4.7 Article

Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials of Antibiotics and Antiseptics for Preventing Infection in People Receiving Primary Total Hip and Knee Prostheses

期刊

ANTIMICROBIAL AGENTS AND CHEMOTHERAPY
卷 59, 期 11, 页码 6696-6707

出版社

AMER SOC MICROBIOLOGY
DOI: 10.1128/AAC.01331-15

关键词

-

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Infection rates in primary (first-time) major joint arthroplasty continue to be a significant issue. The effect of antibiotic and antiseptic prophylaxis on outcomes for this type of surgery has not been adequately reviewed. A systematic search of the main databases for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) evaluating antibiotics and antiseptics was conducted to evaluate the predetermined endpoints of infection, adverse events, costs, quality of life, and concentration levels of antibiotics. A meta-analysis using pooled effect estimates and fixed-effect and random-effect models of risk ratios (RR), calculated with 95% confidence intervals (CI), was utilized. Thirty (30) RCTs examined the effects of antibiotic and antiseptic prophylaxis on infections after primary total hip arthroplasty (THA) (total of 11,597 participants) and total knee arthroplasty (TKA) (total of 6,141 participants). For THA, preoperative systemic intravenous (i.v.) antibiotic prophylaxis may be effective in reducing the incidence of infection after THA from 6 months to >= 5 years. For TKA, there is no RCT evidence that antibiotics and/or antiseptics have any effect on infection rate. Preoperative systemic antibiotic prophylaxis in primary THA may be effective at reducing infection rate. There is no evidence that timing, route of administration, or concentration levels have an effect on reducing infections, adverse events, or costs in THA or TKA. Many of the trials included in this study were published in the 1980s and 1990s. Thus, it would be important to replicate a number of them based on current patient demographics and incidence of bacterial resistance.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据