These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


Pubmed for Handhelds

PUBMED FOR HANDHELDS

Search MEDLINE/PubMed

  • Title: A comparison of the prophylactic efficacy of ceftriaxone and cefotaxime in abdominal surgery.
    Author: Woodfield JC, Van Rij AM, Pettigrew RA, van der Linden AJ, Solomon C, Bolt D.
    Journal: Am J Surg; 2003 Jan; 185(1):45-9. PubMed ID: 12531444.
    Abstract:
    BACKGROUND: Although ceftriaxone (R) and cefotaxime (C) are highly effective antibiotics, few studies have directly compared their prophylactic efficacy. METHODS: In a prospective, randomized, double blind study of 1,013 patients undergoing abdominal surgery, the prophylactic use of ceftriaxone and cefotaxime were compared. Intravenous cephalosporin, 1 g, was given at induction of anesthesia, with intravenous metronidazole, 500 mg, also being given for colorectal surgery. RESULTS: The difference in wound infection (R 8%, C 12%, P <0.05) was due to appendicectomies not receiving metronidazole, (R 6%, C 18%, P <0.03) and was no longer present when these cases were excluded from analysis (R 8%, C 10%). Of note chest and urinary tract infection (R 6%, C 11%, P <0.02) and "any" infection (R 20%, C 27%, P <0.05) were reduced with ceftriaxone. CONCLUSIONS: Both antibiotics provide comparable wound prophylaxis as long as metronidazole is added for colorectal and appendiceal surgery. Ceftriaxone may be more versatile having the additional apparent benefits of reducing other postoperative infections, being less dependent on metronidazole as an adjunct and providing a more effective prophylactic cover against Staphylococcus aureus.
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [New Search]