A comparative trial of cefazolin and moxalactam as prophylaxis for preventing infection after abdominal hysterectomy

Ruth E. Tuomala, Susan G. Fischer, Alvaro Munoz, Paul F. Souney, Linda Steele, B. Frank Polk

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Abstract

In a randomized, double-blind clinical trial, 208 women who underwent abdominal hysterectomy received either cefazolin (N = 108) or moxalactam (N = 100) as perioperative antimicrobial prophylaxis. There were no differences between the two groups in rates of serious infection, minor wound infection, standard febrile morbidity, duration of hospitalization, proportion receiving other postoperative antibiotics, or rates of rehospitalization. Women who received moxalactam had significantly more urinary tract infections, 87% of which were caused by the enterococcus. It is concluded that perioperative prophylaxis with thirdgeneration cephalosporins is not justified at this time.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)372-376
Number of pages5
JournalObstetrics and Gynecology
Volume66
Issue number3
StatePublished - 1985

Fingerprint

Moxalactam
Cefazolin
Hysterectomy
Enterococcus
Wound Infection
Cephalosporins
Infection
Urinary Tract Infections
Hospitalization
Fever
Clinical Trials
Anti-Bacterial Agents
Morbidity

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Obstetrics and Gynecology

Cite this

Tuomala, R. E., Fischer, S. G., Munoz, A., Souney, P. F., Steele, L., & Frank Polk, B. (1985). A comparative trial of cefazolin and moxalactam as prophylaxis for preventing infection after abdominal hysterectomy. Obstetrics and Gynecology, 66(3), 372-376.

A comparative trial of cefazolin and moxalactam as prophylaxis for preventing infection after abdominal hysterectomy. / Tuomala, Ruth E.; Fischer, Susan G.; Munoz, Alvaro; Souney, Paul F.; Steele, Linda; Frank Polk, B.

In: Obstetrics and Gynecology, Vol. 66, No. 3, 1985, p. 372-376.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Tuomala, RE, Fischer, SG, Munoz, A, Souney, PF, Steele, L & Frank Polk, B 1985, 'A comparative trial of cefazolin and moxalactam as prophylaxis for preventing infection after abdominal hysterectomy', Obstetrics and Gynecology, vol. 66, no. 3, pp. 372-376.
Tuomala, Ruth E. ; Fischer, Susan G. ; Munoz, Alvaro ; Souney, Paul F. ; Steele, Linda ; Frank Polk, B. / A comparative trial of cefazolin and moxalactam as prophylaxis for preventing infection after abdominal hysterectomy. In: Obstetrics and Gynecology. 1985 ; Vol. 66, No. 3. pp. 372-376.
@article{8aa5fa28b37241af8e494c34437fb358,
title = "A comparative trial of cefazolin and moxalactam as prophylaxis for preventing infection after abdominal hysterectomy",
abstract = "In a randomized, double-blind clinical trial, 208 women who underwent abdominal hysterectomy received either cefazolin (N = 108) or moxalactam (N = 100) as perioperative antimicrobial prophylaxis. There were no differences between the two groups in rates of serious infection, minor wound infection, standard febrile morbidity, duration of hospitalization, proportion receiving other postoperative antibiotics, or rates of rehospitalization. Women who received moxalactam had significantly more urinary tract infections, 87{\%} of which were caused by the enterococcus. It is concluded that perioperative prophylaxis with thirdgeneration cephalosporins is not justified at this time.",
author = "Tuomala, {Ruth E.} and Fischer, {Susan G.} and Alvaro Munoz and Souney, {Paul F.} and Linda Steele and {Frank Polk}, B.",
year = "1985",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "66",
pages = "372--376",
journal = "Obstetrics and Gynecology",
issn = "0029-7844",
publisher = "Lippincott Williams and Wilkins",
number = "3",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - A comparative trial of cefazolin and moxalactam as prophylaxis for preventing infection after abdominal hysterectomy

AU - Tuomala, Ruth E.

AU - Fischer, Susan G.

AU - Munoz, Alvaro

AU - Souney, Paul F.

AU - Steele, Linda

AU - Frank Polk, B.

PY - 1985

Y1 - 1985

N2 - In a randomized, double-blind clinical trial, 208 women who underwent abdominal hysterectomy received either cefazolin (N = 108) or moxalactam (N = 100) as perioperative antimicrobial prophylaxis. There were no differences between the two groups in rates of serious infection, minor wound infection, standard febrile morbidity, duration of hospitalization, proportion receiving other postoperative antibiotics, or rates of rehospitalization. Women who received moxalactam had significantly more urinary tract infections, 87% of which were caused by the enterococcus. It is concluded that perioperative prophylaxis with thirdgeneration cephalosporins is not justified at this time.

AB - In a randomized, double-blind clinical trial, 208 women who underwent abdominal hysterectomy received either cefazolin (N = 108) or moxalactam (N = 100) as perioperative antimicrobial prophylaxis. There were no differences between the two groups in rates of serious infection, minor wound infection, standard febrile morbidity, duration of hospitalization, proportion receiving other postoperative antibiotics, or rates of rehospitalization. Women who received moxalactam had significantly more urinary tract infections, 87% of which were caused by the enterococcus. It is concluded that perioperative prophylaxis with thirdgeneration cephalosporins is not justified at this time.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=0021850202&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=0021850202&partnerID=8YFLogxK

M3 - Article

C2 - 3927210

AN - SCOPUS:0021850202

VL - 66

SP - 372

EP - 376

JO - Obstetrics and Gynecology

JF - Obstetrics and Gynecology

SN - 0029-7844

IS - 3

ER -