ArticleUlusal travma ve acil cerrahi dergisi = Turkish journal of trauma & emergency surgery : TJTES2023
Selection for antimicrobial prophylaxis in emergency and elective transurethral procedures: Susceptibility pattern in Türkiye.
Article in Ulusal travma ve acil cerrahi dergisi = Turkish journal of trauma & emergency surgery : TJTES, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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 citations in OpenAlex.
- Comparison of the prophylactic effect of cefazolin injection versus oral levofloxacin as prophylactic antibiotic in TURP surgery: a randomized clinical trial.BMC pharmacology & toxicology · 2024Trial
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
14 authors at 1 institution in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundIn this study, we aimed to determine the most appropriate antimicrobial agents for prophylactic antibiotic use during emergency and elective transurethral procedures.
methodsThe study was conducted in five hospitals located in five different geographical regions of Türkiye. The microorganism cultured in urine before emergency and elective transurethral procedures in these centers between March 2021 and March 2022 were reviewed retrospectively from the hospital records. Demographic data (age and gender) of the patients, comorbid disorders, previous urological procedures, anomalies of the urogenital tract, use of urethral catheters (permanent or clean intermittent catheterization), cultured microorganisms, and antibiotic susceptibilities were noted. The patients hospitalized or had antibiotics for any reason in the previous 1 month were excluded from the study.
resultsA total of 1450 patients, 742 men (51.2%) and 708 women (48.8%), were included in the study. The mean age of the patients was 55.3±19.36 (1-98) years. Diabetes mellitus was evident in 271 (18.7%) patients. The five most common microorgan-isms cultured in urine, in order of frequency, were: ESBL (-) Escherichia coli in 418 (28.8%), ESBL (+) E. coli in 309 (21.3%), Klebsiella pneumonia in 183 (12.6%), Enterococcus faecalis in 124 (8.6%), and Pseudomonas aeruginosa in 89 (6.1%). The susceptibility rates to antimicrobial agents recommended for prophylaxis by the American Urology Association and the European Association of Urology guidelines were found as follows: cefepime 87.1%, ampicillin+sulbactam 84%, TMP-SMX 71.6%, amoxicillin+clavulanate 63.5%, cefoxitin 59%, ceftazidime 58.6%, cefuroxime 43.5%, ceftriaxone 43%, and cefixime 38.4%.
conclusionWe found that currently recommended antimicrobials provide poor coverage for the most common pathogens isolated. Urologists should consider patient-based antibiotic prophylaxis in endoscopic urethral procedures, follow appropriate proto-cols, and consider local antibiotic resistance.
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.