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
. 1990 Sep;76(3 Pt 1):343-6.

Antibiotic prophylaxis for cesarean delivery: is an extended-spectrum agent necessary?

Affiliations
  • PMID: 2199866
Clinical Trial

Antibiotic prophylaxis for cesarean delivery: is an extended-spectrum agent necessary?

C Carlson et al. Obstet Gynecol. 1990 Sep.

Abstract

The purpose of this investigation was to determine whether an extended-spectrum antibiotic with a long duration of action was more effective for prophylaxis for cesarean delivery than a limited-spectrum agent with a shorter duration of action. Patients were eligible for the study if they were in labor or had ruptured membranes at the time of surgery. In a randomized, double-blind manner, 377 women were assigned to receive 2 g of cefazolin (192) or 2 g of cefotetan (185) intravenously immediately after the infant's umbilical cord was clamped. There were no significant differences between groups with respect to the frequency of febrile morbidity (22.4 versus 21.6%), the mean fever index (15.8 versus 14.9 degree-hours), the frequency of endometritis (19.3 versus 21.1%), or the mean duration of postoperative hospitalization (3.8 versus 3.9 days). Among patients who became infected despite prophylaxis, enterococcus was isolated with disproportionate frequency. This organism was responsible for 89% of the postoperative urinary tract infections and all three cases of bacteremia. It was also the second most common isolate in women with endometritis. A single dose of cefazolin is comparable in effectiveness to cefotetan. In view of the cost difference between the two antibiotics, there is no justification for use of the more expensive, extended-spectrum agent.

PubMed Disclaimer

Similar articles

Cited by

Publication types

LinkOut - more resources