Why the study?
Is ceftriaxone prophylaxis as effective and cost-effective as alternative antimicrobial agents in surgical procedures?
Is ceftriaxone prophylaxis as effective and cost-effective as alternative antimicrobial agents in surgical procedures?
Ceftriaxone single-shot prophylaxis is an effective and cost-effective alternative to other antimicrobial regimens across various surgical specialties.
Supports ceftriaxone as effective lower-cost prophylaxis; leaves open validation in randomized trials.
The microbiology, efficacy and cost-effectiveness of ceftriaxone prophylaxis were compared with those of alternative antimicrobial agents in abdominal, cardiovascular, thoracic, orthopaedic, neurosurgical and general surgical procedures published since 1996. Ceftriaxone was compared with cefazolin +/- metronidazole, cefoxitin, cefuroxime, ceftazidime, cefotaxime, cefepime + metronidazole, penicillins, ticarcillin/clavulanic acid, ampicillin/sulbactam, vancomycin and combined clindamycin/gentamicin. Ceftriaxone, used primarily as 'single shot prophylaxis', was at least as clinically effective if not better than the comparative single- and multiple-dose agents over the broad range of surgical procedures. Furthermore the overall cost of ceftriaxone prophylaxis has often been shown to be markedly less than comparators, despite the relatively high acquisition cost of ceftriaxoe, when factors other than acquisition cost were considered. Advances in surgical techniques, the changes in bacterial ecology in hospitals, the spread of bacterial resistance and the substantial increase in the surgical population at risk suggest that third generation cephalosporins, particularly ceftriaxone, should be taken into consideration for surgical prophylaxis.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Esposito et al. (2005) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 3 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: