Antibiotic prophylaxis in invasive urodynamics, a Delphi consensus of the Italian Society of Urodynamics (SIUD)
Emanuele Rubilotta,Elisabetta F. Chiarulli,Enrico Ammirati,Marianna C. Bevacqua,Stefano Manodoro,Stefania Chierchia,Eugenia Fragalà,Giuseppe Masiello,Vincenzo Li Marzi,Alessandro Giammò,Stefania Musco,Francesco Savoca,Matteo Balzarro,Cosimo De Nunzio,Gaetano De Rienzo,Ferdinando Fusco,Gianfranco Lamberti,Marco Soligo,Luisa De Palma,Massimo Fasano,Anna Carretta,Fabio Tumietto,Enrico Finazzi‐Agrò,Eleonora Russo,Alessandro Antonelli,Marilena Gubbiotti,Gianluca Sampogna,Michele Spinelli,Roberto Carone,Leonardo Martino,Vito Mancini,Italian Society of Urodynamics,Vincenzo L. Marzi,Italian Society of Urodynamics (SIUD)
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/nau.25463
IF: 2.367
2024-04-09
Neurourology and Urodynamics
Abstract:Introduction Although antibiotic prophylaxis (AB) demonstrated a statistically significant reduction in bacteriuria after invasive urodynamics (UDS), no significant decrease in the incidence of urinary tract infections (UTI) has been confirmed. No absolute recommendations on the use of AB in case of relevant potential risk of UTI have been reported, though some categories of patients at increased infective probability after UDS have been recognized. The aim of this study is to report the experts' consensus on the best practice for the use of AB before UDS in the main categories of patients at potential risk of developing UTI. Materials and Methods A systematic literature review was performed on AB before UDS in males and females. A panel of experts from the Italian Society of Urodynamics, Continence, Neuro‐Urology, and Pelvic Floor (SIUD) assessed the review data and decided by a modified Delphi method on 16 statements proposed and discussed by the panel. The cut‐off percentage for the consensus was a ≥70% of positive responses to the survey. The study was a Delphi consensus with experts' opinions, not a clinical trial involving directly patients. Results The panel group was composed of 57 experts in functional urology and UDS, mainly urologists, likewise gynaecologists, physiatrists, infectivologists, pediatric urologists, and nurses. A positive consensus was achieved on 9/16 (56.25%) of the statements, especially on the need for performing AB before UD in patients with neurogenic bladder and immunosuppression. Urine analysis and urine culture before UDS are mandatory, and in the event of their positivity, UDS should be postponed. A consensus was reached on avoiding AB in menopausal status, diabetes, age, gender, bladder outlet obstruction, high postvoid residual, chronic catheterization, previous urological surgery, lack of urological abnormalities, pelvic organ prolapse, and negative urine analysis. Conclusions Antibiotic prophylaxis is not recommended for patients without notable risk factors and with a negative urine test due to the potential morbidities that may result from antibiotic administration. However, AB can be used for risk categories such as neurogenic bladder and immunosuppression. The evaluation of urine analysis and urine culture and postponing UDS in cases of positive tests were considered good practices, as well as performing AB in the neurogenic bladder and immunosuppression.
urology & nephrology