Open Access
RESIDENT’S CORNER
Extended-spectrum beta-lactamase gram-negative sepsis following prostate biopsy: implications for use of fluoroquinolone prophylaxis
Glenn M. Cannon, Jr.1, Marc C. Smaldone1, David L. Paterson2
1 Department of Urology, University of Pittsburgh School of Medicine, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, USA
2 Division of Infectious Disease, Department of Medicine, University of Pittsburgh School of Medicine, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, USA
Address correspondence to Dr. Marc C. Smaldone, 3471 5th Avenue, Suite 700, Pittsburgh, PA 15213-3232 USA
Canadian Journal of Urology 2007, 14(4), 3653-3655.
Abstract
Extended-spectrum beta-lactamase (ESBL) producing organisms are resistant to penicillins, cephalosporins, aminoglycosides, trimethoprim-sulfamethoxazole, aztreonam, and most fluoroquinolones. We report a case of a 72-year-old man who developed septic shock with an ESBL organism after a transrectal ultrasound (TRUS)-guided prostate biopsy despite having received fluoroquinolone prophylaxis. The patient recovered with intravenous ertapenem. Fluoroquinolone-resistant bacteria are increasing in prevalence. This needs to be recognized when the antibiotic choice for pre-procedure prophylaxis is made.
Keywords
prostate, biopsy, needle, beta-lactamases, urinary tract infections, prevention and control
Cite This Article
APA Style
Cannon, G.M., Jr., , Smaldone, M.C., Paterson, D.L. (2007). Extended-spectrum beta-lactamase gram-negative sepsis following prostate biopsy: implications for use of fluoroquinolone prophylaxis. Canadian Journal of Urology, 14(4), 3653–3655.
Vancouver Style
Cannon GM, Jr. , Smaldone MC, Paterson DL. Extended-spectrum beta-lactamase gram-negative sepsis following prostate biopsy: implications for use of fluoroquinolone prophylaxis. Can J Urology. 2007;14(4):3653–3655.
IEEE Style
G.M. Cannon, Jr., M.C. Smaldone, and D.L. Paterson, “Extended-spectrum beta-lactamase gram-negative sepsis following prostate biopsy: implications for use of fluoroquinolone prophylaxis,” Can. J. Urology, vol. 14, no. 4, pp. 3653–3655, 2007.
Copyright © 2007 The Canadian Journal of Urology.