Systemic Prophylactic Antibiotics for the Modified Introducer Method for Percutaneous Endoscopic Gastrostomy A Prospective, Randomized, Double-Blind Study

被引:12
|
作者
Adachi, Yasushi [1 ,2 ]
Akino, Kimishige [1 ]
Mita, Hiroaki [1 ]
Kikuchi, Takefumi [1 ]
Yamashita, Kentaro [2 ]
Sasaki, Yasushi [2 ]
Arimura, Yoshiaki [2 ]
Endo, Takao [1 ]
机构
[1] Sapporo Shirakaba Dai Hosp, Div Gastroenterol, Dept Internal Med, Sapporo, Hokkaido, Japan
[2] Sapporo Med Univ, Dept Gastroenterol Rheumatol & Clin Immunol, Sapporo, Hokkaido, Japan
关键词
antibiotic prophylaxis; modified introducer method; percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy (PEG); peristomal infection; wound infection; PERISTOMAL INFECTION; PULL METHOD; PEG-GASTROPEXY; RISK; MORTALITY; EFFICACY;
D O I
10.1097/MCG.0000000000000470
中图分类号
R57 [消化系及腹部疾病];
学科分类号
摘要
Background: Percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy (PEG) is the most common method of enteral nutrition in patients who require long-term tube feeding. According to meta-analyses, administration of systemic prophylactic antibiotics for PEG reduces peristomal infection. However, with several recent developments in the procedure and instruments, the risk of infection might have been reduced. The aim of this study was to evaluate the use of systemic antibiotic prophylaxis for a modified introducer method of PEG. Methods: This prospective, randomized, double-blind trial assessed 278 patients undergoing PEG for inclusion. Ninety-one patients with an indication for PEG who gave informed consent to participate were randomized. Forty-six patients received prophylactic ampicillin and 45 patients received a placebo. A modified introducer method of PEG using a Seldinger PEG kit was performed. The primary outcome was the occurrence of clinically evident wound infection within 3 days after PEG. Results: Wound infection within 3 days was observed in none in the prophylaxis group and in 1 patient in the control group (P = 0.4945). There was no significant difference between 2 groups in the other parameters, including peristomal infection within 7 days, overall infection, white blood cell counts, C-reactive protein level, and successive rate of finishing antibiotics. Conclusions: For wound infection within 3 days, noninferiority of the placebo group to the antibiotics group was preliminarily suggested with our criteria, but not for peristomal infection within 7 days. More strict criteria for noninferiority should be examined in a further large sample study.
引用
下载
收藏
页码:727 / 732
页数:6
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [1] Comparison of modified introducer method with pull method for percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy: Prospective randomized study
    Shigoka, Hiroaki
    Maetani, Iruru
    Tominaga, Kenji
    Gon, Katsushige
    Saitou, Michihiro
    Takenaka, Yukio
    DIGESTIVE ENDOSCOPY, 2012, 24 (06) : 426 - 431
  • [2] PROPHYLACTIC ANTIBIOTICS IN APPENDECTOMY - A PROSPECTIVE DOUBLE-BLIND RANDOMIZED STUDY
    OROURKE, MGE
    WYNNE, JM
    MORAHAN, RJ
    GREEN, AJ
    WALKER, RM
    WILSON, ME
    AUSTRALIAN AND NEW ZEALAND JOURNAL OF SURGERY, 1984, 54 (06): : 535 - 541
  • [3] Percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy using introducer method or pull method: A prospective randomized comparison
    Maetani, I
    Tada, T
    Shimura, JI
    Ukita, T
    Inoue, H
    Igarashi, Y
    Sakai, Y
    Yoshikawa, M
    GASTROINTESTINAL ENDOSCOPY, 2002, 55 (05) : AB144 - AB144
  • [4] ANTIBIOTIC-PROPHYLAXIS FOR PERCUTANEOUS ENDOSCOPIC GASTROSTOMY - A PROSPECTIVE, RANDOMIZED, DOUBLE-BLIND CLINICAL-TRIAL
    JAIN, NK
    LARSON, DE
    SCHROEDER, KW
    BURTON, DD
    CANNON, KP
    THOMPSON, RL
    DIMAGNO, EP
    ANNALS OF INTERNAL MEDICINE, 1987, 107 (06) : 824 - 828
  • [5] New introducer PEG gastropexy does not require prophylactic antibiotics: multicenter prospective randomized double-blind placebo-controlled study
    Shastri, Yogesh M.
    Hoepffner, Nicolas
    Tessmer, Angelika
    Ackermann, Hans
    Schroeder, Oliver
    Stein, Juergen
    GASTROINTESTINAL ENDOSCOPY, 2008, 67 (04) : 620 - 628
  • [6] Antibiotic prophylaxis for percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy - a prospective, randomised, double-blind trial
    Ahmad, I
    Mouncher, A
    Abdoolah, A
    Stenson, R
    Wright, J
    Daniels, A
    Tillett, J
    Hawthorne, AB
    Thomas, G
    ALIMENTARY PHARMACOLOGY & THERAPEUTICS, 2003, 18 (02) : 209 - 215
  • [7] A randomized prospective trial of percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy's pull technique and introducer technique modified by Hashiba
    Diniz, G
    Diogo, A
    Hashiba, K
    Borges, VFA
    Guedes, CAF
    Andrade, NB
    Fo, LS
    Brito, CF
    Passos, SA
    Mota, RA
    Chadu, JB
    GASTROINTESTINAL ENDOSCOPY, 2003, 57 (05) : AB158 - AB158
  • [8] Double-blind randomized clinical trial of percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy versus radiologically inserted gastrostomy in children
    Singh, R. R.
    Nah, S. A.
    Roebuck, D. J.
    Eaton, S.
    Pierro, A.
    Curry, J. I.
    BRITISH JOURNAL OF SURGERY, 2017, 104 (12) : 1620 - 1627
  • [9] Role of antibiotic prophylaxis for wound infection in percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy (PEG): result of a prospective double-blind randomized trial
    Panigrahi, H
    Shreeve, DR
    Tan, WC
    Prudham, R
    Kaufman, R
    JOURNAL OF HOSPITAL INFECTION, 2002, 50 (04) : 312 - 315
  • [10] Antibiotic prophylaxis for percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy for non-malignant conditions: a double-blind prospective randomized controlled trial
    Saadeddin, A
    Freshwater, DA
    Fisher, NC
    Jones, BJM
    ALIMENTARY PHARMACOLOGY & THERAPEUTICS, 2005, 22 (06) : 565 - 570