Clinical Consequences and Cost of Limiting Use of Vancomycin for Perioperative Prophylaxis: Example of Coronary Artery Bypass Surgery

Routine us of vancomycin for perioperative prophylaxis is discouraged, principally to minimize microbial resistance to it. However, outcomes and costs of this recommendation have not been assessed. We used decision-analytic models to compare clinical results and cost-effectiveness of no prophylaxis,...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Giorgio Zanetti, Sue J. Goldie, Richard Platt
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: Centers for Disease Control and Prevention 2001-10-01
Series:Emerging Infectious Diseases
Subjects:
Online Access:https://wwwnc.cdc.gov/eid/article/7/5/01-0508_article
id doaj-a4b6ac940d29441280a560959ff34b93
record_format Article
spelling doaj-a4b6ac940d29441280a560959ff34b932020-11-24T21:11:52ZengCenters for Disease Control and PreventionEmerging Infectious Diseases1080-60401080-60592001-10-017582082710.3201/eid0705.010508Clinical Consequences and Cost of Limiting Use of Vancomycin for Perioperative Prophylaxis: Example of Coronary Artery Bypass SurgeryGiorgio ZanettiSue J. GoldieRichard PlattRoutine us of vancomycin for perioperative prophylaxis is discouraged, principally to minimize microbial resistance to it. However, outcomes and costs of this recommendation have not been assessed. We used decision-analytic models to compare clinical results and cost-effectiveness of no prophylaxis, cefazolin, and vancomycin, in coronary artery bypass graft surgery. In the base case, vancomycin resulted in 7% fewer surgical site infections and 1% lower all-cause mortality and saved $117 per procedure, compared with cefazolin. Cefazolin, in turn, resulted in substantially fewer infections and deaths and lower costs than no prophylaxis. We conclude that perioperative antibiotic prophylaxis with vancomycin is usually more effective and less expensive than cefazolin. Data on vancomycin's impact on resistance are needed to quantify the trade-off between individual patients' improved clinical outcomes and lower costs and the future long-term consequences to society.https://wwwnc.cdc.gov/eid/article/7/5/01-0508_articlesurgical wound infectionantibiotic prophylaxisVancomycindrug resistancemicrobialcoronary artery bypass
collection DOAJ
language English
format Article
sources DOAJ
author Giorgio Zanetti
Sue J. Goldie
Richard Platt
spellingShingle Giorgio Zanetti
Sue J. Goldie
Richard Platt
Clinical Consequences and Cost of Limiting Use of Vancomycin for Perioperative Prophylaxis: Example of Coronary Artery Bypass Surgery
Emerging Infectious Diseases
surgical wound infection
antibiotic prophylaxis
Vancomycin
drug resistance
microbial
coronary artery bypass
author_facet Giorgio Zanetti
Sue J. Goldie
Richard Platt
author_sort Giorgio Zanetti
title Clinical Consequences and Cost of Limiting Use of Vancomycin for Perioperative Prophylaxis: Example of Coronary Artery Bypass Surgery
title_short Clinical Consequences and Cost of Limiting Use of Vancomycin for Perioperative Prophylaxis: Example of Coronary Artery Bypass Surgery
title_full Clinical Consequences and Cost of Limiting Use of Vancomycin for Perioperative Prophylaxis: Example of Coronary Artery Bypass Surgery
title_fullStr Clinical Consequences and Cost of Limiting Use of Vancomycin for Perioperative Prophylaxis: Example of Coronary Artery Bypass Surgery
title_full_unstemmed Clinical Consequences and Cost of Limiting Use of Vancomycin for Perioperative Prophylaxis: Example of Coronary Artery Bypass Surgery
title_sort clinical consequences and cost of limiting use of vancomycin for perioperative prophylaxis: example of coronary artery bypass surgery
publisher Centers for Disease Control and Prevention
series Emerging Infectious Diseases
issn 1080-6040
1080-6059
publishDate 2001-10-01
description Routine us of vancomycin for perioperative prophylaxis is discouraged, principally to minimize microbial resistance to it. However, outcomes and costs of this recommendation have not been assessed. We used decision-analytic models to compare clinical results and cost-effectiveness of no prophylaxis, cefazolin, and vancomycin, in coronary artery bypass graft surgery. In the base case, vancomycin resulted in 7% fewer surgical site infections and 1% lower all-cause mortality and saved $117 per procedure, compared with cefazolin. Cefazolin, in turn, resulted in substantially fewer infections and deaths and lower costs than no prophylaxis. We conclude that perioperative antibiotic prophylaxis with vancomycin is usually more effective and less expensive than cefazolin. Data on vancomycin's impact on resistance are needed to quantify the trade-off between individual patients' improved clinical outcomes and lower costs and the future long-term consequences to society.
topic surgical wound infection
antibiotic prophylaxis
Vancomycin
drug resistance
microbial
coronary artery bypass
url https://wwwnc.cdc.gov/eid/article/7/5/01-0508_article
work_keys_str_mv AT giorgiozanetti clinicalconsequencesandcostoflimitinguseofvancomycinforperioperativeprophylaxisexampleofcoronaryarterybypasssurgery
AT suejgoldie clinicalconsequencesandcostoflimitinguseofvancomycinforperioperativeprophylaxisexampleofcoronaryarterybypasssurgery
AT richardplatt clinicalconsequencesandcostoflimitinguseofvancomycinforperioperativeprophylaxisexampleofcoronaryarterybypasssurgery
_version_ 1716752419475423232