The risk factors of urinary tract infection after transurethral resection of bladder tumors

Antibiotic prophylaxis in urologic interventions: Who, when, where?

BACKGROUND

Periprocedural prophylaxis in medicine encompasses the set of measures (physical, chemical, and pharmacological) used to reduce the risk of infection. Antibiotic prophylaxis (AP) refers to the administration of a short-term regimen of antibiotics shortly before a medical procedure to reduce the risk of infectious complications that can result from diagnostic and therapeutic interventions. The outspreading growth of multidrug-resistant bacterial species and changes in the bacterial local ecosystem have impeded the development of a unique scheme of AP in urology.

OBJECTIVES

To review the literature and current guidelines regarding AP for urological diagnostic and therapeutic procedures, and to define agents, timing, and occasions when administering pharmacological prophylaxis. Secondly, according to current literature, to open new scenarios where AP can be useful or useless.

RESULTS

Major gaps in evidence still exist in this field. AP appears useful in many invasive procedures and some sub-populations at risk of infectious complications. AP is not routinely recommended for urodynamic exams, diagnostic cystoscopy, and extracorporeal shock-wave lithotripsy. The available data regarding the use of AP during the transperineal prostate biopsy are still unclear; conversely, in the case of the transrectal approach AP is mandatory. AP is still considered the gold standard for the prevention of postoperative infective complications in the case of ureteroscopy, percutaneous nephrolithotomy, endoscopic resection of bladder tumor, endoscopic resection of the prostate, and prosthetic or major surgery.

CONCLUSION

The review highlights the complexity of determining the appropriate candidates for AP, emphasizing the importance of considering patient-specific factors such as comorbidities, immunocompetence, and the nature of the urologic intervention. The evidence suggests that a one-size-fits-all approach may not be suitable, and a tailored strategy based on the specific procedure and patient characteristics is essential.

Bladder EpiCheck urine test in the follow-up of NMIBC: a cost analysis

PURPOSE

In the Netherlands yearly more than 5000 patients are diagnosed with non-muscle invasive bladder cancer (NMIBC). With a specificity of 88.0% and a negative predictive value (NPV) for high grade NMIBC of 99.3%, the Bladder EpiCheck (BE) urine test may be used in NMIBC to reduce the burden of follow-up cystoscopies.

METHODS

In this study a cost analysis of the BE follow-up strategy in the Dutch healthcare system was performed. In half of the follow-up appointments, BE was used as a rule-in for cystoscopy. In addition, the possible delay in recurrence detection was estimated. A cost calculation tool was developed using Microsoft Excel.

RESULTS

The BE strategy results in an estimated cost reduction of 8%, 4% and 9% in low, intermediate and high risk patients, respectively. In the Netherlands this may result in a cost reduction of approximately 1.6 million euro per year. The estimated delay in the detection of recurrent disease would be 3.9, 1.7 and 1.3 months in low, intermediate and high risk NMIBC patients respectively.

CONCLUSION

To conclude, the BE can be used to reduce the costs of NMIBC follow-up, with a small delay in diagnosis of recurrent disease.

Antibiotic use and survival of patients receiving pembrolizumab for chemotherapy-resistant metastatic urothelial carcinoma

OBJECTIVES

The use of antibiotics alters gut microbiota and has been reported to impact outcomes in immune checkpoint inhibitor (ICI) treatment in various types of cancer. We investigated the impact of antibiotics on patients with metastatic urothelial carcinoma (mUC) treated with pembrolizumab.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

The data of 67 patients with chemotherapy-resistant mUC who were treated with pembrolizumab were retrospectively evaluated. The patients were classified into groups according to antibiotic status (with-antibiotic and without-antibiotic), and the progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS), objective response rate (ORR), and disease control rate (DCR) were compared between the 2 groups.

RESULTS

PFS (median: 1.1 vs. 8.9 months; P < 0.001) and OS (median: 2.3 vs. 19.5 months; P < 0.001) were significantly shorter in the with-antibiotic group (n = 15, 22%) than in the without-antibiotic group (n = 52, 78%). Patients in the with-antibiotic group had significantly higher Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status scores (P = 0.042). Multivariable analyses revealed antibiotic use as an independent predictor of PFS (P < 0.001) and OS (P = 0.002). No patients in the with-antibiotic group achieved a complete response to pembrolizumab. The ORR (complete response (CR) + partial response (PR)) was higher among patients not treated with antibiotics than among patients treated with antibiotics, though the difference was not significant (34.6% vs. 13.3%, P = 0.093). The DCR (CR + PR + stable disease) was also higher among patients in the with-antibiotic group than in the without-antibiotic group (57.7% vs. 20.0%, P = 0.008).

CONCLUSION

The use of antibiotics was negatively associated with outcomes in patients with mUC who are administered pembrolizumab. Baseline performance status was worse for these patients. Further analyses are required to identify associations between antibiotic use, bacterial infection for which it was indicated or its influence on performance status, on treatment outcomes.

A randomized trial regarding antimicrobial prophylaxis (AMP) in transurethral resection of bladder tumor (TURB)

PURPOSE

To determine whether omitting antimicrobial prophylaxis (AMP) in TURB is safe in patients undergoing TURB without an indwelling pre-operative catheter/nephrostomy/DJ and a negative pre-operative urinary culture.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A multi-centered randomized controlled trial (RCT) from 17-09-2017 to 31-12-2019 in 5 hospitals. Patients with a pre-operative indwelling catheter/DJ-stent or nephrostomy and a positive pre-operative urinary culture (> 10⁴ uropathogens/mL) were excluded. Post-operative fever was defined as body temperature ≥ 38.3 °C. A non-inferiority design with a 6% noninferiority margin and null hypothesis (H0) that the infection risk is at least 6% higher in the experimental (E) than in the control (C) group; H0: C (AMP-group) - E (no AMP-group) ≥ Δ (6% noninferiority margin). A multivariable, logistic regression was performed for AMP and post-TURB fever with covariates: tumor size and (clot-) retention. The R Project^® for statistical computing was used for statistical analysis and a p value of 0.05 was considered as statistically significant.

RESULTS

459 Patients were included and 202/459 (44.1%) received AMP vs 257/459 (55.9%) without AMP. Fever occurred in 6/202 [2.9%; 95% CI (1.2-6.6%)] patients with AMP vs 8/257 [3.1%; 95% CI (1.5%-6.1%)] without AMP (p = 0.44). Multivariable, logistic regression showed no significant harm in omitting AMP when controlled for (clot-)retention and tumor size (p = 0.85) and an adjusted risk difference in developing post-TURB fever of 0.0016; 95% CI [- 0.029; 0.032].

CONCLUSION

Our data suggest the safety of omitting AMP in patients undergoing TURB without an indwelling, pre-operative catheter/nephrostomy/DJ and a negative pre-operative urinary culture.