medigraphic.com
Federación Mexicana de Ginecología y Obstetricia, A.C.

2005, Number 10

<< Back Next >>

Ginecol Obstet Mex 2005; 73 (10)

Incidence of infected surgical wound and prophylaxis with cefotaxime in cesarean section

Lemus RR, García GLB, Basavilvazo RMA, Cruz AA, Peralta PML, Hernández VM

Language: Spanish
References: 36
Page: 537-544
PDF size: 71.06 Kb.


ABSTRACT

Background: Surgical wound infection after cesarean section varies from 2.5 to 16.1%, thus the utilization of antibiotic prophylaxis has increased routinely and irrationally. Despite this, we can still see cases of infections.
Objective: To determine if the antibiotic prophylaxis with cefotaxime is associated with the decreased incidence of wound infection in patients submitted to cesarean section without risk factors.
Patients and methods: This study was carried out as a randomized clinical trial in patients submitted to cesarean section. Two groups were formed: in the first group we administered cefotaxime and the other one did not receive prophylaxis. The follow-up lasted 30 days to evaluate clinical data of infection.
Results: We performed 3,300 cesarean in the studied period; 1,000 patients had the inclusion criteria to participate in the study. A surgical wound infection was observed in 31 (0.96%) patients without risk factors. In 14 of these patients we administered cefotaxime, and in 17 patients we did not use prophylaxis. The highest frequency of infection was observed in the group of 24 to 30 years old, with 16 patients (51.6%). The clinical data of infection were: dehiscence in 29 patients (93.5%), pus secretion in 23 (74.2%), and fever in only 3 (9.7%) of them. The hospital stay after the infection was of five days in 75% of the cases. When the use of cefotaxime as prophylaxis was analyzed in both groups we had an odds ratio of 0.82, which was not significant.
Discussion: The use of cefotaxime in patients operated of cesarean does not have great transcendence since it does not reduce the infection incidence. The use of antibiotics in an irrational way implies a high cost, since the majority of the post-operation infections are not complicated, involving exclusively the skin and cellular subcutaneous tissue. Then, the cases with risk factors should be analyzed carefully for the cefotaxime administration.


REFERENCES

  1. Danforth DN. Cesarean section. JAMA 1985;253:811-8.

  2. McNally M, Curtain OAC. Does closure of the peritoneum during caesarean section influence postoperative morbidity and subsequent bladder adhesion formation? J Obstet Gynaecol 1997;17:239-41.

  3. Ramadani H. Cesarean section intraoperative blood loss and mode of place separation. Int J Gynaecol Obstet 2004;87:114-8.

  4. Rashid M, Rashid RS. Higher order repeat caesarean sections: how safe are five or more? BJOG 2004;111:1090-4.

  5. Waaldijk K. The immediate management of fresh obstetric fistulas. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2004;191:795-9.

  6. Anderson E, Gates S. Techniques and materials for closure of the abdominal wall in caesarean section. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2004;18:CD004663.

  7. Wallace D, Hernandez W, Betal SJ. Prevention of abdominal wound disruption utilizing the Smead-Jones closure technique. Obstet Gynecol 1990;56:20-24.

  8. Nichols RL. Surgical infections: prevention and treatment – 1965 to 1995. Am J Surg 1996;172:68-74.

  9. Ikpeze OC, Nwosu OB. Features of uterine fibroids treated by abdominal myomectomy. J Obstet Gynaecol 1998;18:569-71.

  10. Committee on Antimicrobial Agents, Canadian Infectious Disease. Society Waddell, Thomas K Rostein. Can Med Assoc J 1994;151:925-93.

  11. Pirwany R, Mahmood IT. Audit of infective morbidity following caesarean section at a district general hospital. J Obstet Gynaecol 1997;17:439-43.

  12. Wilson JA, Clark JJ. Obesity: impediment to postsurgical wound healing. Adv Skin Wound Care 2004;17:246-435.

  13. Khan MN, Naqvi AH, Irshad K, Chaudhary AR. Frequency and risk factor of abdominal wound dehiscence. J Coll Physicians Surg Pak 2004;14:335-57.

  14. Gates S, Anderson E. Wound drainage for caesarean section. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2005;25:CD004549.

  15. Schneider SM, Veyres P, Pivot X, et al. Malnutrition is an independent factor associated with nosocomial infections. Br J Nutr 2004;92:105-11.

  16. Perlow JH, Morgan MA. Massive maternal obesity and perioperative cesarean morbidity. Am J Obstet Gynecol 1994;170:560-5.

  17. Takoudes TC, Weitzen S, Slocum J, Malee M. Risk of cesarean wound complications in diabetic gestations. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2004;191:958-63.

  18. Virkkunen J, Heikkinen M, Lepantalo M, Metsanoja R, Salenius JP. Diabetes as an independent risk factor for early postoperative complications in critical limb ischemia. J Vasc Surg 2004;40:761-7.

  19. Mathew PJ, Madan R, Subramaniam R, et al. Efficacy of low-dose dexamethasone for preventing postoperative nausea and vomiting following strabismus repair in children. Anaesth Intensive Care 2004;32:372-6.

  20. Norma Oficial de Procedimientos. Manual de procedimientos para la vigilancia epidemiológica: prevención y control de las infecciones nosocomiales, IMSS. Clave de la Norma: 2600-54-018-A003, 2000;pp:44-46.

  21. Verschuur HP, de Wever WW, van Benthem PP. Antibiotic prophylaxis in clean and clean-contaminated early surgery. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2004;3:CD003996.

  22. Grandjean JG, Mariani MA, D’Alfonso A, Musazzi A, Boonstra PW. Endoventriculoplasty using autologous endocardium for anterior left ventricular aneurysms. Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 2005;53:52-55.

  23. Edwards PS, Lipp A, Holmes A. Preoperative skin antiseptics for preventing surgical wound infections after clean surgery. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2004;3:CD003949.

  24. Saunders S. The effective management and administration of premedication. Nurs Times 2004;100:40-43.

  25. Eason EL, Wells GA, Garber GE, Hopkins ML. Prophylactic antibiotics for abdominal hysterectomy: indicative for low-risk Canadian women. J Obstet Gynaecol Can 2004;12:1067-72.

  26. Woodfield JC, Van Rij AM, Pettigrew RA, van der Linden A, Bolt D. Using cost of infection as a tool to demonstrate a difference prophylactic antibiotic efficacy: a prospective randomized comparison of the pharmacoeconomic effectiveness of ceftriaxone and cefotaxime prophylaxis in abdominal surgery. World J Surg 2004;9:20-26.

  27. Platt R, Zaleznik DF, Hopkins DD. Perioperative antibiotic prophylaxis for herniography and breast surgery. N Engl J Med 1990;322:153-60.

  28. Lofgren M, Poromaa IS, Stjerndahl JH, Restrom B. Postoperative infections and antibiotic prophylaxis for hysterectomy in Sweden: a study by the Swedish National Report for Gynecologic Surgery. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand 2004;83:1202-7.

  29. Hall JC, Hall JL. The measurement of wound infection after breast surgery. Breast J 2004;10:412-5.

  30. Ergun O, Celik A, Ergun G, Ozok G. Prophylactic antibiotic use in pediatric burn units. Eur J Pediatr Surg 2004;14:422-6.

  31. Abouassaly R, Steinberg JR, Lemieux M, et al. Complications of tension-free vaginal tape surgery: a multi-institutional review. BJU Int 2004;94:110-3.

  32. DiPiro JT, Cheung RPF, Bowden TA Jr. Single dose systemic antibiotic prophylaxis of surgical wound infections. Am J Surg 1998;152:552-9.

  33. Girotti M, Fedoruk S, Irvine-Meek J. Control of surgical antibiotic prophylaxis by a “handbook”. Does it work? Can J Surg 2000;33:385-8.

  34. Lemus RSR, Martínez ROA, Matute GM, et al. Sacropexia con fascia de recto abdominal en el tratamiento del prolapso de la cúpula vaginal. Ginecol Obstet Mex 2003;71:639-44.

  35. Nichols RL. Antibiotic prophylaxis in surgery. Curr Opin Infect Dis 1994;7:647-52.

  36. Nava FJ, Enríquez MC, Hernández-Valencia M. Condiciones atribuibles y costos de la morbilidad materno-fetal en pacientes con ruptura prematura de membranas después de las 27 semanas de gestación. Ginecol Obstet Mex 2003;71:343-8.




2020     |     www.medigraphic.com