Cargando…
Introduction of surgical site surveillance post transrectal ultrasound (TRUS) guided prostate biopsy and the impact on infection rates
BACKGROUND: Transrectal ultrasound (TRUS)-guided prostate biopsy is associated with infection rates between 0.3 % and 3.2%. Infectious complications include urinary tract infection, prostatitis, bacteraemia and sepsis. Surgical site surveillance in this patient cohort is becoming increasingly import...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Elsevier
2022
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9789349/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36573091 http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.infpip.2022.100247 |
_version_ | 1784858933224013824 |
---|---|
author | Lenihan, Cian Daly, Emma Bernard, Margaret Murphy, Catriona Lauhoff, Sandra Power, Margaret Lanigan, Dermot Ryan, Peter Murphy, Olive Fraher, Marianne |
author_facet | Lenihan, Cian Daly, Emma Bernard, Margaret Murphy, Catriona Lauhoff, Sandra Power, Margaret Lanigan, Dermot Ryan, Peter Murphy, Olive Fraher, Marianne |
author_sort | Lenihan, Cian |
collection | PubMed |
description | BACKGROUND: Transrectal ultrasound (TRUS)-guided prostate biopsy is associated with infection rates between 0.3 % and 3.2%. Infectious complications include urinary tract infection, prostatitis, bacteraemia and sepsis. Surgical site surveillance in this patient cohort is becoming increasingly important given global increases in antimicrobial resistance. METHODS: Surgical site surveillance for patients undergoing TRUS biopsies was introduced in our hospital in 2017. All patients had a risk assessment form completed to assess for carriage or risk of carriage of multi-drug resistant organisms. An intense analysis was completed on any patient who developed an infection post-TRUS biopsy. Data was fed back on a quarterly basis to a multi-disciplinary working group. Members of this group include a Consultant Microbiologist, Infection Prevention and Control Nurse, Consultant Urologist, Antimicrobial Pharmacists and Clinical Nurse Ward Managers. RESULTS: 784 TRUS-guided biopsy of the prostate procedures were performed between January 1 st 2017 and the end of the third quarter, 2021. The rate of infection post-TRUS was 2.7% in 2017, 3.4% in 2018 and 3.2% in 2019. This improved to 0% in 2020 and 0.8% in the first three quarters of 2021. CONCLUSIONS: Several interventions were introduced resulting in a sustained reduction in infection rates in this cohort. These include changing the choice of surgical antibiotic prophylaxis, improvement in the timing of antibiotic prophylaxis and scheduling of other urology procedures. The introduction of surgical site surveillance and multi-disciplinary input has demonstrated a reduction in infection rates post TRUS biopsy. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-9789349 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2022 |
publisher | Elsevier |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-97893492022-12-25 Introduction of surgical site surveillance post transrectal ultrasound (TRUS) guided prostate biopsy and the impact on infection rates Lenihan, Cian Daly, Emma Bernard, Margaret Murphy, Catriona Lauhoff, Sandra Power, Margaret Lanigan, Dermot Ryan, Peter Murphy, Olive Fraher, Marianne Infect Prev Pract Short Report BACKGROUND: Transrectal ultrasound (TRUS)-guided prostate biopsy is associated with infection rates between 0.3 % and 3.2%. Infectious complications include urinary tract infection, prostatitis, bacteraemia and sepsis. Surgical site surveillance in this patient cohort is becoming increasingly important given global increases in antimicrobial resistance. METHODS: Surgical site surveillance for patients undergoing TRUS biopsies was introduced in our hospital in 2017. All patients had a risk assessment form completed to assess for carriage or risk of carriage of multi-drug resistant organisms. An intense analysis was completed on any patient who developed an infection post-TRUS biopsy. Data was fed back on a quarterly basis to a multi-disciplinary working group. Members of this group include a Consultant Microbiologist, Infection Prevention and Control Nurse, Consultant Urologist, Antimicrobial Pharmacists and Clinical Nurse Ward Managers. RESULTS: 784 TRUS-guided biopsy of the prostate procedures were performed between January 1 st 2017 and the end of the third quarter, 2021. The rate of infection post-TRUS was 2.7% in 2017, 3.4% in 2018 and 3.2% in 2019. This improved to 0% in 2020 and 0.8% in the first three quarters of 2021. CONCLUSIONS: Several interventions were introduced resulting in a sustained reduction in infection rates in this cohort. These include changing the choice of surgical antibiotic prophylaxis, improvement in the timing of antibiotic prophylaxis and scheduling of other urology procedures. The introduction of surgical site surveillance and multi-disciplinary input has demonstrated a reduction in infection rates post TRUS biopsy. Elsevier 2022-09-03 /pmc/articles/PMC9789349/ /pubmed/36573091 http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.infpip.2022.100247 Text en © 2022 The Authors https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/). |
spellingShingle | Short Report Lenihan, Cian Daly, Emma Bernard, Margaret Murphy, Catriona Lauhoff, Sandra Power, Margaret Lanigan, Dermot Ryan, Peter Murphy, Olive Fraher, Marianne Introduction of surgical site surveillance post transrectal ultrasound (TRUS) guided prostate biopsy and the impact on infection rates |
title | Introduction of surgical site surveillance post transrectal ultrasound (TRUS) guided prostate biopsy and the impact on infection rates |
title_full | Introduction of surgical site surveillance post transrectal ultrasound (TRUS) guided prostate biopsy and the impact on infection rates |
title_fullStr | Introduction of surgical site surveillance post transrectal ultrasound (TRUS) guided prostate biopsy and the impact on infection rates |
title_full_unstemmed | Introduction of surgical site surveillance post transrectal ultrasound (TRUS) guided prostate biopsy and the impact on infection rates |
title_short | Introduction of surgical site surveillance post transrectal ultrasound (TRUS) guided prostate biopsy and the impact on infection rates |
title_sort | introduction of surgical site surveillance post transrectal ultrasound (trus) guided prostate biopsy and the impact on infection rates |
topic | Short Report |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9789349/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36573091 http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.infpip.2022.100247 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT lenihancian introductionofsurgicalsitesurveillanceposttransrectalultrasoundtrusguidedprostatebiopsyandtheimpactoninfectionrates AT dalyemma introductionofsurgicalsitesurveillanceposttransrectalultrasoundtrusguidedprostatebiopsyandtheimpactoninfectionrates AT bernardmargaret introductionofsurgicalsitesurveillanceposttransrectalultrasoundtrusguidedprostatebiopsyandtheimpactoninfectionrates AT murphycatriona introductionofsurgicalsitesurveillanceposttransrectalultrasoundtrusguidedprostatebiopsyandtheimpactoninfectionrates AT lauhoffsandra introductionofsurgicalsitesurveillanceposttransrectalultrasoundtrusguidedprostatebiopsyandtheimpactoninfectionrates AT powermargaret introductionofsurgicalsitesurveillanceposttransrectalultrasoundtrusguidedprostatebiopsyandtheimpactoninfectionrates AT lanigandermot introductionofsurgicalsitesurveillanceposttransrectalultrasoundtrusguidedprostatebiopsyandtheimpactoninfectionrates AT ryanpeter introductionofsurgicalsitesurveillanceposttransrectalultrasoundtrusguidedprostatebiopsyandtheimpactoninfectionrates AT murphyolive introductionofsurgicalsitesurveillanceposttransrectalultrasoundtrusguidedprostatebiopsyandtheimpactoninfectionrates AT frahermarianne introductionofsurgicalsitesurveillanceposttransrectalultrasoundtrusguidedprostatebiopsyandtheimpactoninfectionrates |