4.5 Article

Surgical site infections in maxillofacial trauma surgery - Single-dose versus prolonged antibiotic prophylaxis

Journal

JOURNAL OF CRANIO-MAXILLOFACIAL SURGERY
Volume 51, Issue 10, Pages 649-654

Publisher

CHURCHILL LIVINGSTONE
DOI: 10.1016/j.jcms.2023.09.005

Keywords

Maxillofacial injuries; Open fracture reduction; Surgical wound infection; Antibiotic prophylaxis; Microbial drug resistance

Ask authors/readers for more resources

This study compared the rate and severity of surgical site infections (SSIs) in facial fracture patients undergoing open reduction with internal fixation (ORIF) using two different antibiotic regimens (single-dose and prolonged antibiotic prophylaxis). The results showed no significant difference in the incidence or severity of SSIs between the two groups.
Open reduction with internal fixation (ORIF) for facial fractures has frequently been associated with the occurrence of surgical site infections (SSIs). Perioperative antibiotic prophylaxis is customarily recommended for ORIF. Thus, the comparison of two different antibiotic regimens (i.e., single-dose and prolonged antibiotic prophylaxis) concerning the rate and severity of SSIs in facial fracture patients undergoing ORIF was the main purpose of this study.This retrospective analysis included patients who underwent ORIF for facial fractures. They were distributed into two groups. The single-dose antibiotic prophylaxis group (SDAP) received single-dose perioperative antibiotic prophylaxis, whereas the prolonged antibiotic prophylaxis group (PAP) were administered prophylactic antibiosis over a course of 5 days.122 patients were included in the study. Nine patients in the SDAP group and 15 patients in the PAP group were affected by SSIs; no significant difference in the incidence of SSIs was found (p = 0.218). Moreover, the severity of SSIs did not significantly differ between the two groups (p = 0.982).

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.5
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available