肥胖症围手术期抗生素预防。

Orthopadie (Heidelberg, Germany) Pub Date : 2025-04-01 Epub Date: 2025-02-19 DOI:10.1007/s00132-025-04611-0
Christoph Schnurr
{"title":"肥胖症围手术期抗生素预防。","authors":"Christoph Schnurr","doi":"10.1007/s00132-025-04611-0","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>In terms of perioperative infections, arthroplasty for obese patients represents a high-risk procedure. Correct antibiotic prophylaxis is a central pillar of infection prophylaxis. Studies showed increased infection rates if an antibiotic other than cefazolin was administered for prophylaxis. In patients with anamnestic penicillin allergy, an existing allergy is extremely rare, and the presence of cross-allergies to cephalosporins is similarly rare. Consequently, every effort should be made to administer a first- or second generation cephalosporin such as cefazolin.</p><p><strong>Dosage: </strong>Whether the dosage of antibiotic prophylaxis should be adjusted to the body weight remains unclear due to the limited data available: case series showed increased infection rates when cefazolin was underdosed and recommended increasing the dose to 3 g if the body weight exceeds 120 kg. However, no studies with a higher level of evidence exist. Published studies on the effective antibiotic levels in the tissue remain contradictory with regard to possible weight-dependent dose adjustments. Similarly, there is insufficient data on whether local intraoperative antibiotic prophylaxis may be useful in obese patients. By contrast, there is no evidence for a positive benefit of double prophylaxis with two different antibiotics or prolonged postoperative antibiotic prophylaxis in obesity.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>In summary, the data on antibiotic prophylaxis is generally insufficient, especially when focussing on possible dose adjustments in obesity. The well-timed administration of a cephalosporin such as cefazolin represents the golden standard in orthopedics and trauma surgery. A possible dose adjustment to 3 g for a body weight over 120 kg appears reasonable considering the low costs and the broad therapeutic window and is therefore recommended in the current AWMF S3 guideline.</p>","PeriodicalId":74375,"journal":{"name":"Orthopadie (Heidelberg, Germany)","volume":" ","pages":"253-260"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-04-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"[Perioperative antibiotic prophylaxis in obesity].\",\"authors\":\"Christoph Schnurr\",\"doi\":\"10.1007/s00132-025-04611-0\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>In terms of perioperative infections, arthroplasty for obese patients represents a high-risk procedure. Correct antibiotic prophylaxis is a central pillar of infection prophylaxis. Studies showed increased infection rates if an antibiotic other than cefazolin was administered for prophylaxis. In patients with anamnestic penicillin allergy, an existing allergy is extremely rare, and the presence of cross-allergies to cephalosporins is similarly rare. Consequently, every effort should be made to administer a first- or second generation cephalosporin such as cefazolin.</p><p><strong>Dosage: </strong>Whether the dosage of antibiotic prophylaxis should be adjusted to the body weight remains unclear due to the limited data available: case series showed increased infection rates when cefazolin was underdosed and recommended increasing the dose to 3 g if the body weight exceeds 120 kg. However, no studies with a higher level of evidence exist. Published studies on the effective antibiotic levels in the tissue remain contradictory with regard to possible weight-dependent dose adjustments. Similarly, there is insufficient data on whether local intraoperative antibiotic prophylaxis may be useful in obese patients. By contrast, there is no evidence for a positive benefit of double prophylaxis with two different antibiotics or prolonged postoperative antibiotic prophylaxis in obesity.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>In summary, the data on antibiotic prophylaxis is generally insufficient, especially when focussing on possible dose adjustments in obesity. The well-timed administration of a cephalosporin such as cefazolin represents the golden standard in orthopedics and trauma surgery. A possible dose adjustment to 3 g for a body weight over 120 kg appears reasonable considering the low costs and the broad therapeutic window and is therefore recommended in the current AWMF S3 guideline.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":74375,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Orthopadie (Heidelberg, Germany)\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"253-260\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-04-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Orthopadie (Heidelberg, Germany)\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1007/s00132-025-04611-0\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2025/2/19 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Orthopadie (Heidelberg, Germany)","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s00132-025-04611-0","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/2/19 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:就围手术期感染而言,肥胖患者的关节置换术是一种高风险手术。正确的抗生素预防是感染预防的中心支柱。研究表明,如果使用头孢唑林以外的抗生素进行预防,感染率会增加。在健忘性青霉素过敏患者中,现有的过敏极为罕见,对头孢菌素的交叉过敏也同样罕见。因此,应尽一切努力使用第一代或第二代头孢菌素,如头孢唑林。剂量:由于现有数据有限,抗生素预防剂量是否应根据体重调整尚不清楚:病例系列显示,头孢唑林剂量不足时感染率增加,如果体重超过120 kg,建议将剂量增加到3 g。然而,没有更高水平证据的研究存在。已发表的关于组织中有效抗生素水平的研究在可能的体重依赖性剂量调整方面仍然存在矛盾。同样,关于局部术中抗生素预防是否对肥胖患者有用的数据也不充分。相比之下,没有证据表明两种不同抗生素的双重预防或肥胖症术后延长抗生素预防有积极的益处。结论:总的来说,关于抗生素预防的数据通常是不足的,特别是当关注肥胖可能的剂量调整时。及时使用头孢唑林等头孢菌素代表了骨科和创伤外科的黄金标准。考虑到低成本和广泛的治疗窗口,体重超过120 kg的可能剂量调整至3 g似乎是合理的,因此在当前的AWMF S3指南中推荐。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
[Perioperative antibiotic prophylaxis in obesity].

Background: In terms of perioperative infections, arthroplasty for obese patients represents a high-risk procedure. Correct antibiotic prophylaxis is a central pillar of infection prophylaxis. Studies showed increased infection rates if an antibiotic other than cefazolin was administered for prophylaxis. In patients with anamnestic penicillin allergy, an existing allergy is extremely rare, and the presence of cross-allergies to cephalosporins is similarly rare. Consequently, every effort should be made to administer a first- or second generation cephalosporin such as cefazolin.

Dosage: Whether the dosage of antibiotic prophylaxis should be adjusted to the body weight remains unclear due to the limited data available: case series showed increased infection rates when cefazolin was underdosed and recommended increasing the dose to 3 g if the body weight exceeds 120 kg. However, no studies with a higher level of evidence exist. Published studies on the effective antibiotic levels in the tissue remain contradictory with regard to possible weight-dependent dose adjustments. Similarly, there is insufficient data on whether local intraoperative antibiotic prophylaxis may be useful in obese patients. By contrast, there is no evidence for a positive benefit of double prophylaxis with two different antibiotics or prolonged postoperative antibiotic prophylaxis in obesity.

Conclusion: In summary, the data on antibiotic prophylaxis is generally insufficient, especially when focussing on possible dose adjustments in obesity. The well-timed administration of a cephalosporin such as cefazolin represents the golden standard in orthopedics and trauma surgery. A possible dose adjustment to 3 g for a body weight over 120 kg appears reasonable considering the low costs and the broad therapeutic window and is therefore recommended in the current AWMF S3 guideline.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
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