237 Antibiotic Prophylaxis of Precision Point Prostate Biopsy Under LA: Changed Practice in a District General Hospital
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Aim More than 4 million prostate biopsies are performed worldwide each year (1). Out of three different techniques (Template, transperineal, TRUS), Transperineal precision point biopsy under local anaesthesia is the latest and reported to have fewer infectious complications (2). UTI, Urosepsis, septicaemia are some well-known infectious complications following prostate biopsies. Therefore, the Canadian Urological Association recommended the use of broad-based Gram-negative antibiotic prophylaxis 30 to 60 minutes before the procedure and continued for 2 to 3 days in their guideline (3). Our aim was to compare the outcome of two different antibiotic prophylaxis regimens. Method In our study to assess the outcome of single-dose prophylaxis compared to regular dose, we collected retrospective data of 119 patients who had undergone precision point biopsy in our hospital. Results Among 119 patients, 52 (43.69%) were given 3 days of oral antibiotic followed by preprocedural dose and 67 (56.31%) were given just a single dose before the procedure. None of these patients from both groups were readmitted with any infectious complication post-procedure. 1 patient from the second group (single dose) was admitted with urinary retention but no increased inflammatory markers were found. Conclusions TRUS biopsy breeches the rectal mucosa and carries higher chances of post-biopsy infection so requires antibiotic prophylaxis. Single-dose antibiotic prophylaxis is recommended option for transperineal biopsies as the infection rate is lower. Our study shows the same outcome for single-dose and 3-day regimens for transperineal precision point prostate biopsy. Moreover, the use of single dose will significantly reduce medicine costs and antibiotic resistance to improve patient compliance.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| 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".