HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS		QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced] Author: Keyword(s): Year:  Vol:  Page:

This Article Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in PubMed Alert me to new issues of the journal Add to Personal Folders Download to citation manager Permission Requests Citing Articles Citing Articles via HighWire Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by Doebbeling, B. N. Articles by Wenzel, R. P. Search for Related Content PubMed PubMed Citation Articles by Doebbeling, B. N. Articles by Wenzel, R. P.

The Journal of Thoracic and Cardiovascular Surgery, Vol 99, 981-989, Copyright © 1990 by The American Association for Thoracic Surgery and The Western Thoracic Surgical Association

ARTICLES

Cardiovascular surgery prophylaxis. A randomized, controlled comparison of cefazolin and cefuroxime

BN Doebbeling, MA Pfaller, KR Kuhns, RM Massanari, DM Behrendt and RP Wenzel
Department of Medicine, University of Iowa College of Medicine, Iowa City.

A prospective double-blind trial was performed at a tertiary care center to evaluate perioperative cephalosporin prophylaxis in cardiac operations. Patients were randomized to receive either cefazolin (n = 104) or cefuroxime (n = 109), the preoperative dose being given within 1 hour before the initial incision. Drugs were continued for 48 hours (cefazolin, 1 gm intravenously every 8 hours; cefuroxime, 1.5 gm intravenously every 12 hours). Postoperative infections were assessed by trained nurse clinicians, and data were analyzed by the intention-to- treat principle. Sternal wound infections or mediastinitis occurred in one of 104 patients treated with cefazolin and 10 of 109 treated with cefuroxime (p = 0.01). Deep sternal wounds (including mediastinitis and sternal osteomyelitis) occurred in none of the cefazolin-treated patients and five cefuroxime-treated patients (p = 0.06). Although overall nosocomial infection rates were similar (16.3 versus 19.3 per 100), wound infection occurred somewhat more frequently with streptococci (groups B and D) in patients receiving cefazolin (four versus zero, p = 0.110); conversely staphylococcal infections were more frequent in the cefuroxime group (seven versus one, p = 0.066). Mean and median postoperative stay was 1 day shorter in the cefazolin group. In contrast to findings of a previous report, our data indicate that cefazolin prevented more sternal wound infections than cefuroxime, a finding that supports prophylaxis with a first-generation cephalosporin.

This article has been cited by other articles:

				M.-R. Movahed, B. Kasravi, and C. S. Bryan Prophylactic Use of Vancomycin in Adult Cardiology and Cardiac Surgery Journal of Cardiovascular Pharmacology and Therapeutics, March 1, 2004; 9(1): 13 - 20. [Abstract] [PDF]

				R. Saginur, D. Croteau, and M. G. Bergeron Comparative efficacy of teicoplanin and cefazolin for cardiac operation prophylaxis in 3027 patients J. Thorac. Cardiovasc. Surg., December 1, 2000; 120(6): 1120 - 1130. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				H. G. Jakob, M. Borneff-Lipp, A. Bach, S. von Puckler, J. Windeler, H.-G. Sonntag, and S. Hagl The endogenous pathway is a major route for deep sternal wound infection Eur J Cardiothorac Surg, February 1, 2000; 17(2): 154 - 160. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				B. Zickmann, A. Sablotzki, R. Fussle, G. Gorlach, and G. Hempelmann PERIOPERATIVE MICROBIOLOGIC MONITORING OF TRACHEAL ASPIRATES AS A PREDICTOR OF PULMONARY COMPLICATIONS AFTER CARDIAC OPERATIONS J. Thorac. Cardiovasc. Surg., June 1, 1996; 111(6): 1213 - 1218. [Abstract] [Full Text]