Articles Vol. 63 No. 1 (2022) 06/01/2022

THE SITUATION OF USAGE OF ANTIBIOTICS AFTER BASEDOW SURGERY AT THONG NHAT HOSPITAL

Bui Dang Minh Tri1,2, Pham Ngoc Tam3,4, Le Phu Nguyen Thao5,6, Nguyen Huu Ben7,8
1 University of Medicine Pham Ngoc Thach
2 Trường Đại học Y khoa Phạm Ngọc Thạch
3 Can Tho Hematology Blood Transfusion Hospital
4 Bệnh viện Huyết học - Truyền máu, thành phố Cần Thơ
5 Tay Do University
6 Trường Đại học Tây Đô
7 Military Medical University
8 Học viện Quân y
Corresponding author: drtribui1@gmail.com
DOI: 10.52163/yhc.v63i1.250
22 Views
0 Downloads
Keywords
Current situation of antibiotic usage, basedow disease.
Abstract

Objective: Describing the current situation of antibiotic usage after Basedow surgery at Thong Nhat Hospital. Subjects and methods: Retrospective descriptive study on 74 medical records of basedow patients who indicated surgery and had surgery at Thong Nhat hospital from March the 10th, 2021 to June the 10th, 2021. Results: Most of the patients used antibiotics after Basedow surgery with the rate of 64.84%. Antibiotics used after Basedow surgery belonged to two groups of Cefazolin and Ampicillin–Sulbactam with the rate of 54.17% and 45.83% respectively, all patients received injection antibiotics. The rate of patients showing signs of infection was low: 2.70%. The relationship between antibiotic usage and infection rates was unclear. The rate of postoperative infections in patients receiving antibiotics was 2.08% (1/48 patients). The rate of postoperative infections in patients who did not receive antibiotics was 3.84% (1/26 patients). Conclusion: Antibiotics used after Basedow surgery belonged to two groups of Cefazolin and Ampicillin–Sulbactam and were administered by injection. The rate of patients with infection was low.

References
[1]
Gregory DL, Kathy F, Valerie H, et al., Surgical site infection: incidence and impact on hospital utilization and treatment costs, Am J Infect Control, 2009; 37(5): 387-397. Google Scholar
[2]
Michael BZ, Kristien B, Iodine deficiency and thyroid disorders, The Lancet Diabetes & Endocrinology, 2015; 3(4): 286-295. Google Scholar
[3]
De Palma M, Grillo M, Borgia G, et al., Antibiotic prophylaxis and risk of infections in thyroid surgery: results from a national study (UEC—Italian Endocrine Surgery Units Association), Updates in surgery, 2013; 65(3): 213-216. Google Scholar
[4]
Lu Q, Xie SQ, Chen SY, et al., Experience of 1166 thyroidectomy without use of prophylactic antibiotic, Biomed Res Int, 2014: 758432. Google Scholar
[5]
Hardy RG, Forsythe JL, Uncovering a rare but critical complication following thyroid surgery: an audit across the UK and Ireland, Thyroid, 2007; 17: 63–65. Google Scholar
[6]
Avenia N, Sanguinetti A, Cirocchi R et al., Antibiotic prophylaxis in thyroid surgery: a preliminary multicentric Italian experience, Ann Surg Innov Res, 2009; 3-10. Google Scholar
[7]
Uruno T, Masaki C, Suzuki A, et al., Antimicrobial prophylaxis for the prevention of surgical site infection after thyroid and parathyroid surgery: a prospective randomized trial, World J Surg, 2015; 39: 1282-7. Google Scholar
[8]
Kreutzer K, Storck K, Weitz J, Current evidence regarding prophylactic antibiotics in head and neck and maxillofacial surgery, Biomed Res Int, 2014: 879437. Google Scholar
[9]
Fachinetti A, Chiappa C, Arlant, et al., Antibiotic prophylaxis in thyroid surgery, Gland surgery, 2017; 6(5): 525. Google Scholar
[10]
Qin Q, Li H, Wang LB, et al., Thyroid surgery without antibiotic prophylaxis: experiences with 1,030 patients from a teaching hospital in China, World J Surg, 2014; 38: 878-81. Google Scholar