Routine Perioperative Antibiotic Prophylaxis in Renal Transplantation: It Makes No Difference for Bacterial Infections.
10.4285/jkstn.2010.24.1.13
- Author:
Seong Uk CHOI
1
;
Chang Kwon OH
;
Ji Hye KIM
;
Gyu Tae SHIN
;
Heungsoo KIM
;
Se Jung KIM
;
Sun Il KIM
Author Information
1. Division of transplantation, Department of Surgery, Ajou University School of Medicine, Suwon, Korea. ohck@ajou.ac.kr
- Publication Type:Original Article
- Keywords:
Kidney transplantation;
Infection;
Antibiotic prophylaxis
- MeSH:
Anti-Bacterial Agents;
Antibiotic Prophylaxis;
Bacterial Infections;
Cohort Studies;
Humans;
Incidence;
Kidney;
Kidney Transplantation;
Korea;
Retrospective Studies;
Risk Assessment;
Transplants;
Wound Infection
- From:The Journal of the Korean Society for Transplantation
2010;24(1):13-18
- CountryRepublic of Korea
- Language:Korean
-
Abstract:
BACKGROUND: Although it has been a popular practice to use preventative antibiotics for the kidney recipients, it could increase the cost, encourage the growth of resistant micro-organism and have adverse effects. There has been no reported concrete evidence about the benefits and risks of using peri-operative prophylactic antibiotics for an immunosuppressed population. Therefore, we retrospectively evaluated the differences in the incidences of bacterial infection and adverse events after transplant surgery according to using peri-operative prophylactic antibiotics. METHODS: We reviewed retrospectively 106 cases of renal transplantations (cadaver donor: 42 cases, living donor: 64 cases) that were performed at Ajou University Hospital, Korea from January, 2006 to December, 2008. We divided the cases into two groups: Group A (n=41; 38.7%) included the patients who did not receive prophylactic antibiotics and Group B (n= 65; 61.3%) included the patients who did receive prophylactic antibiotics. We analyzed the infectious complications that occurred within 1 month after renal transplantation. RESULTS: In Group A, most patients (62 cases, 95.3%) used a 1st generation cephalosporin. The incidence of wound infection after kidney transplant for the 65 patients who received prophylactic antibiotics was 1.5%, compared to 2.5% for the 41 patients who did not receive prophylactic antibiotics. CONCLUSIONS: This retrospective study could not demonstrate a statistically significant difference in the rates of infectious complications between the two groups, although renal transplantation is considered to be a clean-contaminated surgery. But in order to obtain a definite conclusion, we need a bigger cohort in a prospective study.
