An evaluation of antimicrobial prophylaxis for transrectal prostate biopsies: A potential stewardship target.

BACKGROUND: Transrectal prostate biopsy (TRPB) is a common procedure used to obtain a prostate biopsy. Although generally safe, complications may occur including infection. Preprocedural antimicrobial prophylaxis is recommended to minimize risk of subsequent infection. METHODS: This study is a retrospective chart review via the computerized patient record system from January 1, 2018 to February 28, 2022. The study included patients who underwent a TRPB at the Western New York, Syracuse, or Albany Stratton Veterans Affairs Healthcare Systems. RESULTS: This study included a total of 932 patients who underwent TRPB. Postoperative infection occurred in 3.2% (n = 30) of patients within 14days of the TRPB. Of the 30 patients who developed an infection, 30% (n = 9) resulted in bacteremia. For the 932 patients evaluated, 24 different antibiotic regimens were used, none of which followed guideline recommendations. None of the regimens were found to have an impact on rates of subsequent infection. CONCLUSIONS: The results of this study suggest a need for guideline adherence. There was no benefit to using the guideline-discordant regimens as they were not associated with a decreased risk of infection, and in many cases exposed patients to unnecessarily broad and prolonged antibiotic regimens.

Comparison of Higher-Than-Standard to D-Dimer Driven Thromboprophylaxis in Hospitalized Patients With COVID-19.

Introduction: Coronavirus disease 2019 is a global health threat often accompanied with coagulopathy. Despite use of thromboprophylaxis in this population, thrombotic event rates are high. Materials and methods: This was a multicenter, retrospective cohort study comparing the safety and effectiveness of thromboprophylaxis strategies at 2 institutions in hospitalized patients with coronavirus disease 2019. Regimen A utilized a higher-than-standard thromboprophylaxis dosage and Regimen B received full-dose anticoagulation for any D-dimer 3 mcg/mL or greater and prophylactic for less than 3 mcg/mL. The primary outcome compared the rate of thrombotic events between treatment groups. Secondary endpoints compared rates of major or clinically relevant non-major bleeding as well as the proportion of patients in each group experiencing thrombotic events within 30 days of discharge. Results: One-hundred fifty-three patients were included in the analysis, 64 receiving Regimen A and 89 receiving Regimen B. Seven (4.6%) thrombotic events occurred, 3 (4.7%) in patients receiving Regimen A, and 4 (4.5%) in Regimen B (P = 1.0). Twelve patients (13.5%) receiving Regimen B had a bleeding event versus 2 (3.1%) in Regimen A (P = .04), half of which were major in each group. All patients who bled in either treatment group were receiving mechanical ventilation, and 12 of 14 were receiving full-dose anticoagulation. One patient receiving Regimen A was readmitted with a pulmonary embolism. Conclusions: In this study, the thromboprophylactic regimen impacted bleeding, but no significant difference was seen with thrombotic outcomes. Almost all patients who experienced a bleed were mechanically ventilated and receiving full-dose anticoagulation. The use of full-dose anticoagulation should be cautioned in this population without an additional indication.