A prospective randomized trial of 1-day versus 3-day antibiotic prophylaxis for transrectal ultrasound guided prostate biopsy.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: To compare the incidence of infection between a 1 day and a 3 day antibiotic prophylaxis regimen for transrectal ultrasound (TRUS) guided prostate biopsy in a prospective, randomized open-label trial. MATERIALS AND METHODS: TRUS examination was performed in the left lateral decubitus position using a Brüel and Kjaer 7 MHz rectal probe. Biopsies were carried out with an 18 gauge Tru-cut needle fired by the hand-held Biopsy gun. An average of eight core biopsies (range 6 to 12) was taken. From May 15, 2000 to May 16, 2001, 363 patients were enrolled in this study. Patients were randomized to receive either 1 day or 3 days of fluroquinolone antibiotic prophylaxis, consisting of either ciprofloxacin or levofloxacin orally. Antibiotics were begun at least 1 hour prior to biopsy. Seven days later, telephone follow-up was obtained. RESULTS: Two (0.55%) of the 363 patients, one in each group, had an episode of sepsis. No urinary tract infection was reported. Traumatic complications were only minor and no significant difference was observed between both groups: hematospermia (p> 0.4), hematuria (p>0.1) and rectorragia (p>0.2) being reported most frequently. CONCLUSION: There is no clinically nor statistically significant difference between a 1 day and 3 day antibiotic prophylaxis regimen for patients undergoing TRUS guided biopsies.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".