Postoperative care in hypospadias. Common practices and evidence available. / Cuidados postoperatorios en el hipospadias. Prácticas habituales y evidencia disponible.

INTRODUCTION: There are many alternatives available regarding postoperative care in hypospadias surgery. The objective of this study was to assess the current care situation in our environment and to review the evidence available for pediatric surgeons who conduct this procedure. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A survey regarding the main aspects of hypospadias postoperative care was created and distributed to pediatric surgeons. In addition, the evidence currently published in this field was reviewed. RESULTS: A total of 46 replies were achieved. 100% of the surgeons leave in place a probe or stent, and more than 80% remove it after 5 or 7 days. 87.8% of the respondents use a double diaper, but only 65.2% discharge patients early in the postoperative period. 60.9% prescribe antibiotic prophylaxis for as long as the probe remains in place, and 34.8% use full-dose antibiotic therapy. DISCUSSION: There was a general consensus regarding urethroplasty guiding and the use of compression dressings among the pediatric surgeons surveyed. However, more discrepancies were found in the use of antibiotic therapy and early discharge. The currently available evidence and international practice suggest using a probe with double diaper and early discharge, with postoperative antibiotics being limited. In the absence of clear evidence for a specific care type, the patient's experience could be used to choose the best postoperative protocol on an individual basis.

INTRODUCCION: Existen numerosas alternativas en lo que respecta a los cuidados postoperatorios en la cirugía de hipospadias. El objetivo de este estudio es evaluar la situación actual de estos cuidados en nuestro medio y revisar la evidencia existente al respecto para cirujanos pediátricos que realizan este tipo de intervenciones. MATERIAL Y METODOS: Hemos elaborado y distribuido una encuesta que recoge los principales puntos en el cuidado postoperatorio del hipospadias dirigida a cirujanos pediátricos. Se ha realizado revisión de la evidencia actual publicada al respecto en la especialidad. RESULTADOS: Hemos obtenido un total de 46 respuestas. El 100% de los cirujanos dejan algún tipo de sonda o stent y más del 80% están de acuerdo en retirarlo tras 5 o 7 días. El 87,8% de los encuestados utiliza el doble pañal, pero solo el 65,2% da alta precoz en el postoperatorio. Un 60,9% pauta profilaxis antibiótica mientras dure el sondaje y un 34,8% antibioterapia a dosis plenas. DISCUSION: Existe consenso general respecto a la tutorización de la uretroplastia y el uso de apósito compresivo entre los cirujanos pediátricos encuestados. Se detectan más discrepancias en el uso de antibioterapia y el alta precoz. La evidencia actual y la práctica a nivel internacional apunta hacia el uso de la sonda a doble pañal con alta precoz y la limitación del uso de antibióticos postoperatorios. En ausencia de clara evidencia que favorezca un tipo de cuidado u otro, la experiencia del paciente podría ser utilizada para elegir el mejor protocolo postoperatorio individualizado.

Surgical Antimicrobial Prophylaxis Compliance in Turkey: Data from the Prospective, Observational, Multicenter Survey Including 7,978 Surgical Patients.

Background: Surgical antimicrobial prophylaxis (SAP) is the peri-operative administration of antimicrobial agents. Compliance rates vary worldwide from 15% to 84.3%, with studies in Turkey not exceeding 35%. The aim of this multicenter study was to determine the rate of appropriate antibiotic class, timing, and duration as well as discharge prescriptions in Turkey. Thus, we aimed to determine the rate of full compliance with SAP procedures in our country Patients and Methods: This multicenter, prospective, observational, descriptive study was conducted in 47 hospitals from 28 provinces in seven different regions of Turkey. Patients over 18 years of age in all surgical units between June 6, 2022, and June 10, 2022, were included in the study. Results: Of the 7,978 patients included in the study, 332 were excluded from further analyses because of pre-existing infection, and SAP compliance analyses were performed on the remaining 7,646 cases. The antibiotic most commonly used for SAP was cefazolin (n = 4,701; 61.5%), followed by third-generation cephalosporins (n = 596; 7.8%). The most common time to start SAP was within 30 minutes before surgery (n = 2,252; 32.5%), followed by 30 to 60 minutes before surgery (n = 1,638; 23.6%). Surgical antimicrobial prophylaxis duration was <24 hours in 3,516 (50.7%) patients and prolonged until discharge in 1,505 (21.7%) patients. Finally, the actual proportion of patients compliant with SAP was 19% (n = 1,452) after omitting 4,458 (58.3%) patients who were prescribed oral antibiotic agents at discharge as part of a prolonged SAP. Conclusions: Surgical antimicrobial prophylaxis compliance rates are still very low in Turkey. Prolonged duration of SAP and especially high rate of antibiotic prescription at discharge are the main reasons for non-compliance with SAP.

Contribution of the patient microbiome to surgical site infection and antibiotic prophylaxis failure in spine surgery.

Despite modern antiseptic techniques, surgical site infection (SSI) remains a leading complication of surgery. However, the origins of SSI and the high rates of antimicrobial resistance observed in these infections are poorly understood. Using instrumented spine surgery as a model of clean (class I) skin incision, we prospectively sampled preoperative microbiomes and postoperative SSI isolates in a cohort of 204 patients. Combining multiple forms of genomic analysis, we correlated the identity, anatomic distribution, and antimicrobial resistance profiles of SSI pathogens with those of preoperative strains obtained from the patient skin microbiome. We found that 86% of SSIs, comprising a broad range of bacterial species, originated endogenously from preoperative strains, with no evidence of common source infection among a superset of 1610 patients. Most SSI isolates (59%) were resistant to the prophylactic antibiotic administered during surgery, and their resistance phenotypes correlated with the patient's preoperative resistome (P = 0.0002). These findings indicate the need for SSI prevention strategies tailored to the preoperative microbiome and resistome present in individual patients.

Recent Insights Into Native Valve Infective Endocarditis: JACC Focus Seminar 4/4.

This focused review highlights the latest issues in native valve infective endocarditis. Native valve disease moderately increases the risk of developing infective endocarditis. In 2023, new diagnostic criteria were published by the Duke-International Society of Cardiovascular Infectious Diseases group. New pathogens were designated as typical, and findings on computed tomography imaging were included as diagnostic criteria. It is now recognized that a multidisciplinary approach to care is vital, and the role of an "endocarditis team" is highlighted. Recent studies have suggested that a transition from intravenous to oral antibiotics in selected patients may be reasonable, and the role of long-acting antibiotics is discussed. It is also now clear that an aggressive surgical approach can be life-saving in some patients. Finally, results of several recent studies have suggested there is an association between dental and other invasive procedures and an increased risk of developing infective endocarditis. Moreover, data indicate that antibiotic prophylaxis may be effective in some scenarios.

Estrategias de prevención y tratamiento de la infección por SARS-CoV-2 (Severe Acute Respiratory Coronavirus 2) en pacientes con enfermedad renal crónica: revisión de la literatura / Strategies for prevention and treatment of SARS-CoV-2 infection in patients with chronic kidney disease: Literature review

La COVID-19 ha demostrado ser especialmente agresiva con los pacientes con enfermedad renal crónica (ERC). La menor tasa de respuesta inmunológica y la mayor facilidad para la progresión a formas graves de enfermedad ha propiciado este hecho, que se ha mantenido en la era posvacunal de la pandemia. Paradójicamente, la ERC ha sido excluida de la mayoría de los ensayos clínicos de las principales herramientas terapéuticas desarrolladas frente a SARS-CoV-2. Sin embargo, se ha ido reuniendo experiencia de uso de estos fármacos en distintos estadios de la ERC que avala su uso con garantías de eficacia y seguridad. El objetivo de esta revisión es reunir todas las indicaciones de tratamiento frente a la COVID-19 en los distintos estadios de la enfermedad adaptadas a la ERC en sus distintas fases, incluyendo el tratamiento sustitutivo renal.(AU)

COVID-19 has proven to be particularly aggressive in patients with chronic kidney disease (CKD). The lower immune response rate and the greater susceptibility to progress to severe forms of the disease have contributed to this phenomenon, which has persisted in the post-vaccination era of the pandemic. Paradoxically, CKD has been excluded from most clinical trials of the main therapeutic tools developed against SARS-CoV-2. However, experience in the use of these drugs has been accumulating in different stages of CKD, supporting their use with guarantees of efficacy and safety. The objective of this review is to gather all treatment indications for COVID-19 in the different phases of the disease, tailored to CKD in its various stages, including renal replacement therapy.(AU)

Cuidados postoperatorios en el hipospadias. Prácticas habituales y evidencia disponible / Postoperative care in hypospadias: common practices and evidence available

Introducción: Existen numerosas alternativas en lo que respecta alos cuidados postoperatorios en la cirugía de hipospadias. El objetivo deeste estudio es evaluar la situación actual de estos cuidados en nuestromedio y revisar la evidencia existente al respecto para cirujanos pediátricos que realizan este tipo de intervenciones. Material y métodos: Hemos elaborado y distribuido una encuestaque recoge los principales puntos en el cuidado postoperatorio del hipospadias dirigida a cirujanos pediátricos. Se ha realizado revisión dela evidencia actual publicada al respecto en la especialidad.Resultados: Hemos obtenido un total de 46 respuestas. El 100% delos cirujanos dejan algún tipo de sonda o stent y más del 80% están deacuerdo en retirarlo tras 5 o 7 días. El 87,8% de los encuestados utilizael doble pañal, pero solo el 65,2% da alta precoz en el postoperatorio.Un 60,9% pauta profilaxis antibiótica mientras dure el sondaje y un34,8% antibioterapia a dosis plenas. Discusión: Existe consenso general respecto a la tutorización de lauretroplastia y el uso de apósito compresivo entre los cirujanos pediátricos encuestados. Se detectan más discrepancias en el uso de antibioterapia y el alta precoz. La evidencia actual y la práctica a nivel internacional apunta hacia el uso de la sonda a doble pañal con alta precozy la limitación del uso de antibióticos postoperatorios. En ausencia declara evidencia que favorezca un tipo de cuidado u otro, la experienciadel paciente podría ser utilizada para elegir el mejor protocolo postoperatorio individualizado.(AU)

Introduction: There are many alternatives available regarding postoperative care in hypospadias surgery. The objective of this study wasto assess the current care situation in our environment and to review theevidence available for pediatric surgeons who conduct this procedure. Materials and methods. A survey regarding the main aspects ofhypospadias postoperative care was created and distributed to pediatricsurgeons. In addition, the evidence currently published in this field wasreviewed. Results: A total of 46 replies were achieved. 100% of the surgeonsleave in place a probe or stent, and more than 80% remove it after 5 or7 days. 87.8% of the respondents use a double diaper, but only 65.2%discharge patients early in the postoperative period. 60.9% prescribeantibiotic prophylaxis for as long as the probe remains in place, and34.8% use full-dose antibiotic therapy. Discussion: There was a general consensus regarding urethroplastyguiding and the use of compression dressings among the pediatric surgeons surveyed. However, more discrepancies were found in the use ofantibiotic therapy and early discharge. The currently available evidenceand international practice suggest using a probe with double diaperand early discharge, with postoperative antibiotics being limited. Inthe absence of clear evidence for a specific care type, the patient’sexperience could be used to choose the best postoperative protocol onan individual basis.(AU)

Prevención de infecciones asociadas a cuidados de la salud en pacientes quemados / Prevention of healthcare-associated Infections in burn patients

Las infecciones asociadas a cuidados de la salud (IACS) son una de las complicaciones más importantes que presentan los pacientes gran quemados. Aumentan su morbimortalidad, la duración de su estadía, el consumo de antimicrobianos y los costos hospitalarios. Las tasas reportadas de IACS son muy variables entre los distintos países y centros de atención.El ánimo de esta publicación es brindar el material necesa-rio y actualizado de las medidas de control de infecciones que se deben implementar en la atención de los quemados ya que no es fácil disponer de información sobre este tema.En la presente revisión se analizaron estudios de distin-tas poblaciones, adultos y niños, con diferentes tipos que-maduras y diversos lugares de atención. Se utilizó como material de referencia las recomendaciones vigentes de la Sociedad Internacional de injurias por Quemaduras (ISBI, por su sigla inglés) y se adicionaron publicaciones y expe-riencias de grupos de trabajo local e internacional referen-tes en el tema.Se describen cinco tipos de medidas de control y preven-ción de IACS: medidas generales, medidas de higiene am-biental, prevención de la infección de los lechos de las que-maduras, profilaxis antibiótica y medidas de prevención de neumonía, infecciones asociadas a catéteres vasculares y vesicales en quemados. Es esencial implementar un enfoque proactivo y multidisci-plinario del control de infecciones en la atención de estos pacientes, generando recomendaciones adaptadas a la realidad de cada centro de salud, destinadas a disminuir las transmisión cruzada de microorganismos, utilizar los antimicrobianos tópicos y sistémicos en forma adecuada, disminuir la multirresistencia, reducir las IACS y su mor-talidad

Healthcare-associated infections (HAIs) are one of the most important complications of severe burn patients. They increase their morbidity and mortality, length of stay, antimicrobial consumption, and hospital costs. Re-ported rates of IACS vary widely across countries and care settings.The purpose of this publication is to provide the nec-essary and up-to-date material on the infection control measures that should be implemented in the care of burn patients, since it is not easy to have information on this subject.In this review, we analysed studies of different popula-tions, adults and children, with different types of burns and different places of care. The current recommenda-tions of the International Society of Burn Injuries (ISBI) were used as reference material, and publications and experiences of local and international working groups on the subject were added. Five types of IACS control and prevention measures are described: General mea-sures, Environmental hygiene measures, Prevention of infection of burn injuries, Antibiotic prophylaxis and pre-vention measures for pneumonia, infections associated with vascular and bladder catheters in burn patients.Conclusion: It is essential to implement a proactive and multidisciplinary approach to infection control in the care of these patients, generating recommendations adapted to the reality of each health center, aimed at reducing cross-transmission of microorganisms, using typical and systemic antimicrobials appropriately, reduc-ing multiresistance, reducing HAIs and their mortality

Antimicrobial prophylaxis in companion animal surgery: A scoping review for European Network for Optimization of Antimicrobial Therapy (ENOVAT) guidelines.

Surgical antimicrobial prophylaxis (SAP) is widely used to reduce the risk of surgical site infections (SSI), but there is uncertainty as to what the proportion of SSI reduction is. Therefore, it is difficult for surgeons to properly weigh the costs, risks and benefits for individual patients when deciding on the use of SAP, making it challenging to promote antimicrobial stewardship in primary practice settings. The objective of this study was to map the veterinary evidence focused on assessing the effect of SAP on SSI development and in order to identify surgical procedures with some research evidence and possible knowledge gaps. In October 2021 and December 2022, Scopus, CAB Abstracts, Web of Science Core Collection, Embase and MEDLINE were systematically searched. Double blinded screening of records was performed to identify studies in companion animals that reported on the use of SAP and SSI rates. Comparative data were available from 34 out of 39123 records screened including: eight randomised controlled trials (RCT), 23 cohort studies (seven prospective and 16 retrospective) and three retrospective case series representing 12476 dogs and cats in total. Extracted data described peri- or post-operative SAP in nine, and 25 studies, respectively. In the eight RCTs evaluating SAP in companion animals, surgical procedure coverage was skewed towards orthopaedic stifle surgeries in referral settings and there was large variation in SAP protocols, SSI definitions and follow-up periods. More standardized data collection and agreement of SSI definitions is needed to build stronger evidence for optimized patient care.

The hypotheses of oral disease-associated perioprosthetic joint infections to understand the role of oral health for endoprostheses - a narrative review.

AIMS: Periprosthetic infections are a severe complication, causing enormous morbidity. The role of oral diseases in the development of such infections has been discussed controversially, showing a large discrepancy between prevalence of oral foci and infections of endoprostheses (EP). This narrative review aimed in explaining and discussing two hypotheses for the occurrence of oral disease-associated EP infections. METHODS AND RESULTS: The hypotheses include two mechanisms. (1) In case of an acute exacerbation during the early healingperiod after EP surgery (first 3 months). (2) Coincidental in the context of late EP infections (after successful initial healing), where an initial periprosthetic inflammation can be colonized secondarily by oral microorganisms. In both settings,oral foci are not primarily causative for EP infection, but represent an important reservoir for EP colonization, while the immunological conditions (locally and systemically) are crucial for the onset of an EP infection. As potential consequence, patients with risk factors should be orally rehabilitated prior to EP surgery. Usage of antibiotic prophylaxis during the first 3 months after EP implantation (initial healing period) might be considered, but has no reliable evidence. To avoid morbidity of patients, radical dental clearance is unfavorable for the respective patients. CONCLUSION: Altogether, patients with EP should receive increased attention from the dental perspective alongside with dental preventive measures, because they show a high dental and periodontal treatment need.

Preoperative antibiotics reduce early surgical site infections after orthopaedic implant removal: a propensity-matched cohort study.

BACKGROUND: Implant removal in orthopaedics after fracture consolidation is a very common procedure but is still associated with a high rate of surgical site infection (SSI). Antibiotic prophylaxis is not recommended but advocated by some. AIM: To assess the efficacy of antibiotic prophylaxis in the prevention of early SSI following orthopaedic implant removal. METHODS: A monocentric retrospective cohort study was conducted. Patients who underwent orthopaedic implant removal procedures performed from 2016 to 2021 were included. A 1:1 propensity score matching function was used to create a cohort with matched baseline characteristics and associated risk factors for SSI. Inter-cohort comparison of the occurrence of SSI (superficial or deep) and revision surgery for SSI, after propensity score matching, was performed using the odds ratio to determine the effect of preoperative antibiotic prophylaxis. FINDINGS: In total, 965 distinct surgical procedures were included. Of these, 69 (7.15%) had an SSI, 24 (35.7%) of which required surgical revision; 214 procedures (22.18%) were performed under preoperative antibiotic prophylaxis. The propensity-matched cohort consisted of 396 procedures (198 with and without antibiotic prophylaxis). The SSI rates were 11.11% and 3.03%, respectively, in the control and antibiotic prophylaxis groups (odds ratio: 0.25; 95% confidence interval: 0.099; 0.63; P = 0.011). No difference was found for revision surgery. CONCLUSION: Preoperative administration of antibiotic prophylaxis considerably reduces the risk of SSI during the removal of an orthopaedic implant without increasing the risk of side-effects.

Is mechanical bowel preparation mandatory for elective colon surgery? A systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Growing evidence demonstrates minimal impact of mechanical bowel preparation (MBP) on reducing postoperative complications following elective colectomy. This study investigated the necessity of MBP prior to elective colonic resection. METHOD: A systematic literature review was conducted across PubMed, Ovid, and the Cochrane Library to identify studies comparing the effects of MBP with no preparation before elective colectomy, up until May 26, 2023. Surgical-related outcomes were compiled and subsequently analyzed. The primary outcomes included the incidence of anastomosis leakage (AL) and surgical site infection (SSI), analyzed using Review Manager Software (v 5.3). RESULTS: The analysis included 14 studies, comprising seven RCTs with 5146 participants. Demographic information was consistent across groups. No significant differences were found between the groups in terms of AL ((P = 0.43, OR = 1.16, 95% CI (0.80, 1.68), I2 = 0%) or SSI (P = 0.47, OR = 1.20, 95% CI (0.73, 1.96), I2 = 0%), nor were there significant differences in other outcomes. Subgroup analysis on oral antibiotic use showed no significant changes in results. However, in cases of right colectomy, the group without preparation showed a significantly lower incidence of SSI (P = 0.01, OR = 0.52, 95% CI (0.31, 0.86), I2 = 1%). No significant differences were found in other subgroup analyses. CONCLUSION: The current evidence robustly indicates that MBP before elective colectomy does not confer significant benefits in reducing postoperative complications. Therefore, it is justified to forego MBP prior to elective colectomy, irrespective of tumor location.

Effect of prophylactic use of cefazolin in caesarean section on postoperative infection: A meta-analysis.

Caesarean section rate is increasing and postoperative wound infection is a major health-threatening complication after caesarean section (CS). The aim of this study was to evaluate the efficacy of Cefazolin at different time for post-caesarean delivery. The aim of this study was to compare the use of Cefazolin at different times on infections after CS. The time of antibiotic use in CS can be divided into two groups: before skin incision (SI) and after cord clamping (CC). In this study, 268 relevant articles were found in the database, and finally, 10 articles were analysed. This study included a total of 5256 cases of caesarean section. The data on wound infections, endometritis, urinary tract infections and fever were analysed. Perform an analysis of the data using RevMan 5.3. The results showed that cefazolin before SI reduced wound infection compared to after CC (odds ratio [OR], 0.51; 95% CI: 0.37-0.69; p < 0.0001). Cefazolin prophylactically used before SI reduce endometritis after CS compared to after CC (OR, 0.52; 95% CI: 0.35-0.77; p = 0.001). There was no significant difference in urinary tract infections after CS between cefazolin prophylactically used before SI and after CC (OR, 0.80; 95% CI: 0.50-11.28; p = 0.35). There was no significant difference in fever after CS between the prophylactic use of cefazolin before SI and after CC (OR, 0.60; 95% CI: 0.26-11.43; p = 0.225). Cefazolin before SI reduces wound infection and endometritis after CS.

Optimizing practices to prevent urinary tract infection after cystoscopy and urodynamics in women: A quality improvement study.

OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study was to reduce the incidence of urinary tract infection (UTI) in women undergoing outpatient cystoscopy and/or urodynamic studies (UDS) at our centre by identifying and then altering modifiable risk factors through an analysis of incidence variability among physicians. METHODS: This was a quality improvement study involving adult women undergoing outpatient cystoscopy and/or UDS at an academic tertiary urogynecology practice. Prophylactic practices for cystoscopy/UDS were surveyed and division and physician-specific UTI rates following cystoscopy/UDS were established. In consultation with key stakeholders, this delineated change concepts based on associations between prophylactic practices and UTI incidence, which were then implemented while monitoring counterbalance measures. RESULTS: Two "Plan-Do-Study-Act-Cycles" were conducted whereby 212 and 210 women were recruited, respectively. Change concepts developed and implemented were: (1) to perform routine urine cultures at the time of these outpatient procedures, and (2) to withhold routine prophylactic antibiotics for outpatient cystoscopy/UDS, except in patients with signs of cystitis. There was no change in the incidence of early presenting UTI (9.0% vs. 9.2%, p = 0.680), but there were significantly fewer antibiotic-related adverse events reported (8.5% vs. 1.5%, p = 0.001). There was no significant change in the total incidence of UTI rates between cycles (7.8% vs. 5.6%, p = 0.649). CONCLUSIONS: No specific strategies to decrease the incidence of UTI following outpatient cystoscopy/UDS were identified, however, risk factor-specific antibiotic prophylaxis, as opposed to universal antibiotic prophylaxis, did not increase UTI incidence.

Antibiotic prophylaxis for leptospirosis.

BACKGROUND: Leptospirosis is a global zoonotic and waterborne disease caused by pathogenic Leptospira species. Antibiotics are used as a strategy for prevention of leptospirosis, in particular in travellers and high-risk groups. However, the clinical benefits are unknown, especially when considering possible treatment-associated adverse effects. This review assesses the use of antibiotic prophylaxis in leptospirosis and is an update of a previously published review in the Cochrane Library (2009, Issue 3). OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the benefits and harms of antibiotic prophylaxis for human leptospirosis. SEARCH METHODS: We identified randomised clinical trials through electronic searches of the Cochrane Hepato-Biliary Group Controlled Trials Register, CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, LILACS, Science Citation Index Expanded, and other resources. We searched online clinical trial registries to identify unpublished or ongoing trials. We checked reference lists of the retrieved studies for further trials. The last date of search was 17 April 2023. SELECTION CRITERIA: We included ⁠⁠randomised clinical trials of any trial design, assessing antibiotics for prevention of leptospirosis, and with no restrictions on age, sex, occupation, or comorbidity of trial participants. We looked for trials assessing antibiotics irrespective of route of administration, dosage, and schedule versus placebo or no intervention. We also included trials assessing antibiotics versus other antibiotics using these criteria, or the same antibiotic but with another dose or schedule. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: We followed Cochrane methodology. The primary outcomes were all-cause mortality, laboratory-confirmed leptospirosis regardless of the presence of an identified clinical syndrome (inclusive of asymptomatic cases), clinical diagnosis of leptospirosis regardless of the presence of laboratory confirmation, clinical diagnosis of leptospirosis confirmed by laboratory diagnosis (exclusive of asymptomatic cases), and serious adverse events. The secondary outcomes were quality of life and the proportion of people with non-serious adverse events. We assessed the risk of bias of the included trials using the RoB 2 tool and the certainty of evidence using GRADE. We presented dichotomous outcomes as risk ratios (RR) and continuous outcomes as mean difference (MD), with their 95% confidence intervals (CI). We used a random-effects model for our main analyses and the fixed-effect model for sensitivity analyses. Our primary outcome analyses included trial data at the longest follow-up. MAIN RESULTS: We identified five randomised clinical trials comprising 2593 participants that compared antibiotics (doxycycline, azithromycin, or penicillin) with placebo, or one antibiotic compared with another. Four trials assessed doxycycline with different durations, one trial assessed azithromycin, and one trial assessed penicillin. One trial had three intervention groups: doxycycline, azithromycin, and placebo. Three trials assessed pre-exposure prophylaxis, one trial assessed postexposure prophylaxis, and one did not report this clearly. Four trials recruited residents in endemic areas, and one trial recruited soldiers who experienced limited time exposure. The participants' ages in the included trials were 10 to 80 years. Follow-up ranged from one to three months. Antibiotics versus placebo Doxycycline compared with placebo may result in little to no difference in all-cause mortality (RR 0.15, 95% CI 0.01 to 2.83; 1 trial, 782 participants; low-certainty evidence). Prophylactic antibiotics may have little to no effect on laboratory-confirmed leptospirosis, but the evidence is very uncertain (RR 0.56, 95% CI 0.25 to 1.26; 5 trials, 2593 participants; very low-certainty evidence). Antibiotics may result in little to no difference in the clinical diagnosis of leptospirosis regardless of laboratory confirmation (RR 0.76, 95% CI 0.53 to 1.08; 4 trials, 1653 participants; low-certainty evidence) and the clinical diagnosis of leptospirosis with laboratory confirmation (RR 0.57, 95% CI 0.26 to 1.26; 4 trials, 1653 participants; low-certainty evidence). Antibiotics compared with placebo may increase non-serious adverse events, but the evidence is very uncertain (RR 10.13, 95% CI 2.40 to 42.71; 3 trials, 1909 participants; very low-certainty evidence). One antibiotic versus another antibiotic One trial assessed doxycycline versus azithromycin but did not report mortality. Compared to azithromycin, doxycycline may have little to no effect on laboratory-confirmed leptospirosis regardless of the presence of an identified clinical syndrome (RR 1.49, 95% CI 0.51 to 4.32; 1 trial, 137 participants), on the clinical diagnosis of leptospirosis regardless of the presence of laboratory confirmation (RR 4.18, 95% CI 0.94 to 18.66; 1 trial, 137 participants), on the clinical diagnosis of leptospirosis confirmed by laboratory diagnosis (RR 4.18, 95% CI 0.94 to 18.66; 1 trial, 137 participants), and on non-serious adverse events (RR 1.12, 95% CI 0.36 to 3.48; 1 trial, 137 participants), but the evidence is very uncertain. The certainty of evidence for all the outcomes was very low. None of the five included trials reported serious adverse events or assessed quality of life. One study is awaiting classification. Funding Four of the five trials included statements disclosing their funding/supporting sources, and the remaining trial did not include this. Three of the four trials that disclosed their supporting sources received the supply of trial drugs directly from the same pharmaceutical company, and the remaining trial received financial support from a governmental source. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: We do not know if antibiotics versus placebo or another antibiotic has little or have no effect on all-cause mortality or leptospirosis infection because the certainty of evidence is low or very low. We do not know if antibiotics versus placebo may increase the overall risk of non-serious adverse events because of very low-certainty evidence. We lack definitive rigorous data from randomised trials to support the use of antibiotics for the prophylaxis of leptospirosis infection. We lack trials reporting data on clinically relevant outcomes.

Postoperative antibiotic prophylaxis for percutaneous nephrolithotomy and risk of infection: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

PURPOSE: The aim of this study is to perform a high-quality meta-analysis using only randomized controlled trials (RCT) to better define the role of postoperative antibiotics in patients undergoing percutaneous nephrolithotomy (PCNL). MATERIALS AND METHODS: A literature search for RCTs in EMBASE, PubMed, and Web of Science up to May 2023 was conducted following the PICO framework: Population-adult patients who underwent PCNL; Intervention-postoperative antibiotic prophylaxis until nephrostomy tube withdrawal; Control-single dose of antibiotic during the induction of anesthesia; and Outcome-systemic inflammatory response syndrome (SIRS) or sepsis and fever after PCNL. The protocol was registered on the PROSPERO database (CRD42022361579). We calculated odds ratios (OR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI). A random-effects model was employed, and the alpha risk was defined as < 0.05. RESULTS: Seven articles, encompassing a total of 629 patients, were included in the analysis. The outcome of SIRS or sepsis was extracted from six of the included studies, while the outcome of postoperative fever was extracted from four studies. The analysis revealed no statistical association between the use of postoperative antibiotic prophylaxis until nephrostomy tube withdrawal and the occurrence of SIRS/sepsis (OR 1.236, 95% CI 0.731 - 2.089, p=0.429) or fever (OR 2.049, 95% CI 0.790 - 5.316, p=0.140). CONCLUSION: Our findings suggest that there is no benefit associated with the use of postoperative antibiotic prophylaxis until nephrostomy tube withdrawal in patients undergoing percutaneous nephrolithotomy (PCNL). We recommend that antibiotic prophylaxis should be administered only until the induction of anesthesia in PCNL.

Comparison of preoperative prophylaxis with povidone-iodine (5%) and moxifloxacin (0.5%) versus povidone-iodine (5%) alone: a prospective study from India.

PURPOSE: To compare the effect of povidone-iodine (PI) 5% and moxifloxacin 0.5% solutions versus PI 5% solution alone on the conjunctival bacterial flora. METHODOLOGY: This is a comparative study in which the study population comprised adult patients scheduled for elective small incision cataract surgery. The eye to be operated (control eye) received topical moxifloxacin 0.5% drops 4 times, 1 day before surgery and 2 applications on the day of surgery. As placebo, the contralateral eye (study eye) received saline 0.90% drops as per the same schedule. Before surgery, on table, PI 5% was instilled in the conjunctival sac in both eyes. Conjunctival swabs were taken before initiation of therapy and 3 min after instillation of PI. RESULTS: Of the 96 pairs of eyes included in the study, conjunctival cultures before prophylaxis were similar between the two groups (p = 0.31), with 54 samples (56%) of the study group and 49 (51%) of the control group showing growth. With positive cultures reducing to 7 (14%) in the study group and 8 (16%) in the control group, both the prophylaxis methods appeared equally efficacious (p = 0.79). Both the groups showed a significant reduction in positive cultures following prophylaxis (p < 0.0001). CONCLUSIONS: PI 5% alone as preoperative prophylaxis was as effective as its combination therapy with moxifloxacin 0.5% in the reduction in conjunctival bacterial colonization.