Skip to main content
. 2019 Jun 4;2019(6):CD012902. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD012902.pub2

Blomstedt 1985.

Methods Randomized, controlled
Method of randomisation: unclear
Kind of shunt: ventriculoatrial shunts
Location: Finland
Follow‐up: for a minimum of 6 months
Duration: 38 months
Participants Inclusion: all patients undergoing ventriculoatriostomy or an external ventriculostomy were included in the trial
Exclusion: patients under 12 years of age, patients allergic to sulfamethoxazole or trimethoprim, patients who received antibiotics during the preceding week and patients who already had a shunt in place when the trial started
Treatment: 62, control: 60
Interventions Trimethoprim (80 mg) and sulphamethoxazole (400 mg) versus plain vehicle (sodium hydroxide, dietholamin, sodium pyrosulfis, ethanol, phenylcarbinol and propylengeglycol mixed in sterile water)
Intravenous administration was performed just before surgery and 3 times postoperatively with intervals of 12 hours
Outcomes Proportion of participants who had shunt infection
Time between surgery and infection was up to 24 months
Notes  
Risk of bias
Bias Authors' judgement Support for judgement
Random sequence generation (selection bias) Unclear risk Not described
Allocation concealment (selection bias) Low risk Ampoules filled with trimethoprim‐sulphamethoxazole or placebo were coded by Hoffmann‐La Roche (supplier) and ampoules were administered to every participant just before surgery
Blinding of participants and personnel (performance bias) 
 All outcomes Low risk "Clinicians and pharmacist did not know which group a particular number belonged"
Blinding of outcome assessment (detection bias) 
 All outcomes Low risk After all the data had been collected and fed into a computer file the key to the code was given to the investigators by Hoffmann‐La Roche
Incomplete outcome data (attrition bias) 
 All outcomes Low risk 26 exclusions, well defined in text
Selective reporting (reporting bias) Low risk No study protocol available but it is clear that the published report includes all expected outcomes
Other bias Low risk The study appears to be free of other sources of bias