Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Prophylactic antibiotic treatment following laparoscopic robot-assisted radical prostatectomy for the prevention of catheter-associated urinary tract infections: did the AUA guidelines make a difference?

  • Original Article
  • Published:
Journal of Robotic Surgery Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

We sought to evaluate the effectiveness of the American Urological Association (AUA) antibiotic prophylaxis guidelines in patients undergoing robot-assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy (RALP). Our prospective registry database was reviewed for all RALP cases. The following variables were evaluated: age, associated comorbidities, body mass index (BMI), total operative time, length of stay (LOS), prostate weight, pathological grade and stage. Until 11/2011, RALP patients were treated with antibiotics administered in the operating room and continued until urethral catheter removal. Since 11/2011, all patients were treated with a single intravenous dose of Cephalosporin and Aminoglycoside given within 30 min of surgical incision. The rate of catheter-associated urinary tract infection (CAUTI) was evaluated in both groups. 229 RALP patients were identified. The first 60 patients (26.2%) were treated according to the old protocol (Group 1) while the remaining 169 (73.8%) were treated according to the new protocol (Group 2). Group match was identified in all categories but LOS. Moreover, LOS was found to be longer in Group 1 compared with Group 2 (5.8 vs. 4.5 days, p < 0.001). CAUTI rate was similar in both groups (8.3 vs. 8.9%, respectively, p = 0.89). Logistic regression analysis did not demonstrate any association between treatment protocol and potential risk for CAUTI. Therefore, a single preoperative dose of antibiotics does not increase the rate of CAUTI following RALP compared with prolonged antibiotic treatment. Moreover, it was found to be associated with shorter LOS. Complying with the AUA guidelines may reduce morbidity and medical costs.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Zimlichman E, Henderson D, Tamir O, Franz C, Song P, Yamin CK, Keohane C, Denham CR, Bates DW (2013) Health care-associated infections: a meta-analysis of costs and financial impact on the US health care system. JAMA Intern Med 173(22):2039–2046

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Prokocimer P, Quazza M, Gibert C, Lemoine JE, Joly ML, Dureuil B, Moulonguet A, Manuel C, Desmonths JM (1986) Short-term prophylactic antibiotics in patients undergoing prostatectomy: report of a double-blind randomized trial with 2 intravenous doses of cefotaxime. J Urol 135(1):60–64

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Wolf JS Jr, Bennett CJ, Dmochowski RR, Hollenbeck BK, Pearle MS, Schaeffer AJ (2008) Best practice policy statement on urologic surgery antimicrobial prophylaxis. J Urol 179(4):1379–1390

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Terai A, Ichioka K, Kohe N, Ueda N, Utsonomiya N, Inoue K (2006) Antimicrobial prophylaxis in radical prostatectomy: 1-day versus 4-day treatments. Int J Urol 13(12):1488–1493

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Menon M, Tewari A, Peabody J (2003) Vattikuti Institute prostatectomy: technique. J Urol 169:2289–2292

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Chow SC, Shao J, Wang H (2008) Sample size calculations in clinical research, 2nd edn. Chapman & Hall/CRC Biostatistics Series, Taylor & Francis group, Boca Raton

  7. Classen DC, Evans RS, Pestotnik SL, Horn SD, Menlove RL, Burke JP (1992) The timing of prophylactic administration of antibiotics and the risk of surgical wound infection. NEJM 326(5):281–286

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Bratzler DW, Houck PM, Richards C, Steele L, Dellinger EP, Fry DE, Wright C, Ma A, Carr K, Red L (2005) Use of antimicrobial prophylaxis for major surgery. Arch Surg 140:174–182

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Steinberg JP, Braun BI, Hellinger WC, Kusek L, Bozikis MR, Bush AJ, Dellinger EP, Burke JP, Simmons B, Kritchevsky SB (2009) Timing of antimicrobial prophylaxis and the risk of surgical site infections. Ann Surg 250:10–16

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Stranne J, Aus G, Hansson C, Lodding P, Pileblad E, Hugosson J (2004) Single-dose orally administered quinolone appears to be sufficient antibiotic prophylaxis for radical retropubic prostatectomy. Scan J Urol 38(2):143–147

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  11. Takeyama K, Takahashi S, Maeda T, Mutoh M, Kunishima Y, Matsukawa M, Tagaki Y (2007) Comparison of 1-day, 2-day and 3-day administration of antimicrobial prophylaxis in radical prostatectomy. J Infect Chemother 13(5):320–323

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Calvert JK, Holt SK, Mossanen MW, James AC, Wright JL, Porter MP, Gore JL (2014) Use and outcomes of extended antibiotic prophylaxis in urological cancer surgery. J Urol 192:425–429

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Mossanen M, Calvert JK, Holt SK, James AC, Wright JL, Harper JD, Krieger JN, Gore JL (2015) Overuse of antimicrobial prophylaxis in community practice urology. J Urol 193(2):543–547

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Banks JA, McGuire BB, Loeb S, Shrestha S, Helfand BT, Catalona WJ (2013) Bacteriuria and antibiotic resistance in catheter urine specimens following radical prostatectomy. Urol Oncol 31(7):1049–1053

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

The authors would like to thank Mrs. Yvonne Telner for her assistance with manuscript preparation.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Surgical Oncology, Fox Chase Cancer Center, Philadelphia, PA, USA

    Miki Haifler

  2. Department of Urology, Chaim Sheba Medical Center, Chaim Sheba Medical Center, Tel Hashomer, Ramat Gan, 52621, Israel

    Miki Haifler, Yoram Mor, Zohar Dotan, Jacob Ramon & Dorit E. Zilberman

  3. Affiliated to Sackler Faculty of Medicine, Tel-Aviv University, Tel Aviv, Israel

    Miki Haifler, Yoram Mor, Zohar Dotan, Jacob Ramon & Dorit E. Zilberman

Authors
  1. Miki Haifler
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Yoram Mor
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Zohar Dotan
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Jacob Ramon
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Dorit E. Zilberman
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Dorit E. Zilberman.

Ethics declarations

Funding

This paper was not funded in part or in whole by any organization.

Conflict of interest

All authors declare that they have no conflict of interest of financial ties to disclose.

Ethical approval

This article does not contain any studies with human participants performed by any of the authors.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Haifler, M., Mor, Y., Dotan, Z. et al. Prophylactic antibiotic treatment following laparoscopic robot-assisted radical prostatectomy for the prevention of catheter-associated urinary tract infections: did the AUA guidelines make a difference?. J Robotic Surg 11, 367–371 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11701-016-0667-8

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11701-016-0667-8

Keywords

Search

Navigation