1988•Clinical Orthopaedics and Related ResearchRequires access

Cefazolin Versus Cefamandole for Prophylaxis During Total Joint Arthroplasty

Charles S Bryan, Stephen L. Morgan, ROBERT J. CATON, Emmett M. Lunceford

Open publisher page 35 citations

Abstract

A prospective, randomized, double-blind comparison of cefazolin versus cefamandole was carried out to evaluate safety and efficacy and to determine bone and serum antibiotic concentrations in patients undergoing total joint arthroplasty. Dosages were 1 g of cefazolin before surgery followed by 500 mg every eight hours for six doses, versus 2 g of cefamandole before surgery followed by 1 g every eight hours for six doses. Intraoperative doses were given during prolonged procedures. No significant adverse drug reactions were clearly attributable to either drug. Among 48 patients receiving cefazolin there was one postoperative wound infection and one distant site infection. Among 49 patients receiving cefamandole, there were two postoperative wound infections and two distant site infections. No deep wound infections occurred in either group during at least 48 months of follow-up study. In hip specimens removed at surgery, the mean antibiotic concentrations were 1.6 +/- 1.4 micrograms/g for cefazolin recipients, compared with 5.7 +/- 5.9 micrograms/g for cefamandole recipients (p less than .001). In knee specimens, the mean antibiotic concentrations were 0.64 +/- 0.57 microgram/g for cefazolin recipients compared to 3.8 +/- 3.4 micrograms/g for cefamandole recipients (p = .004). Cefazolin given at one-half the dose of cefamandole appeared to be equally safe and effective but resulted in lower bone concentrations of antibiotic.

About this research paper

What this paper is about

A prospective, randomized, double-blind comparison of cefazolin versus cefamandole was carried out to evaluate safety and efficacy and to determine bone and serum antibiotic concentrations in patients undergoing total joint arthroplasty. Dosages were 1 g of cefazolin before surgery followed by 500 mg every eight hours for six doses, versus 2 g of cefamandole before surgery followed by 1 g every eight hours for six doses. Intraoperative doses were given during prolonged procedures. No significant adverse drug reactions were clearly attributable to either drug. Among 48 patients receiving cefazolin there was one postoperative wound infection and one distant site infection. Among 49 patients receiving cefamandole, there were two postoperative wound infections and two distant site infections. No deep wound infections occurred in either group during at least 48 months of follow-up study. In hip specimens removed at surgery, the mean antibiotic concentrations were 1.6 +/- 1.4 micrograms/g for cefazolin recipients, compared with 5.7 +/- 5.9 micrograms/g for cefamandole recipients (p less than .001). In knee specimens, the mean antibiotic concentrations were 0.64 +/- 0.57 microgram/g for cefazolin recipients compared to 3.8 +/- 3.4 micrograms/g for cefamandole recipients (p = .004). Cefazolin given at one-half the dose of cefamandole appeared to be equally safe and effective but resulted in lower bone concentrations of antibiotic.

Why it matters

OpenAlex reports 35 citations for this work. Citation counts describe recorded attention and do not establish research quality.

Key contribution

A contribution statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.

Method / approach

Method details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Main findings

Findings are not separately available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Limitations

Limitations are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Applications

Application details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Available abstract

A prospective, randomized, double-blind comparison of cefazolin versus cefamandole was carried out to evaluate safety and efficacy and to determine bone and serum antibiotic concentrations in patients undergoing total joint arthroplasty. Dosages were 1 g of cefazolin before surgery followed by 500 mg every eight hours for six doses, versus 2 g of cefamandole before surgery followed by 1 g every eight hours for six doses. Intraoperative doses were given during prolonged procedures. No significant adverse drug reactions were clearly attributable to either drug. Among 48 patients receiving cefazolin there was one postoperative wound infection and one distant site infection. Among 49 patients receiving cefamandole, there were two postoperative wound infections and two distant site infections. No deep wound infections occurred in either group during at least 48 months of follow-up study. In hip specimens removed at surgery, the mean antibiotic concentrations were 1.6 +/- 1.4 micrograms/g for cefazolin recipients, compared with 5.7 +/- 5.9 micrograms/g for cefamandole recipients (p less than .001). In knee specimens, the mean antibiotic concentrations were 0.64 +/- 0.57 microgram/g for cefazolin recipients compared to 3.8 +/- 3.4 micrograms/g for cefamandole recipients (p = .004). Cefazolin given at one-half the dose of cefamandole appeared to be equally safe and effective but resulted in lower bone concentrations of antibiotic.

Key concepts: Medicine, Cefamandole, Cefazolin, Joint arthroplasty, Orthopedic surgery, Arthroplasty, Surgery, Cephalosporin

Related papers

Back to paper searchBrowse research topicsOriginal source
Cefazolin Versus Cefamandole for Prophylaxis During Total Joint Arthroplasty — Research Paper | ScholarLens