Article

Novel approach to antibiotic prophylaxis in percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy (PEG): randomised controlled trial.

Upper Gastrointestinal Research, Department of Molecular Medicine and Surgery, Karolinska Institutet, SE-171 76 Stockholm, Sweden.
BMJ (online) (Impact Factor: 17.22). 01/2010; 341:c3115. DOI: 10.1136/bmj.c3115
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT To evaluate a new and simpler strategy of antibiotic prophylaxis in percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy (PEG).
Single centre, two arm, randomised, controlled, double blind clinical trial.
Endoscopy unit in Karolinska University Hospital, Stockholm, Sweden, between 3 June 2005 and 31 October 2009.
234 patients with an indication for PEG who gave informed consent to participate.
A single 20 ml dose of the oral solution of sulfamethoxazole and trimethoprim (also known as co-trimoxazole or Bactrim; F Hoffmann-La Roche Ltd, Basel, Switzerland) deposited in the PEG catheter immediately after insertion. The control group received standard prophylaxis consisting of a single intravenous dose of 1.5 g cefuroxime (Zinacef; GlaxoSmithKline, London) administered before insertion of the PEG tube.
Primary outcome was the occurrence of clinically evident wound infection within 14 days after insertion of the PEG catheter. Secondary outcomes were positive bacterial culture and blood tests (highly sensitive C reactive protein and white blood cell count). All randomised patients were included in an intention to treat analysis.
Of the 234 patients included in this study, 116 were randomly assigned to co-trimoxazole and 118 to cefuroxime. At follow-up 7-14 days after insertion of the PEG catheter, wound infection was found in 10 (8.6%) patients in the co-trimoxazole group and 14 (11.9%) in the cefuroxime group, which corresponds to a percentage point difference of -3.3% (95% confidence interval -10.9% to 4.5%). The per protocol analysis, which comprised 100 patients in each group, gave similar results-10% and 13% infection in the co-trimoxazole and cefuroxime groups, respectively (percentage point difference -3.0%, 95% CI -11.8% to 5.8%). Both these analyses indicate non-inferiority of co-trimoxazole compared with cefuroxime because the upper bounds of the confidence intervals are lower than the pre-determined non-inferiority margin of 15%. Analyses of the secondary outcomes supported this finding.
20 ml of co-trimoxazole solution deposited in a newly inserted PEG catheter is at least as effective as cefuroxime prophylaxis given intravenously before PEG at preventing wound infections in patients undergoing PEG. Trial registration Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN18677736.

0 Bookmarks
 · 
99 Views
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: CONTEXT: Healthcare-associated infection represents the most frequent adverse event during care delivery. Medical advances like percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy have brought improvement on quality of life to patients but an increased risk of healthcare-associated infection. Predictive risk factors for peristomal wound infection are largely unknown but evidence suggests that antibiotic prophylaxis and preventive strategies related to infection control may reduce infection rates. OBJECTIVES: The primary aim was to evaluate the global prevalence rate of peristomal infection. Secondary objectives were to characterise the positive culture results, to evaluate the prophylactic antibiotic protocol and to identify potential risk factors for peristomal infection. METHODS: Retrospective study of 297 patients with percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy performed at a general hospital between January 2004 and September 2010. Patients received prophylactic cefazolin before the endoscopic gastrostomy procedure. Medical records were reviewed for demographic data, underling disease conditions to percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy and patient potential intrinsic risk factors. Statistical analysis was made with the statistical program SPSS 17.0. RESULTS: A total of 297 percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy tubes were inserted. Wound infection occurred in 36 patients (12.1%). Staphylococcus aureus methicillin resistant was the most frequently isolated microorganism (33.3%) followed by Pseudomonas aeruginosa (30.6%). The incidence rate had been rising each year and differ from 4.65% in 2004/2007 to 17.9% in 2008/2010. This finding was consistent with the increasing of prevalence global infection rates of the hospital. Most of the infections (55.6%) were detected in the first 10 days post procedure. There was no significant difference in age, body mass index values, mean survival time and duration of percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy feeding between patients with and without periostomal infection. Institutional factors, namely global prevalence infection rates and the endemic character of Staphylococcus aureus methicillin resistant, play an important role in peristomal infection rates. Traditional antibiotic prophylaxis with cefazolin is not adequate due to the prevalence of resistant organisms. CONCLUSIONS: Peristomal infection is a frequent problem with clinical impact in percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy patients and should be considered a healthcare associated infection. The antimicrobial prophylaxis regimens using cephalosporins are not adequate and need to be reviewed due to the high prevalence of Staphylococcus aureus methicillin resistant and other resistant organisms in hospitals and nursing homes.
    Arquivos de gastroenterologia 12/2012; 49(4):255-258.
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: BACKGROUND: Since enteral nutrition therapy is the preferred nutritional support for dysphagic patients with a range of diagnoses, PEG has become part of traditional care. However, enteral nutrition with PEG transfers treatment responsibility and activity to the patients and their carers, so the advantages should be discussed. The aim of this study was therefore to investigate patients' experience of living with a percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy (PEG) in order to increase the understanding of patients' need for support. METHOD: In a prospective study at Karolinska University Hospital in Sweden, data were collected consecutively at the time of PEG and two months later using a study-specific questionnaire about each patient's experience of living with a PEG. Fishers exact test was used to test for statistically significant difference at five per cent level. RESULTS: There were 104 responders (response rate of 70%). Women felt more limited in daily activity compared to men (p = 0.004). Older patients experienced a more limited ability to influence the number of feeding times compared to younger (p = 0.026). Highly educated patients found feeding more time-consuming (p = 0.004). Patients with a cancer diagnosis reported that the PEG feeding interfered with their oral feeding more than patients with a neurological disease (p = 0.009). Patients mostly contacted the PEG outpatient clinic with problems regarding their PEG, and were mainly assisted by their spouse rather than district nurses. CONCLUSIONS: PEG feeding is time-consuming and interferes with daily life. Although 73% was satisfied, patients' experiences of living with a PEG may be dependent on age, sex, education and diagnosis. Spouses are the main carers for PEG patients at home, and patients prefer to go to the PEG outpatient clinic for help if problems occur.
    BMC Gastroenterology 09/2012; 12(1):126. · 2.11 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: This study was undertaken to test the extent to which a new antibiotic prophylaxis regimen for percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy (PEG), identified as a justified and simpler alternative to conventional regimen in a randomised clinical trial, has been adopted in clinical practice. A Swedish nationwide implementation survey, conducted in February 2013, assessed the level of clinical implementation of a 20 ml dose of oral solution of sulfamethoxazole and trimethoprim deposited in the PEG catheter immediately after insertion. All hospitals inserting at least five PEGs annually were identified from the Swedish Patient Registry. A clinician involved in the PEG insertions at each hospital participated in a structured telephone interview addressing their routine use of antibiotic prophylaxis. All Swedish hospitals inserting PEGs (n=60). Representatives of PEG insertions at each of the 60 eligible hospitals participated (100% participation). Use of routine antibiotic prophylaxis for PEG. A total of 32 (53%) of the 60 hospitals had adopted the new regimen. It was more frequently adopted in university hospitals (67%) than in community hospitals (41%). An annual total of 1813 (70%) of 2573 patients received the new regimen. Higher annual hospital volume was associated with a higher level of adoption of the new regimen (80% in the highest vs 31% in the lowest). The clinical implementation of the new antibiotic prophylaxis regimen for PEG was high and rapid (70% of all patients within 3 years), particularly in large hospitals.
    BMJ Open 01/2013; 3(5). · 1.58 Impact Factor

Full-text (2 Sources)

View
32 Downloads
Available from
May 22, 2014