Skip to main content
  • ASM
    • Antimicrobial Agents and Chemotherapy
    • Applied and Environmental Microbiology
    • Clinical Microbiology Reviews
    • Clinical and Vaccine Immunology
    • EcoSal Plus
    • Eukaryotic Cell
    • Infection and Immunity
    • Journal of Bacteriology
    • Journal of Clinical Microbiology
    • Journal of Microbiology & Biology Education
    • Journal of Virology
    • mBio
    • Microbiology and Molecular Biology Reviews
    • Microbiology Resource Announcements
    • Microbiology Spectrum
    • Molecular and Cellular Biology
    • mSphere
    • mSystems
  • Log in
  • My alerts
  • My Cart

Main menu

  • Home
  • Articles
    • Current Issue
    • Accepted Manuscripts
    • COVID-19 Special Collection
    • Archive
    • Minireviews
  • For Authors
    • Submit a Manuscript
    • Scope
    • Editorial Policy
    • Submission, Review, & Publication Processes
    • Organization and Format
    • Errata, Author Corrections, Retractions
    • Illustrations and Tables
    • Nomenclature
    • Abbreviations and Conventions
    • Publication Fees
    • Ethics Resources and Policies
  • About the Journal
    • About AAC
    • Editor in Chief
    • Editorial Board
    • For Reviewers
    • For the Media
    • For Librarians
    • For Advertisers
    • Alerts
    • AAC Podcast
    • RSS
    • FAQ
  • Subscribe
    • Members
    • Institutions
  • ASM
    • Antimicrobial Agents and Chemotherapy
    • Applied and Environmental Microbiology
    • Clinical Microbiology Reviews
    • Clinical and Vaccine Immunology
    • EcoSal Plus
    • Eukaryotic Cell
    • Infection and Immunity
    • Journal of Bacteriology
    • Journal of Clinical Microbiology
    • Journal of Microbiology & Biology Education
    • Journal of Virology
    • mBio
    • Microbiology and Molecular Biology Reviews
    • Microbiology Resource Announcements
    • Microbiology Spectrum
    • Molecular and Cellular Biology
    • mSphere
    • mSystems

User menu

  • Log in
  • My alerts
  • My Cart

Search

  • Advanced search
Antimicrobial Agents and Chemotherapy
publisher-logosite-logo

Advanced Search

  • Home
  • Articles
    • Current Issue
    • Accepted Manuscripts
    • COVID-19 Special Collection
    • Archive
    • Minireviews
  • For Authors
    • Submit a Manuscript
    • Scope
    • Editorial Policy
    • Submission, Review, & Publication Processes
    • Organization and Format
    • Errata, Author Corrections, Retractions
    • Illustrations and Tables
    • Nomenclature
    • Abbreviations and Conventions
    • Publication Fees
    • Ethics Resources and Policies
  • About the Journal
    • About AAC
    • Editor in Chief
    • Editorial Board
    • For Reviewers
    • For the Media
    • For Librarians
    • For Advertisers
    • Alerts
    • AAC Podcast
    • RSS
    • FAQ
  • Subscribe
    • Members
    • Institutions
Clinical Therapeutics

Long-Term Fosfomycin-Tromethamine Oral Therapy for Difficult-To-Treat Chronic Bacterial Prostatitis

Ibai Los-Arcos, Carles Pigrau, Dolors Rodríguez-Pardo, Nuria Fernández-Hidalgo, Antonia Andreu, Nieves Larrosa, Benito Almirante
Ibai Los-Arcos
aInfectious Diseases Department, Hospital Universitari Vall d'Hebron, Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona, Barcelona, Spain
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • ORCID record for Ibai Los-Arcos
Carles Pigrau
aInfectious Diseases Department, Hospital Universitari Vall d'Hebron, Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona, Barcelona, Spain
cSpanish Network for the Research in Infectious Diseases (REIPI RD12/0015), Instituto de Salud Carlos III, Madrid, Spain
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Dolors Rodríguez-Pardo
aInfectious Diseases Department, Hospital Universitari Vall d'Hebron, Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona, Barcelona, Spain
cSpanish Network for the Research in Infectious Diseases (REIPI RD12/0015), Instituto de Salud Carlos III, Madrid, Spain
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Nuria Fernández-Hidalgo
aInfectious Diseases Department, Hospital Universitari Vall d'Hebron, Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona, Barcelona, Spain
cSpanish Network for the Research in Infectious Diseases (REIPI RD12/0015), Instituto de Salud Carlos III, Madrid, Spain
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Antonia Andreu
bMicrobiology Department, Hospital Universitari Vall d'Hebron, Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona, Barcelona, Spain
cSpanish Network for the Research in Infectious Diseases (REIPI RD12/0015), Instituto de Salud Carlos III, Madrid, Spain
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Nieves Larrosa
bMicrobiology Department, Hospital Universitari Vall d'Hebron, Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona, Barcelona, Spain
cSpanish Network for the Research in Infectious Diseases (REIPI RD12/0015), Instituto de Salud Carlos III, Madrid, Spain
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Benito Almirante
aInfectious Diseases Department, Hospital Universitari Vall d'Hebron, Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona, Barcelona, Spain
cSpanish Network for the Research in Infectious Diseases (REIPI RD12/0015), Instituto de Salud Carlos III, Madrid, Spain
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
DOI: 10.1128/AAC.02611-15
  • Article
  • Figures & Data
  • Info & Metrics
  • PDF
Loading

ABSTRACT

This is a retrospective study of 15 difficult-to-treat (i.e., exhibiting previous failure, patient side effects, or resistance to ciprofloxacin and co-trimoxazole) chronic bacterial prostatitis infections (5 patients with multidrug-resistant Enterobacteriaceae [MDRE]) receiving fosfomycin-tromethamine at a dose of 3 g per 48 to 72 h for 6 weeks. After a median follow-up of 20 months, 7 patients (47%) had a clinical response, and 8 patients (53%) had persistent microbiological eradication; 4/5 patients with MDRE isolates achieved eradication. There were no side effects. Fosfomycin-tromethamine is a possible alternative therapy for chronic bacterial prostatitis.

TEXT

Chronic bacterial prostatitis (CBP) is a troublesome disease, showing an overall clinical and microbiological response rate to fluoroquinolones, the antibiotics of choice, of only 60% (1–4). In CBP caused by Escherichia coli, the reported resistance rates are 11% to ciprofloxacin and 20% to norfloxacin (5). Co-trimoxazole is an alternative antibiotic option, but its cure rates are lower than those of other drugs (1, 4). The resistance rate to co-trimoxazole is high in patients with urinary tract infections (UTI) (around 34% in Spain) (6), and reported resistance in E. coli CBP is 24% (5). Other antibiotics are usually ineffective due to poor prostatic penetration; hence, there may be no effective antibiotic therapy for some patients (1).

Fosfomycin-tromethamine (FT) has broad-spectrum antimicrobial activity and is useful for treating lower UTI caused by extended-spectrum β-lactamase (ESBL)-producing Enterobacteriaceae (7–10). Mean fosfomycin levels in the uninflamed peripheral prostate region after 3 g of FT were found to be >4 μg/g of tissue in 70% of patients (11). This value is higher than the MIC breakpoint of many uropathogens. In addition, FT proved useful in 2 cases of multidrug-resistant Enterobacteriaceae (MDRE) prostatitis (12).

(This study was presented in part as poster no. 838 at the XIX Congreso de la Sociedad Española de Enfermedades Infecciosas y Microbiología Clínica [SEIMC], 28 to 30 May 2015, Seville, Spain [13].)

In this retrospective study, we assessed the efficacy of FT as an alternative therapy for patients with difficult-to-treat CBP. The inclusion criteria were a diagnosis of CBP, failure of prolonged antibiotic therapy, and no possibility of fluoroquinolone or co-trimoxazole use due to resistance, failure, or side effects (Fig. 1). All patients had been treated and followed up in our UTI outpatient clinic (January 2010 to July 2014) by one of the authors (C.P.). The study was approved by the hospital ethics committee and Spanish Drug Agency (approval VDH-FOS-2014-01).

FIG 1
  • Open in new tab
  • Download powerpoint
FIG 1

Flow diagram of patients included in the study.

A diagnosis of CBP was established when all 4 criteria were met: (i) history of CBP, defined as ≥1 previous symptomatic episode of bacterial prostatitis of ≥4 weeks duration or ≥2 episodes of any duration in the preceding 12 months; (ii) current symptoms of prostatitis; (iii) absence of genitourinary abnormalities on ≥1 urologic ultrasound assessment; and (iv) current laboratory evidence of infection, including positive Meares-Stamey test result (14), positive semen culture, or ≥2 positive urine cultures with the same microorganism performed ≥1 month apart, in which a typical uropathogen was detected.

Semen culture was considered positive when (i) bacteria were found in the semen sample, and either (ii) no bacteria were detected in the first voided urine (VB1) or midstream-voided urine (VB2) sample, or the bacterial colony count in the semen sample was ≥10 times that in the VB1 and VB2 specimens. Urine culture was considered positive with colony counts of ≥103 CFU/ml.

Susceptibility to fosfomycin, co-trimoxazole, and ciprofloxacin was evaluated by disk diffusion or Etest, according to CLSI recommendations (15), up to 2014. In April 2014, our microbiology department implemented the Vitek 2 system (bioMérieux, Marcy l'Etoile, France). ESBL was diagnosed by phenotypic confirmatory methods based on their in vitro inhibition by clavulanic acid (double-disk synergy test and disk diffusion with cefotaxime and ceftazidime alone and in combination with clavulanic acid). An acquired (plasmidic) AmpC strain was suspected in strains with resistance to cefotaxime or ceftazidime but susceptible to cefepime. The phenotypic confirmatory tests used in the laboratory were based on their in vitro inhibition by boronic acid. All cases were confirmed by PCR techniques. Enterobacteriaceae nonsusceptible to at least 1 agent in ≥3 antimicrobial categories were considered MDRE (16).

Previous antibiotic failure was established when symptoms persisted and cultures tested positive in patients treated with ≥4 weeks of ciprofloxacin (500 mg/12 h) or ≥6 weeks of co-trimoxazole (160 mg/800 mg/12 h). All patients included received FT at a dose of 3 g every 48 to 72 h for 6 weeks, and all were followed up for ≥1 year in the UTI outpatient clinic.

Clinical response to FT was defined as resolution or appreciable improvement in pretreatment signs and symptoms, with no additional antibiotic therapy during follow-up. Clinical failure was established when symptoms persisted after 2 weeks of treatment or recurred during follow-up.

The microbiological eradication rate was determined based on a negative Meares-Stamey test result or 2 negative semen cultures at 1 month and 6 months after the completion of treatment. Microbiological failure was defined as persistent isolation of the same microorganism in the follow-up cultures. Superinfection was defined as infection by a new pathogen. Side effects were specifically recorded in all patients. The data for quantitative variables are expressed as the median and interquartile range (IQR), and the data for discrete variables are expressed as the number and percentage.

Over the study period, 15 CBP patients (median age, 54 years; IQR, 44 to 49 years) received FT. The clinical and microbiological data are shown in Table 1. All patients had experienced recurrent UTI (median, 4 prior episodes; IQR, 4 to 9 episodes) and had failed ≥1 previous prolonged antibiotic treatment (median, 6 weeks; IQR, 4 to 8 weeks).

View this table:
  • View inline
  • View popup
TABLE 1

Clinical and microbiological data, therapeutic aspects, and outcomes of chronic bacterial prostatitis patients treated with fosfomycin-tromethamine

The microorganisms isolated included E. coli in 14 (93%) patients, MDRE in 5 (37%) patients (4 ESBL producers and 1 CMY-type AmpC β-lactamase producer), and Klebsiella oxytoca in 1 patient.

Primary ciprofloxacin resistance was detected in 5 isolates. Of 10 isolates from ciprofloxacin-treated patients with clinical failure, 5 isolates showed secondary resistance. Primary co-trimoxazole resistance was found in 8 isolates. None of the 4 co-trimoxazole-treated patients with clinical failure showed secondary resistance. In 3 co-trimoxazole-susceptible isolates, co-trimoxazole was not used because of allergy in 2 patients and gastrointestinal intolerance in 1 patient.

All patients except 1 (case 1, initially given 7 days of ertapenem) were treated with oral FT alone for 6 weeks. In 13, FT was administered every 72 h. In an attempt to improve efficacy, the last 2 patients (cases 14 and 15) received FT every 48 h.

After a median follow-up of 20 months (IQR, 14 to 36 months), 7/15 (47%) patients showed clinical cure. Microbiological eradication at 1 and 6 months was documented in 9/15 (60%) and 8/15 (53%) patients, respectively. Among the 7 microbiological failures, 1 patient had a persistent infection, and 6 patients had clinical relapse. One microbiological failure (case 9) retreated with FT at a dose of 3 g/48 h for 8 weeks relapsed. Only 1 patient with microbiological failure developed fosfomycin resistance. Among 5 MDRE CBP, 4 cases had sustained clinical cure and microbiological eradication at a median of 29 months. Among 6 cases with prostatic calcifications, 2 cases cured, 1 case persisted, and 3 cases relapsed. There were no gastrointestinal side effects or allergic reactions.

Patients failing FT were treated with ≥12 weeks of ciprofloxacin (3 patients) or co-trimoxazole (3 patients) for susceptible microorganisms or long-term suppressive antibiotic regimens (50 mg/day nitrofurantoin in 1 patient); these patients currently are in the follow-up period.

In the experience reported, half our CBP patients failing prolonged first-line antibiotic treatments and given FT at a dose of 3 g every 48 to 72 h for 6 weeks achieved clinical cure and microbiological eradication; nonetheless, the other half failed. Apart from the recognized difficulty in achieving cure in CBP patients failing first-line therapies, several factors may have contributed to this lack of response. The optimal use of FT is hindered by the absence of defined MICs for conditions other than lower UTI (≤64 μg/ml) (15). Our 2014 susceptibility data for E. coli uropathogens using Vitek 2 showed that 8,003/8,291 (96.5%) isolates were susceptible to fosfomycin at MICs of ≤16 μg/ml (our unpublished data). As this is a retrospective study, fosfomycin MICs were not determined. Since fosfomycin prostate levels are around 4 μg/g of tissue, and some isolates may have had MICs of >4 μg/ml, this may be the reason for some failures. We concur with other authors (12, 17, 18) who suggest that fosfomycin should not be used for treating CBP caused by microorganisms with MICs of ≥4 μg/ml. Another factor to consider is that fosfomycin activity is higher in an acidic environment, but the pH is alkaline in CBP (around 8.5), which might lead to decreased activity of the drug (18). Lastly, prostatic calcifications were present in 4/7 (57%) patients with microbiological failure. CBP is now considered a biofilm infection (18–21), and bacteria present in calcification biofilms are difficult to eradicate, potentially leading to therapeutic failure.

To our knowledge, this is the first series of CBP patients treated with oral FT; hence, we had no precedence to guide drug dosing and duration for this condition. We choose 6 weeks of FT, because that is the generally recommended duration of CBP treatment (1–3, 17). The successful treatment of 2 prostatitis patients with 12 to 16 weeks of FT at 3 g/24 h was recently reported (12). We initially administered FT at 3 g/72 h, the recommended dose for uncomplicated UTI, because of concerns that dosing daily or every 48 h might increase gastrointestinal side effects (22). When we started using FT, there was only one reported case of vancomycin-resistant enterococcal prostatitis successfully treated with oral FT at 3 g/72 h for 21 days (23). Because the 72-h dose had been well tolerated, we used FT every 48 h in 1 patient who relapsed and in our last 2 cases. These data and the good tolerance reported by Grayson et al. (12) suggest that a shorter dosing interval may be feasible. Nonetheless, a regimen of 3 g/12 h has been associated with gastrointestinal side effects (12). Further studies are needed to establish the optimal dose and duration of FT in CBP.

Fosfomycin, an old drug recently rediscovered for the treatment of multidrug-resistant infections, has a success rate of >90% for lower UTI (8–10, 17). Interestingly, in our limited experience with MDRE CBP, 4/5 (80%) patients had sustained clinical and microbiological eradication. These data add further information to the recent case reports of MDRE prostatitis successfully treated with fosfomycin (12, 18), making FT a promising antibiotic in the current scenario of an increasing incidence of MDRE infections.

This study is limited by its retrospective, single-center, and noncontrolled design, a small sample size, and uniform management by one of the authors (C.P.), limiting the generalizability of the results. Furthermore, clinical response evaluations are subjective, and the Meares-Stamey test (four-glass test), which is considered the diagnostic reference standard, was not systematically employed, as it is a cumbersome method that is used little in clinical settings (24). Semen culture used in our study has a sensitivity similar to that of the four-glass method (25), and because of its high specificity (94%), some authors consider it sufficient for initiating antibiotics in symptomatic patients (26). We believe it is unlikely that the microbiological relapse rate in our study would have been higher if the 4-glass test had been used, as our patients had a lengthy clinical follow-up period (>1 year).

All patients met the clinical criteria for CBP (recurrent UTI and symptoms for >3 months), had several positive cultures with the same Enterobacteriaceae organism, and had failed >4 weeks of appropriately active antibiotics at an adequate dosage. Therefore, the clinical diagnosis of CBP can be considered reliable. The fact that FT administration is simple, well tolerated, and cost-effective is a strength of our results. Other alternatives to ciprofloxacin and co-trimoxazole require more-complex and non-evidence-based antibiotic regimens (long-term suppressive or intravenous antibiotics).

In conclusion, FT may be considered an alternative treatment for CBP in patients with MDRE infection and resistance or side effects to first-line drugs. Until further data are available, it would be prudent to use this option only for isolates with fosfomycin MICs of ≥4 μg/ml.

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

We thank Celine Cavallo for English language support.

We declare no conflicts of interest.

FOOTNOTES

    • Received 28 October 2015.
    • Returned for modification 8 November 2015.
    • Accepted 2 December 2015.
    • Accepted manuscript posted online 14 December 2015.
  • Copyright © 2016, American Society for Microbiology. All Rights Reserved.

REFERENCES

  1. 1.↵
    1. Lipsky BA,
    2. Byren I,
    3. Hoey CT
    . 2010. Treatment of bacterial prostatitis. Clin Infect Dis 50:1641–1652. doi:10.1086/652861.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  2. 2.↵
    1. Liang C-Z,
    2. Li H-J,
    3. Wang Z-P,
    4. Xing J-P,
    5. Hu W-L,
    6. Zhang T-F,
    7. Ge W-W,
    8. Hao Z-Y,
    9. Zhang X-S,
    10. Zhou J,
    11. Li Y,
    12. Zhou Z-X,
    13. Tang Z-G
    . 2009. Treatment of chronic prostatitis in Chinese men. Asian J Androl 11:153–156. doi:10.1038/aja.2008.46.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  3. 3.↵
    1. Perletti G,
    2. Marras E,
    3. Wagenlehner FME,
    4. Magri V
    . 2013. Antimicrobial therapy for chronic bacterial prostatitis. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 8:CD009071. doi:10.1002/14651858.CD009071.pub2.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  4. 4.↵
    1. Naber KG,
    2. Roscher K,
    3. Botto H,
    4. Schaefer V
    . 2008. Oral levofloxacin 500 mg once daily in the treatment of chronic bacterial prostatitis. Int J Antimicrob Agents 32:145–153. doi:10.1016/j.ijantimicag.2008.03.014.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  5. 5.↵
    1. Cai T,
    2. Mazzoli S,
    3. Meacci F,
    4. Boddi V,
    5. Mondaini N,
    6. Malossini G,
    7. Bartoletti R
    . 2011. Epidemiological features and resistance pattern in uropathogens isolated from chronic bacterial prostatitis. J Microbiol 49:448–454. doi:10.1007/s12275-011-0391-z.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  6. 6.↵
    1. Palou J,
    2. Pigrau C,
    3. Molina I,
    4. Ledesma JM,
    5. Angulo J
    , Grupo Colaborador Español del Estudio ARESC. 2011. Etiology and sensitivity of uropathogens identified in uncomplicated lower urinary tract infections in women (ARESC study): implications on empiric therapy. Med Clin (Barc) 136:1–7. (In Spanish.) doi:10.1016/j.medcli.2010.02.042.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  7. 7.↵
    1. Falagas ME,
    2. Kastoris AC,
    3. Kapaskelis AM,
    4. Karageorgopoulos DE
    . 2010. Fosfomycin for the treatment of multidrug-resistant, including extended-spectrum beta-lactamase producing, Enterobacteriaceae infections: a systematic review. Lancet Infect Dis 10:43–50. doi:10.1016/S1473-3099(09)70325-1.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  8. 8.↵
    1. Rodríguez-Baño J,
    2. Alcalá JC,
    3. Cisneros JM,
    4. Grill F,
    5. Oliver A,
    6. Horcajada JP,
    7. Tórtola T,
    8. Mirelis B,
    9. Navarro G,
    10. Cuenca M,
    11. Esteve M,
    12. Peña C,
    13. Llanos AC,
    14. Cantón R,
    15. Pascual A
    . 2008. Community infections caused by extended-spectrum beta-lactamase-producing Escherichia coli. Arch Intern Med 168:1897–1902. doi:10.1001/archinte.168.17.1897.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  9. 9.↵
    1. Pullukcu H,
    2. Tasbakan M,
    3. Sipahi OR,
    4. Yamazhan T,
    5. Aydemir S,
    6. Ulusoy S
    . 2007. Fosfomycin in the treatment of extended spectrum beta-lactamase-producing Escherichia coli-related lower urinary tract infections. Int J Antimicrob Agents 29:62–65. doi:10.1016/j.ijantimicag.2006.08.039.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  10. 10.↵
    1. Senol S,
    2. Tasbakan M,
    3. Pullukcu H,
    4. Sipahi OR,
    5. Sipahi H,
    6. Yamazhan T,
    7. Arda B,
    8. Ulusoy S
    . 2010. Carbapenem versus fosfomycin tromethanol in the treatment of extended-spectrum beta-lactamase-producing Escherichia coli-related complicated lower urinary tract infection. J Chemother 22:355–337. doi:10.1179/joc.2010.22.5.355.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  11. 11.↵
    1. Gardiner BJ,
    2. Mahony AA,
    3. Ellis AG,
    4. Lawrentschuk N,
    5. Bolton DM,
    6. Zeglinski PT,
    7. Frauman AG,
    8. Grayson ML
    . 2014. Is fosfomycin a potential treatment alternative for multidrug-resistant Gram-negative prostatitis? Clin Infect Dis 58:e101–105. doi:10.1093/cid/cit704.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  12. 12.↵
    1. Grayson ML,
    2. Macesic N,
    3. Trevillyan J,
    4. Ellis AG,
    5. Zeglinski PT,
    6. Hewitt NH,
    7. Gardiner BJ,
    8. Frauman AG
    . 2015. Fosfomycin for treatment of prostatitis: new tricks for old dogs. Clin Infect Dis 61:1141–1143. doi:10.1093/cid/civ436.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  13. 13.↵
    1. Los Arcos I,
    2. Pigrau C,
    3. Fernández-Hidalgo N,
    4. Rodríguez-Pardo D,
    5. Andreu A,
    6. Almirante B
    . 2015. Eficacia de la administración de una pauta de fosfomicina-trometamol como terapia de rescate en pacientes con prostatitis crónica bacteriana (PCB), poster no. 838. XIX Congreso de la Sociedad Española de Enfermedades Infecciosas y Microbiología Clínica (SEIMC), 28 to 30 May 2015, Seville, Spain.
  14. 14.↵
    1. Meares EM,
    2. Stamey TA
    . 1972. Bacterial prostatitis and recurrent urinary tract infections, p 467–473. In Hoeprich PD (ed), Infectious diseases, 3rd ed. Harper & Row, Hagerstown, MD.
  15. 15.↵
    Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute. 2014. Performance standards for antimicrobial susceptibility testing; 24th informational supplement. CLSI document M100-S24. Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute, Wayne, PA.
  16. 16.↵
    1. Magiorakos A-P,
    2. Srinivasan A,
    3. Carey RB,
    4. Carmeli Y,
    5. Falagas ME,
    6. Giske CG,
    7. Harbarth S,
    8. Hindler JF,
    9. Kahlmeter G,
    10. Olsson-Liljequist B,
    11. Paterson DL,
    12. Rice LB,
    13. Stelling J,
    14. Struelens MJ,
    15. Vatopoulos A,
    16. Weber JT,
    17. Monnet DL
    . 2012. Multidrug-resistant, extensively drug-resistant and pandrug-resistant bacteria: an international expert proposal for interim standard definitions for acquired resistance. Clin Microbiol Infect 18:268–281. doi:10.1111/j.1469-0691.2011.03570.x.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  17. 17.↵
    1. Falagas ME,
    2. Rafailidis PI
    . 2015. Fosfomycin: the current status of the drug. Clin Infect Dis 61:1144–1146. doi:10.1093/cid/civ443.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  18. 18.↵
    1. Cunha BA,
    2. Gran A,
    3. Raza M
    . 2015. Persistent extended-spectrum β-lactamase-positive Escherichia coli chronic prostatitis successfully treated with a combination of fosfomycin and doxycycline. Int J Antimicrob Agents 45:427–429. doi:10.1016/j.ijantimicag.2014.12.019.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  19. 19.↵
    1. Wagenlehner FME,
    2. Pilatz A,
    3. Bschleipfer T,
    4. Diemer T,
    5. Linn T,
    6. Meinhardt A,
    7. Schagdarsurengin U,
    8. Dansranjavin T,
    9. Schuppe H-C,
    10. Weidner W
    . 2013. Bacterial prostatitis. World J Urol 31:711–716. doi:10.1007/s00345-013-1055-x.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  20. 20.↵
    1. Bartoletti R,
    2. Cai T,
    3. Nesi G,
    4. Albanese S,
    5. Meacci F,
    6. Mazzoli S,
    7. Naber K
    . 2014. The impact of biofilm-producing bacteria on chronic bacterial prostatitis treatment: results from a longitudinal cohort study. World J Urol 32:737–742. doi:10.1007/s00345-013-1145-9.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  21. 21.↵
    1. Mazzoli S
    . 2010. Biofilms in chronic bacterial prostatitis (NIH-II) and in prostatic calcifications. FEMS Immunol Med Microbiol 59:337–344. doi:10.1111/j.1574-695X.2010.00659.x.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  22. 22.↵
    1. Keating GM
    . 2013. Fosfomycin trometamol: a review of its use as a single-dose oral treatment for patients with acute lower urinary tract infections and pregnant women with asymptomatic bacteriuria. Drugs 73:1951–1966. doi:10.1007/s40265-013-0143-y.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  23. 23.↵
    1. Shresha NK,
    2. Amuh D,
    3. Goldman MP,
    4. Riebel WJ,
    5. Tomford WJ
    . 2000. Treatment of a complicated vancomycin-resistant enterococcal urinary tract infection with fosfomycin. Infect Dis Clin Pract 9:368–371. doi:10.1097/00019048-200009090-00004.
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  24. 24.↵
    1. McNaughton Collins M,
    2. Fowler FJ, Jr,
    3. Elliott DB,
    4. Albertsen PC,
    5. Barry MJ
    . 2000. Diagnosing and treating chronic prostatitis: do urologists use the four-glass test? Urology 55:403–407. doi:10.1016/S0090-4295(99)00536-1.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  25. 25.↵
    1. Budía A,
    2. Luis Palmero J,
    3. Broseta E,
    4. Tejadillos S,
    5. Benedicto A,
    6. Queipo JA,
    7. Gobernado M,
    8. Fernando Jiménez Cruz J
    . 2006. Value of semen culture in the diagnosis of chronic bacterial prostatitis: a simplified method. Scand J Urol Nephrol 40:326–331. doi:10.1080/00365590600748247.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  26. 26.↵
    1. Zegarra Montes LZ,
    2. Sanchez Mejia AA,
    3. Loza Munarriz CA,
    4. Gutierrez EC
    . 2008. Semen and urine culture in the diagnosis of chronic bacterial prostatitis. Int Braz J Urol 34:30–37, discussion 38–40. doi:10.1590/S1677-55382008000100006.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
View Abstract
PreviousNext
Back to top
Download PDF
Citation Tools
Long-Term Fosfomycin-Tromethamine Oral Therapy for Difficult-To-Treat Chronic Bacterial Prostatitis
Ibai Los-Arcos, Carles Pigrau, Dolors Rodríguez-Pardo, Nuria Fernández-Hidalgo, Antonia Andreu, Nieves Larrosa, Benito Almirante
Antimicrobial Agents and Chemotherapy Feb 2016, 60 (3) 1854-1858; DOI: 10.1128/AAC.02611-15

Citation Manager Formats

  • BibTeX
  • Bookends
  • EasyBib
  • EndNote (tagged)
  • EndNote 8 (xml)
  • Medlars
  • Mendeley
  • Papers
  • RefWorks Tagged
  • Ref Manager
  • RIS
  • Zotero
Print

Alerts
Sign In to Email Alerts with your Email Address
Email

Thank you for sharing this Antimicrobial Agents and Chemotherapy article.

NOTE: We request your email address only to inform the recipient that it was you who recommended this article, and that it is not junk mail. We do not retain these email addresses.

Enter multiple addresses on separate lines or separate them with commas.
Long-Term Fosfomycin-Tromethamine Oral Therapy for Difficult-To-Treat Chronic Bacterial Prostatitis
(Your Name) has forwarded a page to you from Antimicrobial Agents and Chemotherapy
(Your Name) thought you would be interested in this article in Antimicrobial Agents and Chemotherapy.
CAPTCHA
This question is for testing whether or not you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.
Share
Long-Term Fosfomycin-Tromethamine Oral Therapy for Difficult-To-Treat Chronic Bacterial Prostatitis
Ibai Los-Arcos, Carles Pigrau, Dolors Rodríguez-Pardo, Nuria Fernández-Hidalgo, Antonia Andreu, Nieves Larrosa, Benito Almirante
Antimicrobial Agents and Chemotherapy Feb 2016, 60 (3) 1854-1858; DOI: 10.1128/AAC.02611-15
del.icio.us logo Digg logo Reddit logo Twitter logo CiteULike logo Facebook logo Google logo Mendeley logo
  • Top
  • Article
    • ABSTRACT
    • TEXT
    • ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
    • FOOTNOTES
    • REFERENCES
  • Figures & Data
  • Info & Metrics
  • PDF

Related Articles

Cited By...

About

  • About AAC
  • Editor in Chief
  • Editorial Board
  • Policies
  • For Reviewers
  • For the Media
  • For Librarians
  • For Advertisers
  • Alerts
  • AAC Podcast
  • RSS
  • FAQ
  • Permissions
  • Journal Announcements

Authors

  • ASM Author Center
  • Submit a Manuscript
  • Article Types
  • Ethics
  • Contact Us

Follow #AACJournal

@ASMicrobiology

       

ASM Journals

ASM journals are the most prominent publications in the field, delivering up-to-date and authoritative coverage of both basic and clinical microbiology.

About ASM | Contact Us | Press Room

 

ASM is a member of

Scientific Society Publisher Alliance

 

American Society for Microbiology
1752 N St. NW
Washington, DC 20036
Phone: (202) 737-3600

Copyright © 2021 American Society for Microbiology | Privacy Policy | Website feedback

Print ISSN: 0066-4804; Online ISSN: 1098-6596