Antibiotic prophylaxis for cardiac surgery: Does the past predict the future?

Clinical Infectious Diseases

Volumn 38, Issue 10, 2004, Pages 1364-1366

  Zanetti, Giorgio ^a   Platt, Richard ^b,c,d,e  

^a LAUSANNE UNIVERSITY HOSPITAL   (Switzerland)

^b HARVARD MEDICAL SCHOOL   (United States)

^c BRIGHAM AND WOMEN S HOSPITAL   (United States)

^d E MA Centers Dis Contr Prev E   (United States)

^e HMO Res Netwk Ctr Educ/Res T   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ANTIBIOTIC AGENT; BETA LACTAM ANTIBIOTIC; CEFAZOLIN; CEPHALOSPORIN; GLYCOPEPTIDE; VANCOMYCIN;

ANTIBIOTIC PROPHYLAXIS; BACTERIUM ISOLATE; CLINICAL TRIAL; HEART SURGERY; HUMAN; MEDICAL PRACTICE; META ANALYSIS; NOTE; PENICILLIN RESISTANCE; PERIOPERATIVE PERIOD; PREVALENCE; PRIORITY JOURNAL; STAPHYLOCOCCUS AUREUS; SURGICAL INFECTION;

ANTI-BACTERIAL AGENTS; ANTIBIOTIC PROPHYLAXIS; FORECASTING; GLYCOPEPTIDES; HUMANS; LACTAMS; SURGICAL WOUND INFECTION; THORACIC SURGERY;

EID: 2442668913     PISSN: 10584838     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1086/383329     Document Type: Note

References (13)

1. L'Ecuyer PB, Murphy D, Little JR, Fraser VJ. The epidemiology of chest and leg wound infections following cardiothoracic surgery. Clin Infect Dis 1996; 22:424-9.
2. Recommendations for preventing the spread of vancomycin resistance: recommendations of the Hospital Infection Control Practices Advisory Committee (HICPAC). MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep 1995; 44:1-13.
3. Bolon MK, Morlote M, Weber SG, Koplan B, Carmeli Y, Wright SB. Glycopeptides are no more effective than β-lactam agents for prevention of surgical site infection after cardiac surgery: a meta-analysis. Clin Infect Dis 2004; 38:1357-63 (in this issue).
4. Finkelstein R, Rabino G, Mashiah T, et al. Vancomycin versus cefazolin prophylaxis for cardiac surgery in the setting of a high prevalence of methicillin-resistant staphylococcal infections. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 2002; 123:326-32.
5. Kitzes-Cohen R, Farin D, Piva G, et al. Pharmacokinetics of vancomycin administered as prophylaxis before cardiac surgery. Ther Drug Monit 2000; 22:661-7.
6. Martin C, Bourget P, Alaya M, et al. Teicoplanin in cardiac surgery: intraoperative pharmacokinetics and concentrations in cardiac and mediastinal tissues. Antimicrob Agents Chemother 1997; 41:1150-5.
7. Cantoni L, Wenger A, Glauser MP, Bille J. Comparative efficacy of amoxicillin-clavulanate, cloxacillin, and vancomycin against methicillin-sensitive and methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus endocarditis in rats. J Infect Dis 1989; 159:989-93.
8. Chambers HF, Sande MA. Teicoplanin versus nafcillin and vancomycin in the treatment of experimental endocarditis caused by methicillin-susceptible or -resistant Staphylococcus aureus. Antimicrob Agents Chemother 1984; 26:61-4.
9. Hiramatsu K, Hanaki H, Ino T, Yabuta K, Oguri T, Tenover FC. Methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus clinical strain with reduced vancomycin susceptibility. J Antimicrob Chemother 1997; 40:135-6.
10. Smith TL, Pearson ML, Wilcox KR, et al. Emergence of vancomycin resistance in Staphylococcus aureus. Glycopeptide-Intermediate Staphylococcus aureus Working Group. N Engl J Med 1999; 340:493-501.
11. Martone WJ. Spread of vancomycin-resistant enterococci: why did it happen in the United States? Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol 1998; 19:539-45.
12. Monnet DL, Lopez-Lozano JM, Campillos P, Burgos A, Yague A, Gonzalo N. Making sense of antimicrobial use and resistance surveillance data: application of ARIMA and transfer function models. Clin Microbiol Infect 2001; 7(Suppl 5):29-36.
13. Zanetti G, Goldie SJ, Platt R. Clinical consequences and cost of limiting use of vancomycin for perioperative prophylaxis: example of coronary artery bypass surgery. Emerg Infect Dis 2001; 7:820-7.