Stephen J Summers1,2, Darshan P Patel1, Blake D Hamilton1,2, Angela P Presson3, Mark A Fisher4,5, William T Lowrance1,2, Andrew W Southwick6,7. 1. Division of Urology, Department of Surgery, University of Utah Health Care, University of Utah, 30 N 1900 E, RM 3B420, Salt Lake City, UT, 84132, USA. 2. George E. Wahlen Department of Veterans Affairs Medical Center, Salt Lake City, UT, USA. 3. Division of Epidemiology, University of Utah, Salt Lake City, UT, USA. 4. Department of Pathology, University of Utah, Salt Lake City, UT, USA. 5. ARUP Laboratories, Salt Lake City, UT, USA. 6. Division of Urology, Department of Surgery, University of Utah Health Care, University of Utah, 30 N 1900 E, RM 3B420, Salt Lake City, UT, 84132, USA. Andrew.southwick@hsc.utah.edu. 7. George E. Wahlen Department of Veterans Affairs Medical Center, Salt Lake City, UT, USA. Andrew.southwick@hsc.utah.edu.
Abstract
PURPOSE: To evaluate the benefit of an antimicrobial prophylaxis protocol using rectal swab cultures in patients undergoing transrectal ultrasound (TRUS)-guided prostate biopsy in our Veterans Affairs population. METHODS: Between June 1, 2013, and June 1, 2014, we implemented an antimicrobial prophylaxis protocol using rectal swab cultures on selective media containing ciprofloxacin for all men scheduled for TRUS-guided prostate biopsy. Data from 2759 patients from Jan 1, 2006 to May 31, 2013, before protocol implementation served as historical controls. Patients with fluoroquinolone (FQ)-susceptible organisms received FQ monotherapy, while those with FQ-resistant organisms received targeted prophylaxis. Our objective was to compare the rate of infectious complications 30 days after prostate biopsy before and after implementation of our antimicrobial protocol. RESULTS: One hundred and sixty-seven patients received rectal swab cultures using our protocol. Seventeen (14 %) patients had FQ-resistant positive cultures. Patients with positive FQ-resistant culture results were more likely to have had a history of previous prostate biopsy and a positive urine culture in the last 12 months (p = 0.032, p = 0.018, respectively). The average annual infectious complication rate within 30 days of biopsy was reduced from 2.8 to 0.6 % before and after implementation of our antimicrobial prophylaxis protocol using rectal swab cultures, although this difference was not statistically significant (p = 0.13). CONCLUSION: An antimicrobial prophylaxis protocol using rectal culture swabs is a viable option for prevention of TRUS-guided prostate biopsy infectious complications. After implementation of an antimicrobial prophylaxis protocol, we observed a nonsignificant decrease in the rate of post-biopsy infectious complications when compared to historical controls.
PURPOSE: To evaluate the benefit of an antimicrobial prophylaxis protocol using rectal swab cultures in patients undergoing transrectal ultrasound (TRUS)-guided prostate biopsy in our Veterans Affairs population. METHODS: Between June 1, 2013, and June 1, 2014, we implemented an antimicrobial prophylaxis protocol using rectal swab cultures on selective media containing ciprofloxacin for all men scheduled for TRUS-guided prostate biopsy. Data from 2759 patients from Jan 1, 2006 to May 31, 2013, before protocol implementation served as historical controls. Patients with fluoroquinolone (FQ)-susceptible organisms received FQ monotherapy, while those with FQ-resistant organisms received targeted prophylaxis. Our objective was to compare the rate of infectious complications 30 days after prostate biopsy before and after implementation of our antimicrobial protocol. RESULTS: One hundred and sixty-seven patients received rectal swab cultures using our protocol. Seventeen (14 %) patients had FQ-resistant positive cultures. Patients with positive FQ-resistant culture results were more likely to have had a history of previous prostate biopsy and a positive urine culture in the last 12 months (p = 0.032, p = 0.018, respectively). The average annual infectious complication rate within 30 days of biopsy was reduced from 2.8 to 0.6 % before and after implementation of our antimicrobial prophylaxis protocol using rectal swab cultures, although this difference was not statistically significant (p = 0.13). CONCLUSION: An antimicrobial prophylaxis protocol using rectal culture swabs is a viable option for prevention of TRUS-guided prostate biopsy infectious complications. After implementation of an antimicrobial prophylaxis protocol, we observed a nonsignificant decrease in the rate of post-biopsy infectious complications when compared to historical controls.
Authors: Jeremy P Grummet; Mahesha Weerakoon; Sean Huang; Nathan Lawrentschuk; Mark Frydenberg; Daniel A Moon; Mary O'Reilly; Declan Murphy Journal: BJU Int Date: 2014-02-19 Impact factor: 5.588
Authors: Robert K Nam; Refik Saskin; Yuna Lee; Ying Liu; Calvin Law; Laurence H Klotz; D Andrew Loblaw; John Trachtenberg; Aleksandra Stanimirovic; Andrew E Simor; Arun Seth; David R Urbach; Steven A Narod Journal: J Urol Date: 2013-01 Impact factor: 7.450
Authors: Michael A Liss; Stephen A Taylor; Deepak Batura; Deborah Steensels; Methee Chayakulkeeree; Charlotte Soenens; G Gopal Rao; Atreya Dash; Samuel Park; Nishant Patel; Jason Woo; Michelle McDonald; Unwanaobong Nseyo; Pooya Banapour; Stephen Unterberg; Thomas E Ahlering; Hendrik Van Poppel; Kyoko Sakamoto; Joshua Fierer; Peter C Black Journal: J Urol Date: 2014-06-10 Impact factor: 7.450
Authors: Jessica Dai; Andrew Leone; Leonard Mermel; Kathleen Hwang; Gyan Pareek; Stephen Schiff; Dragan Golijanin; Joseph F Renzulli Journal: Urology Date: 2014-11-20 Impact factor: 2.649
Authors: Michael A Liss; Alexandra Chang; Rosanne Santos; Amy Nakama-Peeples; Ellena M Peterson; Kathryn Osann; John Billimek; Richard J Szabo; Atreya Dash Journal: J Urol Date: 2011-02-22 Impact factor: 7.450
Authors: Chao Qi; Michael Malczynski; Anthony J Schaeffer; Grace Barajas; Robert B Nadler; Marc H Scheetz; Teresa R Zembower Journal: J Urol Date: 2013-05-30 Impact factor: 7.450
Authors: Ahmed M Elshal; Ahmed M Atwa; Ahmed R El-Nahas; Mohamed A El-Ghar; Asaad Gaber; Essam Elsawy; Abdelwahab Hashem; Yasser Farag; Hashim Farg; Ali Elsorougy; Mohamed Fouda; Hossam Nabeeh; Ahmed Mosbah Journal: World J Urol Date: 2018-05-07 Impact factor: 4.226
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: 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
Authors: Teresa R Zembower; Kelly M Maxwell; Robert B Nadler; John Cashy; Marc H Scheetz; Chao Qi; Anthony J Schaeffer Journal: BMC Infect Dis Date: 2017-06-07 Impact factor: 3.090