American journal of therapeutics · 2019
Cefazolin Monotherapy Versus Cefazolin Plus Aminoglycosides for Antimicrobial Prophylaxis of Type III Open Fractures.
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Patanwala Asad E, Radosevich John J, Meshay Ian, Naderi Mandana, Culver Mark A, Lee Yong G, Weinberg Jordan A, Khobrani Moteb, Nix David E
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: There are conflicting recommendations between organizations regarding aminoglycoside use for the prophylaxis of type III open fractures.
STUDY QUESTION: To compare cefazolin monotherapy versus cefazolin plus aminoglycoside therapy for prophylaxis of type III open fractures in trauma patients.
STUDY DESIGN: This was a multicenter, retrospective, cohort study conducted in 3 academic medical centers in the United States. Consecutive adult trauma patients with type III open fractures between January 2014 and September 2016 were included. Patients were divided into 2 groups: (1) cefazolin monotherapy versus (2) cefazolin plus aminoglycoside.
MEASURES AND OUTCOMES: The primary outcome measure was the occurrence of infection at the open fracture site. The secondary outcome measure was the occurrence of acute kidney injury.
RESULTS: There were 134 patients included in the study cohort. Of these, 39 received cefazolin monotherapy and 95 received cefazolin plus aminoglycoside. Overall, the mean age was 39 ± 15 years, 105 (78%) were male, and the most common fracture location was tibia/fibula (n = 74, 56%). Infection at the open fracture site occurred in 6 of 39 patients (15%) in the cefazolin monotherapy group and 15 of 95 patients (16%) in the cefazolin plus aminoglycoside group (P = 1.000). Acute kidney injury occurred in 0 of 39 (0%) in the cefazolin monotherapy group and 1 of 95 (1%) in the cefazolin plus aminoglycoside group (P = 1.000).
CONCLUSIONS: Cefazolin monotherapy may be appropriate for antimicrobial prophylaxis of type III open fractures in trauma patients.
STUDY QUESTION: To compare cefazolin monotherapy versus cefazolin plus aminoglycoside therapy for prophylaxis of type III open fractures in trauma patients.
STUDY DESIGN: This was a multicenter, retrospective, cohort study conducted in 3 academic medical centers in the United States. Consecutive adult trauma patients with type III open fractures between January 2014 and September 2016 were included. Patients were divided into 2 groups: (1) cefazolin monotherapy versus (2) cefazolin plus aminoglycoside.
MEASURES AND OUTCOMES: The primary outcome measure was the occurrence of infection at the open fracture site. The secondary outcome measure was the occurrence of acute kidney injury.
RESULTS: There were 134 patients included in the study cohort. Of these, 39 received cefazolin monotherapy and 95 received cefazolin plus aminoglycoside. Overall, the mean age was 39 ± 15 years, 105 (78%) were male, and the most common fracture location was tibia/fibula (n = 74, 56%). Infection at the open fracture site occurred in 6 of 39 patients (15%) in the cefazolin monotherapy group and 15 of 95 patients (16%) in the cefazolin plus aminoglycoside group (P = 1.000). Acute kidney injury occurred in 0 of 39 (0%) in the cefazolin monotherapy group and 1 of 95 (1%) in the cefazolin plus aminoglycoside group (P = 1.000).
CONCLUSIONS: Cefazolin monotherapy may be appropriate for antimicrobial prophylaxis of type III open fractures in trauma patients.