F. Longo

Rectal Culture-Guided Targeted Antimicrobial Prophylaxis Reduces the Incidence of Post-Operative Infectious Complications in Men at High Risk for Infections Submitted to Transrectal Ultrasound Prostate Biopsy – Results of a Cross-Sectional Study

The role of rectal culture-guided antimicrobial prophylaxis (TAP) in reducing infectious complications (IC) after transrectal-ultrasound prostate biopsy (TRUSPBx) is conflicting. We assessed the prevalence of IC in a cohort of men at high risk for IC submitted to TRUSPBx and treated with either TAP or empirical prophylaxis (EAP). Data from 53 patients at high risk for IC undergoing TRUSPBx were collected. Patients who did not receive a rectal swab (RS) were treated with EAP with fluoroquinolones (FQs). Of those who received the RS, patients with FQ-susceptible organisms received ciprofloxacin while those with FQ-resistant organisms received TAP. Office visits were scheduled to investigate the rate of complication at day 7 and 30 after TRUSPBx. Comorbidities were scored with the Charlson Comorbidity Index (CCI). Descriptive statistics and logistic regression models detailed the association between clinical parameters and IC rate. Out of 53 men, 17 (32.1%) had RS while 36 (67.9%) did not. All RS cultures were positive for E. Coli and 4 (23.5%) reported FQ-resistant pathogens. Considering risk factors for IC, no difference was found in terms of CCI, rate of diabetes, UTIs or recent antibiotic utilization between groups. Overall, 12 (22.6%) men reported IC, with a greater proportion of them belonging to the group treated with EAP (30.6% vs 5.9%; p = 0.045). Of these, 9 (25.0%) patients, all treated with EAP, developed post biopsy UTIs. E. Coli sustained all UTIs and 7 (77.7%) were FQ resistant. At multivariable analysis, CCI≥1, a history of UTIs/prostatitis and recent antibiotic utilization (all p<0.04) were the most powerful predictors for ICs. In conclusion, we found that compared to EAP, TAP significantly reduces ICs, in men at high risk for post TRUSPBx IC. Patients at risk for IC, especially those with recent antibiotic utilization, CCI≥1 and a history of UTIs/prostatitis before biopsy, could benefit from TAP.

Prevalence and predictors of being lost to follow-up after transurethral resection of the prostate

Patient follow-up after transurethral resection of the prostate (TURP) is crucial to evaluate treatment-related outcomes and potential adverse events. We sought to determine the rate of, and factors associated with, patient nonadherence to follow-up after TURP. Data from 180 patients who underwent TURP were analysed. Patient counselling and follow-up were standardized among the cohort. Patients were considered lost to follow-up (LTF) if they were at least 30 days from their first scheduled follow-up appointment. Descriptive statistics and logistic regression analyses were performed to determine the impact of predictors on the rate of compliance with prescribed follow-up. Of 180 patients, 55 (30.5%) were LTF. LTF patients were younger (p < 0.001), had lower educational status (p = 0.007) and were more frequently single (p = 0.03) than those who were not LTF. Importantly, patients who experienced a postoperative-related event (PRE) were more likely to follow-up (p = 0.04). Multivariable analysis revealed that younger age (p < 0.001) and low educational status (p < 0.001) were independent predictors of being LTF. One out of three men submitted to TURP is lost to follow-up in the real-life setting. Noncompliance to follow-up was more frequent among young, single patients with low educational status. On the contrary, patients who experienced a PRE were more likely to follow-up.