Do or Don't: Results of a Multinational Survey on Antibiotic Prophylaxis in Urodynamics

Antibiotic prophylaxis contributes substantially to the increase in antibiotic resistance rates worldwide. This investigation aims to assess the current standard of practice in using antibiotic prophylaxis for urodynamics (UDS) and identify barriers to guideline adherence. An online survey using a 22-item questionnaire designed according to the Checklist for Reporting Results of Internet E-Surveys (CHERRIES) was circulated among urologists and gynecologists in Austria, Germany, and Switzerland between September 2021 and March 2022. A total of 105 questionnaires were eligible for analysis. Out of 105 completed surveys, most responders (n = 99, 94%) regularly perform dipstick urine analysis prior to urodynamics, but do not perform a urine culture (n = 68, 65%). Ninety-eight (93%) participants refrain from using antibiotic prophylaxis, and sixty-eight (65%) use prophylaxis if complicating factors exist. If asymptomatic bacteriuria is present, approximately 54 (52%) participants omit UDS and reschedule the procedure until antimicrobial susceptibility testing is available. Seventy-eight (78%) participants do not have a standard procedure for antibiotic prophylaxis in their department. Part of the strategy against the development of bacterial resistance is the optimized use of antibiotics, including antibiotic prophylaxis in urodynamics. Establishing a standard procedure is necessary and purposeful to harmonize both aspects in the field of urological diagnostics.

[What is the proportion of infectiology in the specialization urology? : A pilot study to underline the significance of Antibiotic Stewardship in urology]

BACKGROUND

Urinary tract infections account for one of the most bacterial infectious diseases worldwide.

OBJECTIVES

The primary aim of this pilot project was to identify the relative percentage of antibiotic use in comparison to all patients in a university medical center for the better establishment of antibiotic stewardship (ABS) programs.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

This is an epidemiological pilot project. In the time period of three months it was evaluated which relative percentage of the patients was treated with antibiotics for bacterial urinary tract infection in comparison to all patients.

RESULTS

In summary, about 40% of all urological patients received an antibiotic treatment against urinary tract infections or as perioperative prophylaxis against bacterial infection in the operating room (OR). The antibiotic use at the urological ward is highest in comparison to ambulance or OR.

CONCLUSION

Infectious diseases, especially bacterial infections, account for a significant part of urology. This knowledge is essential to establish ABS programs and to tackle the progression of antibiotic resistance. Detailed studies are necessary to understand antibiotic prescription practice in urology to develop targeted ABS interventions.