A PHP Error was encountered

Severity: Warning

Message: file_get_contents(https://...@pubfacts.com&api_key=b8daa3ad693db53b1410957c26c9a51b4908&a=1): Failed to open stream: HTTP request failed! HTTP/1.1 429 Too Many Requests

Filename: helpers/my_audit_helper.php

Line Number: 176

Backtrace:

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 176
Function: file_get_contents

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 250
Function: simplexml_load_file_from_url

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 3122
Function: getPubMedXML

File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 575
Function: pubMedSearch_Global

File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 489
Function: pubMedGetRelatedKeyword

File: /var/www/html/index.php
Line: 316
Function: require_once

Infection Rate after Transperineal Prostate Biopsy with and without Prophylactic Antibiotics: Results from a Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Comparative Studies. | LitMetric

Purpose: We performed a systematic review comparing the incidence of infectious complications following transperineal ultrasound-guided prostate biopsy (TPB) in cases utilizing antibiotic prophylaxis (AP) vs cases not utilizing antibiotic prophylaxis (NAP).

Materials And Methods: The incidences of complications were pooled using the Cochran-Mantel-Haenszel method with the random effect model and expressed as risk ratio (RR). RR higher than 1 indicates an increased risk of complication in patients undergoing TPB without antibiotics. Statistical significance was set at p <0.05 and 95% CI.

Results: A total of 1,748 papers were retrieved. After the screening process, 8 studies were included in the quantitative analysis (4 retrospective, and 4 prospective and nonrandomized), reporting on 3,662 patients. A total of 2,368 patients underwent TPB utilizing AP and 1,294 underwent TPB utilizing NAP. The pooled rates of post-biopsy fever from 6 available studies reporting this parameter were 0.69% in the AP group and 0.47% in the NAP group (RR: 1.02, 95% CI: 0.02-44.55, p=0.99). The pooled rates of post-biopsy genitourinary infections from 8 available studies reporting this parameter were 0.11% in the AP group and 0.31% in the NAP group (RR: 2.09, 95% CI: 0.54-8.10, p=0.29). The pooled rates of post-biopsy sepsis over 8 studies reporting this parameter were 0.13% in the AP group and 0.09% in the NAP group (RR: 1.09, 95% CI: 0.21-5.61, p=0.92). The pooled rates of post-biopsy readmission for infections over 8 studies reporting this parameter were 0.13% in the AP group and 0.23% in the NAP group (RR: 1.29, 95% CI: 0.31-5.29, p=0.73). Death due to post-biopsy sepsis did not occur in any study.

Conclusions: This systematic review found no significant difference in infection rate, fever, sepsis or readmission rate after TPB between those cases utilizing AP and those cases without AP.

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.1097/JU.0000000000002251DOI Listing

Publication Analysis

Top Keywords

prostate biopsy
8
systematic review
8
cases utilizing
8
utilizing antibiotic
8
antibiotic prophylaxis
8
infection rate
4
rate transperineal
4
transperineal prostate
4
biopsy prophylactic
4
prophylactic antibiotics
4

Similar Publications

Want AI Summaries of new PubMed Abstracts delivered to your In-box?

Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!