Rates of post procedural prophylactic antibiotic use following cardiac implantable electronic device insertion and the impact on surgical site infections in Alberta, Canada.

IF 4.8 2区 医学 Q1 INFECTIOUS DISEASES
Elissa Rennert-May, Jenine Leal, Zuying Zhang, Irina Rajakumar, Stephanie Smith, John M Conly, Derek Exner, Vikas Kuriachan, Derek Chew
{"title":"Rates of post procedural prophylactic antibiotic use following cardiac implantable electronic device insertion and the impact on surgical site infections in Alberta, Canada.","authors":"Elissa Rennert-May, Jenine Leal, Zuying Zhang, Irina Rajakumar, Stephanie Smith, John M Conly, Derek Exner, Vikas Kuriachan, Derek Chew","doi":"10.1186/s13756-024-01512-3","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>The necessity of post procedural prophylactic antibiotics following clean surgeries is controversial. While most evidence suggests that there is no benefit from these additional antibiotics and guidelines do not support their use, there is a paucity of evidence as to how often they are still being used and their impact on infection outcomes. The current study assessed the use of prophylactic antibiotics following cardiac implantable electronic device (CIED) implantations in the province of Alberta, and their impact on infection and mortality.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We conducted a population-based cohort study in the province of Alberta. Administrative data was used to link all patients ≥ 18 who underwent outpatient CIED implantation from January 1, 2011 through December 31, 2019 to antibiotics commonly used for surgical prophylaxis which were prescribed within 48 h of implantation. The primary outcome, explored with an adjusted Poisson model, was incidence of complex surgical site infection within one year of device implantation. All-cause mortality was a secondary outcome.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Post implantation prophylactic antibiotics were used 41% of the time overall, though the rate has been decreasing over time. The most commonly used prophylactic antibiotic was cefalexin (52%). When adjusted analyses were completed, there was no difference in the outcome of infection between those who did and did not receive post implantation prophylactic antibiotics (Relative Risk 0.74, 95% CI 0.46-1.17) and there was no difference in mortality (Relative Risk 0.8, 95% CI 0.63-1.02).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>The use of prophylactic antibiotics following CIED implantation does not correlate to a reduced rate of complex surgical site infection or reduced mortality. The widespread use of these antibiotics, which is not guideline concordant, suggests the need for targeted antimicrobial stewardship interventions for surgical prophylaxis to ensure that antibiotic use is being optimized. Further work should explore other adverse outcomes associated with this antibiotic usage and stewardship programs should explore interventions to educate and reduce antibiotic use for this indication.</p>","PeriodicalId":7950,"journal":{"name":"Antimicrobial Resistance and Infection Control","volume":"13 1","pages":"147"},"PeriodicalIF":4.8000,"publicationDate":"2024-12-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Antimicrobial Resistance and Infection Control","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1186/s13756-024-01512-3","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"INFECTIOUS DISEASES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: The necessity of post procedural prophylactic antibiotics following clean surgeries is controversial. While most evidence suggests that there is no benefit from these additional antibiotics and guidelines do not support their use, there is a paucity of evidence as to how often they are still being used and their impact on infection outcomes. The current study assessed the use of prophylactic antibiotics following cardiac implantable electronic device (CIED) implantations in the province of Alberta, and their impact on infection and mortality.

Methods: We conducted a population-based cohort study in the province of Alberta. Administrative data was used to link all patients ≥ 18 who underwent outpatient CIED implantation from January 1, 2011 through December 31, 2019 to antibiotics commonly used for surgical prophylaxis which were prescribed within 48 h of implantation. The primary outcome, explored with an adjusted Poisson model, was incidence of complex surgical site infection within one year of device implantation. All-cause mortality was a secondary outcome.

Results: Post implantation prophylactic antibiotics were used 41% of the time overall, though the rate has been decreasing over time. The most commonly used prophylactic antibiotic was cefalexin (52%). When adjusted analyses were completed, there was no difference in the outcome of infection between those who did and did not receive post implantation prophylactic antibiotics (Relative Risk 0.74, 95% CI 0.46-1.17) and there was no difference in mortality (Relative Risk 0.8, 95% CI 0.63-1.02).

Conclusions: The use of prophylactic antibiotics following CIED implantation does not correlate to a reduced rate of complex surgical site infection or reduced mortality. The widespread use of these antibiotics, which is not guideline concordant, suggests the need for targeted antimicrobial stewardship interventions for surgical prophylaxis to ensure that antibiotic use is being optimized. Further work should explore other adverse outcomes associated with this antibiotic usage and stewardship programs should explore interventions to educate and reduce antibiotic use for this indication.

求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Antimicrobial Resistance and Infection Control
Antimicrobial Resistance and Infection Control PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH -INFECTIOUS DISEASES
CiteScore
9.70
自引率
3.60%
发文量
140
审稿时长
13 weeks
期刊介绍: Antimicrobial Resistance and Infection Control is a global forum for all those working on the prevention, diagnostic and treatment of health-care associated infections and antimicrobial resistance development in all health-care settings. The journal covers a broad spectrum of preeminent practices and best available data to the top interventional and translational research, and innovative developments in the field of infection control.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信