Cefamandole versus cefonicid prophylaxis in cardiovascular surgery

A prospective study

Michael Gelfand, Bryan P. Simmons, Philip Schoettle, Oscar B. Harrington, Frank Martin, Edmond W. Owen, Rebecca B. Craft, Naseem Amarshi

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

10 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

We randomized 400 patients who were scheduled for an elective cardiovascular operation involving median sternotomy to receive cefamandole nafate or cefonicid in a prospective double-blind study. Three hundred fifty-seven patients were evaluable for prophylactic efficacy. Chest wound and donor site infections and early prosthetic valve endocarditis occurred more frequently with cefonicid (11 patients, 6.3%) than with cefamandole (4 patients, 2.2%) (p = 0.05). Three patients, all in the cefonicid group, required sternal debridement to control postoperative deep wound infections. Twenty-five miscellaneous postoperative infections (urinary tract infec0tion, pneumonia, intravenous site infection, bacteremia, sepsis, Clostridium difficile diarrhea) occurred in 16 patients (9.19%) in the cefonicid group and four in 4 patients (2.19%) in the cefamandole group (p = 0.003). These data indicate that cefamandole is superior to cefonicid in preventing both surgical wound infections and miscellaneous nonsurgical infections after cardiovascular operations.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)435-439
Number of pages5
JournalThe Annals of Thoracic Surgery
Volume49
Issue number3
DOIs
StatePublished - Jan 1 1990

Fingerprint

Cefonicid
Cefamandole
Prospective Studies
Surgical Wound Infection
Cardiovascular Infections
Sternotomy
Clostridium difficile
Debridement
Bacteremia
Endocarditis
Infection
Double-Blind Method
Urinary Tract Infections
Diarrhea
Sepsis
Pneumonia
Thorax
Tissue Donors

All Science Journal Classification (ASJC) codes

  • Surgery
  • Pulmonary and Respiratory Medicine
  • Cardiology and Cardiovascular Medicine

Cite this

Gelfand, M., Simmons, B. P., Schoettle, P., Harrington, O. B., Martin, F., Owen, E. W., ... Amarshi, N. (1990). Cefamandole versus cefonicid prophylaxis in cardiovascular surgery: A prospective study. The Annals of Thoracic Surgery, 49(3), 435-439. https://doi.org/10.1016/0003-4975(90)90250-A

Cefamandole versus cefonicid prophylaxis in cardiovascular surgery : A prospective study. / Gelfand, Michael; Simmons, Bryan P.; Schoettle, Philip; Harrington, Oscar B.; Martin, Frank; Owen, Edmond W.; Craft, Rebecca B.; Amarshi, Naseem.

In: The Annals of Thoracic Surgery, Vol. 49, No. 3, 01.01.1990, p. 435-439.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Gelfand, M, Simmons, BP, Schoettle, P, Harrington, OB, Martin, F, Owen, EW, Craft, RB & Amarshi, N 1990, 'Cefamandole versus cefonicid prophylaxis in cardiovascular surgery: A prospective study', The Annals of Thoracic Surgery, vol. 49, no. 3, pp. 435-439. https://doi.org/10.1016/0003-4975(90)90250-A
Gelfand, Michael ; Simmons, Bryan P. ; Schoettle, Philip ; Harrington, Oscar B. ; Martin, Frank ; Owen, Edmond W. ; Craft, Rebecca B. ; Amarshi, Naseem. / Cefamandole versus cefonicid prophylaxis in cardiovascular surgery : A prospective study. In: The Annals of Thoracic Surgery. 1990 ; Vol. 49, No. 3. pp. 435-439.
@article{ba86f625107542d093f533142bf4b95a,
title = "Cefamandole versus cefonicid prophylaxis in cardiovascular surgery: A prospective study",
abstract = "We randomized 400 patients who were scheduled for an elective cardiovascular operation involving median sternotomy to receive cefamandole nafate or cefonicid in a prospective double-blind study. Three hundred fifty-seven patients were evaluable for prophylactic efficacy. Chest wound and donor site infections and early prosthetic valve endocarditis occurred more frequently with cefonicid (11 patients, 6.3{\%}) than with cefamandole (4 patients, 2.2{\%}) (p = 0.05). Three patients, all in the cefonicid group, required sternal debridement to control postoperative deep wound infections. Twenty-five miscellaneous postoperative infections (urinary tract infec0tion, pneumonia, intravenous site infection, bacteremia, sepsis, Clostridium difficile diarrhea) occurred in 16 patients (9.19{\%}) in the cefonicid group and four in 4 patients (2.19{\%}) in the cefamandole group (p = 0.003). These data indicate that cefamandole is superior to cefonicid in preventing both surgical wound infections and miscellaneous nonsurgical infections after cardiovascular operations.",
author = "Michael Gelfand and Simmons, {Bryan P.} and Philip Schoettle and Harrington, {Oscar B.} and Frank Martin and Owen, {Edmond W.} and Craft, {Rebecca B.} and Naseem Amarshi",
year = "1990",
month = "1",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1016/0003-4975(90)90250-A",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "49",
pages = "435--439",
journal = "Annals of Thoracic Surgery",
issn = "0003-4975",
publisher = "Elsevier USA",
number = "3",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Cefamandole versus cefonicid prophylaxis in cardiovascular surgery

T2 - A prospective study

AU - Gelfand, Michael

AU - Simmons, Bryan P.

AU - Schoettle, Philip

AU - Harrington, Oscar B.

AU - Martin, Frank

AU - Owen, Edmond W.

AU - Craft, Rebecca B.

AU - Amarshi, Naseem

PY - 1990/1/1

Y1 - 1990/1/1

N2 - We randomized 400 patients who were scheduled for an elective cardiovascular operation involving median sternotomy to receive cefamandole nafate or cefonicid in a prospective double-blind study. Three hundred fifty-seven patients were evaluable for prophylactic efficacy. Chest wound and donor site infections and early prosthetic valve endocarditis occurred more frequently with cefonicid (11 patients, 6.3%) than with cefamandole (4 patients, 2.2%) (p = 0.05). Three patients, all in the cefonicid group, required sternal debridement to control postoperative deep wound infections. Twenty-five miscellaneous postoperative infections (urinary tract infec0tion, pneumonia, intravenous site infection, bacteremia, sepsis, Clostridium difficile diarrhea) occurred in 16 patients (9.19%) in the cefonicid group and four in 4 patients (2.19%) in the cefamandole group (p = 0.003). These data indicate that cefamandole is superior to cefonicid in preventing both surgical wound infections and miscellaneous nonsurgical infections after cardiovascular operations.

AB - We randomized 400 patients who were scheduled for an elective cardiovascular operation involving median sternotomy to receive cefamandole nafate or cefonicid in a prospective double-blind study. Three hundred fifty-seven patients were evaluable for prophylactic efficacy. Chest wound and donor site infections and early prosthetic valve endocarditis occurred more frequently with cefonicid (11 patients, 6.3%) than with cefamandole (4 patients, 2.2%) (p = 0.05). Three patients, all in the cefonicid group, required sternal debridement to control postoperative deep wound infections. Twenty-five miscellaneous postoperative infections (urinary tract infec0tion, pneumonia, intravenous site infection, bacteremia, sepsis, Clostridium difficile diarrhea) occurred in 16 patients (9.19%) in the cefonicid group and four in 4 patients (2.19%) in the cefamandole group (p = 0.003). These data indicate that cefamandole is superior to cefonicid in preventing both surgical wound infections and miscellaneous nonsurgical infections after cardiovascular operations.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=0025264313&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=0025264313&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1016/0003-4975(90)90250-A

DO - 10.1016/0003-4975(90)90250-A

M3 - Article

VL - 49

SP - 435

EP - 439

JO - Annals of Thoracic Surgery

JF - Annals of Thoracic Surgery

SN - 0003-4975

IS - 3

ER -