RESUMEN
In this study we treated 340 patients with renal and ureteric stones. They all underwent ESWL with the HM-4 lithotriptor. The patients were divided into two groups, the first one including 250 patients and the second 90. The first group consisted of patients with sterile urine prior to ESWL. These patients did not receive any antibiotic prophylaxis, while 5.2% of them developed infectious problems which were followed by significant bacteriuria in only 2% of the cases. The 90 patients of the second group had urinary tract infection on the preoperative cultures and received antibiotic treatment. Of these patients 27.8% developed infectious problems which were followed by significant bacteriuria in 21.1% of the cases. Evaluating the above results, we estimate that the administration of prophylactic antibiotics in the case of patients with sterile urine before ESWL is not required while it may prove to be useful in the case of patients with urinary tract infection prior to ESWL.
Asunto(s)
Profilaxis Antibiótica , Cálculos Renales/terapia , Litotricia , Cálculos Ureterales/terapia , Infecciones Urinarias/prevención & control , Adulto , Anciano , Femenino , Humanos , Incidencia , Litotricia/efectos adversos , Masculino , Persona de Mediana Edad , Resultado del Tratamiento , Infecciones Urinarias/epidemiología , Infecciones Urinarias/etiología , Orina/microbiologíaRESUMEN
Prostatic intraepithelial neoplasia (PIN) is considered a premalignant lesion of the prostate. It is often encountered in prostate needle biopsy in cases where no cancer is identified. In order to evaluate its importance 25 patients with PIN in a former prostate needle biopsy underwent a second ultrasound guided needle biopsy. The first biopsy was performed in all patients as a result of positive DRE. In 13 patients (52%), prostate cancer was identified in the second specimen. All presented with high or intermediate grade PIN in the first biopsy. PSA values were compared with PIN grade and cancer presentation in the second biopsy, although no statistically significant difference was proven. In conclusion, when PIN is discovered in prostate needle biopsy in patients with positive DRE, a second biopsy has to be performed in order to exclude the possibility of a prostate carcinoma.