Ceftriaxone versus cefazolin in peripheral arterial operations: a randomized, prospective trial.

Author(s): Ross CB, Wheeler WG 2nd, Jones MJ, Kerins CA, Peek TE

Affiliation(s): Department of Surgery, University of Louisville School of Medicine, Ky, USA.

Publication date & source: 1997-01, South Med J., 90(1):16-22.

Publication type: Clinical Trial; Randomized Controlled Trial

Serious morbidity and mortality are associated with postoperative wound infections in peripheral vascular surgery. The use of prophylactic antibiotics is considered the standard of care, with attention focused on the most efficacious agent. A prospective, randomized study was conducted to evaluate the efficacy of ceftriaxone versus cefazolin in prevention of postoperative wound infections in a group of patients who had peripheral arterial operations between October 1991 and February 1993. Patient characteristics associated with an increased risk of postoperative wound infection were evaluated. Prophylaxis was provided for 105 operations with cefazolin and 103 operations with ceftriaxone. The overall wound infection rate was 3.85%. Six operations (5.7%) in the cefazolin group were complicated by wound infection versus 2 operations (1.9%) in the ceftriaxone group. Diabetes (6 infections/64 operations; infection rate, 9%) and a personal history of previous aortocoronary bypass (5 infections/49 operations; infection rate, 10%) were characteristics associated with an increased chance for postoperative wound infection. Ceftriaxone is therapeutically equivalent to cefazolin in the prevention of postoperative wound infections in peripheral vascular surgery.