FREE SHIPPING over $40
OVER 9000 FIVE-STAR REVIEWS
5% OFF ALL SUBSCRIPTIONS
100% HAPPINESS GUARANTEE
Analyze Diet
0
Home / Equine Research Bank / Equine Vet J / Prospective randomised comparison of different antimicrobial...
Equine veterinary journal2025; doi: 10.1111/evj.14489

Prospective randomised comparison of different antimicrobial protocols for the prevention of surgical site infections in horses undergoing emergency exploratory celiotomy.

Abstract: Surgical site infection (SSI) is an important complication following emergency celiotomy in the horse. Judicious antimicrobial use is important for the prevention of antimicrobial resistance and the limitation of antimicrobial-associated complications. Previous studies in horses have found no association between SSI and perioperative antimicrobial duration, but the ideal duration of antimicrobial administration in horses undergoing exploratory celiotomy remains unclear. Objective: To compare SSI and describe post-operative complications, survival, duration and cost of hospitalisation in horses receiving one of two antimicrobial protocols following clean or select clean-contaminated emergency exploratory celiotomy. Methods: Prospective randomised clinical study. Methods: Adult horses undergoing clean or selected clean-contaminated emergency celiotomy at The University of Georgia Teaching Hospital (2013-2019) were prospectively enrolled and randomised to protocol A (pre- and intra-operative antimicrobials only, n = 39) or protocol B (antimicrobials continued for 72 h of post-operative administration, n = 37). Incisional closure and protection were standardised. The prevalence of SSI was compared between protocols for horses surviving beyond day five of hospitalisation and additional clinical outcomes were described. Results: Horses in protocol A had an increased prevalence of SSI during hospitalisation compared with protocol B (6/37 [16%] vs. 0/35 [0%]; p = 0.03). The difference was of borderline significance at 4 weeks post-operatively (7/32 [22%] vs. 1/31 [3%]; p = 0.05). Conclusions: Planned enrolment was not met, providing only enough data for a small study. Numbers were limited by inclusion criteria as well as difficulties regarding owner consent and surgeon-determined enrolment. In light of the low statistical power of the study, results should be used to direct further research, and caution must be taken in applying them to clinical practice. Conclusions: The difference in hospitalised SSI between groups and the low prevalence of SSI, particularly in the 72-h post-operative group, supports the need for continued research to determine optimal antimicrobial duration and protocols to reduce SSI in horses undergoing exploratory celiotomy.
© 2025 EVJ Ltd.
Get Full Text
Publication Date: 2025-02-19 PubMed ID: 39972624DOI: 10.1111/evj.14489Google Scholar: Lookup
The Equine Research Bank provides access to a large database of publicly available scientific literature. Inclusion in the Research Bank does not imply endorsement of study methods or findings by Mad Barn.
LinkedInCopy
  • Journal Article

Summary

This research summary has been generated with artificial intelligence and may contain errors and omissions. Refer to the original study to confirm details provided. Submit correction.

The study explores the effects of two different antibiotic protocols on surgical site infections (SSIs) in horses undergoing emergency exploratory celiotomy. It found a significant reduction in SSIs in horses that were given antibiotics for 72 hours post-surgery compared to those who only received pre- and intra-operative antibiotics.

Study Design and Methodology

  • The research is a prospective randomised clinical study conducted at The University of Georgia Teaching Hospital from 2013-2019.
  • Adult horses undergoing clean or selected clean-contaminated emergency celiotomy were randomly divided into two groups. In protocol A, the horses received only pre- and intra-operative antibiotics (39 horses). In protocol B, the antibiotics continued for 72 hours post-operatively (37 horses).
  • All surgical procedures were standardized, including incisional closure and protection.
  • The primary comparison was the prevalence of SSIs between the two groups for horses surviving beyond the fifth day of hospitalization.

Results

  • There was an increased prevalence of SSI among the horses in protocol A during hospitalization when compared to protocol B.
  • The difference was significant during hospitalization (16% in protocol A vs. 0% in protocol B), and was of borderline significance at four weeks post-operatively (22% in protocol A vs. 3% in protocol B).

Conclusions

  • The study did not reach its planned enrolment due to a combination of strict inclusion criteria, inability to obtain owner consent, and surgeon-determined enrolment. Consequently, the study had low statistical power, causing the results to be suggestive rather than conclusive.
  • However, the observed difference in SSIs between the two groups supports the need for further research in determining the optimal duration and protocol of antimicrobial administration in horses undergoing exploratory celiotomy.
  • The researchers advise caution in applying the results directly to clinical practice due to the limitations of the study.

Cite This Article

APA
Christie KD, Epstein KL, Tyma JF, Afonso T, Fultz LE, Giguère S. (2025). Prospective randomised comparison of different antimicrobial protocols for the prevention of surgical site infections in horses undergoing emergency exploratory celiotomy. Equine Vet J. https://doi.org/10.1111/evj.14489

Publication

Equine veterinary journal
ISSN: 2042-3306
NlmUniqueID: 0173320
Country: United States
Language: English

Researcher Affiliations

Christie, Katharine D
  • Department of Large Animal Medicine, University of Georgia, Athens, Georgia, USA.
Epstein, Kira L
  • Department of Large Animal Medicine, University of Georgia, Athens, Georgia, USA.
Tyma, Jesse F
  • Department of Large Animal Medicine, University of Georgia, Athens, Georgia, USA.
Afonso, Tiago
  • Department of Large Animal Medicine, University of Georgia, Athens, Georgia, USA.
Fultz, Lisa E
  • Department of Large Animal Medicine, University of Georgia, Athens, Georgia, USA.
Giguère, Steeve
  • Department of Large Animal Medicine, University of Georgia, Athens, Georgia, USA.

References

This article includes 42 references
  1. Freeman KD, Southwood LL, Lane J, Lindborg S, Aceto HW. Post operative infection, pyrexia and perioperative antimicrobial drug use in surgical colic patients.. Equine Vet J 2012;44:476–481.
  2. Freeman DE, Rötting AK, Inoue OJ. Abdominal closure and complications.. Clin Tech Equine Pract 2002;1:174–187.
  3. Shearer TR, Holcombe SJ, Valberg SJ. Incisional infections associated with ventral midline celiotomy in horses.. J Vet Emerg Crit Care 2020;30:136–148.
  4. Durward‐Akhurst SA, Mair TS, Boston R, Dunkel B. Comparison of two antimicrobial regimens on the prevalence of incisional infections after colic surgery.. Vet Rec 2013;172:287.
  5. Vala H, Vaja MA, Gohil AB. A comparative study of surgical site infection after single dose of preoperative antimicrobial prophylaxis versus multiple doses of antimicrobials in clean and clean contaminated abdominal surgeries.. Int Surg J 2020;7:1143–1147.
  6. Nelson RL, Gladman E, Barbateskovic M. Antimicrobial prophylaxis for colorectal surgery.. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2014;5:CD001181.
  7. Duclos G, Zieleskiewicz L, Leone M. Antimicrobial prophylaxis is critical for preventing surgical site infection.. J Thorac Dis 2017;9:2826–2828.
  8. van Loon JPAM, Visser EMS, de Mik‐van Mourik M, Kerbert P, Huppes T, Menke ES. Colic surgery in horses: a retrospective study into short‐ and long‐term survival rate, complications and rehabilitation toward sporting activity.. J Equine Vet Sci 2020;90:103012.
  9. AlBuhairan B, Hind D, Hutchinson A. Antibiotic prophylaxis for wound infections in total joint arthroplasty: a systematic review.. J Bone Joint Surg Br 2008;90(7):915–919.
  10. Ban KA, Minei JP, Laronga C, Harbrecht BG, Jensen EH, Fry DE. American College of Surgeons and Surgical Infection Society: surgical site infection guidelines, 2016 update.. J Am Coll Surg 2017;224(1):59–74.
  11. Crader MF, Varacallo M. Preoperative antibiotic prophylaxis.. Treasury Island, FL: StatPearls [Internet]; 2020.
  12. Berríos‐Torres SI, Umscheid CA, Bratzler DW, Leas B, Stone EC, Kelz RR. Guideline for the prevention of surgical site infection.. JAMA Surg 2017;152:784.
  13. Brown DC. Wound infection and antimicrobial use.. In: Tobias KM, Johnston SA, editors. Veterinary surgery small animal. St. Louis, MO: Elsevier; 2012. p. 135–139.
  14. Pezzanite LM, Griffenhagen GM, Krause DM, Hendrickson DA. Retrospective evaluation of association between perioperative antimicrobial protocol and complications following elective equine synovial endoscopy.. Vet Med Sci 2021;7(3):609–620.
  15. Muntwyler N, Dubois MS, Weese JS. Retrospective assessment of perioperative antimicrobial use for elective arthroscopy in horses.. Vet Surg 2020;49(3):427–435.
  16. Stöckle SD, Failing K, Koene M, Fey K. Postoperative complications in equine elective, clean orthopaedic surgery with/without antibiotic prophylaxis.. Tierarztl Prax Ausg G Grosstiere Nutztiere 2018;46(2):81–86.
  17. Rockow M, Griffenhagen G, Landolt G, Hendrickson D, Pezzanite L. The effect of antimicrobial protocols and other perioperative factors on postoperative complications in horses undergoing celiotomy: a retrospective analysis, 2008–2021.. Animals Basel 2023;13(22):3573.
  18. Stöckle SD, Kannapin DA, Kauter AML, Lübke‐Becker A, Walther B, Merle R. A pilot randomised clinical trial comparing a short‐term perioperative prophylaxis regimen to a long‐term standard protocol in equine colic surgery.. Antibiotics Basel 2021;10(5):587.
  19. Ceriotti S, Westerfeld R, Bonilla AG, Pang DSJ. Use of clinical audits to evaluate timing of preoperative antimicrobials in equine surgery at a veterinary teaching hospital.. Front Vet Sci 2021;8:630111.
  20. Rockow M, Griffenhagen G, Landolt G, Hendrickson D, Pezzanite L. Current antimicrobial use in horses undergoing exploratory celiotomy: a survey of board‐certified equine specialists.. Animals Basel 2023;13(9):1433.
  21. Schaer BLD, Linton JK, Aceto H. Antimicrobial use in horses undergoing colic surgery.. J Vet Intern Med 2012;26:1449–1456.
  22. Traub‐Dargatz JL, George JL, Dargatz DA, Morley PS, Southwood LL, Tillotson K. Survey of complications and antimicrobial use in equine patients at veterinary teaching hospitals that underwent surgery because of colic.. J Am Vet Med Assoc 2002;220:1359–1365.
  23. Burgess BA, Bauknecht K, Slovis NM, Morley PS. Factors associated with equine shedding of multi‐drug‐resistant Salmonella enterica and its impact on health outcomes.. Equine Vet J 2018;50:616–623.
  24. Båverud V, Gustafsson A, Franklin A, Lindholm A, Gunnarsson A. Clostridium difficile associated with acute colitis in mature horses treated with antibiotics.. Equine Vet J 1997;29:279–284.
  25. Branch‐Elliman W, O'Brian W, Strymish J, Itani K, Wyatt C, Gupta K. Association of duration and type of surgical prophylaxis with antimicrobial‐associated adverse events.. Jama 2019;154:590–598.
  26. Cohen ND, Woods AM. Characteristics and risk factors for failure of horses with acute diarrhea to survive: 122 cases (1990–1996).. J Am Vet Med Assoc 1999;214:382–390.
  27. Bratzler DW, Dellinger EP, Olsen KM, Perl TM, Auwaerter PG, Bolon MK. Clinical practice guidelines for antimicrobial prophylaxis in surgery.. Surg Infect (Larchmt) 2013;14:73–156.
  28. Mair TS, Smith LJ. Survival and complication rates in 300 horses undergoing surgical treatment of colic. Part 2: short‐term complications.. Equine Vet J 2005;37:303–309.
  29. Abrams‐Ogg ACG, Kruth SA. Infections associated with neutropenia in the dog and cat.. In: Giguere S, Prescott JF, Baggot JD, et al., editors. Antimicrobial therapy in veterinary medicine. 4th ed. Ames, Iowa: John Wiley & Sons, Inc.; 2013.
  30. Southwood LL. Surgical antimicrobial prophylaxis: current standards of care.. Equine Vet Educ 2023;35:607–616.
  31. Dunowska M, Morley PS, Traub‐Dargatz J, Hyatt DR, Dargatz DA. Impact of hospitalization and antimicrobial drug administration on antimicrobial susceptibility patterns of commensal Escherichia coli isolated from the feces of horses.. J Am Vet Med Assoc 2006;228:1909–1917.
  32. Schoster A, van Spijk JN, Damborg P, Moodley A, Kirchgaessner C, Hartnack S. The effect of different antimicrobial treatment regimens on the faecal shedding of ESBL‐producing Escherichia coli in horses.. Vet Microbiol 2020;243:108617.
  33. Singleton DA, Rayner A, Brant B, Smyth S, Noble PJM, Radford AD. A randomised controlled trial to reduce highest priority critically important antimicrobial prescription in companion animals.. Nat Commun 2021;12:1593.
  34. Weber WP, Marti WR, Zwahlen M, Misteli H, Rosenthal R, Reck S. The timing of surgical antimicrobial prophylaxis.. Ann Surg 2008;247(6):918–926.
  35. Classen DC, Evans RS, Pestotnik SL, Horn SD, Menlove RL, Purke JP. The timing of prophylactic administration of antibiotics and the risk of surgical‐wound infection.. N Engl J Med 1992;326:281–286.
  36. Isgren CM, Salem SE, Townsend NB, Timofte D, Maddox TW, Archer DC. Sequential bacterial sampling of the midline incision in horses undergoing exploratory laparotomy.. Equine Vet J 2019;51(1):38–44.
  37. Verwilghen D. Surgical site infections: what do we know?. Equine Vet J 2015;47:753–755.
  38. Salem SE, Proudman CJ, Archer DC. Prevention of post‐operative complications following surgical treatment of equine colic: current evidence.. Equine Vet J 2016;48:143–151.
  39. Ingle‐Fehr J, Baxter GM, Howard RD, Trotter GW, Stashak TS. Bacterial culturing of ventral median celiotomies for prediction of postoperative incisional complications in horses.. Vet Surg 1997;26:7–13.
  40. Colbath AC, Patipa L, Berghaus RD, Parks AH. The influence of suture pattern on the incidence of incisional drainage following exploratory laparotomy.. Equine Vet J 2014;46:156–160.
  41. Tnibar A, Lin KG, Nielsen KT, Christophersen MT, Lindegaard C, Martinussen T. Effect of a stent bandage on the likelihood of incisional infection following exploratory coeliotomy for colic in horses: a comparative retrospective study.. Equine Vet J 2013;45:564–569.
  42. Smith LJ, Mellor DJ, Marr CM, Reid SWJ, Mair TS. Incisional complications following exploratory celiotomy: does an abdominal bandage reduce the risk?. Equine Vet J 2007;39:277–283.

Citations

This article has been cited 2 times.
  1. Stöckle SD, Kannapin DA, Merle R, Lübke-Becker A, Gehlen H. Comparison of a Single-Shot Antibiotic Protocol Compared to a Conventional 5-Day Antibiotic Protocol in Equine Diagnostic Laparotomy Regarding Pre- and Postoperative Colonization with Multi-Drug-Resistant Indicator Pathogens. Antibiotics (Basel) 2026 Jan 21;15(1).
    doi: 10.3390/antibiotics15010106pubmed: 41594143google scholar: lookup
  2. Southwood LL, Long A, Perez J, Daniel S, Bittinger K, Aitken M, Redding L. Effect of surgical antimicrobial prophylaxis duration for colic surgery on complications and resistome. Equine Vet J 2026 Mar;58(2):390-403.
    doi: 10.1002/evj.70137pubmed: 41369016google scholar: lookup
Subscribe to our newsletter
Join 99,001 horse owners like you who receive our email updates on horse health and nutrition.