Propensity score analysis for the efficacy of preoperative antibiotics in patients with resected primary lung cancer: Levofloxacin versus cefazolin

Kenji Tomizawa , Junichi Soh , Hana Oiki , Shota Fukuda , Masaya Nishino , Katsuaki Sato , Tetsuya Mitsudomi
{"title":"Propensity score analysis for the efficacy of preoperative antibiotics in patients with resected primary lung cancer: Levofloxacin versus cefazolin","authors":"Kenji Tomizawa ,&nbsp;Junichi Soh ,&nbsp;Hana Oiki ,&nbsp;Shota Fukuda ,&nbsp;Masaya Nishino ,&nbsp;Katsuaki Sato ,&nbsp;Tetsuya Mitsudomi","doi":"10.1016/j.cson.2022.100005","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Objective</h3><p>The use of cefazolin (CEZ) is recommended as a preoperative prophylactic antibiotic, but other antibiotics may be used for various reasons. We adopted a fluoroquinolone (levofloxacin; LVFX) as a preoperative prophylactic antibiotic because of reduced supply of CEZ worldwide, while the efficacy of LVFX in preventing infectious complications including surgical site infection (SSI), empyema, and pneumonia has not been fully investigated.</p></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><p>The medical records of 260 patients who underwent primary lung cancer resection between April 2018 and July 2020 were retrospectively reviewed. Eighty-nine patients before May 2019 were intravenously received a single dose of CEZ with additional administration every 3 ​h during surgery (the CEZ group) and 171 patients after that date were orally received a preoperative single dose of LVFX (the LVFX group). The efficacy of preventing infectious complications was compared between two groups. The propensity score matching (PSM) method was also applied to minimize selection bias.</p></div><div><h3>Results</h3><p>Infectious complications were observed in 3.1% (8/260) of patients, with no significant difference between the LVFX group (2.9%) and the CEZ group (3.4%) regardless of subtypes such as SSI and empyema. After PSM, 77 patients each were matched from the two groups, and there was also no significant difference in the incidence of infectious complications (the LVFX group; 2.6% vs. the CEZ group; 3.9%).</p></div><div><h3>Conclusion</h3><p>LVFX has comparable efficacy to CEZ for preventing infectious complications, and may be an alternative to preoperative antibiotics for patients with primary lung cancer who underwent pulmonary resection.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":100278,"journal":{"name":"Clinical Surgical Oncology","volume":"1 1","pages":"Article 100005"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2773160X22000058/pdfft?md5=239aabd05cc2e1747bc4797cc804349f&pid=1-s2.0-S2773160X22000058-main.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Clinical Surgical Oncology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2773160X22000058","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objective

The use of cefazolin (CEZ) is recommended as a preoperative prophylactic antibiotic, but other antibiotics may be used for various reasons. We adopted a fluoroquinolone (levofloxacin; LVFX) as a preoperative prophylactic antibiotic because of reduced supply of CEZ worldwide, while the efficacy of LVFX in preventing infectious complications including surgical site infection (SSI), empyema, and pneumonia has not been fully investigated.

Methods

The medical records of 260 patients who underwent primary lung cancer resection between April 2018 and July 2020 were retrospectively reviewed. Eighty-nine patients before May 2019 were intravenously received a single dose of CEZ with additional administration every 3 ​h during surgery (the CEZ group) and 171 patients after that date were orally received a preoperative single dose of LVFX (the LVFX group). The efficacy of preventing infectious complications was compared between two groups. The propensity score matching (PSM) method was also applied to minimize selection bias.

Results

Infectious complications were observed in 3.1% (8/260) of patients, with no significant difference between the LVFX group (2.9%) and the CEZ group (3.4%) regardless of subtypes such as SSI and empyema. After PSM, 77 patients each were matched from the two groups, and there was also no significant difference in the incidence of infectious complications (the LVFX group; 2.6% vs. the CEZ group; 3.9%).

Conclusion

LVFX has comparable efficacy to CEZ for preventing infectious complications, and may be an alternative to preoperative antibiotics for patients with primary lung cancer who underwent pulmonary resection.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
原发性肺癌切除术患者术前抗生素疗效的倾向评分分析:左氧氟沙星与头孢唑林
目的推荐头孢唑林(CEZ)作为术前预防性抗生素,但由于各种原因可能会使用其他抗生素。我们采用氟喹诺酮(左氧氟沙星;由于全球CEZ的供应减少,LVFX被用作术前预防性抗生素,而LVFX在预防手术部位感染(SSI)、脓胸和肺炎等感染性并发症方面的疗效尚未得到充分研究。方法回顾性分析2018年4月至2020年7月260例原发性肺癌切除术患者的病历。在2019年5月之前,89例患者静脉注射单剂量CEZ,并在手术期间每3小时额外给药(CEZ组),在该日期之后,171例患者口服术前单剂量LVFX (LVFX组)。比较两组预防感染并发症的效果。倾向得分匹配(PSM)方法也被用于最小化选择偏差。结果3.1%(8/260)的患者出现感染性并发症,LVFX组(2.9%)与CEZ组(3.4%)在SSI、脓胸等亚型上无显著差异。PSM后,两组各匹配77例患者,感染并发症发生率也无显著差异(LVFX组;相对于CEZ组2.6%;3.9%)。结论lvfx在预防感染并发症方面与CEZ具有相当的疗效,可作为原发性肺癌肺切除术患者术前抗生素的替代方案。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
First successful laparoscopic pancreaticoduodenectomy in Bangladesh: Surgical procedure and operation outcome Surgical frontiers in metastatic disease: Shaping cancer care Individualized surgical approach based on Bismuth-Corlette classification for perihilar cholangiocarcinoma Liquid biopsy for monitoring minimal residual disease in colorectal cancer: A promising approach with clinical implications Diagnostic sensitivity of immune-inflammatory cell proportion in early diagnosis of endometrial cancer
×
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
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 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 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1