Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38480534›Full record

ArticleEuropean archives of oto-rhino-laryngology : official journal of the European Federation of Oto-Rhino-Laryngological Societies (EUFOS) : affiliated with the German Society for Oto-Rhino-Laryngology - Head and Neck Surgery2024

Perioperative antibiotic prophylaxis in the setting of cochlear implantation: a retrospective analysis of 700 cases.

Katharina Schaumann, D Mütz, L Althaus, T Prinzen, J Schipper, T Klenzner

Open access · hybridAbstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in European archives of oto-rhino-laryngology : official journal of the European Federation of Oto-Rhino-Laryngological Societies (EUFOS) : affiliated with the German Society for Oto-Rhino-Laryngology - Head and Neck Surgery, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
2.3field-weighted citation impact, top 13% of its field
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

1 citing paper in PubMed, 4 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. 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

6 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Katharina SchaumannDepartment of Otorhinolaryngology, Medical Faculty and University Hospital Düsseldorf, Heinrich-Heine-University Düsseldorf, Moorenstraße 5, 40255, Düsseldorf, Germany. katharina.schaumann@med.uni-duesseldorf.de.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-2617-7325
D MützDepartment of Otorhinolaryngology, Medical Faculty and University Hospital Düsseldorf, Heinrich-Heine-University Düsseldorf, Moorenstraße 5, 40255, Düsseldorf, Germany.
L AlthausDepartment of Otorhinolaryngology, Medical Faculty and University Hospital Düsseldorf, Heinrich-Heine-University Düsseldorf, Moorenstraße 5, 40255, Düsseldorf, Germany.
T PrinzenDepartment of Otorhinolaryngology, Medical Faculty and University Hospital Düsseldorf, Heinrich-Heine-University Düsseldorf, Moorenstraße 5, 40255, Düsseldorf, Germany.
J SchipperDepartment of Otorhinolaryngology, Medical Faculty and University Hospital Düsseldorf, Heinrich-Heine-University Düsseldorf, Moorenstraße 5, 40255, Düsseldorf, Germany.
T KlenznerDepartment of Otorhinolaryngology, Medical Faculty and University Hospital Düsseldorf, Heinrich-Heine-University Düsseldorf, Moorenstraße 5, 40255, Düsseldorf, Germany.
Düsseldorf University Hospital · DE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposePostoperative wound infections after cochlear implantation are rare but sometimes serious and can lead to explantation. Therefore, perioperative antibiotic administration is often recommended. However, in clinical practice, the type and duration of antibiotic prophylaxis varies between different centers. The aim of this study was to investigate the role of perioperative antibiotic prophylaxis in preventing postoperative complications.

methods700 patients who underwent cochlear implantation between 2007 and 2019 were retrospectively evaluated with regard to wound infections within the first 28 postoperative days. These were classified into major and minor complications. Data were analyzed using the IBM statistical program SPSS.

resultsIn 670 out of 700 patients the type and duration of perioperative antibiotic administration could be reconstructed from the records. Of these 67 patients (10%) received antibiotics as a single shot, 158 patients (23.6%) were treated with antibiotics for a period of 48 h, and 445 patients (66.4%) received prolonged antibiotic therapy for more than 72 h. In total 64 patients (9.5%) showed abnormalities in wound assessment within the first 28 postoperative days after implantation. Major infections (1.6%) were detected in 11 patients. Overall, there was no statistically significant difference in wound infection rates between the group receiving single-shot antibiosis and the group receiving 48 h prophylaxis or antibiotic treatment > 72 h (p = 0.46).

conclusionPatients receiving an antibiotic single shot do not appear to be at significantly increased risk for postoperative wound infections compared with patients with prolonged antibiotic treatment. Continuation of data collection across centers seems reasonable.

Indexed as

Anti-Bacterial AgentsAntibiotic ProphylaxisCochlear ImplantationSurgical Wound InfectionAdolescentAdultAgedChildChild, PreschoolFemaleHumansInfantMaleMiddle AgedPerioperative CareRetrospective StudiesAnti-Bacterial AgentsCochlear implantationExplantationPerioperative antibiotic prophylaxisRevision surgerySurgical site infectionWound infection

Identifiers

PMID38480534
PMCPMC11266245
OpenAlexW4392816055

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.