Post-procedural genito-urinary tract infection (UTI) is a frequent occurrence in the clinical setting with associated morbidity, cost of treatment and possible long-term sequelae. Most urological procedures are either Class 1 or 2 procedures with recommended single-shot antibiotic prophylaxis for most. Urological surgeries differ from other surgeries in that (a) Flora that causes surgical site infections is markedly different from cutaneous flora, with more pre-disposition of gram-negative enterobacteriaceae (b) Use of continuous high pressure irrigation in endo-urological surgeries to distend the endoscopic surgical field, resulting in pyelovenous and pyelolymphatic backflow predisposing to development of bacteremia and endotoxiemia, and (c) Frequent use of foreign bodies like stents, catheter or nephrostomy before and after the surgery. As a result, the general recommendations for surgical site infections are not directly applicable to endourological surgery [1].  Even though, most guidelines recommend only a single dose/day of antibiotic prophylaxis for most endourological cases, the use of antibiotics in the peri-operative period is extremely diverse with wide differences between different regions, different hospitals, and even different consultants in same surgical unit. In real-world practice, peri-operative antibiotics use is heavily driven by apprehension of gram-negative bacteremia, endotoxemia and sepsis. Such use stands against the larger community goal of minimizing use of antibiotics wherever feasible. Therefore, there is huge need to reduce this clinical gap between guidelines and actual clinical practice(1). This study seeks to find out if there is any difference between the guideline directed preoperative prophylactic single dose/day vs extended prophylactic antibiotic course for urological surgeries in a prospective randomized manner.