquinolone antibiotics was associated with a lower risk of infectious complications and fever compared to non-FQ antibiotics. CONCLUSION: Rectal disinfection with PI significantly reduces the rates of infectious complications and fever in patients undergoing TRUS-PB. However, this approach does not show a significant impact on reducing the rate of sepsis following the procedure.

Frequency of infections during rituximab treatment of autoimmune blistering diseases.

This study investigates the frequency of infections in autoimmune blistering disease (AIBD) patients treated with rituximab and evaluates the difference in infectious complications in patients on concomitant antibiotic and/or antiviral prophylaxis. The study retrospectively reviewed 43 AIBD patients who received rituximab over a five-year interval. The patients were categorized based on prophylaxis type (antibiotic, antiviral, or both) and concomitant immunosuppression status, which we defined as treatment with an immunosuppressive medication during the time frame they were given Rituximab. Our findings suggest that concomitant immunosuppression alongside rituximab did not significantly increase the risk of developing infectious complications compared to rituximab monotherapy. Results revealed that 34.4% of patients with concomitant immunosuppression had a secondary bacterial infection, defined as bacterial complications requiring hospitalization, consistent with prior studies. Moreover, antibiotic prophylaxis did not significantly reduce infection risk in patients on rituximab, with 45.1% of these patients experiencing bacterial complications. There was an absence of pneumocystis pneumonia in the study population. Despite the small sample size and limited timeline, this study suggests that antibiotic prophylaxis may not significantly mitigate the risk of infections in AIBD patients receiving rituximab, and the risk of infection with concomitant immunosuppression with rituximab requires additional investigation for definitive causal risk.

A Quality Improvement Project to Increase Compliance With a Facility Protocol on Surgical Antimicrobial Prophylaxis.

Surgical site infections (SSIs) contribute to negative outcomes for patients and health care organizations. Compliance with clinical practice guidelines likely can help prevent SSIs. An interdisciplinary team at a regional referral center in Michigan sought to reduce SSIs by improving compliance with the facility's preoperative antibiotic selection, dosing, timing, and redosing protocol. The interventions for the quality improvement project included adding the preprocedural antibiotics and doses to the master OR schedule; holding an education session for all preoperative nurses, intraoperative nurses, and anesthesia professionals; and posting a reference guide in the preoperative and intraoperative areas. Compliance with the facility's protocol for antibiotic selection, dosing, and timing significantly improved. However, SSI rates and compliance with redosing recommendations did not change significantly. The team decided to add the antibiotic order information to the master OR schedule permanently. The team plans to consider providing education sessions on administering preprocedural antibiotics outside the OR.

Regional antibiotic delivery for sternal wound infection prophylaxis a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.

Despite evidence suggesting the benefit of prophylactic regional antibiotic delivery (RAD) to sternal edges during cardiac surgery, it is seldom performed in clinical practice. The value of topical vancomycin and gentamicin for sternal wound infections (SWI) prophylaxis was further questioned by recent studies including randomized controlled trials (RCTs). The aim of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to comprehensively assess the safety and effectiveness of RAD to reduce the risk of SWI.We screened multiple databases for RCTs assessing the effectiveness of RAD (vancomycin, gentamicin) in SWI prophylaxis. Random effects meta-analysis was performed. The primary endpoint was any SWI; other wound complications were also analysed. Odds Ratios served as the primary statistical analyses. Trial sequential analysis (TSA) was performed.Thirteen RCTs (N = 7,719 patients) were included. The odds of any SWI were significantly reduced by over 50% with any RAD: OR (95%CIs): 0.49 (0.35-0.68); p < 0.001 and consistently reduced in vancomycin (0.34 [0.18-0.64]; p < 0.001) and gentamicin (0.58 [0.39-0.86]; p = 0.007) groups (psubgroup = 0.15). Similarly, RAD reduced the odds of SWI in diabetic and non-diabetic patients (0.46 [0.32-0.65]; p < 0.001 and 0.60 [0.44-0.83]; p = 0.002 respectively). Cumulative Z-curve passed the TSA-adjusted boundary for SWIs suggesting adequate power has been met and no further trials are needed. RAD significantly reduced deep (0.60 [0.43-0.83]; p = 0.003) and superficial SWIs (0.54 [0.32-0.91]; p = 0.02). No differences were seen in mediastinitis and mortality, however, limited number of studies assessed these endpoints. There was no evidence of systemic toxicity, sternal dehiscence and resistant strains emergence. Both vancomycin and gentamicin reduced the odds of cultures outside their respective serum concentrations' activity: vancomycin against gram-negative strains: 0.20 (0.01-4.18) and gentamicin against gram-positive strains: 0.42 (0.28-0.62); P < 0.001. Regional antibiotic delivery is safe and effectively reduces the risk of SWI in cardiac surgery patients.

Surgical Antimicrobial Prophylaxis Compliance in Turkey: Data from the Prospective, Observational, Multicenter Survey Including 7,978 Surgical Patients.

Background: Surgical antimicrobial prophylaxis (SAP) is the peri-operative administration of antimicrobial agents. Compliance rates vary worldwide from 15% to 84.3%, with studies in Turkey not exceeding 35%. The aim of this multicenter study was to determine the rate of appropriate antibiotic class, timing, and duration as well as discharge prescriptions in Turkey. Thus, we aimed to determine the rate of full compliance with SAP procedures in our country Patients and Methods: This multicenter, prospective, observational, descriptive study was conducted in 47 hospitals from 28 provinces in seven different regions of Turkey. Patients over 18 years of age in all surgical units between June 6, 2022, and June 10, 2022, were included in the study. Results: Of the 7,978 patients included in the study, 332 were excluded from further analyses because of pre-existing infection, and SAP compliance analyses were performed on the remaining 7,646 cases. The antibiotic most commonly used for SAP was cefazolin (n = 4,701; 61.5%), followed by third-generation cephalosporins (n = 596; 7.8%). The most common time to start SAP was within 30 minutes before surgery (n = 2,252; 32.5%), followed by 30 to 60 minutes before surgery (n = 1,638; 23.6%). Surgical antimicrobial prophylaxis duration was <24 hours in 3,516 (50.7%) patients and prolonged until discharge in 1,505 (21.7%) patients. Finally, the actual proportion of patients compliant with SAP was 19% (n = 1,452) after omitting 4,458 (58.3%) patients who were prescribed oral antibiotic agents at discharge as part of a prolonged SAP. Conclusions: Surgical antimicrobial prophylaxis compliance rates are still very low in Turkey. Prolonged duration of SAP and especially high rate of antibiotic prescription at discharge are the main reasons for non-compliance with SAP.

[Antibacterial prophylaxis with fosfomycin at the time of the urethral catheter removal after radical prostatectomy (prospective randomized trial)].

AIM: To evaluate the effect of antibacterial prophylaxis using oral fosfomycin during the removal of a urethral catheter after radical prostatectomy on the development of urinary tract infection, severity of leukocyturia and bacteriuria, as well as the severity of lower urinary tract symptoms. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A single-center, non-blind, prospective, randomized controlled trial was carried out. The main group included 40 patients, and the control group included 37 patients. In the group 1, patients received two doses of oral fosfomycin, 3 g, namely in the evening on the day of catheter removal (the first dose) and 48 hours after catheter removal (the second dose). In the group 2, patients did not receive any antibacterial prophylaxis after urethral catheter removal. The endpoints of the study were confirmed episodes of urinary tract infection within 1 month after removal of the urethral catheter, leukocyturia and bacteriuria in urinalysis/urine culture) and severity of the lower urinary tract symptoms assessed by IPSS questionnaire. RESULTS: In the group 2, urinary tract infection was noted in 17.1%, while in the group 2 only in 2.6% of patients (p=0.032). Leukocyturia and bacteriuria were significantly less common in the group receiving antibacterial prophylaxis with fosfomycin (18.4% vs. 48.6%, respectively; p=0.006). Positive urine culture was observed in 7.9% vs. 25.7%, respectively (p=0.035). Four weeks after removal of the urethral catheter, the average IPSS score was significantly higher in the group 2 (13.2 vs. 9.5 points; p=0.002). There were no cases of allergic reaction and pseudomembranous colitis associated with C. difficile in both groups. Diarrhea cured with sorbents was noted in 2 patients (5.2%) in fosfomycin group. CONCLUSION: Antibacterial prophylaxis using two oral doses of fosfomycin 3 g on the day of urethral catheter removal and 48 hours after catheter removal after radical prostatectomy appears to be an effective scheme that reduces the incidence of urinary tract infection and the severity of lower urinary tract symptoms, and is characterized by a minimal risk of adverse events. It is necessary to carried out further research and develop clear recommendations for antibacterial prevention in urological interventions requiring prolonged urethral catheterization.

Cotrimoxazole and targeted antibiotic prophylaxis for transrectal prostate biopsy: a single-center study.

PURPOSE: The recent restriction on the use of fluoroquinolones for prophylaxis by the European Commission has left a gap in clear recommendations for practical antibiotic prophylaxis (PAP) for transrectal prostate biopsy (TRPB). This analysis investigated the viability of cotrimoxazole for PAP in TRPB. METHODS: This analysis included n = 697 patients who underwent TRPB for suspected prostate cancer (PCa). All patients received either empiric PAP with four doses of cotrimoxazole 960 mg or targeted antibiotic prophylaxis in case of a positive rectal or urine screening for multiresistant gram-negatives. Infectious complications after TRPB, microbiological findings, and clinical characteristics were evaluated. A multivariable logistic regression model was calculated to identify variables associated with infectious complications. RESULTS: Of the cohort, 86% (600/697) received PAP with cotrimoxazole, 1% (8/697) received cotrimoxazole plus an additional antibiotic, 4% (28/697) received amoxicillin + clavulanic acid, 4% (28/697) received fluoroquinolones, and 5% (33/697) received a single shot intravenous antibiotic prophylaxis with meropenem or piperacillin + tazobactam due to multiresistant microbiological findings in either pre-interventional urine culture or rectal swab. Infectious complications occurred in 2.6% (18/697) of patients. Fever was noted in 89% (16/18) of cases. Inpatient treatment was given to 67% (12/18) of affected patients, with 38% (7/18) having positive blood cultures, identifying cotrimoxazole-resistant E. coli strains in six out of seven cases. Multivariable logistic regression analysis revealed no clinically significant variables, including PAP with cotrimoxazole, as independent risk factors for an infectious complication. CONCLUSIONS: Using cotrimoxazole as PAP for TRPB in cases without multiresistant gram-negatives in pre-interventional urine cultures or rectal swabs seems feasible and practical.

Maximizing Adherence and Minimizing Time to Antibiotics: A Multidisciplinary Institutional Trauma Bay Protocol for Single Antibiotic Prophylaxis in Open Fractures.

OBJECTIVES: To determine if a multidisciplinary institutional protocol can optimize the time to antibiotic (Abx) administration for open fractures (openFx) and improve compliance with the administration of Abx prophylaxis during trauma activation. DESIGN: Retrospective pre-post study design. SETTING: Single Level II Trauma Center. PATIENT SELECTION CRITERIA: All patients who triggered a trauma activation with suspected openFx and were treated according to the institutional single antibiotic regimen were eligible for inclusion. Patients were excluded if fractures did not involve the appendicular skeleton. Patients treated before implementation of a standardized institutional protocol where premixed IV bags of antibiotics were stocked in automated dispensing systems within ED trauma bays (January 2021-October 2022) were defined as the "pre" group and those treated following implementation the "post" group. OUTCOME MEASURES AND COMPARISONS: The primary outcome was time from trauma bay arrival to antibiotic aministration, measured in minutes, with comparisons made between preprotocol and postprotocol implementation. Secondary outcomes for comparison included rates (%) of time to Abx <60 minutes, allergic reactions, acute kidney injury, ototoxicity, surgical site infection, multi-drug-resistant organisms identified in blood or biopsy cultures in cases requiring reoperation, and Clostridium difficile infection in the gastrointestinal system, confirmed by stool test results, within 30 days. RESULTS: Twenty-four patients (mean age 39.5 ± 16.3 years) met the criteria after protocol implementation compared with 72 patients (mean age 34.3 ± 14.8 years) before implementation. Implementation of the institutional protocol resulted in a significant reduction in the time to Abx administration for openFx from 87.9 ± 104.6 minutes to 22.2 ± 12.8 minutes in the postprotocol group ( P < 0.001). In addition, only 53% in the preprotocol group received Abx within 60 minutes compared with 96% in postprotocol group ( P < 0.001). Post hoc power analysis revealed that the study was powered at 92% (effect size = 0.72) to detect a significant difference between the preprotocol and postprotocol groups. CONCLUSION: This study provides evidence that a multidisciplinary institutional protocol for the administration of Abx prophylaxis can be an effective strategy for optimizing the time to Abx administration in cases of suspected openFx. This protocol may be implemented in other trauma centers to optimize time to Abx administration for openFx. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Therapeutic Level III. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

Economic evaluation: immunoglobulin vs prophylactic antibiotics in hypogammaglobulinemia and hematological malignancies.

ABSTRACT: Patients with hematological malignancies are at high risk of developing hypogammaglobulinemia (HGG) and infections. Immunoglobulin (Ig) is one recommended option to prevent these infections, but it is expensive, and its cost-effectiveness compared with other prevention strategies remains unknown. We conducted a trial-based economic evaluation from the Australian health care system perspective to estimate the 12-month cost-effectiveness of prophylactic Ig vs prophylactic antibiotics in 63 adults with HGG and hematological malignancies participating in the RATIONAL feasibility trial. Two analyses were conducted: (1) cost-utility analysis to assess the incremental cost per quality-adjusted life year (QALY) gained; and (2) cost-effectiveness analysis to assess the incremental cost per serious infection prevented (grade ≥3) and per any infection (any grade) prevented. Over 12 months, the total cost per patient was significantly higher in the Ig group than in the antibiotic group (mean difference, AU$29 140; P < .001). Most patients received IVIg, which was the main cost driver; only 2 patients in the intervention arm received subcutaneous Ig. There were nonsignificant differences in health outcomes. Results showed Ig was more costly than antibiotics and associated with fewer QALYs. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of Ig vs antibiotics was AU$111 262 per serious infection prevented, but Ig was more costly and associated with more infections when all infections were included. On average and for this patient population, Ig prophylaxis may not be cost-effective compared with prophylactic antibiotics. Further research is needed to confirm these findings in a larger population and considering longer-term outcomes. The trial was registered at the Australian and New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry as #ACTRN12616001723471.

Preoperative antibiotics reduce early surgical site infections after orthopaedic implant removal: a propensity-matched cohort study.

BACKGROUND: Implant removal in orthopaedics after fracture consolidation is a very common procedure but is still associated with a high rate of surgical site infection (SSI). Antibiotic prophylaxis is not recommended but advocated by some. AIM: To assess the efficacy of antibiotic prophylaxis in the prevention of early SSI following orthopaedic implant removal. METHODS: A monocentric retrospective cohort study was conducted. Patients who underwent orthopaedic implant removal procedures performed from 2016 to 2021 were included. A 1:1 propensity score matching function was used to create a cohort with matched baseline characteristics and associated risk factors for SSI. Inter-cohort comparison of the occurrence of SSI (superficial or deep) and revision surgery for SSI, after propensity score matching, was performed using the odds ratio to determine the effect of preoperative antibiotic prophylaxis. FINDINGS: In total, 965 distinct surgical procedures were included. Of these, 69 (7.15%) had an SSI, 24 (35.7%) of which required surgical revision; 214 procedures (22.18%) were performed under preoperative antibiotic prophylaxis. The propensity-matched cohort consisted of 396 procedures (198 with and without antibiotic prophylaxis). The SSI rates were 11.11% and 3.03%, respectively, in the control and antibiotic prophylaxis groups (odds ratio: 0.25; 95% confidence interval: 0.099; 0.63; P = 0.011). No difference was found for revision surgery. CONCLUSION: Preoperative administration of antibiotic prophylaxis considerably reduces the risk of SSI during the removal of an orthopaedic implant without increasing the risk of side-effects.

A nurse-driven penicillin allergy risk score in the preoperative setting was associated with increased cefazolin use perioperatively.

STUDY OBJECTIVE: To characterize and assess the effects of a preoperative, nurse-driven penicillin allergy risk stratification tool on rates of perioperative cefazolin and second-line antibiotic use. DESIGN: Quasi-experimental quality improvement study of penicillin-allergic surgical patients undergoing procedures for which cefazolin is indicated. SETTING: Outpatient Perioperative Care Clinic (PCC) for preoperative surgical patients at a tertiary care center. PATIENTS: 670 and 1371 adult penicillin-allergic PCC attendants and non-attendants, respectively. INTERVENTION: A paper penicillin allergy risk stratification questionnaire was administered during the PCC visit. Nurses were educated on its use. MEASUREMENTS: Antibiotic (cefazolin, clindamycin, vancomycin) use rates in the 24 months before and 17 months after intervention implementation in November 2020 (November 2018 - April 2022) were assessed in penicillin-allergic PCC attendants with statistical process control charts. Multivariable logistic regression assessed antibiotic use rates pre- and post-intervention adjusting for age, sex, surgical specialty and penicillin allergy history severity. Similar analyses were done in penicillin-allergic PCC non-attendants. MAIN RESULTS: Of 670 penicillin-allergic PCC attendants, 451 (median [IQR] age, 66 (Sousa-Pinto et al., 2021 [14])) were analyzed pre-intervention and 219 (median [IQR] age, 66 (Mine et al., 1970 [13])) post-intervention. One month after implementation, process measures demonstrated an upward shift in cefazolin use for PCC attendants versus no shift or other special cause variation for PCC non-attendants. There were increased odds of cefazolin use (aOR 1.67, 95% CI [1.09-2.57], P = 0.019), decreased odds of clindamycin use (aOR 0.61, 95% CI [0.42-0.89], P = 0.010) and decreased odds of vancomycin use (aOR 0.56, 95% CI [0.35-0.88], P = 0.013) in PCC attendants post-intervention. This effect did not occur in PCC non-attendants. There was no increase in perioperative anaphylaxis post-intervention. CONCLUSIONS: A simple penicillin allergy risk stratification tool implemented in the preoperative setting was associated with increased use of cefazolin and decreased rates of second-line agents post implementation.

Effect of prophylactic use of cefazolin in caesarean section on postoperative infection: A meta-analysis.

Caesarean section rate is increasing and postoperative wound infection is a major health-threatening complication after caesarean section (CS). The aim of this study was to evaluate the efficacy of Cefazolin at different time for post-caesarean delivery. The aim of this study was to compare the use of Cefazolin at different times on infections after CS. The time of antibiotic use in CS can be divided into two groups: before skin incision (SI) and after cord clamping (CC). In this study, 268 relevant articles were found in the database, and finally, 10 articles were analysed. This study included a total of 5256 cases of caesarean section. The data on wound infections, endometritis, urinary tract infections and fever were analysed. Perform an analysis of the data using RevMan 5.3. The results showed that cefazolin before SI reduced wound infection compared to after CC (odds ratio [OR], 0.51; 95% CI: 0.37-0.69; p < 0.0001). Cefazolin prophylactically used before SI reduce endometritis after CS compared to after CC (OR, 0.52; 95% CI: 0.35-0.77; p = 0.001). There was no significant difference in urinary tract infections after CS between cefazolin prophylactically used before SI and after CC (OR, 0.80; 95% CI: 0.50-11.28; p = 0.35). There was no significant difference in fever after CS between the prophylactic use of cefazolin before SI and after CC (OR, 0.60; 95% CI: 0.26-11.43; p = 0.225). Cefazolin before SI reduces wound infection and endometritis after CS.

Antimicrobial prophylaxis in companion animal surgery: A scoping review for European Network for Optimization of Antimicrobial Therapy (ENOVAT) guidelines.

Surgical antimicrobial prophylaxis (SAP) is widely used to reduce the risk of surgical site infections (SSI), but there is uncertainty as to what the proportion of SSI reduction is. Therefore, it is difficult for surgeons to properly weigh the costs, risks and benefits for individual patients when deciding on the use of SAP, making it challenging to promote antimicrobial stewardship in primary practice settings. The objective of this study was to map the veterinary evidence focused on assessing the effect of SAP on SSI development and in order to identify surgical procedures with some research evidence and possible knowledge gaps. In October 2021 and December 2022, Scopus, CAB Abstracts, Web of Science Core Collection, Embase and MEDLINE were systematically searched. Double blinded screening of records was performed to identify studies in companion animals that reported on the use of SAP and SSI rates. Comparative data were available from 34 out of 39123 records screened including: eight randomised controlled trials (RCT), 23 cohort studies (seven prospective and 16 retrospective) and three retrospective case series representing 12476 dogs and cats in total. Extracted data described peri- or post-operative SAP in nine, and 25 studies, respectively. In the eight RCTs evaluating SAP in companion animals, surgical procedure coverage was skewed towards orthopaedic stifle surgeries in referral settings and there was large variation in SAP protocols, SSI definitions and follow-up periods. More standardized data collection and agreement of SSI definitions is needed to build stronger evidence for optimized patient care.