共 50 条
Fosfomycin for Antibiotic Prophylaxis in Men Undergoing a Transrectal Prostate Biopsy: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis
被引:8
作者:
Gu, Hui Mo
[1
]
Gu, Jin Seok
[1
]
Chung, Ho Seok
[1
]
Jung, Seung Il
[1
]
Kwon, Dongdeuk
[1
]
Kim, Myung Ha
[2
]
Jung, Jae Hung
[3
]
Han, Mi Ah
[4
]
Kang, Seung Ji
[5
]
Hwang, Eu Chang
[1
]
Dahm, Philipp
[6
,7
]
机构:
[1] Chonnam Natl Univ, Dept Urol, Med Sch, Hwasun 58128, South Korea
[2] Yonsei Univ, Yonsei Wonju Med Lib, Wonju Coll Med, Wonju 26426, South Korea
[3] Yonsei Univ, Dept Urol, Wonju Coll Med, Wonju 26426, South Korea
[4] Chosun Univ, Coll Med, Dept Prevent Med, Gwangju 61452, South Korea
[5] Chonnam Natl Univ, Dept Infect Dis, Med Sch, Gwangju 61469, South Korea
[6] Univ Minnesota, Dept Urol, Minneapolis, MN 55455 USA
[7] Minneapolis VA Hlth Care Syst, Specialty Care, Minneapolis, MN 55417 USA
来源:
MEDICINA-LITHUANIA
|
2023年
/
59卷
/
05期
关键词:
fosfomycin;
urinary tract infections;
prostate;
biopsy;
HOSPITAL ADMISSION RATES;
ANTIMICROBIAL PROPHYLAXIS;
INFECTIOUS COMPLICATIONS;
CIPROFLOXACIN;
PREVENTION;
TROMETAMOL;
RISK;
EFFICACY;
QUALITY;
REGIMEN;
D O I:
10.3390/medicina59050911
中图分类号:
R5 [内科学];
学科分类号:
1002 ;
100201 ;
摘要:
Background and Objectives: To assess the effects of fosfomycin compared with other antibiotics as a prophylaxis for urinary tract infections (UTIs) in men undergoing transrectal prostate biopsies. Materials and Methods: We searched multiple databases and trial registries without publication language or status restrictions until 4 January 2022. Parallel-group randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and non-randomized studies (NRS) were included. The primary outcomes were febrile UTI, afebrile UTI, and overall UTI. We used GRADE guidance to rate the certainty of evidence of RCTs and NRSs. The protocol was registered with PROSPERO (CRD42022302743). Results: We found data on five comparisons; however, this abstract focuses on the primary outcomes of the two most clinically relevant comparisons. Regarding fosfomycin versus fluoroquinolone, five RCTs and four NRSs with a one-month follow-up were included. Based on the RCT evidence, fosfomycin likely resulted in little to no difference in febrile UTIs compared with fluoroquinolone. This difference corresponded to four fewer febrile UTIs per 1000 patients. Fosfomycin likely resulted in little to no difference in afebrile UTIs compared with fluoroquinolone. This difference corresponded to 29 fewer afebrile UTIs per 1000 patients. Fosfomycin likely resulted in little to no difference in overall UTIs compared with fluoroquinolone. This difference corresponded to 35 fewer overall UTIs per 1000 patients. Regarding fosfomycin and fluoroquinolone combined versus fluoroquinolone, two NRSs with a one- to three-month follow-up were included. Based on the NRS evidence, fosfomycin and fluoroquinolone combined may result in little to no difference in febrile UTIs compared with fluoroquinolone. This difference corresponded to 16 fewer febrile UTIs per 1000 patients. Conclusions: Compared with fluoroquinolone, fosfomycin or fosfomycin and fluoroquinolone combined may have a similar prophylactic effect on UTIs after a transrectal prostate biopsy. Given the increasing fluoroquinolone resistance and its ease to use, fosfomycin may be a good option for antibiotic prophylaxis.
引用
收藏
页数:20
相关论文