Skip to main content
  • American Heart Association
  • Science Volunteer
  • Warning Signs
  • Advanced Search
  • Donate

  • Home
  • About this Journal
    • Editorial Board
    • General Statistics
    • Circulation Doodle
      • Doodle Gallery
      • Circulation Cover Doodle
        • → Blip the Doodle
    • Information for Advertisers
    • Author Reprints
    • Commercial Reprints
    • Customer Service and Ordering Information
    • Subscribe to AHA Journals
  • All Issues
  • Subjects
    • All Subjects
    • Arrhythmia and Electrophysiology
    • Basic, Translational, and Clinical Research
    • Critical Care and Resuscitation
    • Epidemiology, Lifestyle, and Prevention
    • Genetics
    • Heart Failure and Cardiac Disease
    • Hypertension
    • Imaging and Diagnostic Testing
    • Intervention, Surgery, Transplantation
    • Quality and Outcomes
    • Stroke
    • Vascular Disease
  • Browse Features
    • AHA Guidelines and Statements
      • Recently Published Guidelines
    • Bridging Disciplines
    • Circulation at Major Meetings
    • Special Themed Issues
    • Global Impact of the 2017 ACC/AHA Hypertension Guidelines
    • Circulation Supplements
    • Cardiovascular Case Series
    • ECG Challenge
    • Hospitals of History
      • Brigham and Women's Hospital
      • Hartford Hospital
      • Hospital Santa Maria del Popolo, Naples, Italy
      • Instituto do Coração-INCOR (São Paulo, Brasil)
      • Minneapolis City Hospital
      • Parkland Hospital: Dallas, Texas
      • Pennsylvania Hospital, Philadelphia
      • Pitié-Salpêtrière Hospital
      • Royal Infirmary of Edinburgh, Scotland
      • Tufts Medical Center
      • University of Michigan
      • Uppsala University Hospital
      • Vassar Brothers Medical Center (Poughkeepsie, NY)
      • Wroclaw Medical University
      • Women's College Hospital, Toronto, Canada
      • Henry Ford Hospital, Detroit, Michigan
      • Instituto Nacional de Cardiología Ignacio Chávez – INCICh México City, México
      • Kuang-Tien General Hospital (Taichug, Taiwan)
    • On My Mind
    • Podcast Archive
    • → Subscribe to Circulation on the Run
    • →Circulation FIT Podcast 2018
    • → #FITFAVs
  • Resources
    • Instructions for Authors
      • Accepted Manuscripts
      • Revised Manuscripts
    • → Article Types
    • → General Preparation Instructions
    • → Research Guidelines
    • → How to Submit a Manuscript
    • Journal Policies
    • Permissions and Rights Q&A
    • Submission Sites
    • Circulation CME
    • AHA Journals RSS Feeds
    • International Users
    • AHA Newsroom
  • AHA Journals
    • AHA Journals Home
    • Arteriosclerosis, Thrombosis, and Vascular Biology (ATVB)
    • Circulation
    • → Circ: Arrhythmia and Electrophysiology
    • → Circ: Genomic and Precision Medicine
    • → Circ: Cardiovascular Imaging
    • → Circ: Cardiovascular Interventions
    • → Circ: Cardiovascular Quality & Outcomes
    • → Circ: Heart Failure
    • Circulation Research
    • Hypertension
    • Stroke
    • Journal of the American Heart Association
  • Facebook
  • Twitter

  • My alerts
  • Sign In
  • Join

  • Advanced search

Header Publisher Menu

  • American Heart Association
  • Science Volunteer
  • Warning Signs
  • Advanced Search
  • Donate

Circulation

  • My alerts
  • Sign In
  • Join

  • Facebook
  • Twitter
  • Home
  • About this Journal
    • Editorial Board
    • General Statistics
    • Circulation Doodle
    • Information for Advertisers
    • Author Reprints
    • Commercial Reprints
    • Customer Service and Ordering Information
    • Subscribe to AHA Journals
  • All Issues
  • Subjects
    • All Subjects
    • Arrhythmia and Electrophysiology
    • Basic, Translational, and Clinical Research
    • Critical Care and Resuscitation
    • Epidemiology, Lifestyle, and Prevention
    • Genetics
    • Heart Failure and Cardiac Disease
    • Hypertension
    • Imaging and Diagnostic Testing
    • Intervention, Surgery, Transplantation
    • Quality and Outcomes
    • Stroke
    • Vascular Disease
  • Browse Features
    • AHA Guidelines and Statements
    • Bridging Disciplines
    • Circulation at Major Meetings
    • Special Themed Issues
    • Global Impact of the 2017 ACC/AHA Hypertension Guidelines
    • Circulation Supplements
    • Cardiovascular Case Series
    • ECG Challenge
    • Hospitals of History
    • On My Mind
    • Podcast Archive
    • → Subscribe to Circulation on the Run
    • →Circulation FIT Podcast 2018
    • → #FITFAVs
  • Resources
    • Instructions for Authors
    • → Article Types
    • → General Preparation Instructions
    • → Research Guidelines
    • → How to Submit a Manuscript
    • Journal Policies
    • Permissions and Rights Q&A
    • Submission Sites
    • Circulation CME
    • AHA Journals RSS Feeds
    • International Users
    • AHA Newsroom
  • AHA Journals
    • AHA Journals Home
    • Arteriosclerosis, Thrombosis, and Vascular Biology (ATVB)
    • Circulation
    • → Circ: Arrhythmia and Electrophysiology
    • → Circ: Genomic and Precision Medicine
    • → Circ: Cardiovascular Imaging
    • → Circ: Cardiovascular Interventions
    • → Circ: Cardiovascular Quality & Outcomes
    • → Circ: Heart Failure
    • Circulation Research
    • Hypertension
    • Stroke
    • Journal of the American Heart Association
Clinical Investigation and Reports

Prolonged Antibiotic Prophylaxis After Cardiovascular Surgery and Its Effect on Surgical Site Infections and Antimicrobial Resistance

Stephan Harbarth, Matthew H. Samore, Debi Lichtenberg, Yehuda Carmeli
Download PDF
https://doi.org/10.1161/01.CIR.101.25.2916
Circulation. 2000;101:2916-2921
Originally published June 27, 2000
Stephan Harbarth
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Matthew H. Samore
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Debi Lichtenberg
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Yehuda Carmeli
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • Article
  • Figures & Tables
  • Info & Metrics
  • eLetters

Jump to

  • Article
    • Abstract
    • Methods
    • Results
    • Discussion
    • Acknowledgments
    • Footnotes
    • References
  • Figures & Tables
  • Info & Metrics
  • eLetters
Loading

Abstract

Background—Despite evidence supporting short antibiotic prophylaxis (ABP), it is still common practice to continue ABP for more than 48 hours after coronary artery bypass graft (CABG) surgery.

Methods and Results—To compare the effect of short (<48 hours) versus prolonged (>48 hours) ABP on surgical site infections (SSIs) and acquired antimicrobial resistance, we conducted an observational 4-year cohort study at a tertiary-care center. An experienced infection control nurse performed prospective surveillance of 2641 patients undergoing CABG surgery. The main exposure was the duration of ABP, and main outcomes were the adjusted rate of SSI and the isolation of cephalosporin-resistant enterobacteriaceae and vancomycin-resistant enterococci (acquired antibiotic resistance). Adjustment for confounding was performed by multivariable modeling. A total of 231 SSIs (8.7%) occurred after a median of 16 days, including 93 chest-wound infections (3.5%) and 13 deep-organ-space infections (0.5%). After 1502 procedures using short ABP, 131 SSIs were recorded, compared with 100 SSIs after 1139 operations with prolonged ABP (crude OR, 1.0; CI, 0.8 to 1.3). After adjustment for possible confounding, prolonged ABP was not associated with a decreased risk of SSI (adjusted OR, 1.2; CI, 0.8 to 1.6) and was correlated with an increased risk of acquired antibiotic resistance (adjusted OR, 1.6; CI, 1.1 to 2.6).

Conclusions—Our findings confirm that continuing ABP beyond 48 hours after CABG surgery is still widespread; however, this practice is ineffective in reducing SSI, increases antimicrobial resistance, and should therefore be avoided.

  • bypass
  • infection
  • antibiotics

The unnecessary and improper use of antibacterial agents in treatment, and particularly for prophylaxis … will have to be modified or stopped completely. Maxwell Finland, 19701

Surgical site infections (SSIs) in cardiovascular surgery are associated with adverse outcomes.2 3 4 Among the different approaches to prevent these infections, antimicrobial prophylaxis is of substantial importance. Despite evidence from randomized clinical trials and other data supporting antibiotic prophylaxis (ABP) for no longer than 48 hours,5 6 7 8 controversy persists about the optimal duration of prophylaxis.9 10 In particular, it is still common practice to continue ABP for >48 hours after cardiac surgery until all chest tubes are removed.11 12 13 14 15 This routine, although never substantiated by scientific evidence, is aimed at reducing SSI rates, but it has generated concerns about the emergence of antibiotic resistance and other adverse events.16

Therefore, this 4-year observational cohort study was designed to examine the effect of prolonged ABP on the risk of SSI and the selection of antibiotic-resistant microorganisms after coronary artery bypass graft (CABG) surgery.

Methods

This observational cohort study was conducted at the West Campus of Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center (Boston, Mass), a 320-bed teaching hospital with ≈600 cardiovascular operations per year. Patients were included if they had been operated on for CABG or CABG/valve procedure between September 1, 1993, and August 31, 1997. Each patient was included only once.

An experienced infection-control nurse (D.L.) monitored patients who underwent cardiac operations and reviewed microbiology logs and medical reports to detect SSI. These data were prospectively reviewed and validated by the hospital epidemiologist (M.H.S.). SSIs were defined on the basis of National Nosocomial Infection Surveillance (NNIS) System criteria.17 All patients were followed up for at least 3 months after hospital discharge to detect late-appearing infections.

Additional demographic and microbiological data were collected from administrative, pharmacy, and laboratory computerized databases by use of a relational database management system (Access, Microsoft Corp). The databases and related methods of data collection were described before.18

Before surgery, patients took a chlorhexidine shower, and chest hair was clipped without shaving either the night before or on the morning of the operation. Immediately before surgical incision, povidone-iodine was applied for cutaneous disinfection of the operative site. In the operating room, beginning shortly before the first incision, prophylactic intravenous antibiotics (principally cefazolin 1 g; in some cases vancomycin 1 g, ceftriaxone 1 g, or a combination of these agents) were administered to each patient. In case of a prolonged intervention (≥5 hours), the second dose of cefazolin was administered after completion of cardiopulmonary bypass before closure of the sternal wound to ensure an adequate serum level of the antibiotic agent. After surgery, ABP was encouraged to be given for no more than 48 hours, but it could be continued at the surgeon’s discretion.

The main exposure was duration of ABP (<48 hours versus >48 hours). The outcomes of interest were the occurrence of SSIs and isolation of a pathogen with acquired antibiotic resistance from a clinical specimen. For the purpose of the logistic regression analysis, patients with both chest and leg infections were classified as chest infections. In addition, first- and third-generation cephalosporin resistance in enterobacteriaceae (eg, Escherichia coli, Klebsiella spp, Proteus mirabilis) and vancomycin resistance in enterococci were considered to be acquired resistance and were the pathogens further examined.

Statistical Analysis

We used χ2 or t tests to screen the following potential risk factors for SSI: Time from admission to operation, previous intensive care unit (ICU) stay, calendar time of the intervention (in 3-month intervals), sex, age, number of comorbidities (defined as pulmonary, renal, gastrointestinal, or hepatic conditions or malignant disease process causing serious disability), American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) classification (5-point assessment of the patient’s physical condition conducted by the anesthesiologist immediately before surgery), severe obesity (body mass index >37 kg/m2), diabetes mellitus (requiring either oral therapy or insulin treatment), chronic kidney disease (chronic underlying renal disorder), chronic lung disease (resulting in functional disability), emergency operation (surgery performed shortly after admission to avoid unnecessary morbidity or death), direct hospital admission (patients admitted from home), anemia (prebypass hematocrit: men ≤35%, women ≤30%), renal insufficiency (prebypass level of serum urea nitrogen >40 mg/dL), internal mammary artery graft, antimicrobial prophylactic agent, surgeon, history of previous cardiac surgery, additional valve replacement, and duration of surgery (time from first incision to wound closure). Variables with a value of P≤0.1 in the univariate analysis were candidates for multivariable analysis, as well as the main variable of interest (duration of ABP). Multivariable modeling was performed by use of conventional logistic regression analysis. Variables were tested for significance by a Wald χ2 statistic.

In a separate analysis, we analyzed the effect of extended ABP on the isolation of microorganisms with acquired antibiotic resistance irrespective of the calendar time and the antibiotic agent used. To avoid confounding by indication and temporal trends, we performed conditional logistic regression matched on the type of prophylactic agent and calendar time. Variables with a value of P≤0.1 in the crude analysis were considered candidates for multivariable analysis and were added to the model. Duration of prophylaxis was again forced into the model. In addition, we tested variables for confounding by adding them one at a time to the model and examining their effects on the β coefficients of the main exposure variable. Variables that caused substantial confounding (change in β coefficient of >10%) were included in the final model. Effect modification was examined by use of clinically important interaction terms.

All statistical tests were 2-tailed. Values of P<0.05 were considered significant. Statistics were run on SPSS 8.0 (SPSS) and STATA 5.0 (STATA Corp).

Results

Study Population

From September 1993 through August 1997, 2641 adult patients underwent CABG, including 186 patients who received combined CABG and valve replacement procedures. The median age of the patients was 68 years (range, 29 to 91 years), with 75% of the population >59 years old. Of these patients, 831 (31.5%) were female. A total of 1467 patients (55%) were transferred from another healthcare institution; 116 patients underwent emergency operations shortly after admission. The median preoperative stay for all patients was 2 days (range, 0 to 28 days); 631 patients (23.9%) stayed in the ICU before the operation. Operation time averaged 5 hours (±1.1 hour). The median overall length of hospital stay was 9 days (range, 2 to 118 days), with a decreasing trend from 10 days in 1994 to 8 days in 1997 (Spearman’s r=−0.26, P<0.001).

With regard to ABP, 2180 patients received cefazolin, 385 patients vancomycin, and 222 patients ceftriaxone; 1502 patients (57%) received ABP for <48 hours (mean, 35.5±7.9 hours) and 1139 (43%) received ABP for >48 hours (mean, 76.0±30.2 hours).

Infections

Overall, 231 SSIs occurred after a median time interval of 16 days, corresponding to a rate of 8.7 SSIs per 100 operations. Chest wound infections occurred after 93 operations (3.5%), and leg wound infections without chest involvement after 138 interventions (5.2%). The proportion of patients with deep-organ-space involvement (mediastinitis) and sepsis requiring reexploration and drainage was 0.5 per 100 operations.

Among 231 SSIs, 176 (76%) were cultured (chest infections, n=82; leg infections, n=94). Positive cultures were recovered in 70% (123 of 176) of the cultured SSIs and most commonly yielded coagulase-negative staphylococci (n=52), enterococci (n=21), and Gram-negative organisms (n=51), whereas Staphylococcus aureus was encountered only infrequently (n=15). It is noteworthy that Enterobacter spp (n=8), Serratia spp (n=11), and Pseudomonas aeruginosa (n=11) were the 3 most prominent Gram-negative organisms obtained in wound cultures.

ABP and Risk of SSI

The effect of the duration of ABP on the risk of SSI was first examined by univariate analysis and showed that the rates were almost identical in both groups: 131 SSIs (8.7%) were recorded after 1502 procedures with short prophylaxis compared with 100 SSIs (8.8%) after 1139 operations with prolonged prophylaxis (crude OR, 1.0; CI, 0.8 to 1.3). In contrast, 11 other variables were found to be associated with an increased risk of SSI by univariate analysis (P≤0.1): female sex, obesity, direct hospital admission, diabetes mellitus, chronic kidney disease, chronic lung disease, number of comorbidities, ASA classification, anemia, renal insufficiency, and duration of surgery (Table 1⇓⇓). After inclusion of these variables in a multivariate logistic regression model and after control for seasonal variation, the risk of SSI was significantly correlated with female sex (OR, 1.6; CI, 1.1 to 2.2), obesity (OR, 2.5; CI, 1.2 to 5.4), number of comorbidities (OR increase per increment, 2.2; CI, 1.1 to 4.4), ASA score IV (OR, 1.6; CI, 1.1 to 2.4), duration of surgery (OR increase in 1-hour increments, 1.1; CI, 1.0 to 1.3), and direct hospital admission (OR, 1.6; CI, 1.1 to 2.2). After adjustment for the above-mentioned independent risk factors for SSI, prolonged ABP was not associated with a decreased risk of SSI (adjusted OR, 1.2; CI, 0.8 to 1.6). In a separate analysis, we confirmed these results for the association between extended prophylaxis and sternal wound infections only (adjusted OR, 0.9; CI, 0.6 to 1.4).

View this table:
  • View inline
  • View popup
Table 1.

Univariate Analysis of Preoperative and Intraoperative Correlates of SSI (n=231)

View this table:
  • View inline
  • View popup
Table 2.

Multivariable Model for Isolation of Acquired Resistant Enterobacteriaceae and Enterococci After CABG, Matched by Calendar Time and the Prophylactic Antibiotic Agents Used

View this table:
  • View inline
  • View popup
Table 1A.

Continued

ABP and Isolation of Resistant Organisms

Of 2641 patients, 1094 (41%) had had cultures taken at any body site. In 426 patients (16%), ≥1 microorganism resistant to the administered prophylactic agent was isolated; leading pathogens were coagulase-negative staphylococci (20%), Candida spp (19%), and Enterococcus spp (16%). In 166 patients (6%), cephalosporin-resistant enterobacteriaceae (excluding other Gram-negative rods such as Pseudomonas aeruginosa) or vancomycin-resistant enterococci were recovered. Enterobacteriaceae resistant to first-generation cephalosporins were retrieved in 97%, enterobacteriaceae resistant to third-generation cephalosporins in 23%, and enterococci resistant to vancomycin in 4% of these 166 patients.

Multivariable analysis including postoperative antibiotic therapy and length of ICU stay, as well as relevant preoperative and perioperative variables, demonstrated that 4 variables were associated with an increased risk of isolation of enterobacteriaceae or enterococci with acquired resistance (Table 2⇑): antibiotic therapy after CABG, age >65 years, combined CABG/valve surgery, and prolonged ABP. Thus, even after control for confounding, prolonged ABP was associated with an increased risk of acquired antibiotic resistance (OR, 1.6; CI, 1.1 to 2.6).

Discussion

Antimicrobial prophylaxis complements meticulous technique in reducing the incidence of SSI after cardiovascular surgery. Although the principles of surgical prophylaxis have been outlined on numerous occasions, there is still misuse of antimicrobials for this purpose.16 19 Our results demonstrate that prolonging ABP beyond 48 hours after CABG surgery is still frequently practiced but does not decrease the risk of SSI. Moreover, it results in an increased risk of acquired antibiotic resistance and should therefore be avoided.

Some researchers have suggested that extended prophylactic use of antibiotics is appropriate when drains or catheters remain in situ for several days after cardiac surgery.20 The antibiotics would presumably protect the wound from a secondary infection that originated in the foreign body and reached the wound by a hematogenous route. Therefore, surgeons tend to continue antibiotics as long as perioperatively placed transthoracic devices are left in place. For instance, in a survey among 43 pediatric cardiovascular surgery centers in the United States, up to 76% continued antibiotics while chest tubes were in place.13 A questionnaire sent to 120 UK cardiac surgeons showed that 28% continued antibiotic use until the removal of all chest drains.12 In a French survey among 1473 anesthetists, 23% prescribed >48 hours of antibiotics after cardiovascular surgery.

However, results from our study and other reports appear to invalidate this practice. Already 20 years ago, in a double-blind, randomized clinical trial comparing a 6-day with a 2-day regimen of cephalothin prophylaxis, Goldmann et al5 showed that a 6-day course of prophylactic antibiotics after cardiac surgery is not justified. The only published study comparing single-dose prophylaxis versus extended prophylaxis after thoracostomy in chest trauma patients showed no need for use of prophylaxis for as long as the chest tube was in place.21 These findings are also in line with a recent meta-analysis of single- versus multiple-dose prophylaxis for major surgery that indicated no benefit for multiple-dose regimens in preventing SSI in various surgical interventions requiring postoperative drainage.22 In contrast, prolonged antibiotic use after surgery induces antimicrobial resistance and may facilitate the colonization of foreign devices with antimicrobial-resistant organisms.23 24 25 Therefore, in place of extended ABP, meticulous handling of catheters, strict compliance with hand disinfection, maintenance of closed drainage systems, and early catheter removal are the preferred means to avoid infections related to foreign devices.26

Observational cohort studies should complement controlled clinical trials dealing with ABP, because the latter have a limited ability to detect adverse effects such as acquisition of resistant microorganisms, provide information only about patients who satisfy the criteria for study entry, and often concentrate on the efficacy of specific agents rather than evaluate variations in the duration of prophylaxis.27 In addition, randomized trials do not provide data on the effect of therapeutic interventions in actual clinical practice. In contrast to many previously reported clinical trials, the present study focused on the duration of prophylaxis rather than on antibiotic choice. All patients undergoing coronary bypass surgery were included in the analysis, thereby increasing the generalizability of the study results. However, as in all observational studies, there may have been unknown or unmeasured confounding factors for which adjustment was not possible. For instance, despite adjustment for important covariates such as age, number of comorbidities, length of ICU stay, and postoperative antibiotic therapy, it is difficult to completely exclude the possibility of residual confounding among subjects with acquired resistance.

The inappropriate prophylactic antibiotic administration in our cardiovascular surgery unit may have arisen primarily from misconceptions regarding the optimal use of prophylaxis. In some cases, ceftriaxone was chosen as prophylactic agent because of its pharmacokinetic profile, including high serum levels, high tissue penetration, and long elimination half-life, which makes it potentially suitable for prophylaxis in prolonged surgery.28 However, shortly before the end of the study period, we introduced strict antibiotic guidelines and stopped this practice because of antibiotic resistance concerns and cost implications.

The findings should be interpreted in the context of the study design. First, because routine surveillance cultures were not obtained from study patients, one may raise questions about the possible underestimation of the frequency of acquired antibiotic resistance. However, by matching for antibiotic agent, adjusting for calendar time, and including only patients with positive cultures, we minimized the possibility of significant detection bias. Second, an explanation for the association of combined CABG/valve surgery with increased antibiotic resistance is not directly apparent from our study results. We hypothesize that these patients are more likely to have received previous courses of antibiotics for prophylaxis or treatment of endocarditis due to underlying valve abnormalities, thus increasing the risk of acquiring antibiotic resistance. Third, the patient population reported in this study is notable for a high frequency of diabetes and referral from other institutions. These characteristics may have increased the SSI rate (but not the rate of mediastinitis, which was similar to that reported elsewhere), although the observed overall infection rate also probably reflected the intensive nature of the surveillance program. However, we do not believe that these surveillance methods and patient characteristics distorted the generalizability of our study findings.

In conclusion, our study confirms that ABP for CABG surgery is frequently extended beyond 48 hours. It shows that prolonged prophylaxis does not reduce the rate of SSI and is associated with an increased risk of acquired antibiotic resistance. We urge surgeons and all concerned physicians not to ignore the potentially harmful and costly effect of prolonged ABP after CABG surgery.

Acknowledgments

Dr Harbarth was the Harvard University Holtzer Scholar when this work was performed and is currently recipient of Max-Kade Fellowship.

Footnotes

  • Presented in part at the Ninth Annual Meeting of the Society of Healthcare Epidemiology of America, April 18–20, 1999, San Francisco, Calif.

  • Received October 26, 1999.
  • Revision received January 7, 2000.
  • Accepted February 1, 2000.
  • Copyright © 2000 by American Heart Association

References

  1. ↵
    Finland M. Changing ecology of bacterial infections as related to antibacterial therapy. J Infect Dis. 1970;122:419–431.
    OpenUrlFREE Full Text
  2. ↵
    Nelson RM, Dries DJ. The economic implications of infection in cardiac surgery. Ann Thorac Surg. 1986;42:240–246.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  3. ↵
    Milano CA, Kesler K, Archibald N, et al. Mediastinitis after coronary artery bypass graft surgery: risk factors and long-term survival. Circulation. 1995;92:2245–2251.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  4. ↵
    Hall RE, Ash AS, Ghali WA, et al. Hospital cost of complications associated with coronary artery bypass graft surgery. Am J Cardiol. 1997;79:1680–1682.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  5. ↵
    Goldmann DA, Hopkins CC, Karchmer AW, et al. Cephalothin prophylaxis in cardiac valve surgery: a prospective, double-blind comparison of two-day and six-day regimens. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg. 1977;73:470–479.
    OpenUrlPubMed
  6. ↵
    Nooyen SM, Overbeek BP, Brutel de la Riviere A, et al. Prospective randomised comparison of single-dose versus multiple-dose cefuroxime for prophylaxis in coronary artery bypass grafting. Eur J Clin Microbiol Infect Dis.. 1994;13:1033–1037.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  7. ↵
    Niederhäuser U, Vogt M, Vogt P, et al. Cardiac surgery in a high-risk group of patients: is prolonged postoperative antibiotic prophylaxis effective? J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg.. 1997;114:162–168.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  8. ↵
    Kriaras I, Michalopoulos A, Michalis A, et al. Antibiotic prophylaxis in cardiac surgery. J Cardiovasc Surg. 1997;38:605–610.
    OpenUrlPubMed
  9. ↵
    Ariano RE, Zhanel GG. Antimicrobial prophylaxis in coronary bypass surgery: a critical appraisal. DICP Ann Pharmacother. 1991;25:478–484.
    OpenUrl
  10. ↵
    Kreter B, Woods M. Antibiotic prophylaxis for cardiothoracic operations: meta-analysis of 30 years of clinical trials. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg. 1992;104:590–599.
    OpenUrlPubMed
  11. ↵
    Kappstein I, Daschner FD. Use of perioperative antibiotic prophylaxis in selected surgical procedures: results of a survey in 889 surgical departments in German hospitals. Infection. 1991;19:391–394.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  12. ↵
    Parry GW, Holden SR, Shabbo FP. Antibiotic prophylaxis for cardiac surgery: current United Kingdom practice. Br Heart J. 1993;70:585–586.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  13. ↵
    Lee KR, Ring JC, Leggiadro RJ. Prophylactic antibiotic use in pediatric cardiovascular surgery: a survey of current practice. Pediatr Infect Dis J. 1995;14:267–269.
    OpenUrlPubMed
  14. ↵
    Martin C, Pourriat JL. Quality of perioperative antibiotic administration by French anaesthetists. J Hosp Infect. 1998;40:47–53.
    OpenUrlPubMed
  15. ↵
    Namias N, Harvill S, Ball S, et al. Cost and morbidity associated with antibiotic prophylaxis in the ICU. J Am Coll Surg. 1999;188:225–230.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  16. ↵
    Kreisel D, Savel TG, Silver AL, et al. Surgical antibiotic prophylaxis and Clostridium difficile toxin positivity. Arch Surg. 1995;130:989–993.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  17. ↵
    Horan TC, Gaynes RP, Martone WJ, et al. CDC definitions of nosocomial surgical site infections, 1992: a modification of CDC definitions of surgical wound infections. Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol. 1992;13:606–608.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  18. ↵
    Samore M, Lichtenberg D, Saubermann L, et al. A clinical data repository enhances hospital infection control. Proc AMIA Annu Fall Symp. 1997;56–60.
  19. ↵
    Classen DC, Evans RS, Pestotnik SL, et al. The timing of prophylactic administration of antibiotics and the risk of surgical-wound infection. N Engl J Med. 1992;326:281–286.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  20. ↵
    Krieger JN, Kaiser DL, Wenzel RP. Nosocomial urinary tract infections cause wound infections postoperatively in surgical patients. Surg Gynecol Obstet. 1983;156:313–318.
    OpenUrlPubMed
  21. ↵
    Demetriades D, Breckon V, Breckon C, et al. Antibiotic prophylaxis in penetrating injuries of the chest. Ann R Coll Surg Engl. 1991;73:348–351.
    OpenUrlPubMed
  22. ↵
    McDonald M, Grabsch E, Marshall C, et al. Single- versus multiple-dose antimicrobial prophylaxis for major surgery: a systematic review. Aust N Z J Surg. 1998;68:388–396.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  23. ↵
    Archer GL, Armstrong BC. Alteration of staphylococcal flora in cardiac surgery patients receiving antibiotic prophylaxis. J Infect Dis. 1983;147:642–649.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  24. ↵
    Kernodle DS, Barg NL, Kaiser AB. Low-level colonization of hospitalized patients with methicillin-resistant coagulase-negative staphylococci and emergence of the organisms during surgical antimicrobial prophylaxis. Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 1988;32:202–208.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  25. ↵
    Terpstra S, Noordhoek GT, Voesten HG, et al. Rapid emergence of resistant coagulase-negative staphylococci on the skin after antibiotic prophylaxis. J Hosp Infect. 1999;43:195–202.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  26. ↵
    Ehrenkranz NJ. Antimicrobial prophylaxis in surgery: mechanisms, misconceptions, and mischief. Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol. 1993;14:99–106.
    OpenUrlPubMed
  27. ↵
    Maki DG, Bohn MJ, Stolz SM, et al. Comparative study of cefazolin, cefamandole, and vancomycin for surgical prophylaxis in cardiac and vascular operations: a double-blind randomized trial. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg. 1992;104:1423–1434.
    OpenUrlPubMed
  28. ↵
    Boxma H, Broekhuizen T, Patka P, et al. Randomised controlled trial of single-dose antibiotic prophylaxis in surgical treatment of closed fractures: the Dutch Trauma Trial. Lancet. 1996;347:1133–1137.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
View Abstract
Back to top
Previous ArticleNext Article

This Issue

Circulation
June 27, 2000, Volume 101, Issue 25
  • Table of Contents
Previous ArticleNext Article

Jump to

  • Article
    • Abstract
    • Methods
    • Results
    • Discussion
    • Acknowledgments
    • Footnotes
    • References
  • Figures & Tables
  • Info & Metrics
  • eLetters

Article Tools

  • Print
  • Citation Tools
    Prolonged Antibiotic Prophylaxis After Cardiovascular Surgery and Its Effect on Surgical Site Infections and Antimicrobial Resistance
    Stephan Harbarth, Matthew H. Samore, Debi Lichtenberg and Yehuda Carmeli
    Circulation. 2000;101:2916-2921, originally published June 27, 2000
    https://doi.org/10.1161/01.CIR.101.25.2916

    Citation Manager Formats

    • BibTeX
    • Bookends
    • EasyBib
    • EndNote (tagged)
    • EndNote 8 (xml)
    • Medlars
    • Mendeley
    • Papers
    • RefWorks Tagged
    • Ref Manager
    • RIS
    • Zotero
  • Article Alerts
    Log in to Email Alerts with your email address.
  • Save to my folders

Share this Article

  • Email

    Thank you for your interest in spreading the word on Circulation.

    NOTE: We only request your email address so that the person you are recommending the page to knows that you wanted them to see it, and that it is not junk mail. We do not capture any email address.

    Enter multiple addresses on separate lines or separate them with commas.
    Prolonged Antibiotic Prophylaxis After Cardiovascular Surgery and Its Effect on Surgical Site Infections and Antimicrobial Resistance
    (Your Name) has sent you a message from Circulation
    (Your Name) thought you would like to see the Circulation web site.
  • Share on Social Media
    Prolonged Antibiotic Prophylaxis After Cardiovascular Surgery and Its Effect on Surgical Site Infections and Antimicrobial Resistance
    Stephan Harbarth, Matthew H. Samore, Debi Lichtenberg and Yehuda Carmeli
    Circulation. 2000;101:2916-2921, originally published June 27, 2000
    https://doi.org/10.1161/01.CIR.101.25.2916
    del.icio.us logo Digg logo Reddit logo Twitter logo CiteULike logo Facebook logo Google logo Mendeley logo

Related Articles

Cited By...

Subjects

  • Intervention, Surgery, Transplantation
    • Cardiovascular Surgery

Circulation

  • About Circulation
  • Instructions for Authors
  • Circulation CME
  • Statements and Guidelines
  • Meeting Abstracts
  • Permissions
  • Journal Policies
  • Email Alerts
  • Open Access Information
  • AHA Journals RSS
  • AHA Newsroom

Editorial Office Address:
200 Fifth Avenue, Suite 1020
Waltham, MA 02451
email: circ@circulationjournal.org
 

Information for:
  • Advertisers
  • Subscribers
  • Subscriber Help
  • Institutions / Librarians
  • Institutional Subscriptions FAQ
  • International Users
American Heart Association Learn and Live
National Center
7272 Greenville Ave.
Dallas, TX 75231

Customer Service

  • 1-800-AHA-USA-1
  • 1-800-242-8721
  • Local Info
  • Contact Us

About Us

Our mission is to build healthier lives, free of cardiovascular diseases and stroke. That single purpose drives all we do. The need for our work is beyond question. Find Out More about the American Heart Association

  • Careers
  • SHOP
  • Latest Heart and Stroke News
  • AHA/ASA Media Newsroom

Our Sites

  • American Heart Association
  • American Stroke Association
  • For Professionals
  • More Sites

Take Action

  • Advocate
  • Donate
  • Planned Giving
  • Volunteer

Online Communities

  • AFib Support
  • Garden Community
  • Patient Support Network
  • Professional Online Network

Follow Us:

  • Follow Circulation on Twitter
  • Visit Circulation on Facebook
  • Follow Circulation on Google Plus
  • Follow Circulation on Instagram
  • Follow Circulation on Pinterest
  • Follow Circulation on YouTube
  • Rss Feeds
  • Privacy Policy
  • Copyright
  • Ethics Policy
  • Conflict of Interest Policy
  • Linking Policy
  • Diversity
  • Careers

©2018 American Heart Association, Inc. All rights reserved. Unauthorized use prohibited. The American Heart Association is a qualified 501(c)(3) tax-exempt organization.
*Red Dress™ DHHS, Go Red™ AHA; National Wear Red Day ® is a registered trademark.

  • PUTTING PATIENTS FIRST National Health Council Standards of Excellence Certification Program
  • BBB Accredited Charity
  • Comodo Secured