This Article  • References  • Full text PDF  • Send to a friend  • Save in My Folder  • Save to citation manager  • Permissions  Citing Articles  • Contact me when this article is cited  Related Content  • Similar articles in JAMA  Social Bookmarking   What's this?

Bruce L. Moskovitz, MD
Hoffmann-La Roche Inc Nutley, NJ

JAMA. 1985;253(23):3399.

	Since this article does not have an abstract, we have provided the first 150 words of the full text PDF and any section headings.

To the Editor.—

Drs DiPiro, Bowden, and Hooks¹ are correct in their conclusion that there is no evidence to suggest that the prophylactic use of second- or third-generation cephalosporins results in postoperative infection rates lower than those with first-generation cephalosporins. Nonetheless, strong arguments can be made for the adoption of new antimicrobials for particular surgical procedures. Because of their extended half-lives, some of these agents may be administered as a single preoperative dose, thereby effecting substantial savings over a perioperative, multi-dose regimen, as is necessary with "older" agents. One possible added benefit would be the presence of adequate drug concentrations even if surgery were delayed following drug administration.

The choice of antimicrobial prophylaxis should be tailored to cover those organisms that have been implicated in producing postoperative infections in the particular hospital. In this regard, some hospitals report a rise in the frequency of infections due to the Enterobacteriaceae . . . [Full Text PDF of this Article]

CiteULike    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    Twitter     What's this?