Urology Annals
About UA | Search | Ahead of print | Current Issue | Archives | Instructions | Online submissionLogin 
Urology Annals
  Editorial Board | Subscribe | Advertise | Contact
Users Online: 666   Home Print this page  Email this page Small font size Default font size Increase font size
Year : 2013  |  Volume : 5  |  Issue : 2  |  Page : 61-74

Antibiotic prophylaxis for transurethral urological surgeries: Systematic review

1 Department of Urology, The Sydney Children's Hospitals Network: Westmead Campus, Sydney, Australia; Department of Surgery, The Urology Section, King Abdulaziz Medical City, National Guard Health Affairs, Jeddah, Saudi Arabia; Conjoint Associate Lecturer, University of New South Wales, School of Women's and Children's Health, Sydney, Australia
2 Department of Urology, The Sydney Children's Hospitals Network: Westmead Campus; Associate Lecturer, University of Sydney, Sydney, Australia

Correspondence Address:
Basim S Alsaywid
Department of Surgery, Urology Section, King Abdulaziz Medical City, National Guard Health Affairs, Jeddah 21423, Saudi Arabia

Login to access the Email id

DOI: 10.4103/0974-7796.109993

PMID: 23798859

Rights and Permissions

The use of antibiotic prophylaxis to prevent urinary tract infection and bacteremia (sepsis) following endoscopic urologic procedures is a controversial topic. Evidence in the literature revealed that urological instrumentation is associated with increased incidence of urinary tract infection and bacteremia. The aim of this review is to evaluate the effectiveness of antibiotic prophylaxis in reducing the risk of urinary tract infection in patients who had transurethral urological surgeries. We have selected all RCTs of adult population who underwent all different types of transurethral urological surgery, including cystoscopy, transurethral resection of prostate and transurethral resection of bladder tumor, and received prophylactic antibiotics or placebo/no treatment. At first, more than 3000 references were identified and reviewed; of which 42 studies with a total of 7496 patients were included in the final analysis. All those trials were analyzing antibiotic prophylaxis versus placebo/no treatment, and they were significantly favoring antibiotic use in reducing all outcomes, including bacteriuria (RR 0.36, 95% CI 0.29 to 0.46, P < 0.0001) with moderate heterogeneity detected (I 2 48%), symptomatic UTI (RR 0.38, 95% CI 0.28 to 0.51, P < 0.0001) with no significant heterogeneity was detected (I 2 = 17%), bacteremia (RR 0.43, 95% CI 0.23 to 0.82, P < 0.0001) with no noted heterogeneity (I 2 = 0%), and fever ≥38.5 Celsius (RR 0.41, 95% CI 0.23 to 0.73, P = 0.003); also, there was no noted heterogeneity (I 2 = 0%). However, using antibiotic prophylaxis did not reduce the incidence of low grade temperature (RR 0.82, 95% CI 0.61 to 1.11, P = 0.20) or in moderate grade temperature (RR 1.03, 95% CI 0.71 to 1.48, P = 0.89). Antibiotic prophylaxis appears to be an effective intervention in preventing urinary tract infections and its sequels following transurethral urological surgeries in patients with preoperative sterile urine.

Print this article     Email this article
 Next article
 Previous article
 Table of Contents

 Similar in PUBMED
   Search Pubmed for
   Search in Google Scholar for
 Related articles
 Citation Manager
 Access Statistics
 Reader Comments
 Email Alert *
 Add to My List *
 * Requires registration (Free)

 Article Access Statistics
    PDF Downloaded1405    
    Comments [Add]    
    Cited by others 4    

Recommend this journal