Cefamandole versus cefonicid prophylaxis in cardiovascular surgery: A prospective study

Abstract We randomized 400 patients who were scheduled for an elective cardiovascular operation involving median sternotomy to receive cefamandole nafate or cefonicid in a prospective double-blind study. Three hundred fifty-seven patients were evaluable for prophylactic efficacy. Chest wound and donor site infections and early prosthetic valve endocarditis occurred more frequently with cefonicid (11 patients, 6.3%) than with cefamandole (4 patients, 2.2%) ( p = 0.05). Three patients, all in the cefonicid group, required sternal debridement to control postoperative deep wound infections. Twenty-five miscellaneous postoperative infections (urinary tract infec0tion, pneumonia, intravenous site infection, bacteremia, sepsis, Clostridium difficile diarrhea) occurred in 16 patients (9.19%) in the cefonicid group and four in 4 patients (2.19%) in the cefamandole group ( p = 0.003). These data indicate that cefamandole is superior to cefonicid in preventing both surgical wound infections and miscellaneous nonsurgical infections after cardiovascular operations.