Premium
Cefepime vs. Ampicillin/Sulbactam and Aztreonam as antibiotic prophylaxis in neurosurgical patients with external ventricular drain: result of a prospective randomized controlled clinical trial
Author(s) -
Wong G. K. C.,
Poon W. S.,
Lyon D.,
Wai S.
Publication year - 2006
Publication title -
journal of clinical pharmacy and therapeutics
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 0.622
H-Index - 73
eISSN - 1365-2710
pISSN - 0269-4727
DOI - 10.1111/j.1365-2710.2006.00729.x
Subject(s) - medicine , cefepime , antibiotic prophylaxis , sulbactam , aztreonam , randomized controlled trial , antibiotics , chemoprophylaxis , anesthesia , ampicillin , surgery , antibiotic resistance , imipenem , microbiology and biotechnology , biology
Summary Introduction: We aimed to find out whether single board spectrum antibiotic prophylaxis was as good as dual specific antibiotic prophylaxis in neurosurgical patients with external ventricular drain (EVD) in situ . Method: In a 2‐year period, 255 eligible patients were recruited. Patients were randomized into two groups of antibiotic prophylaxis as long as the ventricular catheter in situ . Group A employed Cefepime 2G 12 hourly and Group B employed dual antibiotics as Ampicillin/Sulbactam 3 g 8 hourly and Aztrenam 2 g 8 hourly. Results: There was no statistically significant difference in cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) infection rate with 14 patients (11·5%) in group A (Cefepime prophylaxis) and eight patients (6·0%) in group B (dual prophylaxis with Ampicillin/Sulbactam and Aztrenam) had CSF infection ( P = 0·18). There was also no statistical significant difference between wound infection rate happened in eight patients (6·6%) in Group A and three patients (2·3%) in Group B ( P = 0·17). There was no statistical significant difference in extracranial infection rate between both groups ( P = 0·70). Conclusion: Single board spectrum antibiotic prophylaxis with Cefepime was an effective alternative regimen for neurosurgical patients with an EVD in situ .