The implantation of prosthetic devices is an ever-increasing practice in urologic surgery. The most common devices are penile prostheses, artificial urinary sphincters, synthetic pubovaginal slings, and bone anchors used for pelvic floor reconstruction and incontinence surgery. While their efficacy has been supported over time, infection and rejection are severe complications. Explantation of the entire prosthetic device has been the standard treatment of such complications, often necessitating long-term antibiotics and prolonged recovery before future reimplantation. The dense inflammatory response associated with prosthetic surgery may obliterate tissue planes and further complicate reoperative efforts. These factors support the need for effective antibiotic prophylaxis, with the goal of preventing bacterial seeding of the prosthesis during implantation. Antibiotic regimens should be effective against biofilm-forming bacteria, especially S. epidermidis and P. aeruginosa, and vancomycin should be a mainstay. Prevention of intraoperative infection by treating existing skin and urinary tract reservoirs and employing strict sterile technique cannot be overemphasized. While data is scant, it appears that routine prophylaxis prior to dental procedures, in patients with urologic prostheses, is unwarranted; however, if the patient is immunocompromised or has severe comorbidities, prophylaxis should be employed.
Keywords: antibiotic prophylaxis, urologic prosthetic Surgery, prosthetic devices, urologic surgery, urinary sphincters, s. epidermidis, p. aeruginosa, vancomycin
Rights & PermissionsPrintExport