Surgery Today

, Volume 29, Issue 12, pp 1233–1236 | Cite as

An additional dose of cefazolin for intraoperative prophylaxis

  • Hiroki Ohge
  • Yoshio Takesue
  • Takashi Yokoyama
  • Yoshiaki Murakami
  • Eiso Hiyama
  • Yujiro Yokoyama
  • Tetsuya Kanehiro
  • Hideyuki Itaha
  • Yuichiro Matsuura
Original Articles

Abstract

We examined the pancreatic tissue concentrations of cefazolin in ten patients undergoing pancreatectomy, and determined the optimal intraoperative time to deliver a repeat dose of cefazolin. An intravenous bolus dose of 1 g cefazolin was administered at the time of skin incision. Peripheral blood, subcutaneous adipose tissue, and peritoneal samples were obtained intraoperatively every hour for 4h after the antibiotic was first administered, and pancreatic tissue samples were obtained at the time of pancreatectomy. To determine adquate tissue levels of cefazolin, minimum inhibitory concentrations (MIC) were measured for four bacterial species, namely 360 isolates of methicillin-sensitiveStaphylococcus aureus (MSSA), 204 isolates ofKlebsiella pneumoniae, 314 isolates ofEscherichia coli, and 30 isolates ofStreptococcus spp. The antibiotic concentrations in adipose tissue and peritoneum 3 h after the administration of cefazolin were lower than the MIC80 forK. pneumoniae, E. coli, andStreptococcus spp. Most pancreatic tissue samples showed antibiotic concentrations greater than the MIC80 for these bacterial species; however, those from four patients complicated by severe chronic pancreatitis, massive intraoperative bleeding, or obesity showed concentrations lower than the MIC80. Thus, we recommend that a second dose of cefazolin be given 3 h after thefirst administration to maintain adequate levels of antibiotic activity.

Key Words

surgical prophylaxis cefazolin pancreas drug dosage 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (1998) Draft guidelines for the prevention of surgical site infection, Federal Register, 1998, 63, pp 33167–33192Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Polk HC, Trachtenberg L, Finn MP (1980) Antibiotic activity in surgical incisions. JAMA 244:1353–1354CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Nahata MC, Durrell DE, Ginn-Pease ME, King DR (1991) Pharmacokinetics and tissue concentrations of cefazolin in pediatric patients undergoing gastrointestinal surgery. Eur J Metab Pharmacokinet 16:49–52CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Boscardin JB, Ringus JC, Feingold DJ, Ruda SC (1992) Human intradiscal levels with cefazolin. Supine 17:145–148CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Bergamini TM, Polk HC (1989) Pharmacodynamics of antibiotic penetration of tissue and surgical prophylaxis. Surg Gynecol Obstet 168:283–289PubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Burke JF (1961) The effective period of preventive antibiotic action in experimental incisions and dermal lesions. Surgery 50:161–168PubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Shapiro M, Munoz A, Tager IB, Schoenbaum SC, Polk BF (1982) Risk factors for infection at the operative site after abdominal or vaginal hysterectomy. N Engl J Med 307:1661–1666PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag 1999

Authors and Affiliations

  • Hiroki Ohge
    • 1
  • Yoshio Takesue
    • 1
  • Takashi Yokoyama
    • 2
  • Yoshiaki Murakami
    • 1
  • Eiso Hiyama
    • 2
  • Yujiro Yokoyama
    • 1
  • Tetsuya Kanehiro
    • 1
  • Hideyuki Itaha
    • 3
  • Yuichiro Matsuura
    • 1
  1. 1.First Department of SurgeryHiroshima University School of MedicineHiroshimaJapan
  2. 2.Department of General MedicineHiroshima University HospitalHiroshimaJapan
  3. 3.Clinical Laboratory DepartmentHiroshima University HospitalHiroshimaJapan

Personalised recommendations