Single-dose antibiotic prophylaxis in maxillofacial surgery

Is Antibiotic Prophylaxis Reasonable in Parotid Surgery? Retrospective Analysis of Surgical Site Infection

Background: The prophylactic use of antibiotics in parotid region surgery continues to be a subject of debate. The aim of this study is to elucidate the impact of antibiotic prophylaxis on surgical site infections (SSIs) in parotid region surgery. Patients and Methods: Patients who received antibiotic prophylaxis during the peri-operative period were designated as group 1, whereas those who did not were categorized into group 2. Group 1 cases were further subdivided into three subgroups based on different antibiotic usage patterns. Patient individual information was collected. Clinical data such as surgical duration, post-operative hospital stay, incision infection status, and antibiotic usage were recorded. All data were compared and analyzed among different groups. Results: A total of 357 patients were included in the study, with no statistically significant differences in baseline characteristics. Pre-operative American Society of Anesthesiologists scores did not significantly differ between groups (p = 0.151), but there was a significant distinction in National Nosocomial Infection Surveillance (NNIS) index values (p = 0.044). Furthermore, surgical duration (p = 0.001) and pathology types (p = 0.016) differed significantly. The post-operative hospital stay in group 1 was longer than that in group 2 (p < 0.01). The post-operative SSI rate in group 1 was lower than that in group 2 without statistical significance (2.55% vs. 5.59%, p = 0.141). The logistic regression analysis showed that malignant tumors, longer surgical durations, and higher NNIS index scores correlated positively with post-operative SSI rates. Meanwhile, compared with non-use, all three different antibiotic use modes correlated negatively with SSI occurrence. Conclusions: Antibiotic prophylaxis in parotid gland surgery shows no significant reduction in SSI occurrence. If there is a compelling reason to administer prophylactic antibiotics, pre-operative single dose may be a relatively feasible measure for preventing SSIs.

Antibiotics for preventing infection at the surgical site: Single dose vs. multiple doses

Background

Surgical site infections are common and expensive infections that can cause fatalities or poor patient outcomes. To prevent these infections, antibiotic prophylaxis is used. However, excessive antibiotic use is related to higher costs and the emergence of antimicrobial resistance.

Objectives

The present meta-analysis aimed to compare the effectiveness of a single dosage versus several doses of antibiotics in preventing the development of surgical site infections.

Methods

PubMed was used to find clinical trials evaluating the effectiveness of a single dosage versus several doses of antibiotics in avoiding the development of surgical site infections. The study included trials that were published between 1984 and 2022. Seventy-four clinical trials were included in the analysis. Odds ratios were used to compare groups with 95% confidence intervals. The data were displayed using OR to generate a forest plot. Review Manager (RevMan version 5.4) was used to do the meta-analysis.

Results

Regarding clean operations, there were 389 surgical site infections out of 5,634 patients in a single dose group (6.90%) and 349 surgical site infections out of 5,621 patients in multiple doses group (6.21%) (OR = 1.11, lower CI = 0.95, upper CI = 1.30). Regarding clean-contaminated operations, there were 137 surgical site infections out of 2,715 patients in a single dose group (5.05%) and 137 surgical site infections out of 2,355 patients in multiple doses group (5.82%) (OR = 0.87, lower CI = 0.68, upper CI = 1.11). Regarding contaminated operations, there were 302 surgical site infections out of 3,262 patients in a single dose group (9.26%) and 276 surgical site infections out of 3,212 patients in multiple doses group (8.59%) (OR = 1.11, lower CI = 0.84, upper CI = 1.47). In general, there were 828 surgical site infections out of 11,611 patients in a single dose group (7.13%) and 762 surgical site infections out of 11,188 patients in multiple doses group (6.81%) (OR = 1.05, lower CI = 0.93, upper CI = 1.20). The difference between groups was not significant.

Conclusion

The present study showed that using a single-dose antimicrobial prophylaxis was equally effective as using multiple doses of antibiotics in decreasing surgical site infections.

The role of postoperative prophylactic antibiotics in the treatment of facial fractures: a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled pilot clinical study. Part 2: Mandibular fractures in 59 patients

The aim of this study was to evaluate the difference between a 5-day and a 1-day postoperative course of antibiotic on the incidence of infection after mandibular fractures involving the alveolus. Sixty-two patients with fractures of the mandible involving the dentoalveolar region were randomly assigned to 2 groups, both of which were given amoxicillin/clavulanic acid 1.2 g intravenously every 8 h from admission until 24 h postoperatively. The 5-day group were then given amoxicillin/clavulanic acid 625 mg orally every 8 h for another 4 days. The 1-day group was given an oral placebo at the same intervals. Follow-up appointments were 1, 2, 4, 6, 12 weeks and 6 months postoperatively. Development of an infection was the primary end point. Fifty-nine of the 62 patients completed this study. Six of the 30 patients in the 5-day group (20%) and 6 out of the 29 in the 1-day group (21%) developed local wound infections. Three of the 6 in the 1-day group developed purulent discharge and swelling. One patient in the 5-day group developed a rash on the trunk. There were no significant differences in the incidence of infection or side effects between the groups. In fractures of the mandible involving the alveolus, a 1-day postoperative course of antibiotic is as effective in preventing infective complications as a 5-day regimen.

The role of postoperative prophylactic antibiotics in the treatment of facial fractures: a randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled pilot clinical study. Part 1: orbital fractures in 62 patients

The aim of this study was to evaluate the difference between the effects of a 5-day and a 1-day course of antibiotics on the incidence of postoperative infection after displaced fractures of the orbit. A total of 62 patients with orbital blow-out fractures were randomly assigned to two groups, both of which were given amoxicillin/clavulanic acid 1.2g intravenously every 8h from the time of admission to 24h postoperatively. The 5-day group were then given amoxicillin/clavulanic acid 625 mg orally every 8h for 4 further days. The 1-day group were given placebo orally at the same time intervals. Follow up appointments were 1, 2, 4, 6, and 12 weeks, and 6 months, postoperatively. An infection in the orbital region was the primary end point. Sixty of the 62 patients completed the study. Two of the 29 patients in the 5-day group (6.8%) and 1/31 patients in the 1-day group (3.2%) developed local infections. In the 5-day group 1 patient developed diarrhoea. In the 1-day group 1 patient developed a rash on the trunk. There were no significant differences in the incidence of infection or side effects between the groups. We conclude that in displaced orbital fractures a postoperative 1-day course of antibiotics is as effective in preventing infective complications as a 5-day regimen.

Single-dose and multi-dose clindamycin therapy fails to demonstrate efficacy in preventing infectious and inflammatory complications in third molar surgery

The goal of this study was to evaluate the efficacy of single- and multi-dose (5-day) clindamycin therapy for the prevention of inflammatory complications in patients undergoing lower third molar surgical extraction with bone removal. Patients who qualified for the prospective, randomized, double-masked, placebo-controlled trial were randomly divided into three groups: (1) single dose of oral clindamycin administered preoperatively (single-dose group); (2) clindamycin administered preoperatively with continued therapy for 5 days (5-day group); and (3) a placebo group. The following parameters were evaluated on the first, second and seventh days postsurgery: trismus, facial swelling, body temperature, lymphadenopathy, alveolar osteitis and subjective pain sensations. There were 86 patients (31 in the single-dose group, 28 in the 5-day group and 27 in the placebo group) enrolled in the study. There were no statistically significant differences in postoperative inflammatory complications in patients during the first and second days postsurgery. A statistically significant variation in body temperature was reported on the seventh day. Analysis of the postoperative analgesic intake did not show statistically significant differences between examined groups. Clindamycin applied in a single preoperative dose of 600 mg with or without subsequent 5-day therapy does not demonstrate efficacy in prophylaxis for postoperative inflammatory complications after third molar surgery.

Influence of Different Prophylactic Antibiotic Regimens on Implant Survival Rate: A Retrospective Clinical Study

BACKGROUND

The routine use of antibiotics in oral implant treatment seems to be widespread. The pre- or postoperative use of antibiotics in conjunction with implant surgery and its correlation with failure and success rates are poorly documented in the literature. The debate regarding overprescription of antibiotics raises the need for a critical evaluation of proper antibiotic coverage in association with implant treatment.

PURPOSE

The purpose of this study was to compare the implant survival rate following a 1-day single-dose preoperative antibiotic regimen with that following a 1-week postoperative antibiotic protocol.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

The study included 868 consecutively treated patients. A total of 3,021 implants were placed. The population was split into two categories, either receiving a 1-day single-dose administration only, or a 1-week postoperative administration of antibiotics. Healing was evaluated at second-stage surgery (6 months for the upper jaw, 3 months for the lower jaw). Failure was defined as removal of implants because of non-osseointegration. Statistical analyses were performed with analysis of variance and the Scheffé test, with a significance level of 5% for comparison of data.

RESULTS

No significant differences with regard to complications and implant survival were found in the study.

CONCLUSION

Based on the present data, a more restrictive regimen consisting of a 1-day dose of prophylactic antibiotic in conjunction with routine implant procedures is recommended.

Prophylaxis with cefazolin plus clindamycin in clean-contaminated maxillofacial surgery

PURPOSE

Infections after maxillofacial surgery are usually due to aerobic and anaerobic gram-positive cocci and gram-negative bacilli. Various antimicrobials, including cephalosporins, beta-lactams/beta-lactamase inhibitors, aminoglycosides, lincosamides, and fluoroquinolones, have been tested for use for perioperative prophylaxis in maxillofacial surgery. However, the best regimen has not been determined. We tested the safety and the efficacy of clindamycin plus cefazolin as perioperative prophylaxis for patients undergoing major maxillofacial procedures.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Intravenous cefazolin and clindamycin in 3 doses were administered to 155 patients undergoing major maxillofacial procedures. After surgery, patients were monitored for the presence of infection and side effects.

RESULTS

No patient experienced a fever or infection after surgery. No side effects related to these antibiotics were observed.

CONCLUSIONS

The antibiotics used as prophylaxis in maxillofacial surgery should possess an adequate coverage against gram-positive aerobic and anaerobic cocci as well as gram-negative bacilli. Prophylaxis with cefazolin plus clindamycin in major maxillofacial seems safe and effective.

Ceftriaxone versus Other Antibiotics for Surgical Prophylaxis

OBJECTIVE

To investigate possible differences in prophylaxis with ceftriaxone compared with other antimicrobial agents for surgical-site infections and remote infections such as respiratory tract infections (RTIs) and urinary tract infections (UTIs).

METHODS

The efficacy of ceftriaxone was compared with that of other antibiotics in the perioperative prophylaxis of local (surgical wound) and remote (RTIs and UTIs) infections in a meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials published between 1984 and 2003. The analysis was based on a 2 x 2 contingency table with classification by treatment and number of infections obtained from individual studies.

RESULTS

Evaluations were performed on 48 studies, for a total of 17 565 patients. Overall, 406 patients (4.8%) in the ceftriaxone group and 525 (6.3%) in the comparator group developed a surgical-site infection (log odds ratio [OR] -0.30 [CI -0.50 to -0.13]; p < 0.0001). RTIs were observed in 292 (6.01%) patients in the ceftriaxone group and in 369 (7.6%) patients in the comparator group, (log OR -0.30 [CI -0.55 to -0.09]; p = 0.0013). UTIs were reported for 2.2% of the ceftriaxone prophylaxis patients compared with 3.74% of the comparator group patients (log OR -0.54 [CI -1.18 to -0.16]; p < 0.0001). Overall, in clean surgery 195 (5.1%) and 234 (6.2%) patients developed a surgical site infection in the ceftriaxone and comparator groups, respectively (log OR -0.22 [CI -0.51 to 0.01]; p = 0.0476). RTIs were prevented for all but 1.57% of patients in the ceftriaxone group and 2.62% of patients in the comparator group (p = 0.01) in clean surgery, and for 9.54% of the ceftriaxone group versus 11.6% of the comparator group (p = 0.01) in clean-contaminated surgery. While results observed in clean surgery did not show statistically significant superiority of ceftriaxone in preventing UTI insurgence (log OR -0.21 [CI 0.0-0.65]; p = 0.7702), this was clearly shown in the clean-contaminated surgery. In fact, 4.47% of patients in the ceftriaxone group versus 7.52% of patients in the comparator group developed a UTI (log OR -0.56 [CI -1.25 to -0.16]; p < 0.0001). Adverse events were observed in a similar proportion in the ceftriaxone prophylaxis and the comparator groups (0.35% and 0.23%, respectively). Duration of prophylaxis did not influence outcome of infection.

CONCLUSIONS

The meta-analysis showed that ceftriaxone is statistically superior to other antibiotics in preventing both local and remote postoperative infections.

Prophylactic single-dose administration of 600 mg clindamycin versus 4-time administration of 600 mg clindamycin in orthognathic surgery: A prospective randomized study in bilateral mandibular sagittal ramus osteotomies

OBJECTIVE

The purpose of this study was to compare a single 600-mg dose of preoperative intravenously administered clindamycin with a 24-hour 600-mg regimen of clindamycin as prophylaxis for postoperative infections in bilateral sagittal ramus osteotomies.

STUDY DESIGN

Seventy patients were assigned at random to an antibiotic protocol. Postoperative infection was assessed by one clinician blinded to the protocol. All data were tabulated, and a statistical analysis was performed by means of the paired t test.

RESULTS

In 3 patients, an infection developed. Two of those patients belonged to the single-dose clindamycin group and the other to the 24-hour clindamycin prophylaxis group. The sutures were removed, and wound exudate specimens were obtained for Gram staining and culture. After a 5-day period of 500 mg amoxicillin 4 times daily, the parameters of infection normalized.

CONCLUSIONS

There were no statistically significant differences between postoperative infection after the single dose of clindamycin and infection in the 24-hour prophylaxis group (P =.3244).

Antibiotic use in aesthetic surgery: a national survey and literature review

Although much has been written regarding the use of antibiotics in surgery, no clear guidelines exist in the literature regarding the use of antibiotics in aesthetic surgery. To determine the pattern of antibiotic use in aesthetic surgery, a comprehensive survey was mailed to 6000 American Society of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgeons members and candidates. A total of 1767 completed responses were returned, which represents a response rate of 30 percent. The type, route, and duration of antibiotic administration are reported for 10 common cosmetic surgical procedures. The results of the survey confirmed that there is widespread use of antibiotics in aesthetic surgery. To provide guidelines for proper antibiotic use, the current literature was extensively reviewed. The authors found little or no correlation between reported clinical practice and the literature. It is hoped that this study will stimulate further investigation into this area of aesthetic surgery.

Preoperative antibiotic prophylaxis in orthognathic surgery: a randomized, double-blind, and placebo-controlled clinical study

PURPOSE

This study evaluated the need for antibiotic prophylaxis in orthognathic surgery.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Fifty-four patients (age range, 18 to 40 years) underwent bimaxillary orthognatic surgery. After randomization, a placebo (n = 19), 2,200 mg amoxicillin-clavulanic acid (n = 18), or 1,500 mg cefuroxime (n = 17) was administered in a double-blind fashion. During the first month, the postoperative course was observed according to the clinical parameters of infection, total leukocyte count and erythrocyte sedimentation rate (ESR).

RESULTS

Fifteen of 54 patients developed a wound infection. Of these, 10 had received a placebo; 3, cefuroxime; and 2, amoxicillin-clavulanic acid.

CONCLUSIONS

There was a statistically significant (P<.004) increased risk of having an infectious complication after bimaxillary orthognathic surgery without antibiotic prophylaxis. No significant difference in the incidence of infectious complications was found between the 2 medications.