Trial reportArchives of orthopaedic and trauma surgery1995
Prophylaxis with oral cefadroxil versus intravenous cefuroxime in trochanteric fracture surgery. A clinical multicentre study.
Trial report in Archives of orthopaedic and trauma surgery, 1995. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 17 citations in OpenAlex.
- Antibiotic prophylaxis for surgery for proximal femoral and other closed long bone fractures.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2010Pooled it
- Prevention of surgical site infection after open prosthetic inguinal hernia repair: efficacy of parenteral versus oral prophylaxis with amoxicillin-clavulanic acid in a randomized clinical trial.World journal of surgery · 2005Trial
- Comparison of ceftibuten vs. amoxicillin/clavulanic acid as antibiotic prophylaxis in cholecystectomy and/or biliary tract surgery.Journal of gastrointestinal surgery : official journal of the Society for Surgery of the Alimentary TractTrial
- Antibiotic prophylaxis as a quality of care indicator: does it help in the fight against surgical site infections following fragility hip fractures?Archives of orthopaedic and trauma surgery · 2022Article
- Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
A prospective, randomized study was performed in 559 patients to compare two doses of oral cefadroxil with three doses of intravenous cefuorxime as antibiotic prophylaxis in intra- and subtrochanteric hip fracture surgery. Antibiotic concentrations in the wound fluid were determined at the start and at the end of the operation. The first dose of cefadroxil was given about 2 h before surgery and cefuroxime about 30 min before operation. In 226/242 (93%) patients randomized to oral cefadroxil, the concentration in the wound during surgery was on average 15 micrograms/ml, i.e., well above the minimum inhibitory concentration (MIC-90) for Staphylococcus aureus. In the cefuroxime group, antibiotic levels in the wound exceeded the MIC-90 for S. aureus in 204/210 (97%) of the patients at the start and/or at the end of surgery. All patients were followed up for 4 months. One deep and five superficial infections occurred in the cefuroxime group and no deep but one superficial infection in the cefadroxil group (P = 0.07). S. aureus was cultured in three of the infected cases while cultures were negative in four patients. Four of the seven infected patients had adequate levels of antibiotic in the wound during surgery, and in three patients no antibiotic assay was performed. The infected patients did not differ in age, sex, operation time, bleeding or any other basic variable compared with patients who healed without complications. Two doses of cefadroxil seems to be practical and as effective as intravenously administered cefuroxime as antibiotic prophylaxis in trochanteric hip fracture surgery.
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.