Search

Background Simple hand trauma is very common, accounting for 1·8 million emergency department visits annually in the USA alone. Antibiotics are used widely as postinjury prophylaxis, but their efficacy is unclear. This meta-analysis assessed the effect of antibiotic prophylaxis versus placebo or no treatment on wound infection rates in hand injuries managed surgically. Methods Embase, MEDLINE, PubMed, Cochrane Central, and the World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Portal were searched for published and unpublished studies in any language from inception to September 2015. The primary outcome was the effect of antibiotic prophylaxis on wound infection rates. Open fractures, crush injuries and bite wounds were excluded. Study quality was assessed using the Cochrane risk-of-bias tool. Data were pooled using random-effects meta-analysis, and risk ratios ( RRs) and 95 per cent c.i. obtained. Results Thirteen studies (2578 patients) were included, comprising five double-blind randomized clinical trials, five prospective trials and three cohort studies. There was no significant difference in infection rate between the antibiotic and placebo/no antibiotic groups ( RR 0·89, 95 per cent c.i. 0·65 to 1·23; P = 0·49). Subgroup analysis of the five double-blind randomized clinical trials (864 patients) again found no difference in infection rates ( RR 0·66, 0·36 to 1·21; P = 0·18). Conclusion There was moderate-quality evidence that routine use of antibiotics does not reduce the infection rate in simple hand wounds that require surgery. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background Cellular actions of advanced glycation end-products (AGE) are mediated by a receptor for AGE (RAGE), a novel integral membrane protein. Immunohistochemical studies show only low-level RAGE antigen expression in endothelial cells. Design It was the purpose of the study to compare expression of RAGE antigen by endothelial cells in non-diabetic uraemic patients (n=8) with non-uraemic controls (n=11). Samples of arterial tissue were obtained at the time of renal transplantation (in uraemic patients) and abdominal surgery (in controls). RAGE antigen was visualized using guinea-pig anti-RAGE IgG and PAP technique. Results Marked staining for RAGE was noted in endothelial cells, both arterial endothelium and endothelium of vasa vasorum of normoglycaemic uraemic patients, but was not demonstrable in endothelial cells of large arteries and only faintly expressed in vasa vasorum of non-uraemic individuals. Conclusion Normal endothelial cells do not constitually express RAGE antigen; in contrast it is expressed by arterial and capillary endothelial cells of uraemic patients. The observation is of note in view of the putative role of AGE of causing atherosclerotic and non-atherosclerotic vascular lesions. [ABSTRACT FROM PUBLISHER]