Antibiotikaprofylax vid kirurgiska ingrepp - SBU

Table 4.6.5 Low study quality and relevance.
Author
Year
Reference
Country
Study design Population characteristics Comments
Amland
1995
[1]
Norway
RCT 339 consecutive patients >6 years (female 177/
male 162), Sep 1991–May 1992. Subgroups (clefts
70, breast surgery 47, UG 29, otoplastys 18, burns
sequele 45, miscellaneous 45, skin tumours 60)
Subgroup results not separated
Baran
1999
[16]
Turkey
RCT
Patients operated 1992–1998. 1 400 patients
(mean age 30.4 years. Female 722/male 678)
divided into 4 groups.
Group 1 Reconstructive surgery of the head and
neck (malformations, tumours, trauma)
Group 2 Cosmetic surgery (face, breastred, nose)
Group 3 Flaps/grafts of the trunk and extremities
Group 4 Implants, alloplasties
Subgroup results not separated
Bier
1996
[12]
Germany
RCT
Breast surgery (malign and benign) consisting
of mastectomy, axillary dissection, corrections,
red mammaplasty, flap reconstruction (some
with implants)
Subgroup results not separated
Engel
1989
[13]
Germany
RCT
Breast surgery, 80 patients with “high” risk
of post-op infection
Method not clearly described
Kompatscher
2003
[11]
Austria/
Switzerland
Retrospective,
cohort study
Breast reduction. Comparison 2 hospitals.
1997 Apr–2001 Dec. Group 1 (Zurich); vertical
breastreduction. Mean age 34 years (17–67),
BMI 24 (17–34). Group 2 (Austria); T-scar breastreduction.
Mean age 37 years (16–76), BMI 25
(19–37)
Only operation time >2 h could be considered as a medium risk factor for 20%
of the patients in the NNIS score. Low internal validity
Serletti
1994
[10]
USA
Cohort study,
prospective
Breast reduction with inferior pedicle
(14 uni- and 92 bilateral), 106 consecutive
patients
operated 1985–1989
No randomisation. Those that got ab was dependent on which resident that was
working, since they had different strategies
BMI = Body mass index; h = Hours; RCT = Randomised controlled trial; UG = Urogenital
344 antibiotikaprofylax vid kirurgiska ingrepp KAPITEL 4 • den systematiska litteraturöversikten
345