Investigative and clinical urology · 2022
Comparison of amikacin with fosfomycin as an add-on to ciprofloxacin for antibiotic prophylaxis in transrectal prostate biopsy: A single-center retrospective study.
СтатьяПоддержка исследования: вне правительства СШАНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Yu Seong Hyeon, Jung Seung Il, Ryu Ji Won, Kim Myung Soo, Chung Ho Seok, Hwang Eu Chang, Kwon Dong Deuk
Аннотация
PURPOSE: To assess the effect of ciprofloxacin (CP) and fosfomycin compared with CP and amikacin in patients with a fluoroquinolone (FQ)-resistant rectal flora who have undergone transrectal ultrasound-guided prostate biopsy (TRUSPB).
MATERIALS AND METHODS: In total, 516 patients with FQ-resistant rectal flora based on rectal swab cultures were divided into two groups according to prophylactic antibiotics. Patients in both groups were administered CP (400 mg, intravenous [IV], twice daily) on the same day as TRUSPB and 1 day after biopsy. The amikacin group (n=260) was administered a single injection of amikacin (1 g, IV) 1 hour before TRUSPB, whereas the fosfomycin group (n=256) was administered fosfomycin (3 g, orally) the night before the procedure. The primary endpoint was the rate of infectious complications in the two groups.
RESULTS: Overall, 13 patients (2.5%) reported infectious complications: 12 patients (4.62%) in the amikacin group compared with 1 patient (0.39%) in the fosfomycin group (risk ratio, 0.09; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.01-0.65), respectively, which was a statistically significant difference (p=0.017). This corresponds to a number needed to treat of 24 patients (95% CI, 15-65) to prevent one infectious complication. In the multivariate analysis to assess variables related to infectious complications, prophylactic antibiotics with added fosfomycin was associated with infectious complications (odds ratio, 0.060; 95% CI, 0.008-0.459).
CONCLUSIONS: In the era of FQ resistance, CP and fosfomycin may reduce the rate of infectious complications compared with CP and amikacin prophylaxis.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: In total, 516 patients with FQ-resistant rectal flora based on rectal swab cultures were divided into two groups according to prophylactic antibiotics. Patients in both groups were administered CP (400 mg, intravenous [IV], twice daily) on the same day as TRUSPB and 1 day after biopsy. The amikacin group (n=260) was administered a single injection of amikacin (1 g, IV) 1 hour before TRUSPB, whereas the fosfomycin group (n=256) was administered fosfomycin (3 g, orally) the night before the procedure. The primary endpoint was the rate of infectious complications in the two groups.
RESULTS: Overall, 13 patients (2.5%) reported infectious complications: 12 patients (4.62%) in the amikacin group compared with 1 patient (0.39%) in the fosfomycin group (risk ratio, 0.09; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.01-0.65), respectively, which was a statistically significant difference (p=0.017). This corresponds to a number needed to treat of 24 patients (95% CI, 15-65) to prevent one infectious complication. In the multivariate analysis to assess variables related to infectious complications, prophylactic antibiotics with added fosfomycin was associated with infectious complications (odds ratio, 0.060; 95% CI, 0.008-0.459).
CONCLUSIONS: In the era of FQ resistance, CP and fosfomycin may reduce the rate of infectious complications compared with CP and amikacin prophylaxis.