You are seeing this message because your Web browser does not support basic Web standards. Find out more about why this message is appearing and what you can do to make your experience on this site better.


ABOUT ARCHIVES
Advanced Search

Welcome   | My Account | E-mail Alerts | Access Rights | Sign In


  Vol. 110 No. 4, April 1984 TABLE OF CONTENTS
  Archives
  •  Online Features
  ORIGINAL ARTICLES
 This Article
 •References
 •Full text PDF
 • Reply to article
 •Send to a friend
 • Save in My Folder
 •Save to citation manager
 •Permissions
 Citing Articles
 •Citation map
 •Citing articles on HighWire
 •Contact me when this article is cited
 Related Content
 •Similar articles in this journal
 Social Bookmarking
  Add to CiteULike Add to Connotea Add to Del.icio.us Add to Digg Add to Reddit Add to Technorati Add to Twitter What's this?

Efficacy of Two Third-Generation Cephalosporins in Prophylaxis for Head and Neck Surgery

Jonas T. Johnson, MD; Victor L. Yu,, MD; Eugene N. Myers, MD; Robert R. Muder, MD; Patricia B. Thearle, RN; Warren F Diven, PhD

Arch Otolaryngol. 1984;110(4):224-227.


Abstract

• Optimal antimicrobial prophylaxis during head and neck surgery is as yet unclear. The semisynthetic third-generation cephalosporin antibiotics would appear to have potential usefulness because of their broad antibacterial spectrum, favorable pharmacokinetic properties, and record of safety. Eighty patients were prospectively randomized into this placebo-controlled, double-blind study to receive either placebo, cefoperazone sodium, or cefotaxime sodium preoperatively and for 24 hours postoperatively. Infection rates were 78% for the placebo group and 10% for the group receiving the cephalosporin antibiotics. Infections were polymicrobial. Anaerobic bacteria constituted 42% of the pathogens isolated. Wound and serum antibiotic concentrations exceeded the minimal inhibitory concentration of the bacterial flora. This study establishes the necessity of antimicrobial prophylaxis for contaminated oncologic procedures of the head and neck. Our experience indicates that cefoperazone and cefotaxime are particularly useful.

(Arch Otolaryngol 1984;110:224-227)



Author Affiliations

From the Departments of Otolaryngology (Drs Johnson and Myers and Ms Thearle) and Pathology (Dr Diven) and the Division of Infectious Disease, Department of Medicine (Drs Yu and Muder), University of Pittsburgh School of Medicine; the Eye and Ear Hospital of Pittsburgh (Drs Johnson and Myers and Ms Thearle); the Veterans Administration Medical Center, Pittsburgh (Drs Yu and Muder); and the Presbyterian-University Hospital, Pittsburgh (Dr Diven).


Footnotes

Accepted for publication Oct 5, 1983.

Presented as a scientific exhibit at the 25th annual meeting of the American Society of Head and Neck Surgeons, Palm Springs, Calif, March 8-12, 1983.

Reprint requests to Medical Library, Eye and Ear Hospital of Pittsburgh, 230 Lothrop St, Pittsburgh, PA 15213 (Dr Johnson).



Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati   Add to Twitter Twitter     What's this?

THIS ARTICLE HAS BEEN CITED BY OTHER ARTICLES

Bacteriologic Analysis of Wound Infection Following Major Head and Neck Surgery
Rubin et al.
Arch Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 1988;114:969-972.
ABSTRACT  

Infection Following Uncontaminated Head and Neck Surgery
Johnson and Wagner
Arch Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 1987;113:368-369.
ABSTRACT  

Cefazolin vs Moxalactam? A Double-blind Randomized Trial of Cephalosporins in Head and Neck Surgery
Johnson et al.
Arch Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 1986;112:151-153.
ABSTRACT  

Cefazolin Sodium in Prophylaxis
PARELL
Arch Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 1984;110:628-628.
ABSTRACT  





HOME | CURRENT ISSUE | PAST ISSUES | TOPIC COLLECTIONS | CME | SUBMIT | SUBSCRIBE | HELP
CONDITIONS OF USE | PRIVACY POLICY | CONTACT US | SITE MAP
 
© 1984 American Medical Association. All Rights Reserved.