Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Comparative study of two cefazolin prophylactic protocols in oncologic surgery of the larynx: A randomized trial

  • Original Article
  • Published:
Indian Journal of Otolaryngology and Head & Neck Surgery Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Objective

Patients who need major head and neck surgery like laryngectomy are at risk of postoperative wound infection. Although the role of antibiotics in prophylaxis of clean contaminated head and neck surgery has been well documented, controversy exists in the optimal antibiotic regimen.

Methods

In two tertiary referral hospitals (Imam Khomeini and Amir Alam hospital), 90 patients undergoing laryngectomy were prospectively randomized into two groups receiving cefazolin perioperative prophylaxis either for 2 days or for 5 days from June 2004 to March 2006. Then patients were blindly examined for the development of wound infection.

Results

No wound infection was detected in either group. Two (4.4%) mucocutaneous fistula occurred in the 2-day group, and 3 (6.7%) in the 5-day group. There was no statistically significant difference in the infection rate between two groups.

Conclusion

We conclude that a 2-day perioperative cefazolin prophylaxis is equally effective as longer therapies. The increased morbidity and cost of the latter are in favor of the 2-day prophylactic regimen.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. French RS (2006) The use of prophylactic antibiotics in head and neck oncological surgery. Cur Opin Otol Head Neck Surg 14:55–61

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Weber RS, Callender DL (1992) Antibiotic prophylaxis in clean-contaminated head and neck oncologic surgery. Ann Otol Rhinol Laryngol Suppl 155:16–20

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Coskun, Levent, Basut, Ogus (2000) Factors affecting wound infection rates in head and neck surgery. Otol Head Neck Surg 123(3):328–333

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  4. Penel N, Fournier C, Lefebvre D, et al. (2005) Multivariate analysis of risk factors for wound infection in head and neck squamous cell carcinoma surgery with opening of mucosa. Study of 260 surgical procedures. Oral oncology 41(3): 294–303

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Funsconi, Massimo, Andrea, Vitiello, Cecilia, Pagliuca, Giuli (2006) Clean-Contaminated Neck Surgery: Risk of infection by intrinsic and extrinsic factors. Arch Otol — Head and Neck Surgery 132(9):953–957

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Johnson JM, Myers, Eugene, Sigler, Barbara (1984) Antimicrobial prophylaxis for contaminated head and neck surgery. Laryngoscope 94(1):46–50

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Penel N, Lefebvre D, Fournier C, Sarnia J, Kara A, Lefebvre JL (2001) Risk factors for wound infection in head and neck cancer surgery: a prospective study. Head and Neck 23(6):447–455

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Tabet JC JJ (1990) Wound infection in head and neck surgery: prophylaxis, etiology and management. J Otolaryngol 19(3):197–200

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Simons JP MJ, Jonas T Yu, Victor L (2001) the role of topical antibiotics in flap reconstruction. The Laryngoscope 111(2):329–335

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Blair EA, Johnson JT, Wagner RL, Carrau RL, Bizakis JG (1995) Cost analysis of antibiotic prophylaxis in clean head and neck surgery. Arch Otolaryngol — Head and Neck Surg 121(3):269–271

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  11. Callender DL (1999) Antibiotic prophylaxis in head and neck oncologic surgery: the role of gram-negative coverage. Int J Antimicrob Agents 12:21–27

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Skitarelic N, Morovic M, Manestar D (2007) Antibiotic prophylaxis in clean-contaminated head and neck oncological surgery. J Craniomaxillofac Surg 35(1):15–20

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Rodrigo JP, Alvarez JC, Gomez JR, Suarez C, Fernandez JA, Martinez JA (1997) Comparison of three prophylactic antibiotic regimens in clean-contaminated head and neck surgery. Head Neck 9(3):188–193

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Johnson WRL (1987) Infection following uncontaminated head and neck surgery. Arch otolaryngol and head and neck surgery 113(4)

  15. Rebecca Fraioli JT, Johnson (2004) Prevention and treatment of postsurgical head and neck infections. Current Infectious Disease Reports 62 4:172–180

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Johnson JT, Schuller DE, Silver F, Gluckman JL, Newman RK, Shagets FW, et al. (1986) Antibiotic prophylaxis in high-risk head and neck surgery: One-day vs. five-day therapy. Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 95(5):554–557

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Johnson JT, Yu VL, Myers EN, Wagner RL (1987) An assessment of the need for gram-negative bacterial coverage in antibiotic prophylaxis for oncological head and neck surgery. J infect disea 155(2):331–333

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  18. Mombelli G, Coppens L, Dor P, Klastersky J (1981) Antibiotic prophylaxis in surgery for head and neck cancer. Comparative study of short and prolonged administration of carbenicillin. J Antimicro Chemoth 7(6):665–671

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  19. Schwartz Yueh, Bevand (2004) Maynard Predictors of wound complications after laryngectomy: A study of over 2000 patients. Otolaryngol Head and Neck Surg 131(1): 61–68

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Ganly I, Patel S, Matsuo J, Singh B, Kraus D, Boyle J, et al. (2005) Postoperative complications of salvage total laryngectomy. Cancer 103(10):2073–2081

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Otolaryngology — Head and Neck Surgery, Otolaryngology Research Center, Imam Khomeini Hospital, Tehran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran

    Mohammad Taghy, Khorsandi Ashtiani, Mohammad Sadeghi, Babak Saedi & Gilda Givechi

Authors
  1. Mohammad Taghy
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Khorsandi Ashtiani
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Mohammad Sadeghi
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Babak Saedi
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Gilda Givechi
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Babak Saedi.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Taghy, M., Ashtiani, K., Sadeghi, M. et al. Comparative study of two cefazolin prophylactic protocols in oncologic surgery of the larynx: A randomized trial. Indian J Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 62, 55–59 (2010). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12070-010-0002-z

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12070-010-0002-z

Keywords

Search

Navigation