Comparison of Complication Rates with Antibiotic Prophylaxis with Cefpodoxime Versus Fluoroquinolones After Transrectal Prostate Biopsy

被引:6
|
作者
Wenzel, Mike [1 ,2 ]
Welte, Maria N. [1 ]
Theissen, Lena H. [1 ]
Wittler, Clarissa [1 ]
Hoeh, Benedikt [1 ]
Humke, Clara [1 ]
Preisser, Felix [1 ]
Wurnschimmel, Christoph [2 ,3 ]
Tilki, Derya [3 ,4 ]
Graefen, Markus [3 ]
Roos, Frederik C. [1 ]
Becker, Andreas [1 ]
Karakiewicz, Pierre, I [2 ]
Chun, Felix K. H. [1 ]
Kluth, Luis A. [1 ]
Mandel, Philipp [1 ]
机构
[1] Goethe Univ Frankfurt, Univ Hosp Frankfurt, Dept Urol, Frankfurt, Germany
[2] Univ Montreal, Div Urol, Canc Prognost & Hlth Outcomes Unit, Hlth Ctr, Montreal, PQ, Canada
[3] Univ Hosp Hamburg Eppendorf, Martini Klin, Prostate Canc Ctr, Hamburg, Germany
[4] Univ Hosp Hamburg Eppendorf, Dept Urol, Hamburg, Germany
来源
EUROPEAN UROLOGY FOCUS | 2021年 / 7卷 / 05期
关键词
Epididymitis; Fusion biopsy; Hematuria; Prostatitis; Prostate cancer; Systematic biopsy; Urinary tract infection; FOSFOMYCIN TROMETAMOL; RISK-FACTORS; INFECTIONS; PREVENTION; MANAGEMENT; RESISTANCE; SINGLE;
D O I
10.1016/j.euf.2020.11.006
中图分类号
R5 [内科学]; R69 [泌尿科学(泌尿生殖系疾病)];
学科分类号
1002 ; 100201 ;
摘要
Background: After recommended restriction of the use of fluoroquinolones, the optimal antibiotic prophylaxis for transrectal prostate biopsy is still under debate. Objective: To test the effectiveness of cefpodoxime as oral antibiotic prophylaxis for transrectal prostate biopsies and the complication rates relative to fluoroquinolones. Design, setting, and participants: Antibiotic prophylaxis for transrectal prostate biopsies at the Department of Urology at University Hospital Frankfurt was fluoroquinolones for 342 consecutive patients in January 2018 and December 2019 and cefpodoxime for 100 patients from January 2020 to July 2020. Data were prospectively evaluated and retrospectively analyzed. Patients were followed up according to clinical routine at 6 wk after biopsy at the earliest. Patients without follow-up (n = 98) and those receiving antibiotic prophylaxis other than cefpodoxime or fluoroquinolones (n = 15) were excluded. Intervention: Use of cefpodoxime or fluoroquinolones as antibiotic prophylaxis for transrectal prostate biopsies. Outcome measurements and statistical analysis: Logistic regression models were used to predict biopsy-related complications according to antibiotic prophylaxis. Results and limitations: Of 442 patients, 100 (22.6%) received cefpodoxime as antibiotic prophylaxis. Patient baseline and biopsy characteristics were comparable between the cefpodoxime and fluoroquinolone groups. Moreover, there were no differences in the number of prior prostate biopsies or the proportions of systematic vs. fusion biopsies (p > 0.05). There were no differences between the groups in infectious complications such as epididymitis and prostatitis after biopsy. Infectious complication rates were very low, at 2.0% in the cefpodoxime and 0.9%fluoroquinolone group. Moreover, there were no differences between the groups in patient-reported complications, such as gross hema-turia occurring at more than 5 d after biopsy, hematospermia, or rectal bleeding. In multivariable analyses, after adjustment for patient and prostate biopsy characteristics, cefpodoxime was not associated with higher complication rates than fluoroquinolones (p > 0.05).
引用
收藏
页码:980 / 986
页数:7
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [1] Comparison of fosfomycin against fluoroquinolones for transrectal prostate biopsy prophylaxis
    Kisa, Erdem
    WORLD JOURNAL OF UROLOGY, 2018, 36 (07) : 1175 - 1176
  • [2] Comparison of fosfomycin against fluoroquinolones for transrectal prostate biopsy prophylaxis
    Erdem Kisa
    World Journal of Urology, 2018, 36 : 1175 - 1176
  • [3] Antibiotic prophylaxis for transrectal prostate biopsy In the context of restricted indications for fluoroquinolones and antibiotic stewardship
    Rothe, Kathrin
    Querbach, Christiane
    Busch, Dirk H.
    Gschwend, Juergen E.
    Hauner, Katharina
    UROLOGE, 2022, 61 (02): : 160 - 166
  • [4] Complications after transrectal prostate biopsy with antibiotic prophylaxis versus transperineal without antibiotic prophylaxis: Comparison of two clinical practices
    Hogenhout, R.
    Luiting, H. B.
    Osses, D. F.
    Roobol, M. J.
    EUROPEAN UROLOGY, 2022, 81 : S907 - S908
  • [5] Comparison of Fluoroquinolones and Other Antibiotic Prophylaxis Regimens for Preventing Complications in Patients Undergoing Transrectal Prostate Biopsy
    Tulone, Gabriele
    Giannone, Sofia
    Mannone, Piero
    Tognarelli, Alessio
    Di Vico, Tommaso
    Giaimo, Rosa
    Zucchi, Alessandro
    Rossanese, Marta
    Abrate, Alberto
    Pavan, Nicola
    Claps, Francesco
    Ficarra, Vincenzo
    Bartoletti, Riccardo
    Simonato, Alchiede
    ANTIBIOTICS-BASEL, 2022, 11 (03):
  • [6] The transition from transrectal to transperineal prostate biopsy without antibiotic prophylaxis: Cancer detection rates and complication rates
    Renée Hogenhout
    Sebastiaan Remmers
    Geert J. L. H. van Leenders
    Monique J. Roobol
    Prostate Cancer and Prostatic Diseases, 2023, 26 : 581 - 587
  • [7] The transition from transrectal to transperineal prostate biopsy without antibiotic prophylaxis: Cancer detection rates and complication rates
    Hogenhout, Renee
    Remmers, Sebastiaan
    van Leenders, Geert J. L. H.
    Roobol, Monique J.
    PROSTATE CANCER AND PROSTATIC DISEASES, 2023, 26 (03) : 581 - 587
  • [8] Antibiotic prophylaxis for transrectal prostate biopsy. In the context of restricted indications for fluoroquinolones and antibiotic stewardship
    Rothe, Kathrin
    Querbach, Christiane
    Busch, Dirk H.
    Gschwend, Jurgen E.
    Hauner, Katharina
    UROLOGIE, 2022, 61 (02): : 160 - 166
  • [9] Antibiotic prophylaxis in transrectal prostate biopsy
    Munoz Velez, Daniel
    Vicens Vicens, Antoni
    Ozonas Moragues, Mariano
    ACTAS UROLOGICAS ESPANOLAS, 2009, 33 (08): : 853 - 859
  • [10] Antibiotic prophylaxis for transrectal prostate biopsy
    Zani, Emerson L.
    Camara Clark, Otavio Augusto
    Netto, Nelson Rodrigues, Jr.
    COCHRANE DATABASE OF SYSTEMATIC REVIEWS, 2011, (05):