ArticleArab journal of urology2012
Does intravenous cefuroxime improve the efficacy of ciprofloxacin for preventing infectious complications after transrectal prostate biopsy? A prospective comparative study.
Article in Arab journal of urology, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 5 citations in OpenAlex.
- The augmented prophylactic antibiotic could be more efficacious in patients undergoing transrectal prostate biopsy: a systematic review and meta-analysis.International urology and nephrology · 2016Pooled it
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesTo compare the frequency of infection after transrectal ultrasonography (TRUS)-guided biopsy of the prostate (TRUSBP) using prophylactic ciprofloxacin with or without adding cefuroxime. PATIENTS AND
methodsBetween June 2008 and October 2009, 205 consecutive patients had TRUSBP with the use of oral 500 mg ciprofloxacin twice per day, 2 days before and 3 days after the biopsy (defined as group A). Starting from November 2009 and onwards, 250 consecutive patients had TRUSBP using the same previous protocol of antibiotic prophylaxis but with the addition of intravenous 1.5 g cefuroxime given 30 min before the procedure (defined as group B). The incidence of sepsis after TRUSBP, together with the results of urine and blood cultures and antibiotic sensitivity, were compared between the groups.
resultsFever after TRUSBP was recorded in 18 of 205 patients in group A (8.8%) and in nine of 250 in group B (3.6%); the difference was significant (P = 0.018). Urine culture was positive in 14 and five of patients in groups A and B, respectively, with extended-spectrum β-lactamase-producing (ESBL) Escherichia coli as the most common organism. The blood culture was positive in seven and three patients in groups A and B, respectively, with ESBL E. coli as the most common organism. All patients who had sepsis after TRUSBP sepsis were treated successfully.
conclusionAdding a single intravenous injection with 1.5 g of cefuroxime to oral ciprofloxacin significantly reduced the frequency of infectious complications after TRUSBP.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.