Jj. Curtis et al., RANDOMIZED, PROSPECTIVE COMPARISON OF FIRST-GENERATION AND 2ND-GENERATION CEPHALOSPORINS AS INFECTION PROPHYLAXIS FOR CARDIAC-SURGERY, The American journal of surgery, 166(6), 1993, pp. 734-737
Surgical wound infections after cardiovascular surgery may be life thr
eatening and are resource intensive. Second-generation cephalosporins
are purported to have a broader antimicrobial spectrum than first-gene
ration cephalosporins and, therefore, may be more efficacious for infe
ction prophylaxis. We have conducted a randomized prospective study of
702 patients undergoing open heart surgery to test the hypothesis tha
t the second-generation cephalosporin, cefuroxime, will be more effica
cious for infection prophylaxis than the first-generation cephalospori
n, cefazolin. Patients were randomized to receive cefazolin 1 g intrav
enously every 8 hours for 48 hours begun 1 hour preoperatively plus 1
g after 4 hours of surgery (8 doses, n = 425) or cefuroxime 1.5 g 1 ho
ur prior to surgery plus 1.5 g every 12 hours for 3 additional doses (
4 doses, n 277). Infection was defined as a draining wound with or wit
hout a positive culture. There was no difference in the wound infectio
n rate between the groups (p = 0.68). Chest wound infections occurred
in 2.1% of patients treated with cefazolin and 2.9% of patients treate
d with cefuroxime (p = 0.79). The rate of true mediastinitis requiring
exploration and drainage was 0.7% in both groups (p = 0.84). Leg infe
ctions occurred in 6.6% of cefazolin-treated patients and 5.6% of cefu
roxime-treated patients (p = 0.83). The second-generation cephalospori
n, cefuroxime, did not reduce the incidence of wound infection when co
mpared with the first-generation cephalosporin, cefazolin. Since insti
tutional antibiotic acquisition and administration costs vary, careful
analysis of these factors will allow determination of the most cost-e
ffective infection prophylaxis regimen in cardiac surgery.