Michael A Liss1, William Kim2, Dena Moskowitz2, Richard J Szabo3. 1. Department of Urology, University of Texas Health Science Center San Antonio, San Antonio, Texas. 2. Department of Urology, University of California-Irvine, Irvine, California. 3. Department of Urology, Southern California Kaiser Permanente, Orange County, Irvine, California. Electronic address: Richard.Szabo@kp.org.
Abstract
PURPOSE: We compared the effectiveness of targeted prophylaxis to the effectiveness of empirical prophylaxis for preventing sepsis after transrectal prostate biopsy using a retrospective multicenter quality improvement study. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A total of 13 Kaiser Permanente urology departments participated in a 1-year retrospective analysis of a quality improvement study. In the targeted prophylaxis group rectal cultures were performed before transrectal prostate biopsy and antibiotic sensitivities of Escherichia coli were used to guide the selection of a single agent antibiotic for prophylaxis. Cultures were plated on 10 μg/ml ciprofloxacin infused MacConkey agar at a central laboratory. Urologists using empirical prophylaxis continued the usual regimen of ciprofloxacin monotherapy prophylaxis but sometimes added an additional prophylactic antibiotic. The primary outcome of post-biopsy sepsis was compiled by a search of the electronic medical record for the appropriate ICD-9 codes. RESULTS: A total of 5,355 prostate biopsy procedures were performed between May 1, 2013 and April 30, 2014. Targeted prophylaxis was used in 1,802 procedures (34%) and empirical prophylaxis was used in 3,553 (66%). The overall incidence of post-biopsy sepsis was 0.52% (28 of 5,355 cases). The incidence of sepsis was 0.44% (8 of 1,802 cases) in the targeted prophylaxis group and 0.56% (20 of 3,553) in the empirical prophylaxis group (p = 0.568). The prevalence of ciprofloxacin resistant E. coli on rectal culture was 25% (444 of 1,802 cases). Seven of the 8 patients (88%) on targeted prophylaxis in whom sepsis developed used a prophylactic antibiotic to which the bacteria causing post-biopsy sepsis were sensitive. CONCLUSIONS: The targeted prophylaxis protocol enabled physicians to avoid using more than 1 broad-spectrum empirical antibiotic while simultaneously achieving an overall rate of sepsis similar to the rate seen with empirical prophylaxis.
PURPOSE: We compared the effectiveness of targeted prophylaxis to the effectiveness of empirical prophylaxis for preventing sepsis after transrectal prostate biopsy using a retrospective multicenter quality improvement study. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A total of 13 Kaiser Permanente urology departments participated in a 1-year retrospective analysis of a quality improvement study. In the targeted prophylaxis group rectal cultures were performed before transrectal prostate biopsy and antibiotic sensitivities of Escherichia coli were used to guide the selection of a single agent antibiotic for prophylaxis. Cultures were plated on 10 μg/ml ciprofloxacin infused MacConkey agar at a central laboratory. Urologists using empirical prophylaxis continued the usual regimen of ciprofloxacin monotherapy prophylaxis but sometimes added an additional prophylactic antibiotic. The primary outcome of post-biopsy sepsis was compiled by a search of the electronic medical record for the appropriate ICD-9 codes. RESULTS: A total of 5,355 prostate biopsy procedures were performed between May 1, 2013 and April 30, 2014. Targeted prophylaxis was used in 1,802 procedures (34%) and empirical prophylaxis was used in 3,553 (66%). The overall incidence of post-biopsy sepsis was 0.52% (28 of 5,355 cases). The incidence of sepsis was 0.44% (8 of 1,802 cases) in the targeted prophylaxis group and 0.56% (20 of 3,553) in the empirical prophylaxis group (p = 0.568). The prevalence of ciprofloxacin resistant E. coli on rectal culture was 25% (444 of 1,802 cases). Seven of the 8 patients (88%) on targeted prophylaxis in whom sepsis developed used a prophylactic antibiotic to which the bacteria causing post-biopsy sepsis were sensitive. CONCLUSIONS: The targeted prophylaxis protocol enabled physicians to avoid using more than 1 broad-spectrum empirical antibiotic while simultaneously achieving an overall rate of sepsis similar to the rate seen with empirical prophylaxis.
Authors: Sofie C M Tops; Marlie Bruens; Sacha van Mook-Vermulst; Diane Lamers-Jansen; Tobias Engel; Ger van den Brink; Rob van Duuren; Heiman F L Wertheim; Eva Kolwijck Journal: J Clin Microbiol Date: 2018-08-27 Impact factor: 5.948
Authors: Pedro Recabal; Taehyoung Lee; Emily Vertosick; Michael Manasia; James Eastham; Karim Touijer; Susan K Seo; Massimiliano Spaliviero; Behfar Ehdaie Journal: World J Urol Date: 2019-06-12 Impact factor: 4.226
Authors: K Lahdensuo; A Rannikko; V-J Anttila; A Erickson; A Pätäri-Sampo; M Rautio; H Santti; E Tarkka; M Vaara; K Huotari Journal: Prostate Cancer Prostatic Dis Date: 2016-08-16 Impact factor: 5.554
Authors: Susan Scott; Patrick N Harris; Deborah A Williamson; Michael A Liss; Suhail A R Doi; Matthew J Roberts Journal: World J Urol Date: 2018-02-16 Impact factor: 4.226