Key result
Cephamandole plus tinidazole shows no benefit over tinidazole alone for wound infections in colorectal surgery.
Why the study?
It was uncertain whether prophylactic therapy with an antibiotic active against anaerobic bacteria needs supplementation with an antibiotic active against aerobic bacteria to minimize postoperative wound sepsis in elective colorectal surgery.
Does tinidazole and cephamandole reduce postoperative wound sepsis compared to tinidazole alone in patients undergoing elective colorectal surgery?
RCT (n=211)
Double-blind
randomized
Does tinidazole and cephamandole reduce postoperative wound sepsis compared to tinidazole alone in patients undergoing elective colorectal surgery?
Absolute Event Rate: 7% vs 9%
p-value: p=> 0.7
The addition of cephamandole to tinidazole did not significantly reduce overall wound infection rates in elective colorectal surgery compared to tinidazole alone, though subgroup analyses suggested potential benefit.
Adding cephamandole to tinidazole offers no benefit for prophylaxis; confirms tinidazole monotherapy suffices in elective colorectal surgery.
A prospective randomized double-blind clinical trial was undertaken to determine whether prophylactic therapy with an antibiotic agent active against anaerobic bacteria needs to be supplemented by an antibiotic agent predominantly active against aerobic bacteria to minimize postoperative wound sepsis caused by enteric organisms in elective colorectal surgery. Two hundred and eleven patients were studied, of whom 100 received tinidazole and cephamandole, and 111 received tinidazole and a placebo. Wound infection occurred in 7% of the tinidazole/cephamandole group and in 9% of the tinidazole/placebo group (P > 0.7). After patients who required a second laparotomy, and those with staphylococcal wound infections were excluded, the wound infection rate in patients who received prophylaxis with combination chemotherapy was 2% compared with 9% in patients who received tinidazole alone (P = 0.03, Fisher's exact test). When patients with intra-abdominal sepsis were also excluded, the wound infection rate in the tinidazole group fell to 7%; in the combination therapy group, it remained at 2% (P = 0.08). There was a significant reduction in the mean wound infection rate in the combination chemotherapy group (P = 0.05, Fisher's exact test) when patients of the two surgeons who contributed two-thirds of the patients in the trial were excluded from analysis.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Cuthbertson et al. (1983) conducted an RCT in Elective colorectal surgery (n=211). Cephamandole with tinidazole vs. Tinidazole and placebo was evaluated on Postoperative wound sepsis (p=> 0.7). Prophylactic therapy with cephamandole and tinidazole did not significantly reduce overall wound infection compared to tinidazole alone in elective colorectal surgery (7% vs 9%, P > 0.7).
Synapse has enriched 4 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: