Antibiotikaprofylax vid kirurgiska ingrepp - SBU

Table 4.5.9 Prosthesis and antibiotic in cement.
Author
Year
Reference
Country
Study design
Population
characteristics
Intervention/
Method (I)
Control (C)
Results
Outcome 1
Intervention
Withdrawal
Drop outs
Study quality
and relevance
Comments
Chiu
2002
[31]
Taiwan
RCT, open
randomised by
chart number
TKR, primary operation.
Pts with diabetes excluded.
If double knee operation,
one knee randomised to
each group.
Follow-up 26–80 months
I: Cefuroxime in
cement. All pts got
cefazolin 0.5 g x 4 +
gentamicin 80 mg x
2 for 36 h followed
by po cefazolin for
7 days (number of
prosthesis=178)
C: Regular cement.
All pts got cefazolin
0.5 g x 4 + gentamicin
80 mg x 2 for 36 h
followed by po cefazolin
for 7 days
(number of prosthesis=162)
Deep infection
I: 0/178 (0%)
C: 5/162 (3.1%)
p=0.024
Superficial infection
I: 1/178
C: 1/178 ns
Not stated
Moderate
Inadequate randomisation
procedure.
Timing of systemic ab
unclear. No power
calculation
Josefsson
1981, 1990,
1993
[34–36]
Sweden
RCT, open,
multicenter
THR Prosthesis
Trial started 1976.
Follow-up 1, 2,
5, 10 years
I: Gentamicin
in cement (number
of prosthesis=851)
C: Regular cement
+ iv dicloxacillin,
cloxacillin, cefalexin,
or pencillin. First
dose 1–24 h before
surgery, continued for
7–14 days depending
on center (number
of prosthesis=834)
Deep infection
2 years
I: 3/821 (0.4%)
C: 13/812 (1.6%)
p