Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Antibiotic prophylaxis in urologic interventions: Who, when, where?
Marino, Filippo; Rossi, Francesco; Murri, Rita; Sacco, Emilio.
Afiliação
  • Marino F; Department of Urology, Fondazione Policlinico Universitario Agostino Gemelli IRCCS, Rome, Italy.
  • Rossi F; Università Cattolica Del Sacro Cuore, Rome, Italy.
  • Murri R; Department of Urology, Addenbrooke's Hospital, Cambridge University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, Cambridge, UK.
  • Sacco E; Department of Urology, Fondazione Policlinico Universitario Agostino Gemelli IRCCS, Rome, Italy.
Urologia ; 91(1): 11-25, 2024 Feb.
Article em En | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38288737
ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND:

Periprocedural prophylaxis in medicine encompasses the set of measures (physical, chemical, and pharmacological) used to reduce the risk of infection. Antibiotic prophylaxis (AP) refers to the administration of a short-term regimen of antibiotics shortly before a medical procedure to reduce the risk of infectious complications that can result from diagnostic and therapeutic interventions. The outspreading growth of multidrug-resistant bacterial species and changes in the bacterial local ecosystem have impeded the development of a unique scheme of AP in urology.

OBJECTIVES:

To review the literature and current guidelines regarding AP for urological diagnostic and therapeutic procedures, and to define agents, timing, and occasions when administering pharmacological prophylaxis. Secondly, according to current literature, to open new scenarios where AP can be useful or useless.

RESULTS:

Major gaps in evidence still exist in this field. AP appears useful in many invasive procedures and some sub-populations at risk of infectious complications. AP is not routinely recommended for urodynamic exams, diagnostic cystoscopy, and extracorporeal shock-wave lithotripsy. The available data regarding the use of AP during the transperineal prostate biopsy are still unclear; conversely, in the case of the transrectal approach AP is mandatory. AP is still considered the gold standard for the prevention of postoperative infective complications in the case of ureteroscopy, percutaneous nephrolithotomy, endoscopic resection of bladder tumor, endoscopic resection of the prostate, and prosthetic or major surgery.

CONCLUSION:

The review highlights the complexity of determining the appropriate candidates for AP, emphasizing the importance of considering patient-specific factors such as comorbidities, immunocompetence, and the nature of the urologic intervention. The evidence suggests that a one-size-fits-all approach may not be suitable, and a tailored strategy based on the specific procedure and patient characteristics is essential.
Assuntos
Palavras-chave

Texto completo: 1 Coleções: 01-internacional Temas: Geral Base de dados: MEDLINE Assunto principal: Procedimentos Cirúrgicos Urológicos / Antibioticoprofilaxia Tipo de estudo: Guideline Limite: Humans / Male Idioma: En Revista: Urologia Ano de publicação: 2024 Tipo de documento: Article País de afiliação: Itália

Texto completo: 1 Coleções: 01-internacional Temas: Geral Base de dados: MEDLINE Assunto principal: Procedimentos Cirúrgicos Urológicos / Antibioticoprofilaxia Tipo de estudo: Guideline Limite: Humans / Male Idioma: En Revista: Urologia Ano de publicação: 2024 Tipo de documento: Article País de afiliação: Itália