MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4393055448 · doi:10.3390/jpm14030327

Prophylactic Antibiotics before Gynecologic Surgery: A Comprehensive Review of Guidelines

2024· review· en· W4393055448 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Stamatios Petousis, Panagiota Angelou, Aristarchos Almperis, Antonio Simone Laganà, Gerasimos Titilas, Chrysoula Margioula‐Siarkou, Konstantinos Dinas

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Personalized Medicine · 2024
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicSurgical site infection prevention
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineCefazolinUrogynecologyObstetrics and gynaecologyGeneral surgeryPerioperativeGynecologic oncologyHysterectomyCefotetanGynecologyAntibiotic prophylaxisSurgeryAntibioticsPregnancyAntibiotic resistance

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Surgical site infections (SSIs) refer to infections in the incision, organ, or postoperative space. As common healthcare-associated infections, SSIs correlate with prolonged hospital stay, additional procedures, ICU stay, and higher mortality rates. Around 8-10% of gynecologic surgery patients may experience infectious complications, influenced by microbial contamination, surgical nature, and patient factors. The goal of this narrative review is to compare and merge recommendations from globally published guidelines concerning the utilization of antibiotics in the perioperative phase. A comparative descriptive/narrative review of the guidelines issued by the American College of Obstetrics and Gynecology (ACOG), Society of Obstetricians and Gynecologists of Canada (SOGC), Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists (RCOG), National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE), Royal Australian and New Zealand College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists (RANZCOG), European Society of Gynecologic Oncology (ESGO), Société Française d' Anésthesie et de Réanimation (SFAR), Spanish Society of Infectious Diseases and Clinical Microbiology (SEIMC), and Hellenic Society of Obstetrics and Gynecology (HSOG) was conducted. For hysterectomy, first/second-generation cephalosporins are suggested, with metronidazole as an option. Laparoscopy without entering the bowel or vagina typically does not require prophylaxis. Uterine evacuation and hysteroscopy may involve doxycycline or azithromycin based on risk factors, whereas, for vulvectomy, cefazolin is recommended. Urogynecology procedures may include cefazolin with metronidazole. In cases of penicillin allergy, cephalosporins are suggested, and, for obese patients, adjusted doses are advised. Additional doses may be needed for prolonged procedures or excessive blood loss. Timing recommendations are 15-60 min before incision, adjusting for specific antibiotics. Clear indications exist for certain surgeries like hysterectomy, termination of pregnancy, and urogynecologic procedures. Conversely, procedures such as intrauterine device insertion, hysteroscopy, and laparoscopy typically do not necessitate antibiotic prophylaxis. For several other procedures, the evidence is inconclusive, while considering dose, timing, and indications can mitigate infectious complications and provide benefits for the healthcare system.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.007
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.562
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0080.003
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.205
GPT teacher head0.476
Teacher spread0.271 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designSystematic review
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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".

Quick stats

Citations12
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Personalized MedicineSame topicSurgical site infection preventionFrench-language works237,207