Re: Antibiotic prophylaxis prior to urodynamic study in patients with traumatic spinal cord injury. Is there an indication?

M. Floyd Jr., R. Khadr
{"title":"Re: Antibiotic prophylaxis prior to urodynamic study in patients with traumatic spinal cord injury. Is there an indication?","authors":"M. Floyd Jr., R. Khadr","doi":"10.1590/S1677-5538.IBJU.2018.0193","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"We read with interest the recent paper by da Silva et al. examining effects of antibiotic prophylaxis and risk of urinary tract infection for spinal cord injured patients undergoing urodynamic studies. The authors describe a multi institutional study involving 661 patients who underwent urodynamic evaluation over 2 years (1). Three different antibiotic protocols are described in separate institutions and a cumulative infection rate of 3.18% was found. No differences between patient age or ASIA classification were found to have an association with the development of subsequent urinary tract infection. However, patients with injuries at T6 or above were at increased risk of developing urinary tract infection following urodynamic evaluation (1). The authors are to be commended for conducting this study as there remains a paucity of literature regarding the topic with only 1 trial to date examining the topic (2). The authors should acknowledge that the length of time between injury, first and subsequent urodynamic evaluation is not recorded and the rate of autonomic dysreflexia (if any) is not mentioned. It is stated that in the consideration of variables a numbers that several factors were included yet there is no baseline assessment of subjective symptoms based on patient questionnaires such as the neurogenic bladder symptom score (3). In the spinal cord injured patient videourodynamic assessment is the preferred method of urodynamic assessment. Specific to our Spinal cord injury unit we routinely perform videourodynamic evaluation of spinal cord injured patients both as inpatients and outpatients and all undergo mandatory dipstick assessment prior to the procedure. If suggestive of infection the procedure is deferred but we do not prescribe antimicrobials pre investigation. Additionally we record bladder symptom scores at baseline with a validated questionnaire (SF Qualiveen) and repeat scores following definitive treatment to evaluate response (4).","PeriodicalId":13674,"journal":{"name":"International Brazilian Journal of Urology : official journal of the Brazilian Society of Urology","volume":"18 1","pages":"860 - 861"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2019-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Brazilian Journal of Urology : official journal of the Brazilian Society of Urology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1590/S1677-5538.IBJU.2018.0193","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

We read with interest the recent paper by da Silva et al. examining effects of antibiotic prophylaxis and risk of urinary tract infection for spinal cord injured patients undergoing urodynamic studies. The authors describe a multi institutional study involving 661 patients who underwent urodynamic evaluation over 2 years (1). Three different antibiotic protocols are described in separate institutions and a cumulative infection rate of 3.18% was found. No differences between patient age or ASIA classification were found to have an association with the development of subsequent urinary tract infection. However, patients with injuries at T6 or above were at increased risk of developing urinary tract infection following urodynamic evaluation (1). The authors are to be commended for conducting this study as there remains a paucity of literature regarding the topic with only 1 trial to date examining the topic (2). The authors should acknowledge that the length of time between injury, first and subsequent urodynamic evaluation is not recorded and the rate of autonomic dysreflexia (if any) is not mentioned. It is stated that in the consideration of variables a numbers that several factors were included yet there is no baseline assessment of subjective symptoms based on patient questionnaires such as the neurogenic bladder symptom score (3). In the spinal cord injured patient videourodynamic assessment is the preferred method of urodynamic assessment. Specific to our Spinal cord injury unit we routinely perform videourodynamic evaluation of spinal cord injured patients both as inpatients and outpatients and all undergo mandatory dipstick assessment prior to the procedure. If suggestive of infection the procedure is deferred but we do not prescribe antimicrobials pre investigation. Additionally we record bladder symptom scores at baseline with a validated questionnaire (SF Qualiveen) and repeat scores following definitive treatment to evaluate response (4).
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
关于:外伤性脊髓损伤患者尿动力学研究前的抗生素预防。有什么迹象吗?
我们饶有兴趣地阅读了da Silva等人最近发表的一篇论文,该论文研究了接受尿动力学研究的脊髓损伤患者抗生素预防的效果和尿路感染的风险。作者描述了一项涉及661名患者的多机构研究,这些患者在2年内接受了尿动力学评估(1)。在不同的机构中描述了三种不同的抗生素方案,发现累积感染率为3.18%。没有发现患者年龄或ASIA分类与随后尿路感染的发展有关。然而,T6或以上损伤的患者在尿动力学评估后发生尿路感染的风险增加(1)。作者进行这项研究值得赞扬,因为关于该主题的文献仍然很少,迄今为止只有1项试验研究了该主题(2)。首次和随后的尿动力学评估没有记录,自主神经反射障碍的发生率(如果有的话)也没有提及。有人指出,在考虑变量a数时,包括了几个因素,但没有基于患者问卷的主观症状的基线评估,如神经源性膀胱症状评分(3)。在脊髓损伤患者中,视频尿动力学评估是首选的尿动力学评估方法。具体到我们的脊髓损伤部门,我们对住院和门诊脊髓损伤患者进行常规的视频尿动力学评估,并在手术前进行强制性的油条评估。如果提示感染的程序被推迟,但我们不开抗菌剂前调查。此外,我们在基线时使用有效的问卷(SF Qualiveen)记录膀胱症状评分,并在最终治疗后重复评分以评估疗效(4)。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Advocating hormonal treatment to prevent adult infertility in patients diagnosed with congenital undescended testes REPLY TO THE AUTHORS: Re: One-day voiding diary in the evaluation of Lower Urinary Tract Symptoms in children Vesical imaging reporting and data system (VI-RADS) in bladder cancer diagnosis in review in this number of International Brazilian Journal of Urology The evolution of stress urinary incontinence treatment techniques of the last three decades Impact of artificial urinary sphincter erosion in the reimplantation of the device
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1