Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29487398›Full record

SynthesisProstate cancer and prostatic diseases2018

Fosfomycin vs. quinolone-based antibiotic prophylaxis for transrectal ultrasound-guided biopsy of the prostate: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Jurate Noreikaite, Patrick Jones, John Fitzpatrick, Ramachandran Amitharaj, Amelia Pietropaolo, Nikhil Vasdev, David Chadwick, Bhaskar K Somani, Bhavan Prasad Rai

Abstract readComparative StudyMeta-AnalysisSystematic Review
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Prostate cancer and prostatic diseases, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 16 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
16citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
3.2field-weighted citation impact, top 8% of its field
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

16 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 37 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Infection Prophylaxis in Urological Diagnostic and Surgical Procedures - A narrative review and recommendations.International braz j urol : official journal of the Brazilian Society of Urology
    Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

9 authors at 5 institutions in 1 country.

Jurate NoreikaiteDepartment of Urology, James Cook University Hospital, Middlesbrough, UK.
Patrick JonesDepartment of Urology, Royal Preston Hospital, Preston, UK.
John FitzpatrickDepartment of Urology, James Cook University Hospital, Middlesbrough, UK.
Ramachandran AmitharajCounty Durham & Darlington NHS Foundation Trust, Darlington, UK.
Amelia PietropaoloUniversity Hospital Southampton NHS Trust, Southampton, UK.
Nikhil VasdevHertfordshire and Bedfordshire Urological Cancer Centre, Lister Hospital (East and North Herts NHS Trust), Watford General Hospital (West Herts NHS Trust), Watford, UK.
David ChadwickDepartment of Urology, James Cook University Hospital, Middlesbrough, UK.
Bhaskar K SomaniUniversity Hospital Southampton NHS Trust, Southampton, UK.
Bhavan Prasad RaiDepartment of Urology, James Cook University Hospital, Middlesbrough, UK. urobhavan@gmail.com.
James Cook University Hospital · GBUniversity Hospital Southampton NHS Foundation Trust · GBCounty Durham and Darlington NHS Foundation Trust · GBLister Hospital · GBRoyal Preston Hospital · GB

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundInfection-related complications secondary to quinolone resistance have been on the rise following transrectal ultrasound-guided biopsy of the prostate (TRUSBP). The aim of this review was to compare the efficacy of fosfomycin with quinolone-based antibiotic prophylaxis for TRUSBP.

methodsA systematic review in line with the preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses (PRISMA) and Cochrane guidelines was conducted. All studies comparing fosfomycin vs. non-fosfomycin antimicrobial prophylaxis for TRUSBP were considered. The main outcomes were number of urinary tract infections (UTIs) (overall, afebrile, febrile, and urosepsis) and fluoroqinolone resistance. Secondary outcomes were positive urine and blood cultures, and adverse effects of drugs.

resultsFive studies comparing fosfomycin and non-fosfomycin antimicrobials were included in the review. In all, 1447 and 1665 patients were included in the fosfomycin and non-fosfomycin cohorts, respectively. The systematic review report significantly lower UTIs in the fosfomycin cohort (M-H, Fixed, 95% CI), 0.20 (0.13, 0.30), p < 0.00001. Urine cultures from patients given fosfomycin showed significantly lower resistance rates (M-H, Fixed, 95% CI) 0.27 (0.15, 0.50), p < 0.0001. The adverse effect profile between the two cohorts were similar (M-H, Fixed, 95% CI) 1.13 (0.51, 2.50), p = 0.33. On Grade Pro evaluation, overall UTI, afebrile UTI, febrile UTI, and urosepsis were rates as moderate, low, very low, and moderate quality evidence, respectively. Positive blood and urine culture were rated as moderate and very low-quality evidence, respectively. Fluoroquinolone resistance was rated as low-quality evidence. Adverse effects was rated as very low-quality evidence.

conclusionsThis review suggests that fosfomycin has significantly lower septic complications with an equivalent side effect profile in comparison with quinolone-based prophylaxis regimen for TRUSBP. There is an urgent need for appropriate antibiotic stewardship and it is paramount that studies with robust methodology are developed to establish the role of fosfomycin over existing antibiotic regimens for TRUSBP.

Indexed as

Antibiotic ProphylaxisAnti-Bacterial AgentsBacterial InfectionsFosfomycinHumansImage-Guided BiopsyMaleProstatic NeoplasmsQuinolonesUltrasonographyAnti-Bacterial AgentsFosfomycinQuinolones

Identifiers

PMID29487398
OpenAlexW2790088971

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.