Preview

Bashkortostan Medical Journal

Advanced search

PERIOPERATIVE ANTIBIOTIC PROPHYLAXIS: PATHOGENETIC REALITIES OF BREAST SURGERY

Abstract

The objective of the study was to assess the risks of developing wound infection, taking into account the pharmacokinetics of ceftriaxone used as a means of perioperative antibiotic prophylaxis during breast surgery.

Material and methods. 53 patients who had undergone surgery for breast cancer were examined. Verification of ceftriaxone in biological media was performed by capillary electrophoresis (KAPEL-105M; Lumex, St. Petersburg). Laser-Doppler flowmetry (LAKK-02; Russia) was used for microcirculation assessment.

Results and discussion. On the first day after surgery, the wound area had increased microcirculation by rising the maximum amplitude of the endothelial (p=0.049) and myogenic (p=0.037) control factors. On this background, an hour after the administration of ceftriaxone, its maximum content was in the muscle tissue (50,5±9,52 μg/0.1 g). A minimum of the drug was detected in the subcutaneous tissue, which determined the risk of developing a wound infection there.

Conclusion. After a breast cancer surgery, the local status of nutritive channel provides a stable concentration of ceftriaxone in the vulnar zone administered for perioperative antibiotic prophylaxis. The resulting complications (infiltrate, "seroma") have minimal clinical significance.

About the Authors

A. B. Larichev
ФГБОУ ВО «Ярославский государственный медицинский университет» Минздрава России
Russian Federation


M. M. Ryabov
ФГБОУ ВО «Ярославский государственный медицинский университет» Минздрава России
Russian Federation


A. V. Smirnova
ФГБОУ ВО «Ярославский государственный медицинский университет» Минздрава России
Russian Federation


N. A. Slobodskaya
ФГБОУ ВО «Ярославский государственный медицинский университет» Минздрава России
Russian Federation


V. B. Kryuchkov
ФГБОУ ВО «Ярославский государственный медицинский университет» Минздрава России
Russian Federation


A. A. Vasiliev
ФГБОУ ВО «Ярославский государственный медицинский университет» Минздрава России
Russian Federation


E. M. Bukin
ФГБОУ ВО «Ярославский государственный медицинский университет» Минздрава России
Russian Federation


I. K. Gabibov
ФГБОУ ВО «Ярославский государственный медицинский университет» Минздрава России
Russian Federation


References

1. Petukhova I.N., Dmitrieva N.V., Bagirova N.S. [et al.] Postoperative infections in cancer patients. Zlokachestvennye opukholi = Malignant tumors. 2016; (4S1 (21)): 48-53. (In Russ.) DOI: 10.18027/2224-5057-2016-4s1-48-53

2. Starkova M.V., Grushina T.I., Zikiryakhodzhaev A.D., Usov F.N. Comparative analysis of the frequency of early wound infectious complications due to radical mastectomy and organ-sparing surgery in patients with breast cancer. P.A. Herzen Journal of Oncology. 2016; 5 (4): 72-76. (In Russ.) DOI: 10.17116/onkolog20165472-76

3. Edwards B.L., Stukenborg G.J., Brenin D.R., Schroen A.T. Use of prophylactic postoperative antibiotics during surgical drain presence following mastectomy. Annals of Surgical Oncology. 2014; 21 (10): 3249-55. DOI: 10.1245/s10434-014-3960-7.

4. Crawford C.B., Clay J.A., Seydel A.S., Wernberg J.A. Surgical site infections in breast surgery: the use of preoperative antibiotics for elective, nonreconstructive procedures. International Journal of Breast Cancer. 2016; 2016: 1645192. DOI: 10.1155/2016/1645192

5. Yang S., Liu G., Tang D., Cai D. Evaluation intravenous drip cephazolin prophylaxis of breast cancer surgery site infection. Journal of Craniofacial Surgery. 2017; 28 (6): e527-31. DOI: 10.1097/SCS.0000000000003780

6. Alam B., Akbari A.R., Alali B. [et al.] Antibiotic prophylaxis in breast surgery: a meta-analysis to identify the optimal strategy to reduce infection rates in breast surgery. Breast Cancer. 2022; 29: 945–956. DOI: 10.1007/s12282-022-01387-5

7. Prudencio R.M.A., Campos F.S.M., Loyola A.B. [et al.] Antibiotic prophylaxis in breast cancer surgery. A randomized controlled trial Acta Cirúrgica Brasileira. 2020; 35 (9): e202000907. DOI: 10.1590/s0102-865020200090000007

8. Zhang, H., Wang Y, Yang S, Zhang Y. Peri-operative antibiotic prophylaxis does not reduce surgical site infection in breast cancer. Surg Infect (Larchmt). 2020; 21 (3): 268-74. DOI: 10.1089/sur.2019.116

9. Larichev A.B., Smirnova A.V., Slobodskaya N.A. [et al.] Verification of ceftriaxone and determination of its concentration in blood serum by capillary electrophoresis in surgical patients. Humans and their health. 2022; 25 (3): 60-71. (In Russ.) DOI: 10.21626/vestnik/2022-3/07.

10. Fomin A.N., Larichev A.B., Kryuchkov V.B. [et al.] A method for determining the concentration of ceftriaxone in the tissues of the surgical field. Russian Federation patent RU 2759533. Nov 15, 2021 (in Russ.)

11. Larichev A.B., Lisovskiy A.V., Kodina T.V. Investigation of the concentration of cefoperazone (cefobide a) in the blood and tissues of experimental animals and in the blood of surgical patients. Vestnik limfologii. 2009; (1): 40–43 (in Russ.)

12. Larichev A.B., Babadzhanyan A.R., Fomin A.N. [et al.] The clinical pharmacokinetic parallels of perioperational antibiotics prevention in abdominal surgery. Rossiiskii meditsinskii zhurnal (Medical Journal of the Russian Federation). 2018; 24 (2): 73-77. (In Russ.) DOI: 10.18821/0869-2106-2018-24-2-73-77


Review

For citations:


Larichev A.B., Ryabov M.M., Smirnova A.V., Slobodskaya N.A., Kryuchkov V.B., Vasiliev A.A., Bukin E.M., Gabibov I.K. PERIOPERATIVE ANTIBIOTIC PROPHYLAXIS: PATHOGENETIC REALITIES OF BREAST SURGERY. Bashkortostan Medical Journal. 2023;18(4):18-22. (In Russ.)

Views: 29


Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.


ISSN 1999-6209 (Print)