SynthesisBJS open2025
Weight-based dosing of surgical antibiotic prophylaxis in patients with obesity: meta-analysis.
Synthesis in BJS open, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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.
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.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe use of preoperative surgical antibiotic prophylaxis is effective in preventing surgical site infection. However, obesity, a major risk factor for surgical site infection, affects the pharmacokinetics and effectiveness of surgical antibiotic prophylaxis. Evidence for weight-based surgical antibiotic prophylaxis in patients with obesity is inconsistent.
methodsMEDLINE (PubMed), Embase, CENTRAL, and CINAHL were searched up to 21 October 2025 for eligible studies on weight-based surgical antibiotic prophylaxis and surgical site infection. This systematic review and random-effects meta-analysis compared weight-based dosing of surgical antibiotic prophylaxis with standard surgical antibiotic prophylaxis, in terms of surgical site infection rates in patients with obesity. The certainty of evidence was evaluated using the Revised Cochrane risk-of-bias tool for randomized trials, the Risk Of Bias in Non-randomized Studies-of Interventions tool for observational studies, and Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE).
resultsOf 2782 potentially relevant articles, 33 studies were eligible (3 randomized clinical trials, 30 observational). A total of 99 211 patients were included, of whom 2362 (2.4%) developed a surgical site infection. Risk of bias varied from 'low' to 'some concerns' in randomized trials, and 'some concerns' to 'serious' in observational studies. Meta-analysis of 3 randomized trials with only 1 surgical site infection among 103 patients (1.0%) showed no significant reduction in surgical site infection rates in patients receiving weight-based dosing of cefazolin versus standard dosing (risk difference 2.02 (95% confidence interval -3.15 to 7.19)%). Meta-analysis of 6 observational studies with 45 554 patients and 610 surgical site infections (1.3%) showed significantly reduced surgical site infection rates in patients receiving weight-based dosing of cefazolin versus standard dosing (risk difference -1.93 (-2.84 to -1.02)%), with most studies focusing on orthopaedic surgery. GRADE assessments showed very low certainty of evidence.
conclusionBased on observational data, the use of weight-based dosing of surgical antibiotic prophylaxis may reduce the risk of surgical site infection in patients with obesity compared with standard dosing, but the existing evidence is very uncertain.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.