Korean J Urol.  2011 Feb;52(2):115-118.

A Prospective Study of Single-Dose Antibiotic Prophylaxis in Live Donor Nephrectomy

• Jang HS
• Choi KH
• Yang SC
• Han WK

Abstract

PURPOSE
To perform a prospective analysis of the clinical outcomes of prophylactic antibiotic treatment before the standard surgical modality of living donor nephrectomy (LDN) without postoperative antibiotic treatment.
MATERIALS AND METHODS
From November 2005 to June 2010, a total of 470 patients underwent LDN at our medical institution, and 280 of these patients were injected with 1 g cephalosporin 30 minutes before the operation. The group receiving prophylactic antibiotics was compared with a control group composed of 190 patients who received injections of 2 g cephalosporin per day for 5 days after the operation. The presence of fever, incidence of blood transfusion, and period of drainage use were compared between the two groups.
RESULTS
There were no significant differences in gender, age, body mass index, incidence of blood transfusion after the operation, fever over 38degrees C 3 days after the operation, or period of drain insertion between the single-dose group and the control group. The follow-up was conducted for 1 month after the operation, and 1 case of surgical site infection (SSI) was observed in each group (p=0.783).
CONCLUSIONS
Of 280 patients in the single-dose group, 1 contracted SSI. In comparison with the control group, which was dosed with prophylactic antibiotics for 5 days after the operation, the single-dose group did not have a significantly different occurrence of SSI. We found that the incidence rate of SSI did not increase, even though prophylactic antibiotics were not used after standard and conventional open surgeries, such as video-assisted minilaparotomy surgery.

Keyword

Antibiotic prophylaxis; Living donors; Nephrectomy; Surgical wound infection; Video-assisted surgery

MeSH Terms

Anti-Bacterial Agents
Antibiotic Prophylaxis
Blood Transfusion
Body Mass Index
Contracts
Drainage
Fever
Follow-Up Studies
Humans
Incidence
Laparotomy
Living Donors
Nephrectomy
Prospective Studies
Surgical Wound Infection
Tissue Donors
Video-Assisted Surgery
Anti-Bacterial Agents

Reference

1. Sakong P, Lee JS, Lee EJ, Ko KP, Kim CH, Kim Y, et al. Association between the pattern of prophylactic antibiotic use and surgical site infection rate for major surgeries in Korea. J Prev Med Public Health. 2009. 42:12–20.

2. Mangram AJ, Horan TC, Pearson ML, Silver LC, Jarvis WR. Hospital Infection Control Practices Advisory Committee. Guideline for prevention of surgical site infection, 1999. Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol. 1999. 20:250–278.

3. Kirkland KB, Briggs JP, Trivette SL, Wilkinson WE, Sexton DJ. The impact of surgical-site infections in the 1990s: attributable mortality, excess length of hospitalization, and extra costs. Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol. 1999. 20:725–730.

4. Brumfitt W, Hamilton-Miller J. Methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus. N Engl J Med. 1989. 320:1188–1196.

5. Yi J, Kim EC. Microbiological characteristics of methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus. Korean J Clin Microbiol. 2010. 13:1–6.

6. Yoshida S, Masuda H, Yokoyama M, Kobayashi T, Kawakami S, Kihara K. Absence of prophylactic antibiotics in minimum incision endoscopic urological surgery (MEUS) of adrenal and renal tumors. Int J Urol. 2007. 14:384–387.

7. Koh JI, Kim YH, Kim ME. Antibiotic prophylaxis practice in urology: a survey of 21 Korean Medical Institutions. Korean J Urogenital Tract Infect Inflamm. 2009. 4:72–79.

8. Takeyama K, Shimizu T, Mutoh M, Nishiyama N, Kunishima Y, Matsukawa M, et al. Prophylactic antimicrobial agents in urologic laparoscopic surgery: 1-day versus 3-day treatments. J Infect Chemother. 2004. 10:168–171.

9. Wolf JS Jr, Bennett CJ, Dmochowski RR, Hollenbeck BK, Pearle MS, Schaeffer AJ. Best practice policy statement on urologic surgery antimicrobial prophylaxis. J Urol. 2008. 179:1379–1390.

10. Trinchieri A, Paparella S, Cappoli S, Esposito N, Butti A, Vaiani R, et al. Prospective assessment of the efficacy of the EAU guidelines for the prevention of nosocomial acquired infections after genitourinary surgery in a district hospital. Arch Ital Urol Androl. 2009. 81:46–50.

11. Leaper DJ, van Goor H, Reilly J, Petrosillo N, Geiss HK, Torres AJ, et al. Surgical site infection - a European perspective of incidence and economic burden. Int Wound J. 2004. 1:247–273.

12. Garratty G, Arndt PA. An update on drug-induced immune hemolytic anemia. Immunohematology. 2007. 23:105–119.

13. Martin ME, Laber DA. Cefotetan-induced hemolytic anemia after perioperative prophylaxis. Am J Hematol. 2006. 81:186–188.

14. Kaiser AB, Clayson KR, Mulherin JL Jr, Roach AC, Allen TR, Edwards WH, et al. Antibiotic prophylaxis in vascular surgery. Ann Surg. 1978. 188:283–289.

15. International Infection Control Council. Global consensus conference on infection prevention and control practice for Clostridium difficile associated disease (CDAD). Can J Infect Control. 2008. 23:110–111.

16. Kim CS. Antimicrobial prophylaxis for urologic surgery. Korean J Urogenital Tract Infect Inflamm. 2009. 4:20–36.

17. Bratzler DW, Houck PM. Antimicrobial prophylaxis for surgery: an advisory statement from the National Surgical Infection Prevention Project. Am J Surg. 2005. 189:395–404.

18. Polk HC, Christmas AB. Prophylactic antibiotics in surgery and surgical wound infections. Am Surg. 2000. 66:105–111.

19. Page CP, Bohnen JM, Fletcher JR, McManus AT, Solomkin JS, Wittmann DH. Antimicrobial prophylaxis for surgical wounds. Guidelines for clinical care. Arch Surg. 1993. 128:79–88.

20. Kageyama Y, Kihara K, Ishizaka K, Okuno T, Hayashi T, Kawakami S, et al. Endoscopic minilaparotomy radical nephrectomy for chronic dialysis patients. Int J Urol. 2002. 9:73–76.

21. Hamasuna R, Betsunoh H, Sueyoshi T, Yakushiji K, Tsukino H, Nagano M, et al. Bacteria of preoperative urinary tract infections contaminate the surgical fields and develop surgical site infections in urological operations. Int J Urol. 2004. 11:941–947.

22. O'Toole JE, Eichholz KM, Fessler RG. Surgical site infection rates after minimally invasive spinal surgery. J Neurosurg Spine. 2009. 11:471–476.

23. Dobson MW, Daniel Geisler DG, Victor Fazio VF, Feza Remzi FR, Tracy Hull TH, Jon Vogel JV. Minimally invasive surgical wound infections: laparoscopic surgery decreases morbidity of surgical site infections and decreases the cost of wound care. Colorectal Dis. 2010. Epub ahead of print.