Comparison of amikacin with fosfomycin as an add-on to ciprofloxacin for antibiotic prophylaxis in transrectal prostate biopsy: A single-center retrospective study

Abstract

Purpose: To assess the effect of ciprofloxacin (CP) and fosfomycin compared with CP and amikacin in patients with a fluoroquino-lone (FQ)-resistant rectal flora who have undergone transrectal ultrasound-guided prostate biopsy (TRUSPB).Materials and Methods: In total, 516 patients with FQ-resistant rectal flora based on rectal swab cultures were divided into two groups according to prophylactic antibiotics. Patients in both groups were administered CP (400 mg, intravenous [IV], twice daily) on the same day as TRUSPB and 1 day after biopsy. The amikacin group (n=260) was administered a single injection of amikacin (1 g, IV) 1 hour before TRUSPB, whereas the fosfomycin group (n=256) was administered fosfomycin (3 g, orally) the night before the procedure. The primary endpoint was the rate of infectious complications in the two groups. Results: Overall, 13 patients (2.5%) reported infectious complications: 12 patients (4.62%) in the amikacin group compared with 1 patient (0.39%) in the fosfomycin group (risk ratio, 0.09; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.01-0.65), respectively, which was a statisti-cally significant difference (p=0.017). This corresponds to a number needed to treat of 24 patients (95% CI, 15-65) to prevent one infectious complication. In the multivariate analysis to assess variables related to infectious complications, prophylactic antibiotics with added fosfomycin was associated with infectious complications (odds ratio, 0.060; 95% CI, 0.008-0.459).Conclusions: In the era of FQ resistance, CP and fosfomycin may reduce the rate of infectious complications compared with CP and amikacin prophylaxis.