• Rodrigo ZanonJefersonJDepartment of Palliative Care and Nephrology, Jales Cancer Hospital (Pio XII Foundation), Jales, Brazil., Mateus Saldanha Cardoso, Marcelo Jenné Mimica, Eliney Ferreira Faria, Glauco Baiocchi, and Guerreiro FregnaniJosé Humberto TavaresJHTGraduate Program at the Cancer Hospital of Barretos, Barretos, Brazil.Director of Teaching and Learning, A.C. Camargo Cancer Center, Antônio Prudente Foundation, São Paulo, Brazil..
• Department of Palliative Care and Nephrology, Jales Cancer Hospital (Pio XII Foundation), Jales, Brazil.
• J Palliat Med. 2020 May 1; 23 (5): 686-691.

AbstractBackground: Antibiotic prophylaxis is usually adopted to prevent urinary tract infection (UTI) after nephrostomy catheter placement and replacement. This prophylaxis has been little studied in cancer patients, and its efficacy is uncertain. Objective: To determine the rate of UTI associated with percutaneous nephrostomy catheters placement and replacement and associated risk factors. Methods: This retrospective study collected data from the available medical records. Catheter-related UTI was defined as any diagnosis of UTI based on clinical symptoms recorded in antibiotic prescription charts, and on the results of urine culture collected up to 7 days after percutaneous nephrostomy catheter. The associations between categorical variables were analyzed using Fisher's exact test. The risk factors for UTI were assessed using logistic regression. Results: In the univariate analyses, there was no significant difference in the rate of urinary infection between patients receiving and not receiving antibiotic prophylaxis before percutaneous nephrostomy and after replacement. Conclusion: The results of the present study suggest that the use of antibiotic prophylaxis for managing urinary tract obstruction by percutaneous nephrostomy is not recommended in cancer patients. In contrast, for catheter replacement, antibiotic prophylaxis appears to have a protective effect for UTI.

15 keywords...

hide…