ライフサイエンスコーパス: antibiotic prophylaxis

1 us, IE cannot be prevented by circumstantial antibiotic prophylaxis.

2 in the incidence of SSIs was amikacin use as antibiotic prophylaxis.

3 ive vaccination, education, and occasionally antibiotic prophylaxis.

4 identified 114 eligible randomized trials of antibiotic prophylaxis.

5 high compliance with standard perioperative antibiotic prophylaxis.

6 n were similar with either <24 h or <48 h of antibiotic prophylaxis.

7 om cephalosporins to gentamicin for surgical antibiotic prophylaxis.

8 e index case highlights a potential role for antibiotic prophylaxis.

9 transplantation, with limited data to guide antibiotic prophylaxis.

10 idated questionnaire evaluating adherence to antibiotic prophylaxis.

11 alvulopathy and can be entirely prevented by antibiotic prophylaxis.

12 hesiologists score, and choice and timing of antibiotic prophylaxis.

13 t was not susceptible to the peri-procedural antibiotic prophylaxis.

14 69%) studies reported use of any intrapartum antibiotic prophylaxis.

15 idelines cite a lack of evidence for routine antibiotic prophylaxis.

16 coureteral reflux management with surgery or antibiotic prophylaxis.

17 pore exposure requires a prolonged course of antibiotic prophylaxis.

18 ed until 14 days after the administration of antibiotic prophylaxis.

19 by minimizing the delay until initiation of antibiotic prophylaxis.

20 ux nephropathy can be reduced effectively by antibiotic prophylaxis.

21 alational anthrax is the optimum duration of antibiotic prophylaxis.

22 There is substantial underuse and overuse of antibiotic prophylaxis.

23 oach) to identify candidates for intrapartum antibiotic prophylaxis.

24 techniques, diagnosis in young infants, and antibiotic prophylaxis.

25 of delayed graft function, and perioperative antibiotic prophylaxis.

26 -risk subset of persons who may benefit from antibiotic prophylaxis.

27 the root words endocarditis, bacteremia, and antibiotic prophylaxis.

28 ost (71%) discussed compliance with surgical antibiotic prophylaxis.

29 cs at the time of POEM may be sufficient for antibiotic prophylaxis.

30 of bacterial wound contamination, and use of antibiotic prophylaxis.

31 lenectomy infections through vaccination and antibiotic prophylaxis.

32 vaccinations, and monoclonal antibodies) and antibiotic prophylaxis.

33 blood cell transfusions, and thrombotic and antibiotic prophylaxis.

34 ix have been able to discontinue CGD-related antibiotic prophylaxis.

35 is more effective and less expensive than no antibiotic prophylaxis.

36 58 in the period after implementation of the antibiotic prophylaxis.

37 nfection with and without the use of topical antibiotic prophylaxis.

38 an effective option for surgeons electing IC antibiotic prophylaxis.

39 omen were also scheduled to receive standard antibiotic prophylaxis.

40 ggested to balance the risks and benefits of antibiotic prophylaxis.

41 nt scenarios of reduction in the efficacy of antibiotic prophylaxis (10%, 30%, 70%, and 100% reductio

42 , 3412 women were assigned to receive either antibiotic prophylaxis (1705 [50%] of 3412) or placebo (

43 O was detected in 27 patients (35.1%) during antibiotic prophylaxis; 33 patients (42.9%) developed se

44 highest compliance observed for preincision antibiotic prophylaxis (99.6%) and the lowest compliance

45 Despite evidence supporting short antibiotic prophylaxis (ABP), it is still common practic

46 story of immunocompromise, need for enhanced antibiotic prophylaxis, absent rectum, or inability to p

47 tudies are needed to answer the questions on antibiotic prophylaxis across the spectrum of UTI in dif

48 This study suggests that antibiotic prophylaxis after endoscopic hemostasis for a

49 ought to determine whether a short course of antibiotic prophylaxis after exposure could protect non-

50 have raised serious doubts about the role of antibiotic prophylaxis after UTI by demonstrating the pr

51 ry, there are still no definitive studies on antibiotic prophylaxis against endophthalmitis after cat

52 Although antibiotic prophylaxis against infective endocarditis is

53 red children with SCD may receive inadequate antibiotic prophylaxis against pneumococcal infections,

54 (5) A poor choice of antibiotic prophylaxis agent occurred in 8% of patients

55 n and sulbactam was the most common systemic antibiotic prophylaxis agent used (n = 367 [66.2%]), wit

56 hanced the protection afforded by 14 days of antibiotic prophylaxis alone and completely protected an

57 -would have the greatest impact on uptake of antibiotic prophylaxis among patients with RHD in Uganda

58 t study of patients receiving periprocedural antibiotic prophylaxis, an algorithm with a high sensiti

59 In advanced cirrhotic patients, antibiotic prophylaxis and drainage of hydrothorax may b

60 cal CNS prophylaxis and supportive care with antibiotic prophylaxis and granulocyte colony-stimulatin

61 Antibiotic prophylaxis and growth factor support were re

62 lly delivered babies whose mothers underwent antibiotic prophylaxis and in babies who were not breast

63 the isolates were resistant to the systemic antibiotic prophylaxis and in none of six cases with sus

64 Therapeutic strategies such as antibiotic prophylaxis and microbiological diagnosis are

65 tion in pregnant women, offering intrapartum antibiotic prophylaxis and point-of-care testing, and un

66 ng stone surgery can be catastrophic despite antibiotic prophylaxis and sterile pre-operative urine.

67 Whether this change affected the use of antibiotic prophylaxis and the incidence of IE is unclea

68 to investigate changes in the prescribing of antibiotic prophylaxis and the incidence of infective en

69 eting-risks model to address the duration of antibiotic prophylaxis and the incubation period that ac

70 s in understanding the role of perioperative antibiotic prophylaxis and the optimal treatment approac

71 isk, they receive pneumococcal vaccines, and antibiotic prophylaxis and treatment.

72 in displacement of first-line therapies for antibiotic prophylaxis and treatment.

73 with subsequent testing for reflux, urinary antibiotic prophylaxis, and prompt treatment of urine in

74 ions at discharge, selection and duration of antibiotic prophylaxis, and use of the internal mammary

75 Antibiotic prophylaxis (AP) before invasive dental proce

76 lth and Care Excellence recommended stopping antibiotic prophylaxis (AP) for those at risk of infecti

77 Appropriate use of surgical antibiotic prophylaxis (AP) reduces surgical site infect

78 als in surgery suggest that some failures of antibiotic prophylaxis are related to the in vivo degrad

79 Antibiotic prophylaxis at caesarean section is widely re

80 and, if they are colonized, that intrapartum antibiotic prophylaxis be administered.

81 ion of azithromycin to standard regimens for antibiotic prophylaxis before cesarean delivery may furt

82 The value of antibiotic prophylaxis before insertion of an intrauteri

83 r patients with prosthetic joints to provide antibiotic prophylaxis before invasive dental procedures

84 he transcatheter approach are candidates for antibiotic prophylaxis before invasive dental procedures

85 Antibiotic prophylaxis before miscarriage surgery did no

86 These data support the use of antibiotic prophylaxis before percutaneous liver biopsy

87 lled, randomized trial investigating whether antibiotic prophylaxis before surgery to complete a spon

88 m the cumulative attack rate up to the point antibiotic prophylaxis begins.

89 As well as antibiotic prophylaxis being a generally effective inter

90 bstantial difference in the effectiveness of antibiotic prophylaxis between "clean" and "contaminated

91 ular, gastrointestinal, and gynecology) with antibiotic prophylaxis between October 1, 2006, and Sept

92 Antibiotic prophylaxis cannot be recommended for prevent

93 ng granulocyte colony stimulating factor and antibiotic prophylaxis causes a further reduction in inf

94 % (5/148) in the antibiotic group (P = 0.72).Antibiotic prophylaxis conferred a 17.7% (95% confidence

95 lly related to vancomycin for intraoperative antibiotic prophylaxis continues.

96 SSI, and classify patients in which standard antibiotic prophylaxis could be avoided.

97 r for wound complications on which selective antibiotic prophylaxis could be based.

98 iderable morbidity would likely occur before antibiotic prophylaxis could even be initiated.

99 odds of recurrent UTI in patients receiving antibiotic prophylaxis decreased by 47% when adjusting f

100 Antibiotic prophylaxis decreased significantly in the mo

101 Prescriptions for antibiotic prophylaxis decreased substantially in the mo

102 The optimum duration of antibiotic prophylaxis depends critically on the dose of

103 Patient adherence to antibiotic prophylaxis did not alter microbial susceptib

104 Single-dose preoperative antibiotic prophylaxis dramatically reduces post-HALDN i

105 The impact of antibiotic prophylaxis during cyclical out-patient chemo

106 Although intrapartum antibiotic prophylaxis during labor and delivery has dec

107 Antibiotic prophylaxis effectively prevents not only the

108 of bladder and bowel dysfunction; continuous antibiotic prophylaxis; endoscopic subureteral injection

109 l analysis; 5 supported a protective role of antibiotic prophylaxis, especially among individuals at

110 ctive endocarditis would be preventable with antibiotic prophylaxis, even with 100% effectiveness ass

111 ean delivery who were all receiving standard antibiotic prophylaxis, extended-spectrum prophylaxis wi

112 This study aimed to determine the effective antibiotic prophylaxis for (sub)normothermic preservatio

113 Overall, 77 patients received antibiotic prophylaxis for an average of 93 days.

114 that exposed persons would need to remain on antibiotic prophylaxis for at least 4 months, and consid

115 we outline the data supporting perioperative antibiotic prophylaxis for clean-contaminated surgeries,

116 infective endocarditis might be prevented by antibiotic prophylaxis for dental procedures even if suc

117 apies (including combinations) and effective antibiotic prophylaxis for HIV-infected children, and a

118 Clinical evidence now also supports antibiotic prophylaxis for low-risk patients.

119 Vancomycin is often used as surgical antibiotic prophylaxis for major surgery.

120 Our findings suggest that systemic antibiotic prophylaxis for more than 2 days may be benef

121 Guidelines recommend routine antibiotic prophylaxis for patients undergoing endoscopi

122 of Orthopedic Surgeons' guidelines on dental antibiotic prophylaxis for prevention of endocarditis an

123 with regard to which patients should receive antibiotic prophylaxis for prevention of IE and for what

124 nce (NICE) recommended complete cessation of antibiotic prophylaxis for prevention of infective endoc

125 s ongoing debate on the clinical benefits of antibiotic prophylaxis for reducing pelvic infection aft

126 This study assessed the effectiveness of antibiotic prophylaxis for reducing pneumonia in patient

127 of randomized clinical trials investigating antibiotic prophylaxis for reducing SSIs in skin cancer

128 The usefulness of topical antibiotic prophylaxis for routine oculofacial plastic s

129 The aim of this study was to test whether antibiotic prophylaxis for SBP is cost-effective and to

130 In matched-pair analysis, antibiotic prophylaxis for spontaneous bacterial periton

131 Antibiotic prophylaxis for spontaneous bacterial periton

132 of Orthopedic Surgeons' guidelines on dental antibiotic prophylaxis for the prevention of endocarditi

133 Prescriptions of antibiotic prophylaxis for the prevention of infective e

134 , the American Heart Association recommended antibiotic prophylaxis for the prevention of infective e

135 A 30% reduction in the efficacy of antibiotic prophylaxis for these procedures would result

136 Current antibiotic prophylaxis for vascular procedures includes

137 rent WHO guidelines do not recommend routine antibiotic prophylaxis for women undergoing operative va

138 We analysed data for the prescription of antibiotic prophylaxis from Jan 1, 2004, to March 31, 20

139 Antibiotic prophylaxis given before invasive dental proc

140 The standard antibiotic prophylaxis given to prevent the infections i

141 eks of surgery, of whom 68 (43%) were in the antibiotic prophylaxis group and 90 (57%) in the placebo

142 In terms of post-surgery antibiotics, the antibiotic prophylaxis group was US$0.27 (95% CI -0.49 t

143 Despite widespread use of intrapartum antibiotic prophylaxis, group B streptococcus remains a

144 crude incidence following the 2008 change in antibiotic prophylaxis guidelines (relative risk of chan

145 ation of universal screening and intrapartum antibiotic prophylaxis guidelines but late-onset (LOGBS)

146 Recent changes in antibiotic prophylaxis guidelines in the USA and Europe

147 rditis and the effect of changes in national antibiotic prophylaxis guidelines on incident infective

148 nderstanding effects from current HEU infant antibiotic prophylaxis guidelines will inform guideline

149 Despite changes in antibiotic prophylaxis guidelines, the crude incidence o

150 cidence before and after changes to national antibiotic prophylaxis guidelines.

151 ta-lactams to glycopeptides for preoperative antibiotic prophylaxis has been controversial.

152 Antibiotic prophylaxis has been found to have multiple b

153 Neither constant nor intermittent antibiotic prophylaxis has been proven to prevent endoca

154 Antibiotic prophylaxis has been shown to decrease the in

155 Antibiotic prophylaxis has made the infectious morbidity

156 Current routine screening and antibiotic prophylaxis have fallen short of complete pre

157 blish a causal association, prescriptions of antibiotic prophylaxis have fallen substantially and the

158 such as the timing of surgery or the role of antibiotic prophylaxis have not been resolved.

159 pportive measures such as growth factors and antibiotic prophylaxis have resulted in a dramatic decre

160 Intrapartum antibiotic prophylaxis (IAP) reduces a newborn's risk of

161 ogether, 20-30% of women receive intrapartum antibiotic prophylaxis (IAP) to prevent sepsis in infant

162 d how it varies with coverage of intrapartum antibiotic prophylaxis (IAP), used to reduce the inciden

163 ontexts, despite declines due to intrapartum antibiotic prophylaxis (IAP).

164 Antibiotic prophylaxis, if implemented routinely before

165 Antibiotic prophylaxis improved survival among decompens

166 ment of secondary infections and re-evaluate antibiotic prophylaxis in case of selection of quinolone

167 ardiographic screening followed by secondary antibiotic prophylaxis in case they had echocardiographi

168 in 2007 that markedly restricted the use of antibiotic prophylaxis in certain at-risk patients under

169 in October 2012, promoting the cessation of antibiotic prophylaxis in dentistry for the prevention o

170 insufficient data to support any benefit of antibiotic prophylaxis in individuals at moderate risk.

171 This study aimed to evaluate antibiotic prophylaxis in kidney transplantation and ide

172 This review will consider the rationale for antibiotic prophylaxis in light of contemporary data reg

173 in various settings should be confident that antibiotic prophylaxis in miscarriage surgery is cost-ef

174 changing its previous position on the use of antibiotic prophylaxis in patients at risk of infective

175 h the use of systematic echocardiography and antibiotic prophylaxis in patients with acute Q fever an

176 The use of antibiotic prophylaxis in pediatric leukemia, myelodyspl

177 reatment of hepatorenal syndrome, a trial of antibiotic prophylaxis in preventing early variceal rebl

178 th, alternation) to estimate the efficacy of antibiotic prophylaxis in preventing infections and infe

179 IVUR) study, which will evaluate the role of antibiotic prophylaxis in preventing recurrent UTI and r

180 roach introduces new avenues for stratifying antibiotic prophylaxis in proinflammatory diseases.

181 The role of antibiotic prophylaxis in reducing post-TRUS biopsy infe

182 udy has investigated the pharmacokinetics of antibiotic prophylaxis in the breast implant pocket.

183 study provides support for the cessation of antibiotic prophylaxis in the moderate-risk population.

184 We aimed to study the cost-effectiveness of antibiotic prophylaxis in the surgical management of mis

185 al designed to evaluate the effectiveness of antibiotic prophylaxis in the surgical management of mis

186 ppressing cancer chemotherapies that rely on antibiotic prophylaxis in the USA.

187 individuals with resistant organisms due to antibiotic prophylaxis increases febrile neutropenia or

188 Antibiotic prophylaxis indication and administration acc

189 Scaling down antibiotic prophylaxis indications was not associated wi

190 Antibiotic prophylaxis is a cornerstone of SSI reduction

191 There is 97-98% probability that antibiotic prophylaxis is a cost-effective intervention

192 Preoperative oral antibiotic prophylaxis is a potential infection control

193 At very low doses, 60 days of antibiotic prophylaxis is adequate.

194 However, antibiotic prophylaxis is also associated with a clinica

195 Current guidelines recommend that antibiotic prophylaxis is considered in all patients at

196 sensible philosophy would be to assume that antibiotic prophylaxis is effective in reducing the risk

197 Antibiotic prophylaxis is more effective and less expens

198 ux, open surgical intervention compared with antibiotic prophylaxis is no better at preventing renal

199 need an explanation when they are told that antibiotic prophylaxis is no longer recommended for them

200 General use of preoperative topical antibiotic prophylaxis is not cost-effective compared wi

201 Routine postoperative antibiotic prophylaxis is not recommended for third mola

202 nfective endocarditis (IE) guideline update, antibiotic prophylaxis is now being restricted to a smal

203 Antibiotic prophylaxis is often recommended for close co

204 Broad-spectrum antibiotic prophylaxis is recommended for both military

205 15 European Society of Cardiology guideline, antibiotic prophylaxis is recommended for patient prepar

206 ally reduced the number of patients for whom antibiotic prophylaxis is recommended.

207 Intrapartum antibiotic prophylaxis is the current mainstay of preven

208 Cefazolin-based perioperative antibiotic prophylaxis is the guideline-recommended drug

209 f neonatal disease (with/without intrapartum antibiotic prophylaxis), maternal GBS disease, neonatal/

210 Moreover, data indicate that antibiotic prophylaxis may be effective in some scenario

211 cefuroxime, suggesting that this approach to antibiotic prophylaxis may be far more effective than tr

212 lder adults with UTI, the harms of long-term antibiotic prophylaxis may outweigh their benefits.

213 Antibiotic prophylaxis may reduce the risk of pelvic inf

214 lung disease, respiratory hospitalizations, antibiotic prophylaxis) measured in the first 2 years of

215 s recommended restricting the indications of antibiotic prophylaxis of IE.

216 Antibiotic prophylaxis of SBP appears to be less efficie

217 ing, bacterial infections, and the impact of antibiotic prophylaxis on mortality at different stages

218 the effect of a single dose of preoperative antibiotic prophylaxis on the incidence of SSIs followin

219 c patients that will benefit from continuous antibiotic prophylaxis or surgical intervention, includi

220 = 0.010), inadequate timing of preoperative antibiotic prophylaxis (OR 1.62, P = 0.047), and applica

221 Whereas antibiotic prophylaxis overall showed a 40% to 50% reduc

222 its of blood transfusion (p = 0.031), and no antibiotic prophylaxis (p <0.001); for bacterial infecti

223 .003), active alcoholism (p = 0.035), and no antibiotic prophylaxis (p = 0.009).

224 Antibiotic prophylaxis plays a major role in preventing

225 pectively compared the impact of a change in antibiotic prophylaxis practice from no BKV prophylaxis

226 Outcomes were antibiotic prophylaxis prescription rates and incidence

227 We aimed to investigate whether antibiotic prophylaxis prevented maternal infection afte

228 patients received peri-operative intravenous antibiotic prophylaxis, primarily cefazolin.

229 Preoperative oral antibiotic prophylaxis prior to colorectal surgery is as

230 nique in these procedures are mandatory, but antibiotic prophylaxis prior to injection of nondegradab

231 o advise patients as to whether they require antibiotic prophylaxis prior to invasive procedures.

232 these, 13 patients with valvulopathy without antibiotic prophylaxis progressed to endocarditis.

233 x and no previous UTIs to receive continuous antibiotic prophylaxis (prophylaxis group) or no treatme

234 eral reflux and no previous UTIs, continuous antibiotic prophylaxis provided a small but significant

235 ciated with performance on process measures (antibiotic prophylaxis, R = -0.216 [P = .24]; appropriat

236 Antibiotic prophylaxis recommendations for the preventio

237 More data are needed to establish how antibiotic prophylaxis recommendations should be modifie

238 cin-resistant E. coli, so as to tailor their antibiotic prophylaxis, rectal swabs are screened using

239 th latent rheumatic heart disease, secondary antibiotic prophylaxis reduced the risk of disease progr

240 ed trials and meta-analyses demonstrate that antibiotic prophylaxis reduces the incidence of febrile

241 Antibiotic prophylaxis reduces the incidence of fever du

242 nd longstanding controversies such as use of antibiotic prophylaxis remain unresolved.

243 sure vaccination can shorten the duration of antibiotic prophylaxis required to protect against inhal

244 ajor infection risk, but optimal duration of antibiotic prophylaxis requires further study.

245 The evidence that antibiotic prophylaxis results in adverse patient outcom

246 fidence interval (CI) for the association of antibiotic prophylaxis (route and agent) with risk of en

247 refore, the general prevailing attitude that antibiotic prophylaxis should be assumed to be ineffecti

248 Antibiotic prophylaxis should be considered in patients

249 Antibiotic prophylaxis should be offered to patients rec

250 benefit for eyes complicated by PCR, and IC antibiotic prophylaxis should be strongly considered for

251 minimizing that risk, including altering the antibiotic prophylaxis, should be investigated and imple

252 Antibiotic prophylaxis significantly decreased SSI incid

253 Future studies regarding antibiotic prophylaxis strategies covering enterococci s

254 ct surgery, intraocular lens type, method of antibiotic prophylaxis, surgeon experience, vitreous cul

255 ntilator-associated pneumonia was lower with antibiotic prophylaxis than with placebo (19 patients [1

256 Antibiotic prophylaxis that covers enteric pathogens is

257 yes studied over a period of 2 years without antibiotic prophylaxis the rate of endophthalmitis was 0

258 hair removal, adequate preoperative systemic antibiotic prophylaxis, the administration of 1 g of van

259 hair removal, adequate preoperative systemic antibiotic prophylaxis, the administration of 1 g of van

260 disease with the introduction of intrapartum antibiotic prophylaxis, this pathogen remains a leading

261 cases of IE are successfully prevented using antibiotic prophylaxis, those few cases may represent a

262 It may be possible to reduce standard antibiotic prophylaxis to a single dose in patients with

263 ts newly diagnosed with myeloma benefit from antibiotic prophylaxis to prevent infection, and to inve

264 mately 10,000 people were offered 60 days of antibiotic prophylaxis to prevent inhalational anthrax,

265 The trend in antibiotic prophylaxis to prevent late infections in tot

266 hildren participating in a clinical trial of antibiotic prophylaxis to prevent recurrent urinary trac

267 The efficacy of antibiotic prophylaxis to prevent spontaneous bacterial

268 e-based guidelines on the recommended use of antibiotic prophylaxis to prevent viridans group strepto

269 ering a potential alternative to intrapartum antibiotic prophylaxis to reduce disease burden.

270 l reviews should amend current protocols for antibiotic prophylaxis to reduce the incidence of wound

271 This study suggests that the addition of antibiotic prophylaxis to standard epidemic-control meas

272 act infection by either providing continuous antibiotic prophylaxis to sterilize the urine and thus p

273 rdship principles such as the restriction of antibiotic prophylaxis to subpopulations at a very high

274 yses of human endocarditis cases in terms of antibiotic prophylaxis usage patterns and apparent proph

275 ed time series, to investigate the effect of antibiotic prophylaxis versus no prophylaxis on the inci

276 ng cataract surgery for preoperative topical antibiotic prophylaxis vs no-prophylaxis was 0.034% (95%

277 procedures in individuals who were receiving antibiotic prophylaxis vs those who were not was compute

278 Routine antibiotic prophylaxis was administered to all patients.

279 By meta-analysis, antibiotic prophylaxis was associated with a significant

280 Weaning from breast milk and use of antibiotic prophylaxis was associated with increased lev

281 Antibiotic prophylaxis was employed in 21 patients with

282 ainage, the beneficial effect of intraductal antibiotic prophylaxis was even more evident (OR = 0.153

283 Antibiotic prophylaxis was highly effective (HR, 0.002;

284 enital heart disease (CHD) patients for whom antibiotic prophylaxis was indicated.

285 or if the price of the preoperative topical antibiotic prophylaxis was less than $0.75.

286 Antibiotic prophylaxis was reported to be the least prac

287 Antibiotic prophylaxis was strictly intraoperative in on

288 othesis and to assess the effect of systemic antibiotic prophylaxis, we obtained intraoperative cultu

289 Studies that reported use of any intrapartum antibiotic prophylaxis were associated with lower incide

290 antly higher risks of SBP development during antibiotic prophylaxis were observed for patients with v

291 Prescriptions for antibiotic prophylaxis were obtained from the Ontario Dr

292 Indications for antibiotic prophylaxis were restricted by guidelines beg

293 Three strategies of topical antibiotic prophylaxis were used by the respective surge

294 rial, we assessed the efficacy and safety of antibiotic prophylaxis with ertapenem, as compared with

295 The first study to compare antibiotic prophylaxis with increased surveillance and p

296 Although antibiotic prophylaxis with levofloxacin can reduce the

297 ng randomized patients with VUR who received antibiotic prophylaxis with those who did not receive an

298 On 1 January 2013, oral antibiotic prophylaxis with tobramycin and colistin was

299 In this study, antibiotic prophylaxis with trimethoprim-sulfamethoxazol

300 he hypotheses to be assessed were first that antibiotic prophylaxis would be an effective interventio