Evidence map›Paper›PMID 17468819›Full record

Trial reportSurgery today2007

Randomized clinical trial comparing intravenous antimicrobial prophylaxis alone with oral and intravenous antimicrobial prophylaxis for the prevention of a surgical site infection in colorectal cancer surgery.

Minako Kobayashi, Yasuhiko Mohri, Hitoshi Tonouchi, Chikao Miki, Keiji Nakai, Masato Kusunoki, Mie Surgical Infection Research Group

Abstract readComparative StudyMulticenter StudyRandomized Controlled Trial
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Trial report in Surgery today, 2007. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 42 papers, 15 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
42citing papers in PubMed, 15 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

42 citing papers in PubMed, 15 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Pooled it
  7. Pooled it
  8. Pooled it
  9. Pooled it
  10. Pooled it
  11. Pooled it
  12. Pooled it
  13. Antimicrobial prophylaxis for colorectal surgery.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2014
    Pooled it
  14. Pooled it
  15. Pooled it
  16. Trial
  17. Trial
  18. Trial
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors.

Minako KobayashiDepartment of Innovative Surgery and Surgical Techniques Development, Division of Reparative Medicine, Institute of Life Sciences, Mie University Graduate School of Medicine, 2-174 Edobashi, Tsu, Mie 514-8507, Japan.
Yasuhiko Mohri
Hitoshi Tonouchi
Chikao Miki
Keiji Nakai
Masato Kusunoki
Mie Surgical Infection Research Group

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeThe use of preoperative oral antibiotics during preparation for elective colorectal surgery remains controversial. This was a prospective randomized clinical trial to compare the efficacy of intravenous antimicrobial prophylaxis alone with combined oral and intravenous antimicrobial prophylaxis for surgical site infection (SSI) in patients undergoing elective colorectal surgery.

methodsFive hundred patients were enrolled in this study. Of these, 491 were randomly assigned to receive either intravenous antimicrobial prophylaxis or combined oral and intravenous antimicrobial prophylaxis. The primary outcome was the incidence of SSI within 6 weeks of elective colorectal surgery.

resultsThe incidence of SSI was similar in the two treatment groups: intravenous alone, 10.7%; and oral and intravenous, 7.0% (difference 3.7%; 95% confidence interval -4.8% to 5.6%). No critical adverse events were reported.

conclusionThe addition of oral antibiotics to intravenous antimicrobial prophylaxis showed no advantage in the prevention of SSI.

Indexed as

Antibiotic ProphylaxisAdministration, OralAgedAged, 80 and overColorectal NeoplasmsElective Surgical ProceduresFemaleHumansInfusions, IntravenousMaleMiddle AgedSurgical Wound Infection

Identifiers

PMID17468819

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.