Cost analysis of cefmetazole versus cefoxitin in the treatment of penetrating abdominal trauma

Okamoto, Mark P.; Gill, Mark A.; Nakahiro, Randall K.; Chin, Alfred; Yellin, Albert E.; Berne, Thomas V.; Heseltine, Peter N. R.; Appleman, Maria D.

doi:10.1016/s0011-393x(05)80241-3

Cited by 3 publications

(1 citation statement)

References 18 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Antibiotic prophylaxis should be given in penetrating trauma, but it should not last more than 24 hours in the absence of hollow viscus injuries; broad-spectrum antibiotics with aerobic and anaerobic bacteria coverage should be preferred, while aminoglycosides should be avoided whenever possible. In the case of hemorrhagic shock and associated acute kidney injury, the dose of antibiotics should be adjusted 66–95 . Hollow viscus injury with contamination should be considered an indication for antibiotic therapy rather than AP.…”

Section: Definitionsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Antibiotic prophylaxis in trauma: GAIS, SIS-E, WSIS, AAST, WSES guidelines

Coccolini,

Sartelli,

Sawyer

et al. 2023

J Trauma Acute Care Surg

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Trauma is a complex disease, and the use of antibiotic prophylaxis (AP) in trauma patients is common practice. However, considering the increasing rates of antibiotic resistance, AP use should be questioned and limited only to specific cases. Antibiotic stewardship is of paramount importance in fighting resistance spread. Definitive rules or precise indications about antibiotic prophylaxis in trauma remain unclear. The present manuscript describes the indications of antibiotic prophylaxis in traumatic lesions to the head, brain, torso, maxillo-facial, extremities, skin, and soft tissues endorsed by the Global Alliance for Infection in Surgery (GAIS), Surgical Infection Society Europe (SIS-E), World Surgical Infection Society (WSIS), American Association for the Surgery of Trauma (AAST), World Society of Emergency Surgery (WSES).

show abstract

Section: Definitionsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Antibiotic prophylaxis in trauma: GAIS, SIS-E, WSIS, AAST, WSES guidelines

Coccolini,

Sartelli,

Sawyer

et al. 2023

J Trauma Acute Care Surg

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Prophylactic antibiotics for penetrating abdominal trauma: duration of use and antibiotic choice

Herrod

Boyd-Carson

Doleman

et al. 2019

Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Pharmacoeconomics of Aztreonam‐Clindamycin versus Gentamicin‐Clindamycin in the Treatment of Penetrating Abdominal Injury

Fabian,

Boucher,

Croce

1996

Pharmacotherapy

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Study Objective. To evaluate the pharmacoeconomic implications of using aztreonam‐clindamycin (A‐C) versus gentamicin‐clindamycin (G‐C) from the perspective of the hospital and pharmacy directors.Design. Pharmacoeconomic analysis performed at one of the sites participating in the prospective, randomized, double‐blind, comparative, multicenter efficacy study.Setting. Referral hospital with level 1 trauma center.Patients. Eight‐five adults with a suspected penetrating intraabdominal injury requiring laparotomy.Interventions. Patients were randomized to receive aztreonam 2 g intravenously every 8 hours or gentamicin 2 mg/kg intravenous load followed by 5 mg/kg/day intravenously initially adjusted to peak concentrations of 6–8 μg/ml. All patients received clindamycin 900 mg intravenously every 8 hours.Measurements and Main Results. Charge data were gathered from the hospital billing system and converted to cost data using an institutional cost:charge ratio of 0.6. Study drug and aminoglycoside monitoring costs were also calculated. Overall, 43 (97%) of 44 patients receiving A‐C had a favorable clinical response compared with 35 (85.4%) of 41 receiving G‐C (p=0.052). The mean hospital cost of $66,336 for 7 infected patients was significantly higher than that of $8014 in 78 noninfected patients (p>0.0001). Mean hospital costs of $12,058 and $13,742 for A‐C and G‐C groups, respectively, were not significantly different (p<0.05) despite having only a single failure (total cost $162,666) in the A‐C group. Similarly, mean pharmacy costs of $1411 and $1604, respectively, were not significantly different (p>0.05).Conclusions. Hospital costs for infected patients with penetrating abdominal trauma exceed those of noninfected patients by 5‐fold. Despite a lower infection rate in the A‐C group, neither hospital nor pharmacy costs were significantly different compared with those in the G‐C group.

show abstract

Cost analysis of cefmetazole versus cefoxitin in the treatment of penetrating abdominal trauma

Cited by 3 publications

References 18 publications

Antibiotic prophylaxis in trauma: GAIS, SIS-E, WSIS, AAST, WSES guidelines

Antibiotic prophylaxis in trauma: GAIS, SIS-E, WSIS, AAST, WSES guidelines

Prophylactic antibiotics for penetrating abdominal trauma: duration of use and antibiotic choice

Pharmacoeconomics of Aztreonam‐Clindamycin versus Gentamicin‐Clindamycin in the Treatment of Penetrating Abdominal Injury

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About