02.01.2015 Views

Antibiotikaprofylax vid kirurgiska ingrepp - SBU

Antibiotikaprofylax vid kirurgiska ingrepp - SBU

Antibiotikaprofylax vid kirurgiska ingrepp - SBU

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

Create successful ePaper yourself

Turn your PDF publications into a flip-book with our unique Google optimized e-Paper software.

Table 4.8.3 continued<br />

Author<br />

Year<br />

Reference<br />

Country<br />

Study<br />

design<br />

Population<br />

characteristics<br />

Intervention<br />

Method<br />

Number indi<strong>vid</strong>uals<br />

Control<br />

Number<br />

indi<strong>vid</strong>uals<br />

Results<br />

Withdrawal<br />

Drop outs<br />

Study quality<br />

and relevance<br />

Comments<br />

Kreter<br />

1992<br />

[1]<br />

Canada<br />

Metaanalysis<br />

Cardio-thoracic operations<br />

Total 28 studies<br />

6 759 pts; prospective<br />

design, randomised<br />

Comparisons<br />

1. 6 studies (n=966)<br />

2. 6 studies (cephradine<br />

vs cefamandole 1 study)<br />

3. 6 studies (n=2 630),<br />

data were combined<br />

from both cefamandole<br />

and cefuroxime<br />

4. 2 studies (n=629)<br />

5. 3 studies (n=1 515)<br />

6. 1 study (n=99)<br />

7. 1 study (n=263)<br />

8. 1 study (n=512)<br />

9. 1 study<br />

10. 1 study<br />

I1: Cephalosporin<br />

I2: Cephalothin or cephradine<br />

I3: Cefazolin<br />

I4: Cefamandole<br />

I5: Cefazolin<br />

I6: Cephalotin<br />

I7: Cephalotin<br />

I8: Cefuroxime<br />

I9: Cefazolin + gentamicin<br />

I10: Penicillin G<br />

I11: Teicoplanin 2 dosage<br />

regimens<br />

C1: Antistaphylococcal<br />

penicillin<br />

C2: Cefamandole<br />

+ ceforanide<br />

C3: Cefamandole<br />

or cefafuroxim<br />

C4: Cefuroxime<br />

C5: Ceftriaxone<br />

C6: Cefazolin<br />

C7: Clindamycin<br />

C8: Ceftriaxone<br />

C9: Cefamandole<br />

+ gentamicin<br />

C10: Vancomycin<br />

C11: Flucloxacillin<br />

+ gentamicin<br />

Total SSI stenal wound<br />

+ sapenous vein donor<br />

site infection<br />

1. OR 0.51<br />

(95% CI 0.23–1.02)<br />

2. OR; 1.28<br />

(95% CI 0.68–2.43)<br />

3. OR 1.58<br />

(95% CI 1.03–2.45)<br />

4. OR 1.58<br />

(95% CI 0.51–5.35)<br />

5. OR 0.44<br />

(95% CI 0.16–1.11)<br />

6. 2% in both treatment<br />

groups<br />

7. Trend for reduction<br />

in SSI with clindamycin<br />

8. 1.2% in both treatment<br />

groups<br />

9. Significant reduction<br />

SSI with cefamandole/<br />

gentamicin<br />

Moderate<br />

Authors own<br />

conclusions;<br />

Limitations;<br />

lack of power,<br />

stratification of<br />

pts according to<br />

emergency or<br />

type of procedure<br />

lacking,<br />

variations in<br />

definitions<br />

of outcome<br />

(infection),<br />

removal from<br />

consideration<br />

after randomisation<br />

varied<br />

0–31%, doses<br />

of antibiotics<br />

used were<br />

justified by<br />

pharmacokinetic<br />

studies<br />

in some cases,<br />

but seemed<br />

unusually low<br />

in others<br />

11. 1 study (n=517)<br />

10. Significant reduction<br />

SSI with vancomycin<br />

11. High sternal wound<br />

infection rate in teicoplanin<br />

group (21.5–28.0%), also<br />

in flucloxacillin + getamicin<br />

groups (10.3–17.2%)<br />

The table continues on the next page<br />

378 antibiotikaprofylax <strong>vid</strong> <strong>kirurgiska</strong> <strong>ingrepp</strong> KAPITEL 4 • den systematiska litteraturöversikten<br />

379

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!