We have located links that may give you full text access.
Journal Article
Randomized Controlled Trial
Controversies in Reduction Mammoplasty: Being A "Clean" Operation, Does It Mandate Antibiotic Prophylaxis?
Surgical Infections 2016 October
BACKGROUND: Considered a clean operation, breast surgery has surgical site infection (SSI) rates ranging from 4% to 18%, higher than the reference value for clean surgery (<3.4%). The aim of this study was to measure the incidence of SSI in patients undergoing reduction mammoplasty with and without antibiotic prophylaxis, comparing the results and defining the value of antibiotic prophylaxis.
METHODS: The study was randomized, double-blinded, and interventional. Two groups were formed randomly, with 75 patients in each. Group 1 received prophylactic antibiotic (cefazolin 2 g 30 min before surgery with repetition at 1 g every 3 h during surgery), and Group 2 (control) did not have antibiotic prophylaxis. Patients were followed until the 30th post-operative day for identification of SSI.
RESULTS: There were 13 cases of SSI, 3 in Group 1 (4.1%) and 10 in Group 2 (13.9%) (p = 0.039). Their secretion cultures were positive for Staphylococcus aureus. There were more cases of SSI in patients having greater resections (n = 9), but the difference was not significant (p = 0.051).
CONCLUSION: Infection was significantly more common in the group that did not receive prophylaxis.
METHODS: The study was randomized, double-blinded, and interventional. Two groups were formed randomly, with 75 patients in each. Group 1 received prophylactic antibiotic (cefazolin 2 g 30 min before surgery with repetition at 1 g every 3 h during surgery), and Group 2 (control) did not have antibiotic prophylaxis. Patients were followed until the 30th post-operative day for identification of SSI.
RESULTS: There were 13 cases of SSI, 3 in Group 1 (4.1%) and 10 in Group 2 (13.9%) (p = 0.039). Their secretion cultures were positive for Staphylococcus aureus. There were more cases of SSI in patients having greater resections (n = 9), but the difference was not significant (p = 0.051).
CONCLUSION: Infection was significantly more common in the group that did not receive prophylaxis.
Full text links
Related Resources
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app
All material on this website is protected by copyright, Copyright © 1994-2024 by WebMD LLC.
This website also contains material copyrighted by 3rd parties.
By using this service, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy.
Your Privacy Choices
You can now claim free CME credits for this literature searchClaim now
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app