ArticleIndian journal of orthopaedics2025
Surgical Antimicrobial Prophylaxis in Orthopedic Implant Surgeries: An Analysis of Practices, Outcomes, and Costs.
Article in Indian journal of orthopaedics, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Shorter Versus Prolonged Systemic Perioperative Antibiotic Prophylaxis in Clean Orthopedic Surgery: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.Antibiotics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Purpose: To characterize various regimens used for surgical antimicrobial prophylaxis (SAP) in patients undergoing orthopedic implant surgeries (OISs). Method: A prospective observational study was conducted in patients undergoing OISs to identify various antimicrobial regimens used for SAP. Patients were followed up for a month to detect signs of surgical site infections (SSIs). Risk factors that increase the likelihood of SSIs were determined. Adherence to standard guidelines for SAP was evaluated. Cost analysis and adverse drug reaction (ADR) profiling of each of the regimens used were also done. Results: Among the 264 patients included, 11 regimens for SAP were followed. Ceftriaxone + amikacin given for 1-5 days was the most common regimen employed (37.87%). One-day regimens (< 24 h) were more commonly prescribed (34.84%) than all other durations (2-5 days). SSIs were observed in 2.37% of the included patients. Gender, presence of cardiovascular comorbidities, low preoperative Hb, and the choice of antimicrobial regimen selected for SAP were associated with SSIs. The adherence rate to standard guidelines for SAP was 35.5%. In our study, ceftriaxone given for < 24 h was the most cost-effective regimen, with the lowest cost per patient (0.28 USD) and no infections. Procurement of ceftriaxone and amikacin contributed to > 70% of the total cost of SAP. Vomiting, epigastric pain, and thrombophlebitis were the common ADRs observed. Conclusion: SAP practices for patients undergoing OISs are highly variable, with low adherence to standard guidelines. Development of evidence-based national and institution-specific guidelines, along with regular antibiotic stewardship activities, could help curb the heterogeneity in SAP practices.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.