STUDY OF NEW ORAL QUINOLONES (LEVOFLOXACIN AND SITAFLOXACIN) AS PROPHYLACTIC ANTIMICROBIAL AGENTS IN TRANSRECTAL PROSTATE NEEDLE BIOPSY
Bibliographic record
Abstract
(Objective) A single prophylactic dose of new quinolones is recommended to prevent infection associated with transrectal prostate needle biopsy (TRPB), except in high-risk patients, and a single dose of levofloxacin (LVFX) 500 mg is often administered. We examined single administrations of LVFX and sitafloxacin (STFX), in relation to the frequency of febrile infection. (Patients and methods) The subjects were 411 patients deemed to be suitable candidates for TRPB and ranging in age from 52 to 84 years (median, 75 years). Their PSA values ranged from 3.89 to 2,450 ng/mL (median, 6.92 ng/mL). They were randomly assigned to receive LVFX (group A, 204 patients) or STFX (group B, 207 patients), and the two groups were compared for the incidence of infection with a temperature of 38°C or more within 48 hours after TRPB. (Results) Febrile infection was observed in 8 (3.92%) of the 204 patients in group A and 1 (0.48%) of the 207 patients in group B. Of the 9 patients with febrile infection, 8 had acute prostatitis. There was a significant difference in the incidences of febrile infection between the two groups (p = 0.041; odds ratio, 8.41; 95% confidence interval, 1.04-67.85). The pathogenic bacteria in the 9 patients were Escherichia coli in 7 (Extended-spectrum beta-lactamase [ESBL]-producing bacteria in 3, LVFX-resistant bacteria in 2), Klebsiella pneumoniae in one, and Enterococcus faecalis in one. (Discussion) Measures against quinolone-resistant bacteria, ESBL-producing bacteria, and gram-positive bacteria should be considered for the prevention of infections associated with TRPB. Based on our present observations, STFX is considered to have more favorable effects than LVFX.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| 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) | 0.001 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".