Examining cefazolin utilization and perioperative anaphylaxis in patients with and without a penicillin allergy label : A cross-sectional study
Copyright © 2024 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved..
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.
| Medienart: |
E-Artikel |
|---|
| Erscheinungsjahr: |
2024 |
|---|---|
| Erschienen: |
2024 |
| Enthalten in: |
Zur Gesamtaufnahme - volume:94 |
|---|---|
| Enthalten in: |
Journal of clinical anesthesia - 94(2024) vom: 01. März, Seite 111377 |
| Sprache: |
Englisch |
|---|
| Beteiligte Personen: |
Murphy, Zachary R [VerfasserIn] |
|---|
| Links: |
|---|
| Anmerkungen: |
Date Completed 11.03.2024 Date Revised 16.03.2024 published: Print-Electronic Citation Status MEDLINE |
|---|
| doi: |
10.1016/j.jclinane.2024.111377 |
|---|
| funding: |
|
|---|---|
| Förderinstitution / Projekttitel: |
|
| PPN (Katalog-ID): |
NLM367322846 |
|---|
| LEADER | 01000caa a22002652 4500 | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| 001 | NLM367322846 | ||
| 003 | DE-627 | ||
| 005 | 20240316232701.0 | ||
| 007 | cr uuu---uuuuu | ||
| 008 | 240120s2024 xx |||||o 00| ||eng c | ||
| 024 | 7 | |a 10.1016/j.jclinane.2024.111377 |2 doi | |
| 028 | 5 | 2 | |a pubmed24n1332.xml |
| 035 | |a (DE-627)NLM367322846 | ||
| 035 | |a (NLM)38241788 | ||
| 035 | |a (PII)S0952-8180(24)00004-7 | ||
| 040 | |a DE-627 |b ger |c DE-627 |e rakwb | ||
| 041 | |a eng | ||
| 100 | 1 | |a Murphy, Zachary R |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
| 245 | 1 | 0 | |a Examining cefazolin utilization and perioperative anaphylaxis in patients with and without a penicillin allergy label |b A cross-sectional study |
| 264 | 1 | |c 2024 | |
| 336 | |a Text |b txt |2 rdacontent | ||
| 337 | |a ƒaComputermedien |b c |2 rdamedia | ||
| 338 | |a ƒa Online-Ressource |b cr |2 rdacarrier | ||
| 500 | |a Date Completed 11.03.2024 | ||
| 500 | |a Date Revised 16.03.2024 | ||
| 500 | |a published: Print-Electronic | ||
| 500 | |a Citation Status MEDLINE | ||
| 520 | |a Copyright © 2024 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved. | ||
| 520 | |a 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 | ||
| 520 | |a DESIGN: Cross-sectional study | ||
| 520 | |a SETTING: A large U.S. healthcare system in the Baltimore-D.C. region, July 2017 to July 2020 | ||
| 520 | |a 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 | ||
| 520 | |a INTERVENTIONS: Perioperative cefazolin administration within 4 h before surgery to 4 h after the procedure began | ||
| 520 | |a 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 | ||
| 520 | |a 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 | ||
| 520 | |a 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 | ||
| 650 | 4 | |a Journal Article | |
| 650 | 4 | |a Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't | |
| 650 | 4 | |a Research Support, N.I.H., Extramural | |
| 650 | 4 | |a Cefazolin surgical prophylaxis | |
| 650 | 4 | |a Cross-reactivity among beta-lactams | |
| 650 | 4 | |a Drug allergy | |
| 650 | 4 | |a Penicillin allergy label | |
| 650 | 4 | |a Perioperative anaphylaxis | |
| 650 | 4 | |a Surgical-site infections | |
| 650 | 7 | |a Cefazolin |2 NLM | |
| 650 | 7 | |a IHS69L0Y4T |2 NLM | |
| 650 | 7 | |a Anti-Bacterial Agents |2 NLM | |
| 650 | 7 | |a Penicillins |2 NLM | |
| 700 | 1 | |a Muzaffar, Anum F |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
| 700 | 1 | |a Massih, Sandra A |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
| 700 | 1 | |a Klein, Eili Y |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
| 700 | 1 | |a Dispenza, Melanie C |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
| 700 | 1 | |a Fabre, Valeria |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
| 700 | 1 | |a Hensley, Nadia B |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
| 700 | 1 | |a Blumenthal, Kimberly G |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
| 700 | 1 | |a Alvarez-Arango, Santiago |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
| 773 | 0 | 8 | |i Enthalten in |t Journal of clinical anesthesia |d 1996 |g 94(2024) vom: 01. März, Seite 111377 |w (DE-627)NLM013003399 |x 1873-4529 |7 nnns |
| 773 | 1 | 8 | |g volume:94 |g year:2024 |g day:01 |g month:03 |g pages:111377 |
| 856 | 4 | 0 | |u http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jclinane.2024.111377 |3 Volltext |
| 912 | |a GBV_USEFLAG_A | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_NLM | ||
| 951 | |a AR | ||
| 952 | |d 94 |j 2024 |b 01 |c 03 |h 111377 | ||