English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

Background At a urology center in Australia, patients undergoing elective nonurgent urological surgery routinely receive empirical antibiotic treatment based on urinalysis (UA) prior to intervention to treat presumptive bacteriuria. Sterilization of urine with empirical antibiotics in procedures involving stone manipulation and mucosal disruption in the genitourinary system has been shown to reduce infection risks but whether this translates to low-risk urological interventions is not clear. Methods Patients undergoing outpatient elective urological procedures during a 3-month period between September and November 2017 were retrospectively reviewed. Patient demographics, results of urinalyses, empirical antibiotic use, and data surrounding post-intervention complications were collected and reviewed. Results were analyzed using SPSS v 25. Results Of 119 patients, 111 underwent a pre-procedure urinalysis. Fifty-eight percent (n = 64) of patients were treated with empiric antibiotics pre-operatively based on a positive UA (defined as the presence of urinary leukocytes or nitrites). Fifty-five percent (n = 41) of patients who received empirical antibiotics returned a positive urine culture, and only 49 percent (n = 20) of those receiving antibiotics cultured organisms susceptible to initial antibiotics prescribed. 1 Death, 3 incidences of bacteremia, and 10 incidences of bacteriuria up to 2 weeks occurred post-intervention in this cohort. There was no discernible risk of adverse events based on a composite of post-intervention death, bacteremia and bacteriuria in patients with a positive pre-procedural UA (n = 67/111, RR0.67 CI 0.49–0.91, P = 0.10). Pre-procedural sterilized urine similarly did not demonstrated any reduced risk of post-intervention adverse outcomes (n = 77/119, RR1.02 CI 0.64–1.63, P = 0.94). Conclusion This study demonstrated no increased risk of post-operative infection in patients with a positive urinalysis or urine culture with bacteriuria prior to intervention. There was a high use of broad-spectrum antibiotic as a reflex to positive urinalyses alone highlighting an avenue for improved anti-microbial stewardship. More research is needed to guide clinicians on the role of urine cultures and antibiotics prior to non-urgent urological procedures. Disclosures All authors: No reported disclosures.

1476. The Role of Empirical Antibiotics Determined by Pre-procedural Urinalysis and Urine Cultures in Elective Urological Interventions