Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Clinical Trial
. 1999 Feb;18(2):113-9.
doi: 10.1007/s100960050238.

Comparative multicenter trial of teicoplanin versus cefazolin for antimicrobial prophylaxis in prosthetic joint implant surgery. Italian Study Group for Antimicrobial Prophylaxis in Orthopedic Surgery

Affiliations
Clinical Trial

Comparative multicenter trial of teicoplanin versus cefazolin for antimicrobial prophylaxis in prosthetic joint implant surgery. Italian Study Group for Antimicrobial Prophylaxis in Orthopedic Surgery

P Periti et al. Eur J Clin Microbiol Infect Dis. 1999 Feb.

Abstract

A randomized multicenter study was carried out in 12 centers in Italy to compare administration of a single dose of teicoplanin (400 mg i.v. bolus at time of anesthesia) versus that of five doses of cefazolin over a 24-h period (2 g at induction of anesthesia and 1 g every 6 h postoperatively, i.v. bolus) as antimicrobial prophylaxis in patients undergoing hip or knee arthroplasty. Of 860 patients enrolled, 427 received teicoplanin and 433 cefazolin. A total of 846 patients (422 teicoplanin and 424 cefazolin) were evaluable for safety and 826 patients for efficacy. Six patients (1.5%) in the teicoplanin group and seven patients (1.7%) in the cefazolin group developed a surgical wound infection during their postoperative hospital stay: this difference was not significant. Proven or suspected infections involving other body systems occurred in 114 patients (57 in each group). Seven hundred ninety-two patients completed a 3-month evaluation and 738 patients a 12-month evaluation: the success rates in evaluable patients at these observation times were 99.2% and 99.7% for teicoplanin and 99.2% and 99.7% for cefazolin, respectively. Adverse events occurred in three (0.7%) teicoplanin patients and nine (2.1%) cefazolin patients (P = 0.083). A single preoperative dose of teicoplanin ensures adequate surgical antisepsis, with results comparable to a standard multiple-dose regimen of cefazolin.

PubMed Disclaimer

MeSH terms

LinkOut - more resources