This article has been reviewed according to Science X's editorial process and policies. Editors have highlighted the following attributes while ensuring the content's credibility:

fact-checked

peer-reviewed publication

trusted source

proofread

More is not better: Trial finds giving more antibiotics to prevent joint replacement infections doesn't help

joint replacement
Credit: Unsplash/CC0 Public Domain

Knee and hip replacements are increasing globally due to an aging population. In the United States, the number of patients needing a joint replacement will exceed 2.7 million in the next seven years. Post-surgery infections, while rare at 1–5% of patients, result in high patient morbidity and mortality.

In the United States the annual national hospital costs for treating infection are projected to exceed $1.85 billion.

We currently use an antibiotic, cefazolin, at the time of surgery to prevent infection. But with the rise of antibiotic resistant bacteria, experts have debated whether adding a second antibiotic, vancomycin, would be better to prevent more infection. Vancomycin is a commonly used antibiotic for MRSA (methicillin resistant Staphylococcus aureus). Many centers in Australia and globally had adopted the practice of giving both cefazolin and vancomycin to prevent infections, despite the lack of clear benefit.

Now a clinical trial, published in the New England Journal of Medicine and led by Monash University researchers, in collaboration with and infectious diseases doctors, has found that the addition of vancomycin did not protect against infection and may have led to more infections and more for the patients.

According to the study lead, Professor Trisha Peel, from the Monash University Central Clinical School, "Given the number of joint replacements performed in Australia and globally, our trial has answered the important about whether more antibiotics are better for our patients having joint replacement surgery: with the definitive answer being 'no.' This trial will have a significant impact on practice," she said.

The Australian Surgical Antibiotic Prophylaxis (ASAP) trial looked at 4,239 patients without a history of MRSA, in 11 hospitals across Australia, including regional and .

Patients were randomized to receive receive either vancomycin or saline placebo, in combination with cefazolin. Among all patients, the addition of vancomycin was no better than the traditional cefazolin antibiotic.

Unexpectedly, in patients undergoing knee , the risk of infection was higher in the group, 5.7%, than in the placebo group, with 3.7% rate.

Professor Peel said that the study reflects how important these large, randomized, multi-center clinical trials are "A lot of things seem to make sense, but we don't really know for sure until they are tested in a clinical trial."

"This is one of those cases—more antibiotics weren't better, and in some people might have actually been worse." she said.

More information: Trial of Vancomycin and Cefazolin as Surgical Prophylaxis in Arthroplasty, New England Journal of Medicine (2023). DOI: 10.1056/NEJMoa2301401

Journal information: New England Journal of Medicine
Provided by Monash University
Citation: More is not better: Trial finds giving more antibiotics to prevent joint replacement infections doesn't help (2023, October 18) retrieved 28 February 2024 from https://medicalxpress.com/news/2023-10-trial-antibiotics-joint-infections-doesnt.html
This document is subject to copyright. Apart from any fair dealing for the purpose of private study or research, no part may be reproduced without the written permission. The content is provided for information purposes only.

Explore further

Trial shows using two drugs not better than one when treating MRSA blood infections

90 shares

Feedback to editors