↓ Skip to main content

Risk factors for infection following prostate biopsy - a case control study

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Infectious Diseases, December 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (51st percentile)
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (53rd percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
4 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
23 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
55 Mendeley
Title
Risk factors for infection following prostate biopsy - a case control study
Published in
BMC Infectious Diseases, December 2015
DOI 10.1186/s12879-015-1328-7
Pubmed ID
Authors

Elliot Anderson, Olivia Leahy, Allen C. Cheng, Jeremy Grummet

Abstract

Infection is a complication of TRUS prostate biopsy, despite the use of antimicrobial prophylaxis. Worryingly the rate of infectious complications following TRUS biopsy has been shown to be increasing. We aimed to determine the rate, severity, risk factors, standard patterns of care and microbiology resistance profiles associated with TRUS biopsy sepsis. A retrospective case-control study was conducted. Using electronic coding all patients who presented to Cabrini Hospital with sepsis following a TRUS biopsy from 2009 to 2013 were identified. Validated cases were matched to controls in a ratio of 1:3. Eligible controls were required to have undergone a TRUS biopsy at the same surgical institution as the case and in the closest period of time. Demographic, procedural and patient related data-points were recorded for all patients using hospital and urologist records. Univariate logistic regression models were constructed and used to determine risk factors associated with infection. 71 cases developed sepsis following TRUS biopsy and were matched to 213 controls. The average rate of sepsis over the 5-year study period was 1.5 %. A SOFA score ≥ 2 was identified in 28 % of cases. We found a high prevalence of antimicrobial resistant E. coli, with 61 % of blood culture isolates classified as Multidrug resistant organisms. Eight different prophylactic antimicrobial regimens were identified with 33 % of cases receiving ineffective antimicrobial prophylaxis. Statistically significant risk factors included previous antimicrobial use and prior international travel within the six months prior to biopsy. TRUS biopsy is an elective procedure and as such needs to be associated with minimal morbidity. The patterns of care surrounding periprocedural variables for TRUS biopsies were non-uniform and diverse. A wide variety of different prophylaxis regimens and bowel preparation routines were recorded. Patients with risk factors for sepsis may represent a better target population for intervention with alternative preventative strategies. Alternative preventative options include augmented prophylaxis, tailored prophylaxis or the TP biopsy approach either as a first line biopsy modality or based on epidemiological risk factors.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 4 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 55 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Colombia 1 2%
Netherlands 1 2%
Unknown 53 96%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 8 15%
Student > Master 6 11%
Other 6 11%
Student > Doctoral Student 6 11%
Student > Bachelor 4 7%
Other 12 22%
Unknown 13 24%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 24 44%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 5 9%
Immunology and Microbiology 3 5%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 2 4%
Nursing and Health Professions 2 4%
Other 4 7%
Unknown 15 27%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 04 August 2016.
All research outputs
#13,671,220
of 23,305,591 outputs
Outputs from BMC Infectious Diseases
#3,388
of 7,804 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#189,232
of 393,003 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Infectious Diseases
#51
of 113 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,305,591 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 41st percentile – i.e., 41% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 7,804 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 10.3. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 55% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 393,003 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 51% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 113 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 53% of its contemporaries.