Controversies in orthopaedic oncology.

Chondrosarcoma is the second most common surgically treated primary bone sarcoma. Despite a large number of scientific papers in the literature, there is still significant controversy about diagnostics, treatment of the primary tumour, subtypes, and complications. Therefore, consensus on its day-to-day treatment decisions is needed. In January 2024, the Birmingham Orthopaedic Oncology Meeting (BOOM) attempted to gain global consensus from 300 delegates from over 50 countries. The meeting focused on these critical areas and aimed to generate consensus statements based on evidence amalgamation and expert opinion from diverse geographical regions. In parallel, periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) in oncological reconstructions poses unique challenges due to factors such as adjuvant treatments, large exposures, and the complexity of surgery. The meeting debated two-stage revisions, antibiotic prophylaxis, managing acute PJI in patients undergoing chemotherapy, and defining the best strategies for wound management and allograft reconstruction. The objectives of the meeting extended beyond resolving immediate controversies. It sought to foster global collaboration among specialists attending the meeting, and to encourage future research projects to address unsolved dilemmas. By highlighting areas of disagreement and promoting collaborative research endeavours, this initiative aims to enhance treatment standards and potentially improve outcomes for patients globally. This paper sets out some of the controversies and questions that were debated in the meeting.

Should we review our prophylaxis approach for increased antibiotic resistance in transrectal prostate biopsy?

INTRODUCTION: This study aims to show the bacteriologic picture of acute prostatitis and bacteremia caused by infective agent after transrectal ultrasound-guided prostate biopsy (TRUSBx) and to determine the resistance rates of the infections in patients undergoing transrectal biopsy and to guide prophylaxis approach before biopsy. METHODOLOGY: The retrospective data of 935 patients who underwent TRUSBx between January 2010 to January 2019 were reviewed. Pre-biopsy urine cultures and antimicrobial susceptibility were obtained. Subsequently, patients admitted to the hospital with any complaint after biopsy were examined for severe infection complications. RESULTS: Of the 430 (61.7%) patients who underwent urine culture before the procedure, 45 (10.5%) had growth; 30 (66.7%) of the growing microorganisms were Escherichia coli. Twenty (44.4%) of all Gram-negative agents in pre-biopsy urine culture were susceptible to quinolone. Post TRUSBx bacteremia was present in 18.2%, urinary system infection in 83.6%, and hospitalization in 61.8% of 55 patients who were admitted to the hospital. In the isolated gram-negative microorganisms, fluoroquinolones resistance in urinary system infections was seen in 40% and bacteremia was seen in 70% of the cases. ESBL-producing Gram-negative bacteria were determined in 40% of infections in blood and 38.5% of urinary system infections in the post biopsy period in the current study. CONCLUSIONS: These high antibiotic resistance rates suggest that we better review our pre-procedure prophylaxis approaches.

Prevention of infective endocarditis in at-risk patients: how should dentists proceed in 2024?

National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) guidelines are ambiguous over the need for patients at increased risk of infective endocarditis (IE) to receive antibiotic prophylaxis (AP) prior to invasive dental procedures (IDPs), and this has caused confusion for patients and dentists alike. Moreover, the current law on consent requires clinicians to ensure that patients are made aware of any material risk they might be exposed to by any proposed dental treatment and what can be done to ameliorate this risk, so that the patient can decide for themselves how they wish to proceed. The aim of this article is to provide dentists with the latest information on the IE-risk posed by IDPs to different patient populations (the general population and those defined as being at moderate or high risk of IE), and data on the effectiveness of AP in reducing the IE risk in these populations. This provides the information dentists need to facilitate the informed consent discussions they are legally required to have with patients at increased risk of IE about the risks posed by IDPs and how this can be minimised. The article also provides practical information and advice for dentists on how to manage patients at increased IE risk who present for dental treatment.

New evidence calls into question NICE's endocarditis prevention guidance.

In 2008, National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) guidelines recommended against the use of antibiotic prophylaxis (AP) before invasive dental procedures (IDPs) to prevent infective endocarditis (IE). They did so because of lack of AP efficacy evidence and adverse reaction concerns. Consequently, NICE concluded AP was not cost-effective and should not be recommended. In 2015, NICE reviewed its guidance and continued to recommend against AP. However, it subsequently changed its wording to 'antibiotic prophylaxis against infective endocarditis is not routinely recommended'. The lack of explanation of what constituted routinely (and not routinely), or how to manage non-routine patients, caused enormous confusion and NICE remained out of step with all major international guideline committees who continued to recommend AP for those at high risk.Since the 2015 guideline review, new data have confirmed an association between IDPs and subsequent IE and demonstrated AP efficacy in reducing IE risk following IDPs in high-risk patients. New evidence also shows that in high-risk patients, the IE risk following IDPs substantially exceeds any adverse reaction risk, and that AP is therefore highly cost-effective. Given the new evidence, a NICE guideline review would seem appropriate so that UK high-risk patients can receive the same protection afforded high-risk patients in the rest of the world.

Antibiotic impregnated catheters and intrathecal antibiotics for CSF shunt infection prevention in children undergoing low-risk CSF shunt surgery.

BACKGROUND: Cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) shunts allow children with hydrocephalus to survive and avoid brain injury (J Neurosurg 107:345-57, 2007; Childs Nerv Syst 12:192-9, 1996). The Hydrocephalus Clinical Research Network implemented non-randomized quality improvement protocols that were shown to decrease infection rates compared to pre-operative prophylactic intravenous antibiotics alone (standard care): initially with intrathecal (IT) antibiotics between 2007-2009 (J Neurosurg Pediatr 8:22-9, 2011), followed by antibiotic impregnated catheters (AIC) in 2012-2013 (J Neurosurg Pediatr 17:391-6, 2016). No large scale studies have compared infection prevention between the techniques in children. Our objectives were to compare the risk of infection following the use of IT antibiotics, AIC, and standard care during low-risk CSF shunt surgery (i.e., initial CSF shunt placement and revisions) in children. METHODS: A retrospective observational cohort study at 6 tertiary care children's hospitals was conducted using Pediatric Health Information System + (PHIS +) data augmented with manual chart review. The study population included children ≤ 18 years who underwent initial shunt placement between 01/2007 and 12/2012. Infection and subsequent CSF shunt surgery data were collected through 12/2015. Propensity score adjustment for regression analysis was developed based on site, procedure type, and year; surgeon was treated as a random effect. RESULTS: A total of 1723 children underwent initial shunt placement between 2007-2012, with 1371 subsequent shunt revisions and 138 shunt infections. Propensity adjusted regression demonstrated no statistically significant difference in odds of shunt infection between IT antibiotics (OR 1.22, 95% CI 0.82-1.81, p = 0.3) and AICs (OR 0.91, 95% CI 0.56-1.49, p = 0.7) compared to standard care. CONCLUSION: In a large, observational multicenter cohort, IT antibiotics and AICs do not confer a statistically significant risk reduction compared to standard care for pediatric patients undergoing low-risk (i.e., initial or revision) shunt surgeries.

Bacterial growth in patients with low back pain and Modic changes: protocol of a multicentre, case-control biopsy study.

INTRODUCTION: Bacterial infection and Modic changes (MCs) as causes of low back pain (LBP) are debated. Results diverged between two randomised controlled trials examining the effect of amoxicillin with and without clavulanic acid versus placebo on patients with chronic LBP (cLBP) and MCs. Previous biopsy studies have been criticised with regard to methods, few patients and controls, and insufficient measures to minimise perioperative contamination. In this study, we minimise contamination risk, include a control group and optimise statistical power. The main aim is to compare bacterial growth between patients with and without MCs. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: This multicentre, case-control study examines disc and vertebral body biopsies of patients with cLBP. Cases have MCs at the level of tissue sampling, controls do not. Previously operated patients are included as a subgroup. Tissue is sampled before antibiotic prophylaxis with separate instruments. We will apply microbiological methods and histology on biopsies, and predefine criteria for significant bacterial growth, possible contamination and no growth. Microbiologists, surgeons and pathologist are blinded to allocation of case or control. Primary analysis assesses significant growth in MC1 versus controls and MC2 versus controls separately. Bacterial disc growth in previously operated patients, patients with large MCs and growth from the vertebral body in the fusion group are all considered exploratory analyses. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: The Regional Committees for Medical and Health Research Ethics in Norway (REC South East, reference number 2015/697) has approved the study. Study participation requires written informed consent. The study is registered at ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT03406624). Results will be disseminated in peer-reviewed journals, scientific conferences and patient fora. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT03406624.

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)

Infection risk reduction with povidone-iodine rectal disinfection prior to transrectal prostate biopsy: an updated systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: To prevent infectious complications after transrectal ultrasound-guided prostate biopsy (TRUS-PB), some studies have investigated the efficacy of rectal disinfection using povidone-iodine (PI) and antibiotic prophylaxis (AP). OBJECTIVE: To summarize available data and compare the efficacy of rectal disinfection using PI with non-PI methods prior to TRUS-PB. EVIDENCE ACQUISITION: Three databases were queried through November 2023 for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) analyzing patients who underwent TRUS-PB. We compared the effectiveness of rectal disinfection between PI groups and non-PI groups with or without AP. The primary outcomes of interest were the rates of overall infectious complications, fever, and sepsis. Subgroups analyses were conducted to assess the differential outcomes in patients using fluoroquinolone groups compared to those using other antibiotics groups. EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS: We included ten RCTs in the meta-analyses. The overall rates of infectious complications were significantly lower when rectal disinfection with PI was performed (RR 0.56, 95% CI 0.42-0.74, p < 0.001). Compared to AP monotherapy, the combination of AP and PI was associated with significantly lower risk of infectious complications (RR 0.54, 95% CI 0.40-0.73, p < 0.001) and fever (RR 0.47, 95% CI 0.30-0.75, p = 0.001), but not with sepsis (RR 0.49, 95% CI 0.23-1.04, p = 0.06). The use of fluoroquinolone antibiotics was associated with a lower risk of infectious complications and fever compared to non-FQ antibiotics. CONCLUSION: Rectal disinfection with PI significantly reduces the rates of infectious complications and fever in patients undergoing TRUS-PB. However, this approach does not show a significant impact on reducing the rate of sepsis following the procedure.

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.

A Quality Improvement Project to Increase Compliance With a Facility Protocol on Surgical Antimicrobial Prophylaxis.

Surgical site infections (SSIs) contribute to negative outcomes for patients and health care organizations. Compliance with clinical practice guidelines likely can help prevent SSIs. An interdisciplinary team at a regional referral center in Michigan sought to reduce SSIs by improving compliance with the facility's preoperative antibiotic selection, dosing, timing, and redosing protocol. The interventions for the quality improvement project included adding the preprocedural antibiotics and doses to the master OR schedule; holding an education session for all preoperative nurses, intraoperative nurses, and anesthesia professionals; and posting a reference guide in the preoperative and intraoperative areas. Compliance with the facility's protocol for antibiotic selection, dosing, and timing significantly improved. However, SSI rates and compliance with redosing recommendations did not change significantly. The team decided to add the antibiotic order information to the master OR schedule permanently. The team plans to consider providing education sessions on administering preprocedural antibiotics outside the OR.

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.

Frequency of infections during rituximab treatment of autoimmune blistering diseases.

This study investigates the frequency of infections in autoimmune blistering disease (AIBD) patients treated with rituximab and evaluates the difference in infectious complications in patients on concomitant antibiotic and/or antiviral prophylaxis. The study retrospectively reviewed 43 AIBD patients who received rituximab over a five-year interval. The patients were categorized based on prophylaxis type (antibiotic, antiviral, or both) and concomitant immunosuppression status, which we defined as treatment with an immunosuppressive medication during the time frame they were given Rituximab. Our findings suggest that concomitant immunosuppression alongside rituximab did not significantly increase the risk of developing infectious complications compared to rituximab monotherapy. Results revealed that 34.4% of patients with concomitant immunosuppression had a secondary bacterial infection, defined as bacterial complications requiring hospitalization, consistent with prior studies. Moreover, antibiotic prophylaxis did not significantly reduce infection risk in patients on rituximab, with 45.1% of these patients experiencing bacterial complications. There was an absence of pneumocystis pneumonia in the study population. Despite the small sample size and limited timeline, this study suggests that antibiotic prophylaxis may not significantly mitigate the risk of infections in AIBD patients receiving rituximab, and the risk of infection with concomitant immunosuppression with rituximab requires additional investigation for definitive causal risk.

Regional antibiotic delivery for sternal wound infection prophylaxis a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.

Despite evidence suggesting the benefit of prophylactic regional antibiotic delivery (RAD) to sternal edges during cardiac surgery, it is seldom performed in clinical practice. The value of topical vancomycin and gentamicin for sternal wound infections (SWI) prophylaxis was further questioned by recent studies including randomized controlled trials (RCTs). The aim of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to comprehensively assess the safety and effectiveness of RAD to reduce the risk of SWI.We screened multiple databases for RCTs assessing the effectiveness of RAD (vancomycin, gentamicin) in SWI prophylaxis. Random effects meta-analysis was performed. The primary endpoint was any SWI; other wound complications were also analysed. Odds Ratios served as the primary statistical analyses. Trial sequential analysis (TSA) was performed.Thirteen RCTs (N = 7,719 patients) were included. The odds of any SWI were significantly reduced by over 50% with any RAD: OR (95%CIs): 0.49 (0.35-0.68); p < 0.001 and consistently reduced in vancomycin (0.34 [0.18-0.64]; p < 0.001) and gentamicin (0.58 [0.39-0.86]; p = 0.007) groups (psubgroup = 0.15). Similarly, RAD reduced the odds of SWI in diabetic and non-diabetic patients (0.46 [0.32-0.65]; p < 0.001 and 0.60 [0.44-0.83]; p = 0.002 respectively). Cumulative Z-curve passed the TSA-adjusted boundary for SWIs suggesting adequate power has been met and no further trials are needed. RAD significantly reduced deep (0.60 [0.43-0.83]; p = 0.003) and superficial SWIs (0.54 [0.32-0.91]; p = 0.02). No differences were seen in mediastinitis and mortality, however, limited number of studies assessed these endpoints. There was no evidence of systemic toxicity, sternal dehiscence and resistant strains emergence. Both vancomycin and gentamicin reduced the odds of cultures outside their respective serum concentrations' activity: vancomycin against gram-negative strains: 0.20 (0.01-4.18) and gentamicin against gram-positive strains: 0.42 (0.28-0.62); P < 0.001. Regional antibiotic delivery is safe and effectively reduces the risk of SWI in cardiac surgery patients.

Cost-effectiveness of methenamine hippurate compared with antibiotic prophylaxis for the management of recurrent urinary tract infections in secondary care: a multicentre, open-label, randomised, non-inferiority trial.

OBJECTIVES: To estimate the cost-effectiveness of methenamine hippurate compared with antibiotic prophylaxis in the management of recurrent urinary tract infections. DESIGN: Multicentre, open-label, randomised, non-inferiority trial. SETTING: Eight centres in the UK, recruiting from June 2016 to June 2018. PARTICIPANTS: Women aged ≥18 years with recurrent urinary tract infections, requiring prophylactic treatment. INTERVENTIONS: Women were randomised to receive once-daily antibiotic prophylaxis or twice-daily methenamine hippurate for 12 months. Treatment allocation was not masked and crossover between arms was allowed. PRIMARY AND SECONDARY OUTCOME MEASURES: The primary economic outcome was the incremental cost per quality-adjusted life year (QALY) gained at 18 months. All costs were collected from a UK National Health Service perspective. QALYs were estimated based on responses to the EQ-5D-5L administered at baseline, 3, 6, 9, 12 and 18 months. Incremental costs and QALYs were estimated using an adjusted analysis which controlled for observed and unobserved characteristics. Stochastic sensitivity analysis was used to illustrate uncertainty on a cost-effectiveness plane and a cost-effectiveness acceptability curve. A sensitivity analysis, not specified in the protocol, considered the costs associated with antibiotic resistance. RESULTS: Data on 205 participants were included in the economic analysis. On average, methenamine hippurate was less costly (-£40; 95% CI: -684 to 603) and more effective (0.014 QALYs; 95% CI: -0.05 to 0.07) than antibiotic prophylaxis. Over the range of values considered for an additional QALY, the probability of methenamine hippurate being considered cost-effective ranged from 51% to 67%. CONCLUSIONS: On average, methenamine hippurate was less costly and more effective than antibiotic prophylaxis but these results are subject to uncertainty. Methenamine hippurate is more likely to be considered cost-effective when the benefits of reduced antibiotic use were included in the analysis. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: ISRCTN70219762.

[Antibacterial prophylaxis with fosfomycin at the time of the urethral catheter removal after radical prostatectomy (prospective randomized trial)].

AIM: To evaluate the effect of antibacterial prophylaxis using oral fosfomycin during the removal of a urethral catheter after radical prostatectomy on the development of urinary tract infection, severity of leukocyturia and bacteriuria, as well as the severity of lower urinary tract symptoms. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A single-center, non-blind, prospective, randomized controlled trial was carried out. The main group included 40 patients, and the control group included 37 patients. In the group 1, patients received two doses of oral fosfomycin, 3 g, namely in the evening on the day of catheter removal (the first dose) and 48 hours after catheter removal (the second dose). In the group 2, patients did not receive any antibacterial prophylaxis after urethral catheter removal. The endpoints of the study were confirmed episodes of urinary tract infection within 1 month after removal of the urethral catheter, leukocyturia and bacteriuria in urinalysis/urine culture) and severity of the lower urinary tract symptoms assessed by IPSS questionnaire. RESULTS: In the group 2, urinary tract infection was noted in 17.1%, while in the group 2 only in 2.6% of patients (p=0.032). Leukocyturia and bacteriuria were significantly less common in the group receiving antibacterial prophylaxis with fosfomycin (18.4% vs. 48.6%, respectively; p=0.006). Positive urine culture was observed in 7.9% vs. 25.7%, respectively (p=0.035). Four weeks after removal of the urethral catheter, the average IPSS score was significantly higher in the group 2 (13.2 vs. 9.5 points; p=0.002). There were no cases of allergic reaction and pseudomembranous colitis associated with C. difficile in both groups. Diarrhea cured with sorbents was noted in 2 patients (5.2%) in fosfomycin group. CONCLUSION: Antibacterial prophylaxis using two oral doses of fosfomycin 3 g on the day of urethral catheter removal and 48 hours after catheter removal after radical prostatectomy appears to be an effective scheme that reduces the incidence of urinary tract infection and the severity of lower urinary tract symptoms, and is characterized by a minimal risk of adverse events. It is necessary to carried out further research and develop clear recommendations for antibacterial prevention in urological interventions requiring prolonged urethral catheterization.

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.