Examining cefazolin utilization and perioperative anaphylaxis in patients with and without a penicillin allergy label: A cross-sectional study - 07/03/24
Abstract |
Study objective |
To compare the occurrence of cefazolin perioperative anaphylaxis (POA) in patients with and without a penicillin allergy label (PAL) to determine whether the prevalence of cefazolin POA differs based on the presence of a PAL.
Design |
Cross-sectional study.
Setting |
A large U.S. healthcare system in the Baltimore-D.C. region, July 2017 to July 2020.
Patients |
112,817 surgical encounters across inpatient and outpatient settings in various specialties, involving 90,089 patients. Of these, 4876 (4.3%) encounters had a PAL.
Interventions |
Perioperative cefazolin administration within 4 h before surgery to 4 h after the procedure began.
Measurements |
The primary outcome was cefazolin POA in patients with and without PALs. Potential POA cases were identified based on tryptase orders or diphenhydramine administrations within the initial cefazolin administration to 6 h postoperatively. Verification included two validation steps. The first checked for hypersensitivity reaction (HSR) documentation, and the second, led by Allergy specialists, identified POA and the probable culprit. The secondary outcome looked at cefazolin use trends in patients with a PAL, stratified by setting and specialty.
Main results |
Of 112,817 encounters, 1421 (1.3%) had possible cefazolin HSRs. Of these, 22 (1.5%) had POA, resulting in a 0.02% prevalence. Of these, 13 (59.1%) were linked to cefazolin and 9 (40.9%) attributed to other drugs. Only one cefazolin POA case had a PAL, indicating no significant difference in cefazolin POA prevalence between patients with and without PALs (p = 0.437). Perioperative cefazolin use in patients with PALs steadily increased from 2.6% to 6.0% between 2017 and 2020, specifically in academic settings.
Conclusions |
The prevalence of cefazolin POA does not exhibit significant differences between patients with and without PALs, and notably, the incidence remains remarkably low. Based on these findings, it is advisable to view cefazolin as an acceptable choice for prophylaxis in patients carrying a PAL.
Le texte complet de cet article est disponible en PDF.Highlights |
• | POA rate remains low at 0.02%, aligning with 1 in 1000 to 10,000 in prior reports. |
• | Cefazolin POA rates are similar with/without PALs, echoing safety for PAL patients. |
• | Rising cefazolin use in PAL patients signals a positive prescribing shift. |
• | The complex POA study underlines the need for allergy-anesthesiology collaboration. |
• | Promote guideline updates for cefazolin use in PAL patients. |
Keywords : Cefazolin surgical prophylaxis, Surgical-site infections, Penicillin allergy label, Drug allergy, Perioperative anaphylaxis, Cross-reactivity among beta-lactams
Abbreviations : AAAAI, ACAAI, EHR, ENT, HSR, ICD-10, IV, IM, IQR, JHHS, SSI, NLP, PAL, PMAP, POA
Plan
Vol 94
Article 111377- juin 2024 Retour au numéro
Article précédent
- Survey of anesthesia department chairs about the environmental sustainability initiatives of their programs
- Rakesh Vijayashankar Sondekoppam, Franklin Dexter, Samira Vithani, Cynthia A. Wong
- Diagnostic accuracy of a simple qualitative ultrasound assessment for the diagnosis of high-risk gastric contents in the parturient. A prospective observational cohort study
- Lionel Bouvet, Alix Favre, Alexandre Riso, Juliette Fabre, Laurent Zieleskiewicz, François-Pierrick Desgranges, Dominique Chassard
Bienvenue sur EM-consulte, la référence des professionnels de santé.
L’accès au texte intégral de cet article nécessite un abonnement.
Déjà abonné à cette revue ?