中国组织工程研究

中国组织工程研究 ›› 2011, Vol. 15 ›› Issue (47): 8869-8872.doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1673-8225.2011.47.032

• 生物材料循证医学 evidence-based medicine of biomaterials • 上一篇    下一篇

生物补片植入腹股沟疝无张力疝修补后预防性应用抗生素的荟萃分析

梁兆克，孙  林   

  1. 甘肃省临洮县人民医院普外科，甘肃省临洮县  730500
  • 收稿日期:2011-06-21 修回日期:2011-09-02 出版日期:2011-11-19 发布日期:2011-11-19
  • 通讯作者: 孙林，甘肃省临洮县人民医院普外科，甘肃省临洮县730500
  • 作者简介:梁兆克，男，1961年生，甘肃省会宁县人，1985年兰州医学院毕业，副主任医师，主要从事普通外科的研究。 sunlinlintao@163.com

Effectiveness of prophylactic antibiotic administration for inguinal hernia repair with biological patch: A Meta-analysis

Liang Zhao-ke, Sun Lin   

  1. Department of General Surgery, People’s Hospital of Lintao County, Lintao  730500, Gansu Province, China
  • Received:2011-06-21 Revised:2011-09-02 Online:2011-11-19 Published:2011-11-19
  • Contact: Sun Lin, Department of General Surgery, People’s Hospital of Lintao County, Lintao 730500, Gansu Province, China
  • About author:Liang Zhao-ke, Associate chief physician, Department of General Surgery, People’s Hospital of Lintao County, Lintao 730500, Gansu Province, China sunlinlintao@163.com

PDF

381

被引次数

24

摘要：

背景：预防性应用抗生素在腹股沟疝无张力修补后非常普遍，但是，不加选择的应用抗生素会增加患者的费用及抗生素耐药。
目的：系统评价预防性应用抗生素对腹股沟疝无张力疝修补术后手术部位感染发生率的影响。
方法：计算机检索PubMed、EMBASE、Cochrane Library、CBM、CNKI、VIP数据库，用RevMan5.0软件进行统计分析。
结果与结论：纳入8篇随机对照试验进行分析，Meta分析结果显示：预防性应用抗生素和安慰剂在预防腹股沟疝无张力疝修补术后手术部位感染发生率方面两组间差异有显著性意义[RR=0.68，95%CI(0.49，0.94)]；而敏感性分析结果提示：两组差异无显著性意义[RR=0.78，95%CI(0.56，1.10)]。亚组分析提示β-内酰胺类抗生素和安慰剂相比在预防腹股沟疝无张力疝修补后手术部位感染发生率方面差异无显著性意义[RR=0.63，95%CI(0.16，2.57)]，头孢类抗生素和安慰剂相比差异也无显著性意义[RR=0.66，95%CI(0.41，1.06)]。结果提示，没有足够的证据支持腹股沟疝无张力疝修补后常规预防性应用抗生素。

关键词: 抗生素, 腹股沟疝修补术, 感染, 荟萃分析, 生物补片

Abstract:

BACKGROUND: Prophylactic antibiotics are very common following tension-free inguinal hernia repair; however, indiscriminate use of antibiotics will increase the cost and antibiotic resistance of patients.
OBJECTIVE: To systematic review the effectiveness of prophylactic antibiotic administration in reducing postoperative wound infection rates in inguinal hernia repair.
METHODS: We searched PubMed, EMBASE, the Cochrane Library, CBM, CNKI, VIP databases, and the data were analyzed using Review Manager 5.0.
RESULTS AND CONCLUSION: Eight randomized controlled trials were included. The Meta analysis showed that there was significant difference between prophylactic antibiotic group and placebo group in surgical site infection rate [RR=0.68, 95%CI(0.49, 0.94)]; The heterogeneity analysis did not reach statistical significance neither for the sensitivity analysis [RR=0.78, 95%CI(0.56, 1.10)] nor in the sub-groups analysis[RR=0.63, 95%CI(0.16, 2.57) for comparison between β-lactam antibiotics and placebo] [RR=0.66, 95%CI(0.41, 1.06) for comparison between cephalosporins and placebo]. There was not enough evidence to support routine prophylactic antibiotic administration for inguinal hernia repair.

中图分类号: