Prospective, randomized, multicentric, open, comparative study on the efficacy of a prophylactic single dose of 500 mg levofloxacin versus 1920 mg trimethoprim/sulfamethoxazole versus a control group in patients undergoing TUR of the prostate

Abstract

Objectives: Transurethral resection of the prostate (TUR-P) is one of the most frequent urological procedures. The efficacy of a prophylactic single dose of levofloxacin vs. trimethoprim/sulfamethoxazole (TMP/SMZ) vs. a control group, receiving no antibiotic prophylaxis, in patients undergoing TUR-P was investigated in a multicentre study. The aims were to assess the rate of bacteriuria (cfu> or =10(4)/ml) 5 to 7 days, and 3 to 5 weeks after TUR-P, as well as postoperative complications.

Methods: The study was prospective, randomized, multicentric, open and comparative. Patients without bacteriuria (cfu<10(4)/ml) scheduled for TUR-P and not having received antibiotics prior within four days were enclosed. Patients received an oral single dose prophylaxis with either 500 mg levofloxacin, or 320/1600 mg TMP/SMZ, or no prophylaxis according to a 2:2:1 randomization. Clinical examination of the patients and urine culture were performed prior to, 5 to 7 days and 3 to 5 weeks after TUR-P.

Results: 14 urological centres throughout Germany recruited 400 patients. 376 patients were evaluable until day 5 to 7, 339 until week 3 to 5. Overall bacteriuria rate at day 5 to 7 was 22% (levofloxacin 21%; TMP/SMZ 20%; control group 30%). Bacteriuria rate at week 3 to 5 was 28% (levofloxacin 26%; TMP/SMZ 26%; control group 36%). Complication rate at week 3 to 5 was 10% (levofloxacin 8%; TMP/SMZ 10%; control group 16%). The rates of postoperative bacteriuria ranged widely between centers (0%-75%). Statistically significant (p<0.05) risk factors for bacteriuria (range) were qualification of surgeon (19%-37%), presence of a suprapubic catheter (22%-34%), disconnection of the closed drainage system (25%-52%), operating time (12%-31%) and operative centre (0%-75%). Total antibiotic consumption (for prophylaxis and treatment) in the control group was higher and more expensive than in groups with antibiotic prophylaxis (6.9 vs. 5.0 doses/patient; 24.9 vs. 19.7 /patient) (p<0.0001). Postoperative complications in patients with bacteriuria (cfu> or =10(4)/ml) were more frequent than in non bacteriuric (cfu<10(4)/ml) patients (17% vs. 8%) (p<0.01).

Conclusions: It is debatable whether postoperative bacteriuria is the key parameter to define efficacy of antimicrobial prophylaxis in patients undergoing TUR-P. The rate of bacteriuria, however, correlated well with the overall rate of postoperative complications. Therefore, it seems reasonable to lower the rate of bacteriuria by prophylaxis. Since patients without antibiotic prophylaxis received at the end even more antibiotic doses than patients with prophylaxis, the overall selection pressure by antibiotic usage can obviously not be lowered by resigning prophylaxis. Therefore we conclude that at least patients at risk should receive antibiotic prophylaxis prior to TUR-P.