PURPOSE: Controversy exists regarding antibiotic prophylaxis before shock wave lithotripsy.
The AUA (American Urological Association) guideline recommends universal antibiotic prophylaxis, whereas the EAU (European Association of Urology) guideline recommends prophylaxis only for select patients. We evaluated the use of targeted antibiotic prophylaxis in preventing urinary tract infections in patients undergoing shock wave lithotripsy.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: A prospective single cohort study was performed during 6 months with patients undergoing shock wave lithotripsy. All patients underwent urine dipstick and culture before shock wave lithotripsy. Targeted antibiotic prophylaxis was provided at the discretion of the treating urologist. All patients had a urine culture performed after shock wave lithotripsy and completed a survey documenting fevers or urinary symptoms. The primary outcome was the incidence of urinary tract infections, urosepsis and asymptomatic bacteriuria after shock wave lithotripsy. The secondary outcome was the sensitivity and specificity of urinary dipstick leukocytes and nitrites.
RESULTS: A total of 526 patients were enrolled in the study. Of the 389 patients included in the determination of the primary outcome, urinary tract infection developed in only 1 (0.3%), urosepsis did not develop in any patients and asymptomatic bacteriuria developed in 11 (2.8%). Eight (2.1%) patients were administered antibiotic prophylaxis. The specificity of urine dipstick nitrites was high (95%) while the sensitivity was poor (9.7%).
CONCLUSIONS: In our cohort study using targeted antibiotic prophylaxis the rates of urinary tract infection after shock wave lithotripsy and rates of asymptomatic bacteriuria were extremely low, with no development of urosepsis. This finding questions the need for universal antibiotic prophylaxis before shock wave lithotripsy.
Written by:
D'A Honey RJ, Ordon M, Ghiculete D, Wiesenthal JD, Kodama R, Pace KT. Are you the author?
Division of Urology, St. Michael's Hospital, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.
Reference: J Urol. 2012 Dec 28. pii: S0022-5347(12)06004-1.
doi: 10.1016/j.juro.2012.12.063
PubMed Abstract
PMID: 23276509
UroToday.com Infections Section
