Powered by OpenAIRE graph
Found an issue? Give us feedback
image/svg+xml art designer at PLoS, modified by Wikipedia users Nina, Beao, JakobVoss, and AnonMoos Open Access logo, converted into svg, designed by PLoS. This version with transparent background. http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Open_Access_logo_PLoS_white.svg art designer at PLoS, modified by Wikipedia users Nina, Beao, JakobVoss, and AnonMoos http://www.plos.org/ https://doi.org/10.1...arrow_drop_down
image/svg+xml art designer at PLoS, modified by Wikipedia users Nina, Beao, JakobVoss, and AnonMoos Open Access logo, converted into svg, designed by PLoS. This version with transparent background. http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Open_Access_logo_PLoS_white.svg art designer at PLoS, modified by Wikipedia users Nina, Beao, JakobVoss, and AnonMoos http://www.plos.org/
https://doi.org/10.17504/proto...
Article . 2020 . Peer-reviewed
License: CC BY
Data sources: Crossref
image/svg+xml art designer at PLoS, modified by Wikipedia users Nina, Beao, JakobVoss, and AnonMoos Open Access logo, converted into svg, designed by PLoS. This version with transparent background. http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Open_Access_logo_PLoS_white.svg art designer at PLoS, modified by Wikipedia users Nina, Beao, JakobVoss, and AnonMoos http://www.plos.org/
image/svg+xml art designer at PLoS, modified by Wikipedia users Nina, Beao, JakobVoss, and AnonMoos Open Access logo, converted into svg, designed by PLoS. This version with transparent background. http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Open_Access_logo_PLoS_white.svg art designer at PLoS, modified by Wikipedia users Nina, Beao, JakobVoss, and AnonMoos http://www.plos.org/
https://doi.org/10.17504/proto...
Article . 2020 . Peer-reviewed
License: CC BY
Data sources: Crossref
versions View all 2 versions
addClaim

PlOSONE folder v1

Authors: Sung-Jin Bae; Inah Kim; Jaechul Song; Euy-Suk Chung;

PlOSONE folder v1

Abstract

Background This study investigated the efficacy of first-generation (cefazolin) and third-generation (ceftizoxime) prophylactic antibiotics in patients undergoing cardiac surgery and the incidence of surgical site infections, hospital stay lengths, and medical costs. Methods All adult patients (≥20 years) undergoing cardiac surgery (coronary artery bypass surgery, valve operation, or combined surgery) at one hospital from January 01, 2009 to December 31, 2016 were included in this study. A single prophylactic antibiotic was administered at a dose of 1 g within 1 hour of surgical incision and for three days after surgery at eight-hour intervals. After the propensity score matching, 194 patients in each antibiotic prophylaxis groups (first-generation vs third-generation) were analyzed. Among the 388 patients, the incidence of surgical site infection were compared according to the type of prophylactic antibiotics and risk factors were evaluated by chi-squared tests followed by multivariate logistic regression analysis. A Student’s t-tests were analyzed to compare hospitalization and medical costs. Results The incidence of deep surgical site infections significantly lower in first-generation group (5.7%) than third-generation group (16.5%). The pathogens isolated from surgical infection sites were similarly distributed in both groups, but gram-positive bacteria were more highly infectious than gram-negative bacteria (67% vs 23%). Preoperative hospitalization duration, mean operation time, and ventilator use time were similar in both groups but the postoperative hospitalization duration was significantly shorter in the first-generation group (25.5 days) than third-generation (29.8 days). In addition, the medical cost lower in the first-generation group (20,594 USD) than third-generation (26,488 USD). Conclusion In conclusion, the first-generation (cefazolin) is better than the third-generation (ceftizoxime) as a prophylactic antibiotic in reducing surgical site infection rates, hospitalization lengths, and medical expenditures.

Related Organizations
  • BIP!
    Impact byBIP!
    selected citations
    These citations are derived from selected sources.
    This is an alternative to the "Influence" indicator, which also reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
    0
    popularity
    This indicator reflects the "current" impact/attention (the "hype") of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network.
    Average
    influence
    This indicator reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
    Average
    impulse
    This indicator reflects the initial momentum of an article directly after its publication, based on the underlying citation network.
    Average
Powered by OpenAIRE graph
Found an issue? Give us feedback
selected citations
These citations are derived from selected sources.
This is an alternative to the "Influence" indicator, which also reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
BIP!Citations provided by BIP!
popularity
This indicator reflects the "current" impact/attention (the "hype") of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network.
BIP!Popularity provided by BIP!
influence
This indicator reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
BIP!Influence provided by BIP!
impulse
This indicator reflects the initial momentum of an article directly after its publication, based on the underlying citation network.
BIP!Impulse provided by BIP!
0
Average
Average
Average
hybrid