Differences in clinical and cost-effectiveness between cefmetazole and flomoxef for the prevention of surgical site infection in elective colorectal surgery: A single-center, retrospective cohort study

Surgical site infection (SSI) is associated with increased morbidity and mortality rates, postoperative length of stay (pLOS), and medical costs. In colorectal surgery, cefmetazole (CMZ) and flomoxef (FMOX) are predominantly used in Japan, and they have almost the same spectrum of antibiotic activit...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Journal of infection and chemotherapy : official journal of the Japan Society of Chemotherapy 2022-04, Vol.28 (4), p.510-515
Hauptverfasser: Urano, Yuya, Saito, Shunichi, Machimoto, Takafumi, Tsugihashi, Yukio, Ishimaru, Hiroyasu, Akebo, Hiroyuki, Sada, Ryuichi
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
container_end_page 515
container_issue 4
container_start_page 510
container_title Journal of infection and chemotherapy : official journal of the Japan Society of Chemotherapy
container_volume 28
creator Urano, Yuya
Saito, Shunichi
Machimoto, Takafumi
Tsugihashi, Yukio
Ishimaru, Hiroyasu
Akebo, Hiroyuki
Sada, Ryuichi
description Surgical site infection (SSI) is associated with increased morbidity and mortality rates, postoperative length of stay (pLOS), and medical costs. In colorectal surgery, cefmetazole (CMZ) and flomoxef (FMOX) are predominantly used in Japan, and they have almost the same spectrum of antibiotic activity against SSI pathogens, and an approximately four-fold cost difference (CMZ: ∼4$, FMOX: ∼16$). However, the difference between these antibiotics in SSI prophylaxis in colorectal surgery remains poorly understood. We performed a single-center retrospective cohort study to investigate the prophylactic effects of these antibiotics, pLOS, and hospitalization costs. Patients who underwent elective colorectal surgery between April 2016 and March 2020 were considered for this study. Of the 634 patients, 316 (49.8%) were eligible. The SSI rates in the CMZ and FMOX groups were 14.7% and 12.5%, respectively. The incidence of organ/space SSI was approximately two-fold lower in the CMZ group than in the FMOX group (4.4% vs. 9.4%). Multivariable regression analysis revealed that CMZ was not significantly related to SSI, with an adjusted odds ratio of 1.21 (95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.52–2.82) and did not induce a significant difference in pLOS (difference ratio: 0.951 [95% CI: 0.868–1.041]). Hospitalization costs were reduced in the CMZ group (difference ratio, 0.951 [95% CI: 0.907–0.998], p = 0.042). The sensitivity analysis also showed results similar to the above findings. Our study showed that CMZ could be a cost-effective antibiotic with similar efficacy for SSI prophylaxis in colorectal surgery, compared with FMOX.
doi_str_mv 10.1016/j.jiac.2021.12.023
format Article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_2619209146</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><els_id>S1341321X21003597</els_id><sourcerecordid>2619209146</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c331t-73225c59073e1dee7a15694a99857362f9f889221dc005cc0dc0f545c68de68e3</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNp9kctuFDEQRS0EIiHwAyyQlyzojh_tfiA2UXhFipQNSOwsx11OPHK3B9sdGP6Qv6J6JmSZVZVU594q-xLymrOaM96ebuqNN7YWTPCai5oJ-YQc80Z2Vdf17Cn2suGVFPzHEXmR84Yx3qm-f06OpEJ9L9Qx-fvROwcJZguZ-pna4GdvTaBmHqmNuVSAc1v8HcyQM72G8gsAOXATFPMnBtijLsQp_gZHXUy03ALdJkBJ8XGm0dG8pJu9bfYFcM_eEke4EcLBHreFmLBfKcQh7d7TMxTMNwEqi16Q3tEEJcW8fZDcxlRoLsu4e0meORMyvLqvJ-T750_fzr9Wl1dfLs7PLisrJS9VJ4VQVg2sk8BHgM5w1Q6NGYZedbIVbnB9PwjBR8uYspZhdapRtu1HaHuQJ-TtwXeb4s8FctGTzxZCMDPEJWvR8kGwgTctouKAWrw5J3B6m_xk0k5zptcI9UavEeo1Qs2FxghR9Obef7meYHyQ_M8MgQ8HAPCVdx6SztavAY5-_T49Rv-Y_z8kZLJc</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>2619209146</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Differences in clinical and cost-effectiveness between cefmetazole and flomoxef for the prevention of surgical site infection in elective colorectal surgery: A single-center, retrospective cohort study</title><source>MEDLINE</source><source>Alma/SFX Local Collection</source><creator>Urano, Yuya ; Saito, Shunichi ; Machimoto, Takafumi ; Tsugihashi, Yukio ; Ishimaru, Hiroyasu ; Akebo, Hiroyuki ; Sada, Ryuichi</creator><creatorcontrib>Urano, Yuya ; Saito, Shunichi ; Machimoto, Takafumi ; Tsugihashi, Yukio ; Ishimaru, Hiroyasu ; Akebo, Hiroyuki ; Sada, Ryuichi</creatorcontrib><description>Surgical site infection (SSI) is associated with increased morbidity and mortality rates, postoperative length of stay (pLOS), and medical costs. In colorectal surgery, cefmetazole (CMZ) and flomoxef (FMOX) are predominantly used in Japan, and they have almost the same spectrum of antibiotic activity against SSI pathogens, and an approximately four-fold cost difference (CMZ: ∼4$, FMOX: ∼16$). However, the difference between these antibiotics in SSI prophylaxis in colorectal surgery remains poorly understood. We performed a single-center retrospective cohort study to investigate the prophylactic effects of these antibiotics, pLOS, and hospitalization costs. Patients who underwent elective colorectal surgery between April 2016 and March 2020 were considered for this study. Of the 634 patients, 316 (49.8%) were eligible. The SSI rates in the CMZ and FMOX groups were 14.7% and 12.5%, respectively. The incidence of organ/space SSI was approximately two-fold lower in the CMZ group than in the FMOX group (4.4% vs. 9.4%). Multivariable regression analysis revealed that CMZ was not significantly related to SSI, with an adjusted odds ratio of 1.21 (95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.52–2.82) and did not induce a significant difference in pLOS (difference ratio: 0.951 [95% CI: 0.868–1.041]). Hospitalization costs were reduced in the CMZ group (difference ratio, 0.951 [95% CI: 0.907–0.998], p = 0.042). The sensitivity analysis also showed results similar to the above findings. Our study showed that CMZ could be a cost-effective antibiotic with similar efficacy for SSI prophylaxis in colorectal surgery, compared with FMOX.</description><identifier>ISSN: 1341-321X</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1437-7780</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1016/j.jiac.2021.12.023</identifier><identifier>PMID: 35016825</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Netherlands: Elsevier Ltd</publisher><subject>Anti-Bacterial Agents - pharmacology ; Anti-Bacterial Agents - therapeutic use ; Antibiotic Prophylaxis ; Antimicrobial prophylaxis ; Cefmetazole ; Cefmetazole - therapeutic use ; Cephalosporins ; Colorectal surgery ; Colorectal Surgery - adverse effects ; Cost-Benefit Analysis ; Flomoxef ; Humans ; Retrospective Studies ; Surgical site infection ; Surgical Wound Infection - epidemiology ; Surgical Wound Infection - prevention &amp; control</subject><ispartof>Journal of infection and chemotherapy : official journal of the Japan Society of Chemotherapy, 2022-04, Vol.28 (4), p.510-515</ispartof><rights>2021 Japanese Society of Chemotherapy and The Japanese Association for Infectious Diseases</rights><rights>Copyright © 2021 Japanese Society of Chemotherapy and The Japanese Association for Infectious Diseases. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c331t-73225c59073e1dee7a15694a99857362f9f889221dc005cc0dc0f545c68de68e3</cites><orcidid>0000-0002-0591-4878 ; 0000-0003-4221-8705</orcidid></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><link.rule.ids>314,780,784,27924,27925</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35016825$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Urano, Yuya</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Saito, Shunichi</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Machimoto, Takafumi</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Tsugihashi, Yukio</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Ishimaru, Hiroyasu</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Akebo, Hiroyuki</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Sada, Ryuichi</creatorcontrib><title>Differences in clinical and cost-effectiveness between cefmetazole and flomoxef for the prevention of surgical site infection in elective colorectal surgery: A single-center, retrospective cohort study</title><title>Journal of infection and chemotherapy : official journal of the Japan Society of Chemotherapy</title><addtitle>J Infect Chemother</addtitle><description>Surgical site infection (SSI) is associated with increased morbidity and mortality rates, postoperative length of stay (pLOS), and medical costs. In colorectal surgery, cefmetazole (CMZ) and flomoxef (FMOX) are predominantly used in Japan, and they have almost the same spectrum of antibiotic activity against SSI pathogens, and an approximately four-fold cost difference (CMZ: ∼4$, FMOX: ∼16$). However, the difference between these antibiotics in SSI prophylaxis in colorectal surgery remains poorly understood. We performed a single-center retrospective cohort study to investigate the prophylactic effects of these antibiotics, pLOS, and hospitalization costs. Patients who underwent elective colorectal surgery between April 2016 and March 2020 were considered for this study. Of the 634 patients, 316 (49.8%) were eligible. The SSI rates in the CMZ and FMOX groups were 14.7% and 12.5%, respectively. The incidence of organ/space SSI was approximately two-fold lower in the CMZ group than in the FMOX group (4.4% vs. 9.4%). Multivariable regression analysis revealed that CMZ was not significantly related to SSI, with an adjusted odds ratio of 1.21 (95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.52–2.82) and did not induce a significant difference in pLOS (difference ratio: 0.951 [95% CI: 0.868–1.041]). Hospitalization costs were reduced in the CMZ group (difference ratio, 0.951 [95% CI: 0.907–0.998], p = 0.042). The sensitivity analysis also showed results similar to the above findings. Our study showed that CMZ could be a cost-effective antibiotic with similar efficacy for SSI prophylaxis in colorectal surgery, compared with FMOX.</description><subject>Anti-Bacterial Agents - pharmacology</subject><subject>Anti-Bacterial Agents - therapeutic use</subject><subject>Antibiotic Prophylaxis</subject><subject>Antimicrobial prophylaxis</subject><subject>Cefmetazole</subject><subject>Cefmetazole - therapeutic use</subject><subject>Cephalosporins</subject><subject>Colorectal surgery</subject><subject>Colorectal Surgery - adverse effects</subject><subject>Cost-Benefit Analysis</subject><subject>Flomoxef</subject><subject>Humans</subject><subject>Retrospective Studies</subject><subject>Surgical site infection</subject><subject>Surgical Wound Infection - epidemiology</subject><subject>Surgical Wound Infection - prevention &amp; control</subject><issn>1341-321X</issn><issn>1437-7780</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2022</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>EIF</sourceid><recordid>eNp9kctuFDEQRS0EIiHwAyyQlyzojh_tfiA2UXhFipQNSOwsx11OPHK3B9sdGP6Qv6J6JmSZVZVU594q-xLymrOaM96ebuqNN7YWTPCai5oJ-YQc80Z2Vdf17Cn2suGVFPzHEXmR84Yx3qm-f06OpEJ9L9Qx-fvROwcJZguZ-pna4GdvTaBmHqmNuVSAc1v8HcyQM72G8gsAOXATFPMnBtijLsQp_gZHXUy03ALdJkBJ8XGm0dG8pJu9bfYFcM_eEke4EcLBHreFmLBfKcQh7d7TMxTMNwEqi16Q3tEEJcW8fZDcxlRoLsu4e0meORMyvLqvJ-T750_fzr9Wl1dfLs7PLisrJS9VJ4VQVg2sk8BHgM5w1Q6NGYZedbIVbnB9PwjBR8uYspZhdapRtu1HaHuQJ-TtwXeb4s8FctGTzxZCMDPEJWvR8kGwgTctouKAWrw5J3B6m_xk0k5zptcI9UavEeo1Qs2FxghR9Obef7meYHyQ_M8MgQ8HAPCVdx6SztavAY5-_T49Rv-Y_z8kZLJc</recordid><startdate>202204</startdate><enddate>202204</enddate><creator>Urano, Yuya</creator><creator>Saito, Shunichi</creator><creator>Machimoto, Takafumi</creator><creator>Tsugihashi, Yukio</creator><creator>Ishimaru, Hiroyasu</creator><creator>Akebo, Hiroyuki</creator><creator>Sada, Ryuichi</creator><general>Elsevier Ltd</general><scope>CGR</scope><scope>CUY</scope><scope>CVF</scope><scope>ECM</scope><scope>EIF</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7X8</scope><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0591-4878</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4221-8705</orcidid></search><sort><creationdate>202204</creationdate><title>Differences in clinical and cost-effectiveness between cefmetazole and flomoxef for the prevention of surgical site infection in elective colorectal surgery: A single-center, retrospective cohort study</title><author>Urano, Yuya ; Saito, Shunichi ; Machimoto, Takafumi ; Tsugihashi, Yukio ; Ishimaru, Hiroyasu ; Akebo, Hiroyuki ; Sada, Ryuichi</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c331t-73225c59073e1dee7a15694a99857362f9f889221dc005cc0dc0f545c68de68e3</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2022</creationdate><topic>Anti-Bacterial Agents - pharmacology</topic><topic>Anti-Bacterial Agents - therapeutic use</topic><topic>Antibiotic Prophylaxis</topic><topic>Antimicrobial prophylaxis</topic><topic>Cefmetazole</topic><topic>Cefmetazole - therapeutic use</topic><topic>Cephalosporins</topic><topic>Colorectal surgery</topic><topic>Colorectal Surgery - adverse effects</topic><topic>Cost-Benefit Analysis</topic><topic>Flomoxef</topic><topic>Humans</topic><topic>Retrospective Studies</topic><topic>Surgical site infection</topic><topic>Surgical Wound Infection - epidemiology</topic><topic>Surgical Wound Infection - prevention &amp; control</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Urano, Yuya</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Saito, Shunichi</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Machimoto, Takafumi</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Tsugihashi, Yukio</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Ishimaru, Hiroyasu</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Akebo, Hiroyuki</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Sada, Ryuichi</creatorcontrib><collection>Medline</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE (Ovid)</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><jtitle>Journal of infection and chemotherapy : official journal of the Japan Society of Chemotherapy</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Urano, Yuya</au><au>Saito, Shunichi</au><au>Machimoto, Takafumi</au><au>Tsugihashi, Yukio</au><au>Ishimaru, Hiroyasu</au><au>Akebo, Hiroyuki</au><au>Sada, Ryuichi</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Differences in clinical and cost-effectiveness between cefmetazole and flomoxef for the prevention of surgical site infection in elective colorectal surgery: A single-center, retrospective cohort study</atitle><jtitle>Journal of infection and chemotherapy : official journal of the Japan Society of Chemotherapy</jtitle><addtitle>J Infect Chemother</addtitle><date>2022-04</date><risdate>2022</risdate><volume>28</volume><issue>4</issue><spage>510</spage><epage>515</epage><pages>510-515</pages><issn>1341-321X</issn><eissn>1437-7780</eissn><abstract>Surgical site infection (SSI) is associated with increased morbidity and mortality rates, postoperative length of stay (pLOS), and medical costs. In colorectal surgery, cefmetazole (CMZ) and flomoxef (FMOX) are predominantly used in Japan, and they have almost the same spectrum of antibiotic activity against SSI pathogens, and an approximately four-fold cost difference (CMZ: ∼4$, FMOX: ∼16$). However, the difference between these antibiotics in SSI prophylaxis in colorectal surgery remains poorly understood. We performed a single-center retrospective cohort study to investigate the prophylactic effects of these antibiotics, pLOS, and hospitalization costs. Patients who underwent elective colorectal surgery between April 2016 and March 2020 were considered for this study. Of the 634 patients, 316 (49.8%) were eligible. The SSI rates in the CMZ and FMOX groups were 14.7% and 12.5%, respectively. The incidence of organ/space SSI was approximately two-fold lower in the CMZ group than in the FMOX group (4.4% vs. 9.4%). Multivariable regression analysis revealed that CMZ was not significantly related to SSI, with an adjusted odds ratio of 1.21 (95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.52–2.82) and did not induce a significant difference in pLOS (difference ratio: 0.951 [95% CI: 0.868–1.041]). Hospitalization costs were reduced in the CMZ group (difference ratio, 0.951 [95% CI: 0.907–0.998], p = 0.042). The sensitivity analysis also showed results similar to the above findings. Our study showed that CMZ could be a cost-effective antibiotic with similar efficacy for SSI prophylaxis in colorectal surgery, compared with FMOX.</abstract><cop>Netherlands</cop><pub>Elsevier Ltd</pub><pmid>35016825</pmid><doi>10.1016/j.jiac.2021.12.023</doi><tpages>6</tpages><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0591-4878</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4221-8705</orcidid></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 1341-321X
ispartof Journal of infection and chemotherapy : official journal of the Japan Society of Chemotherapy, 2022-04, Vol.28 (4), p.510-515
issn 1341-321X
1437-7780
language eng
recordid cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_2619209146
source MEDLINE; Alma/SFX Local Collection
subjects Anti-Bacterial Agents - pharmacology
Anti-Bacterial Agents - therapeutic use
Antibiotic Prophylaxis
Antimicrobial prophylaxis
Cefmetazole
Cefmetazole - therapeutic use
Cephalosporins
Colorectal surgery
Colorectal Surgery - adverse effects
Cost-Benefit Analysis
Flomoxef
Humans
Retrospective Studies
Surgical site infection
Surgical Wound Infection - epidemiology
Surgical Wound Infection - prevention & control
title Differences in clinical and cost-effectiveness between cefmetazole and flomoxef for the prevention of surgical site infection in elective colorectal surgery: A single-center, retrospective cohort study
url https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2024-12-30T00%3A20%3A42IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Differences%20in%20clinical%20and%20cost-effectiveness%20between%20cefmetazole%20and%20flomoxef%20for%20the%20prevention%20of%20surgical%20site%20infection%20in%20elective%20colorectal%20surgery:%20A%20single-center,%20retrospective%20cohort%20study&rft.jtitle=Journal%20of%20infection%20and%20chemotherapy%20:%20official%20journal%20of%20the%20Japan%20Society%20of%20Chemotherapy&rft.au=Urano,%20Yuya&rft.date=2022-04&rft.volume=28&rft.issue=4&rft.spage=510&rft.epage=515&rft.pages=510-515&rft.issn=1341-321X&rft.eissn=1437-7780&rft_id=info:doi/10.1016/j.jiac.2021.12.023&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E2619209146%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=2619209146&rft_id=info:pmid/35016825&rft_els_id=S1341321X21003597&rfr_iscdi=true