Safety of Cefazolin Test Dose in Patients With Penicillin Allergy Just Prior to Cardiac Device Implantation: A Single-Centre Experience
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: Cephalosporins are the cornerstone of cardiac device infection prophylaxis. Owing to fears of cross-reactivity, penicillin-allergic patients are exposed to potentially more-toxic drugs, with decreased efficacy. We evaluated the safety of a cefazolin test dose (CTD) in self-reported penicillin-allergic patients. Methods: In this single-centre study, we evaluated consecutive patients with chart documentation of penicillin allergy undergoing cardiac device implantation, over a 2-year period. A CTD was performed if no cephalosporin allergy or severe anaphylactic reaction to penicillin had been documented. Patients were given 2 doses of 100 mg IV cefazolin, and if no allergic reaction occurred after 5 minutes, the full dose (1800 mg) was administered in the electrophysiology laboratory just before the implantation procedure. Results: A total of 2200 patients were included. The frequency of reported penicillin allergy was 9.3% (n = 204). In 80% of cases, the type of allergic reaction was not reported in medical notes or was unknown by the patient. A CTD was performed in 67.6% of patients with a penicillin allergy (n = 138). A total of 5 adverse events occurred (3.6% of patients [95% confidence interval, 1.1%-6.1%]) - 4 skin rashes and 1 tongue edema. These 5 patients became asymptomatic after antihistaminic and corticosteroid IV treatment. Even if the test dose was negative, 79% of patients also were administered vancomycin before the procedure, as it requires a 1-hour infusion prior to the CTD in the implantation procedure room. Conclusion: A CTD in most penicillin-allergic patients appears to be safe and allows its use per recommended guidelines.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".