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
. 2021 Feb;62(2):172-176.
doi: 10.3349/ymj.2021.62.2.172.

Prospective Control Study of Clinical Effectiveness of Prophylactic Antibiotics in Laparoscopic Cholecystectomy on Infection Rate

Jae Do Yang  1   2   3 , Hee Chul Yu  1   2   4
Affiliations
Clinical Trial

Prospective Control Study of Clinical Effectiveness of Prophylactic Antibiotics in Laparoscopic Cholecystectomy on Infection Rate

Jae Do Yang et al. Yonsei Med J. 2021 Feb.

Abstract

Purpose: This study evaluated the effectiveness of prophylactic antibiotics in elective laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LCC) for the reduction of postoperative infection rate.

Materials and methods: Elective LCC was performed on 529 patients at Jeonbuk National University Hospital between April 2015 and August 2017. A total of 509 patients were enrolled based on the inclusion criteria. This prospective study compared the results for antibiotic group (AG) (n=249, cefotetan 1 g, 1 dose/prophylactic) and non-antibiotic group (NAG) (n=260).

Results: There were no significant differences in clinical characteristics between the two groups: AG and NAG (p=0.580, 0.782, and 0.325, respectively). Levels of C-reactive protein were higher in NAG compared to AG at postoperative day 2 (16.6±24.2 vs. 24.2±40.6; p=0.033). There were no significant differences in white blood cell counts and erythrocyte sedimentation rate. Fever ≥38℃ on postoperative day 2 occurred in 3 (1.2%) and 9 (3%) patients in AG and NAG, respectively. One patient in each group had subhepatic fluid collection by abdominal computed tomography, but there was no evidence of infection. Two patients in NAG (3%) had serous wound drainage on postoperative day 14.

Conclusion: Our results showed no significant differences in patients receiving or not receiving prophylactic antibiotics during LCC. Therefore, it is not necessary to use prophylactic antibiotics during elective LCC in patients who meet the inclusion criteria.

Keywords: Laparoscopic cholecystectomy; infection; prophylactic antibiotics.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

The authors have no potential conflicts of interest to disclose.

References

    1. Mangram AJ, Horan TC, Pearson ML, Silver LC, Jarvis WR. Guideline for prevention of surgical site infection, 1999. Hospital Infection Control Practices Advisory Committee. Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol. 1999;20:250–278. - PubMed
    1. McGuckin M, Shea JA, Schwartz JS. Infection and antimicrobial use in laparoscopic cholecystectomy. Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol. 1999;20:624–626. - PubMed
    1. Catarci M, Mancini S, Gentileschi P, Camplone C, Sileri P, Grassi GB. Antibiotic prophylaxis in elective laparoscopic cholecystectomy. Lack of need or lack of evidence? Surg Endosc. 2004;18:638–641. - PubMed
    1. Choudhary A, Bechtold ML, Puli SR, Othman MO, Roy PK. Role of prophylactic antibiotics in laparoscopic cholecystectomy: a meta-analysis. J Gastrointest Surg. 2008;12:1847–1853. - PubMed
    1. Zhou H, Zhang J, Wang Q, Hu Z. Meta-analysis: antibiotic prophylaxis in elective laparoscopic cholecystectomy. Aliment Pharmacol Ther. 2009;29:1086–1095. - PubMed

Publication types

Substances