Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-gvvz8 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-23T08:51:57.950Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Clinical, Microbiological, and Economic Benefit of a Change in Antibiotic Prophylaxis for Cardiac Surgery

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  02 January 2015

Denis Spelman ,
Glenys Harrington ,
Phil Russo  and
S. Wesselingh
Denis Spelman*
Affiliation:
Infection Control and Hospital Epidemiology Unit, Alfred Hospital, Prahran, Victoria, Australia
Glenys Harrington
Affiliation:
Infection Control and Hospital Epidemiology Unit, Alfred Hospital, Prahran, Victoria, Australia
Phil Russo
Affiliation:
Infection Control and Hospital Epidemiology Unit, Alfred Hospital, Prahran, Victoria, Australia
S. Wesselingh
Affiliation:
Infection Control and Hospital Epidemiology Unit, Alfred Hospital, Prahran, Victoria, Australia
*
Microbiology, Alfred Hospital, Commercial Road, Prahran 3181, Australia
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Vancomycin and rifampicin replaced cephazolin as antibiotic prophylaxis for coronary artery bypass surgery at our institution. Following this intervention, there was a significant decrease (P < .001) in the surgical-site infection rate from 10.5 (95% confidence interval, 8.2 to 13.3) to 4.9 (95% confidence interval, 3.2 to 7.1) infections per 100 procedures. An estimated $576,655 (Australian) was saved between two 12-month periods.

Type
Concise Communications
Information
Infection Control & Hospital Epidemiology , Volume 23 , Issue 7 , July 2002 , pp. 402 - 404
Copyright
Copyright © The Society for Healthcare Epidemiology of America 2002

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1.Kreter, B, Woods, M. Antibiotic prophylaxis for cardiothoracic operations. Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 1992;104:590–599.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
2.Gilbert, DN, Moellering, RC, Sande, MA, eds. Sanford Guide to Antimicrobial Therapy. Hyde Park, VT: Antimicrobial Therapy Inc.; 2000. Table 15B.Google Scholar
3.Spicer, J, Christiansen, K, Currie, B, et al. Therapeutic Guidelines: Antibiotic Version 11. Victoria, Australia: Therapeutic Guidelines Limited; 2000.Google Scholar
4.Horan, TC, Gaynes, RP, Martone, WJ, et al. CDC definitions of surgical site infection, 1992: a modification of CDC definitions of surgical site infections. Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol 1992;13:606–608.Google Scholar
5.Spelman, DW, Russo, P, Harrington, G, et al. Risk factors for surgical wound infection and bacteremia following coronary artery bypass surgery. Aust N Z J Surg 2000;70:45–51.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
6.Jenney, AW, Harrington, GA, Russo, PI, Spelman, DW. The cost of surgical site infections following coronary artery bypass graft surgery. Aust N Z J Surg 2001;71:662–664.Google Scholar
7.Maki, DG, Bolin, MJ, Stolz, SM, Kroncke, GM, Archer, CW, Myerowitz, PD. Comparative study of cefazolin, cefamandole and vancomycin for surgical prophylaxis in cardiac and vascular operations. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 1992;104:1423–1434.Google Scholar
8.Vuorisalo, S, Pokala, K, Syrjala, H. Comparison of vancomycin and cefuroxime for infection prophylaxis in coronary artery bypass surgery. Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol 1998;19:234–239.Google Scholar
9.Archer, GL, Armstrong, BC, Kline, BJ. Rifampicin blood and tissue levels in patients undergoing cardiac valve surgery. Antimicrob Agents Chemother 1992;21:800–803.Google Scholar
10.Tornieporth, NG, Roberts, RB, John, J, Hafner, A, Riley, LW. Risk factors associated with vancomycin-resistant Enterococcus faecium infection or colonization in 145 matched case patients and control patients. Clin Infect Dis 1996;23:767–772.Google Scholar