Cargando…
Comparison of amikacin with fosfomycin as an add-on to ciprofloxacin for antibiotic prophylaxis in transrectal prostate biopsy: A single-center retrospective study
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 r...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
The Korean Urological Association
2022
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9643727/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36347556 http://dx.doi.org/10.4111/icu.20220147 |
_version_ | 1784826580552384512 |
---|---|
author | Yu, Seong Hyeon Jung, Seung Il Ryu, Ji Won Kim, Myung Soo Chung, Ho Seok Hwang, Eu Chang Kwon, Dong Deuk |
author_facet | Yu, Seong Hyeon Jung, Seung Il Ryu, Ji Won Kim, Myung Soo Chung, Ho Seok Hwang, Eu Chang Kwon, Dong Deuk |
author_sort | Yu, Seong Hyeon |
collection | PubMed |
description | 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. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-9643727 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2022 |
publisher | The Korean Urological Association |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-96437272022-11-18 Comparison of amikacin with fosfomycin as an add-on to ciprofloxacin for antibiotic prophylaxis in transrectal prostate biopsy: A single-center retrospective study Yu, Seong Hyeon Jung, Seung Il Ryu, Ji Won Kim, Myung Soo Chung, Ho Seok Hwang, Eu Chang Kwon, Dong Deuk Investig Clin Urol Original Article 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. The Korean Urological Association 2022-11 2022-09-20 /pmc/articles/PMC9643727/ /pubmed/36347556 http://dx.doi.org/10.4111/icu.20220147 Text en © The Korean Urological Association https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Non-Commercial License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0 (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/) ) which permits unrestricted non-commercial use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. |
spellingShingle | Original Article Yu, Seong Hyeon Jung, Seung Il Ryu, Ji Won Kim, Myung Soo Chung, Ho Seok Hwang, Eu Chang Kwon, Dong Deuk Comparison of amikacin with fosfomycin as an add-on to ciprofloxacin for antibiotic prophylaxis in transrectal prostate biopsy: A single-center retrospective study |
title | Comparison of amikacin with fosfomycin as an add-on to ciprofloxacin for antibiotic prophylaxis in transrectal prostate biopsy: A single-center retrospective study |
title_full | Comparison of amikacin with fosfomycin as an add-on to ciprofloxacin for antibiotic prophylaxis in transrectal prostate biopsy: A single-center retrospective study |
title_fullStr | Comparison of amikacin with fosfomycin as an add-on to ciprofloxacin for antibiotic prophylaxis in transrectal prostate biopsy: A single-center retrospective study |
title_full_unstemmed | Comparison of amikacin with fosfomycin as an add-on to ciprofloxacin for antibiotic prophylaxis in transrectal prostate biopsy: A single-center retrospective study |
title_short | Comparison of amikacin with fosfomycin as an add-on to ciprofloxacin for antibiotic prophylaxis in transrectal prostate biopsy: A single-center retrospective study |
title_sort | comparison of amikacin with fosfomycin as an add-on to ciprofloxacin for antibiotic prophylaxis in transrectal prostate biopsy: a single-center retrospective study |
topic | Original Article |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9643727/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36347556 http://dx.doi.org/10.4111/icu.20220147 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT yuseonghyeon comparisonofamikacinwithfosfomycinasanaddontociprofloxacinforantibioticprophylaxisintransrectalprostatebiopsyasinglecenterretrospectivestudy AT jungseungil comparisonofamikacinwithfosfomycinasanaddontociprofloxacinforantibioticprophylaxisintransrectalprostatebiopsyasinglecenterretrospectivestudy AT ryujiwon comparisonofamikacinwithfosfomycinasanaddontociprofloxacinforantibioticprophylaxisintransrectalprostatebiopsyasinglecenterretrospectivestudy AT kimmyungsoo comparisonofamikacinwithfosfomycinasanaddontociprofloxacinforantibioticprophylaxisintransrectalprostatebiopsyasinglecenterretrospectivestudy AT chunghoseok comparisonofamikacinwithfosfomycinasanaddontociprofloxacinforantibioticprophylaxisintransrectalprostatebiopsyasinglecenterretrospectivestudy AT hwangeuchang comparisonofamikacinwithfosfomycinasanaddontociprofloxacinforantibioticprophylaxisintransrectalprostatebiopsyasinglecenterretrospectivestudy AT kwondongdeuk comparisonofamikacinwithfosfomycinasanaddontociprofloxacinforantibioticprophylaxisintransrectalprostatebiopsyasinglecenterretrospectivestudy |