Prophylactic antibiotics in urinary catheterisation to prevent infection

Date First Published:
December 20, 2001
Last Updated:
July 25, 2006
Report by:
F Garnham & C Smith, SpR in Emergency Medicine (Charing Cross Hospital, London)
Search checked by:
S Williams, Charing Cross Hospital, London
Three-Part Question:
In [patients requiring urinary catheterisation for urinary retention] are [prophylactic antibiotics better than no antibiotics] at [reducing the incidence of urinary tract infection]?
Clinical Scenario:
A 70 year old gentleman presents to the emergency department in acute urinary retention. You decide to catheterise him. Your SHO tells you that when he was doing Urology it was standard practice to give systemic antibiotics to any patient catheterised post operatively. You wonder whether the patient in front of you needs them?
Search Strategy:
OVID Medline 1966 to May Week 1 2006 and Embase 1980 to 2006 Week 19 using multifile searching.
The Cochrane Library Issue 2 2006
Search Details:
{urinary catheter.mp OR urinary catheterization.exp OR exp.catheterization} AND {Infection.exp} AND {prophylaxis.mp OR antibiotic, Prophylaxis.exp} AND {urin$} LIMIT Human, English, abstracts

Cochrane:Urinary catheterization [MeSH] AND (Antibiotic prophylaxis [MeSH] OR prophyla* [Title, abstract, keywords])
Outcome:
104 papers identified in Medline, 81 in Embase and 2 in Cochrane. 1 paper was a systematic review that was relevant.
Relevant Paper(s):
Study Title Patient Group Study type (level of evidence) Outcomes Key results Study Weaknesses
Antibiotic policies for short-term catheter bladder drainage in adults. Niel-Weise, B S, van den Broek, P J. Netherlands, 2005 Three trials of hospitalised adults undergoing non-urological surgery who had postoperative bladder drainage Systematic review Antibiotic prophylaxis compared with giving antibiotics when clinically indicated Only 1 relevant paper: significantly lower symptomatic UTI rate in the group receiving prophylactic antibiotics (RR 0.20, 95% CI 0.06 to 0.66) Observation based on only 16 cases of infection in women in one small trial



Data too heterogeneous to allow meta-analysis
Antibiotic prophylaxis compared with giving antibiotics when microbiologically indicated Five to eight-fold fewer cases of bacteriuria amongst those allocated prophylactic antibiotics
Author Commentary:
Many papers were found in the search that examined the use of antibiotics for the prophylaxis of urinary instrumentation during surgery, or in the management of patients with long term problems requiring intermittent catheterisation. Such patients are very different to those found in the emergency department. Similarly, epidemiological papers looking at incidence of infection in hospitalised patients show lower levels of infection in those taking antibiotics for other reasons. No papers directly addressed the issue of the patient presenting to the emergency department.

The paper presented suggests a role for antibiotics but only in patients requiring medium term catheterisation. Another consideration is the potential for the development of bacterial resistance in the patient and in the general population.

The evidence for catheterisation in the emergency patient described is far from conclusive and cannot be routinely recommended. However, there will be high risk patients in whom it may be appropriate.
Bottom Line:
There is insufficient evidence to recommend the routine use of prophylactic antibiotics in the management of acute urinary retention presenting to the emergency department.
Level of Evidence:
Level 1: Recent well-done systematic review was considered or a study of high quality is available
References:
  1. Niel-Weise, B S, van den Broek, P J.. Antibiotic policies for short-term catheter bladder drainage in adults.