Top

World Journal of Urology

Published in:

01-11-2020 | Antibiotic | Topic Paper

Infectious complications of prostate biopsy: winning battles but not war

Authors: Okan Derin, Limírio Fonseca, Rafael Sanchez-Salas, Matthew J. Roberts

Published in: World Journal of Urology | Issue 11/2020

Abstract

Background

Prostate biopsy is a standard tool for diagnosing prostate cancer, with more than 4 million procedures performed worldwide each year. Infectious complications and economic burden are reportedly rising with continued use of trans-rectal ultrasound-guided biopsy, despite the transperineal approach being associated with less infectious complications.

Objective and methods

In this review, the contemporary literature on pathophysiology, epidemiology, risk factors, causative organisms and emerging approaches for prevention of infectious complications are outlined.

Results

Management of infectious complications after TRUSB has caused significant financial burden on health systems. The most frequent causative agents of infectious complications after prostate biopsy are Gram-negative bacilli are particularly concerning in the era of antibiotic resistance. Increasing resistance to fluoroquinolones and beta-lactam antibiotics has complicated traditional preventive measures. Patient- and procedure-related risk factors, reported by individual studies, can contribute to infectious complications after prostate biopsy.

Conclusions

Recent literature shows that the transrectal ultrasound-guided prostate biopsy results in higher infectious complication rate than the transperineal prostate biopsy. NAATs, recently introduced technique to detect FQr may detect all antibiotic-resistant rectal microbiota members—included MDRs—although the technique still has limitations and economical burdens. Transient solutions are escalating antibiotic prophylaxis and widening the indications for TPB.

Wagenlehner FM, van Oostrum E, Tenke P, Tandogdu Z, Cek M, Grabe M, Wullt B, Pickard R, Naber KG, Pilatz A, Weidner W, Bjerklund-Johansen TE, Investigators G (2013) Infective complications after prostate biopsy: outcome of the Global Prevalence Study of Infections in Urology (GPIU) 2010 and 2011, a prospective multinational multicentre prostate biopsy study. Eur Urol 63(3):521–527. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eururo.2012.06.003CrossRefPubMed

Roberts MJ, Bennett HY, Harris PN, Holmes M, Grummet J, Naber K, Wagenlehner FME (2017) Prostate biopsy-related infection: a systematic review of risk factors, prevention strategies, and management approaches. Urology 104:11–21. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.urology.2016.12.011CrossRefPubMed

Pepdjonovic L, Tan GH, Huang S, Mann S, Frydenberg M, Moon D, Hanegbi U, Landau A, Snow R, Grummet J (2017) Zero hospital admissions for infection after 577 transperineal prostate biopsies using single-dose cephazolin prophylaxis. World J Urol 35(8):1199–1203. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00345-016-1985-1CrossRefPubMed

Mottet N, Bellmunt J, Bolla M, Briers E, Cumberbatch MG, De Santis M, Fossati N, Gross T, Henry AM, Joniau S (2017) EAU-ESTRO-SIOG guidelines on prostate cancer. Part 1: screening, diagnosis, and local treatment with curative intent. Eur Urol 71(4):618–629CrossRef

Kawakami S, Yamamoto S, Numao N, Ishikawa Y, Kihara K, Fukui I (2007) Direct comparison between transrectal and transperineal extended prostate biopsy for the detection of cancer. Int J Urol 14(8):719–724. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1442-2042.2007.01810.xCrossRefPubMed

Bennett HY, Roberts MJ, Doi SA, Gardiner RA (2016) The global burden of major infectious complications following prostate biopsy. Epidemiol Infect 144(8):1784–1791. https://doi.org/10.1017/s0950268815002885CrossRefPubMed

Loeb S, Vellekoop A, Ahmed HU, Catto J, Emberton M, Nam R, Rosario DJ, Scattoni V, Lotan Y (2013) Systematic review of complications of prostate biopsy. Eur Urol 64(6):876–892. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eururo.2013.05.049CrossRefPubMed

Lundstrom KJ, Drevin L, Carlsson S, Garmo H, Loeb S, Stattin P, Bill-Axelson A (2014) Nationwide population based study of infections after transrectal ultrasound guided prostate biopsy. J Urol 192(4):1116–1122. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.juro.2014.04.098CrossRefPubMed

Liss MA, Ehdaie B, Loeb S, Meng MV, Raman JD, Spears V, Stroup SP (2017) An update of the American Urological Association white paper on the prevention and treatment of the more common complications related to prostate biopsy. J Urol 198(2):329–334CrossRefPubMed

10.

Olvera-Posada D, Welk B, McClure JA, Winick-Ng J, Izawa JI, Pautler SE (2018) A population-based cohort study of the impact of infectious complications requiring hospitalization after prostate biopsy on radical prostatectomy surgical outcomes. Urology 121:139–146. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.urology.2018.07.049CrossRefPubMed

11.

Borghesi M, Ahmed H, Nam R, Schaeffer E, Schiavina R, Taneja S, Weidner W, Loeb S (2017) Complications after systematic, random, and image-guided prostate biopsy. Eur Urol 71(3):353–365CrossRefPubMed

12.

Grabe M, Botto H, Cek M, Tenke P, Wagenlehner FME, Naber KG, Bjerklund Johansen TE (2012) Preoperative assessment of the patient and risk factors for infectious complications and tentative classification of surgical field contamination of urological procedures. World J Urol 30(1):39–50. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00345-011-0722-zCrossRefPubMed

13.

Bonkat G, Pickard R, Bartoletti R, Bruyère F, Geerlings SE, Wagenlehner F, Wullt B (2017) EAU guidelines on urological infections. Eur Assoc Urol 22–26

14.

Crawford ED, Haynes AL Jr, Story MW, Borden TA (1982) Prevention of urinary tract infection and sepsis following transrectal prostatic biopsy. J Urol 127(3):449–451. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0022-5347(17)53860-4CrossRefPubMed

15.

Nam RK, Saskin R, Lee Y, Liu Y, Law C, Klotz LH, Loblaw DA, Trachtenberg J, Stanimirovic A, Simor AE (2010) Increasing hospital admission rates for urological complications after transrectal ultrasound guided prostate biopsy. J Urol 183(3):963–969CrossRefPubMed

16.

Nam RK, Saskin R, Lee Y, Liu Y, Law C, Klotz LH, Loblaw DA, Trachtenberg J, Stanimirovic A, Simor AE, Seth A, Urbach DR, Narod SA (2010) Increasing hospital admission rates for urological complications after transrectal ultrasound guided prostate biopsy. J Urol 183(3):963–968. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.juro.2009.11.043CrossRefPubMed

17.

Zowawi HM, Harris PNA, Roberts MJ, Tambyah PA, Schembri MA, Pezzani MD, Williamson DA, Paterson DL (2015) The emerging threat of multidrug-resistant Gram-negative bacteria in urology. Nat Rev Urol 12:570. https://doi.org/10.1038/nrurol.2015.199. https://www.nature.com/articles/nrurol.2015.199#supplementary-information

18.

Williamson DA, Barrett LK, Rogers BA, Freeman JT, Hadway P, Paterson DL (2013) Infectious complications following transrectal ultrasound-guided prostate biopsy: new challenges in the era of multidrug-resistant Escherichia coli. Clin Infect Dis 57(2):267–274. https://doi.org/10.1093/cid/cit193CrossRefPubMed

19.

Karakonstantis S, Kalemaki D (2018) A significant percentage of patients with transrectal biopsy-related infections have positive blood cultures but negative urine cultures. A literature review and meta-analysis. Infect Dis (Lond) 50(11–12):791–803. https://doi.org/10.1080/23744235.2018.1508882CrossRef

20.

Sukumaran V, Roberts MJ, Harris PNA (2018) Infectious complications following transrectal ultrasound-guided prostate biopsy: what additional diagnostic value do blood cultures provide? Infect Dis (Lond) 50(11–12):804–806. https://doi.org/10.1080/23744235.2018.1508886CrossRef

21.

Young R, Norris B, Reeves F, Peters JS (2019) A retrospective comparison of transrectal and transperineal prostate biopsies: experience of a single surgeon. J Endourol 33(6):498–502. https://doi.org/10.1089/end.2019.0170CrossRefPubMed

22.

Skouteris VM, Crawford ED, Mouraviev V, Arangua P, Metsinis MP, Skouteris M, Zacharopoulos G, Stone NN (2018) Transrectal ultrasound-guided versus transperineal mapping prostate biopsy: complication comparison. Rev Urol 20(1):19–25. https://doi.org/10.3909/riu0785CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

23.

Nicolle LE, Gupta K, Bradley SF, Colgan R, DeMuri GP, Drekonja D, Eckert LO, Geerlings SE, Koves B, Hooton TM, Juthani-Mehta M, Knight SL, Saint S, Schaeffer AJ, Trautner B, Wullt B, Siemieniuk R (2019) Clinical practice guideline for the management of asymptomatic bacteriuria: 2019 update by the Infectious Diseases Society of America. Clin Infect Dis. https://doi.org/10.1093/cid/ciy1121CrossRefPubMed

24.

Shoag J, Gross M, Pantuck M, Gorin M, Schaeffer E, Sun TY, Sedrakyan A, Vickers A, Hu J (2019) Increasing incidence of infections after prostate biopsy in the United States. J Urol 201(4):E781–E782

25.

Johansen TEB, Zahl PH, Baco E, Bartoletti R, Bonkat G, Bruyere F, Cai T, Cek M, Kulchavenya E, Koves B, Mouraviev V, Pilatz A, Tandogdu Z, Tenke P, Wagenlehner FME (2019) Antibiotic resistance, hospitalizations, and mortality related to prostate biopsy: first report from the Norwegian Patient Registry. World J Urol. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00345-019-02837-0CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

26.

Hiyama Y, Takahashi S, Uehara T, Ichihara K, Hashimoto J, Masumori N (2016) A case of infective endocarditis and pyogenic spondylitis after transrectal ultrasound guided prostate biopsy. J Infect Chemother 22(11):767–769. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jiac.2016.05.002CrossRefPubMed

27.

Roberts MJ, Parambi A, Barrett L, Hadway P, Gardiner RA, Hajkowicz KM, Yaxley J (2013) Multifocal abscesses due to multiresistant Escherichia coli after transrectal ultrasound-guided prostate biopsy. Med J Aust 198(5):282–284CrossRefPubMed

28.

Batura D, Gopal Rao G (2012) The national burden of infections after prostate biopsy in England and Wales: a wake-up call for better prevention. J Antimicrob Chemother 68(2):247–249. https://doi.org/10.1093/jac/dks401CrossRefPubMed

29.

Evans R, Loeb A, Kaye KS, Cher ML, Martin ET (2017) Infection-related hospital admissions after prostate biopsy in United States men Open Forum. Infect Dis 4(1):ofw265. https://doi.org/10.1093/ofid/ofw265CrossRef

30.

Gross MD, Alshak MN, Shoag JE, Laviana AA, Gorin MA, Sedrakyan A, Hu JC (2019) Healthcare costs of post-prostate biopsy sepsis. Urology. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.urology.2019.06.011CrossRefPubMed

31.

Roth H, Millar JL, Cheng AC, Byrne A, Evans S, Grummet J (2015) The state of TRUS biopsy sepsis: readmissions to Victorian hospitals with TRUS biopsy-related infection over 5 years. BJU Int 116(S3):49–53. https://doi.org/10.1111/bju.13209CrossRefPubMed

32.

Wu X, Yu C, Li T, Lin L, Xu Q, Zhu Q, Ye L, Gao X (2018) Obesity was an independent risk factor for febrile infection after prostate biopsy: a 10-year single center study in South China. Medicine (Baltimore) 97(1):e9549–e9549. https://doi.org/10.1097/MD.0000000000009549CrossRef

33.

Shu-Ling L, Chang-Te L, Wan-Ting H, Yeong-Chin J, Tzong-Shin T, Yuh-Shyan T (2019) History of urinary retention is a risk factor for infection after prostate biopsy: a nationwide, population-based cohort study. Surg Infect (Larchmt) 20(3):202–207. https://doi.org/10.1089/sur.2018.174CrossRef

34.

Simsir A, Kismali E, Mammadov R, Gunaydin G, Cal C (2010) Is it possible to predict sepsis, the most serious complication in prostate biopsy? Urol Int 84(4):395–399. https://doi.org/10.1159/000296290CrossRefPubMed

35.

Danielsen L, Faizi G, Snitgaard S, Lund L, Frey A (2019) Infections after transrectal ultrasonic guided prostate biopsies—a retrospective study. Scand J Urol 53(2–3):97–101. https://doi.org/10.1080/21681805.2019.1608295CrossRefPubMed

36.

Bruyere F, Malavaud S, Bertrand P, Decock A, Cariou G, Doublet JD, Bernard L, Bugel H, Conquy S, Sotto A, Boiteux JP, Pogu B, Rebillard X, Mongiat-Artus P, Coloby P (2015) Prosbiotate: a multicenter, prospective analysis of infectious complications after prostate biopsy. J Urol 193(1):145–150. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.juro.2014.07.086CrossRefPubMed

37.

Carignan A, Roussy J-F, Lapointe V, Valiquette L, Sabbagh R, Pépin J (2012) Increasing risk of infectious complications after transrectal ultrasound-guided prostate biopsies: time to reassess antimicrobial prophylaxis? Eur Urol 62(3):453–459. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eururo.2012.04.044CrossRefPubMed

38.

Hasanzadeh A, Black P, Pourmand MR, Pourmand G (2019) Clinical and bacterial risk factors for development of post-prostate biopsy infections. Urol J. https://doi.org/10.22037/uj.v0i0.4603CrossRefPubMed

39.

Roberts MJ, Williamson DA, Hadway P, Doi SA, Gardiner RA, Paterson DL (2014) Baseline prevalence of antimicrobial resistance and subsequent infection following prostate biopsy using empirical or altered prophylaxis: a bias-adjusted meta-analysis. Int J Antimicrob Agents 43(4):301–309CrossRefPubMed

40.

World Health Organization (2014) Antimicrobial resistance: global report on surveillance. WHO, Geneva. ISBN 9789241564748

41.

Doherty AF, Ikuerowo SO, Jeje EA, Ibrahim NA, Ojongbede OL, Mutiu WB, Omisanjo OA, Abolarinwa AA (2019) A prospective randomized comparative study of targeted versus empirical prophylactic antibiotics in the prevention of infective complications following transrectal ultrasound-guided prostate biopsy. Ann Afr Med 18(3):132–137. https://doi.org/10.4103/aam.aam_48_18CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

42.

Korkmaz N, Gurbuz Y, Sandikci F, Kul G, Tutuncu EE, Sencan I (2019) The role of ciprofloxacin resistance and extended-spectrum beta-lactamase (ESBL) positivity in infective complications following prostate biopsy. Urol J. https://doi.org/10.22037/uj.v0i0.4755CrossRef

43.

Tan WP, Papagiannopoulos D, Latchamsetty KC, Wilson N, O’Block N, Raff L, Mena Lora A, Coogan CL, Abern MR (2019) Predictors of fluoroquinolone-resistant bacteria in the rectal vault of men undergoing prostate biopsy. Prostate Cancer Prostatic Dis 22(2):268–275. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41391-018-0092-3CrossRefPubMed

44.

Patel U, Dasgupta P, Amoroso P, Challacombe B, Pilcher J, Kirby R (2012) Infection after transrectal ultrasonography-guided prostate biopsy: increased relative risks after recent international travel or antibiotic use. BJU Int 109(12):1781–1785. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1464-410X.2011.10561.xCrossRefPubMed

45.

Pan American Health Organization/World Health Organization (2019) Epidemiological alert: outbreaks of resistant microorganisms associated with medical tourism. www.paho.org

46.

Liss MA, Leach RJ, Rourke E, Sherrill A, Johnson-Pais T, Lai Z, Basler J, White JR, Patterson JE (2019) Microbiome diversity in carriers of fluoroquinolone resistant Escherichia coli. Investig Clin Urol 60(2):75–83. https://doi.org/10.4111/icu.2019.60.2.75CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

47.

Seitz M, Stief C, Waidelich R, Bader M, Tilki D (2017) Transrectal ultrasound guided prostate biopsy in the era of increasing fluoroquinolone resistance: prophylaxis with single-dose ertapenem. World J Urol 35(11):1681–1688. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00345-017-2043-3CrossRefPubMed

48.

Samarasinghe S (2019) The distribution of ESBL-producing Enterobacteriaceae: Leicestershire UK compared to worldwide. Am J Biomed Sci Res 3(1):70–72. https://doi.org/10.34297/ajbsr.2019.03.000636CrossRef

49.

Falagas ME, Tansarli GS, Karageorgopoulos DE, Vardakas KZ (2014) Deaths attributable to carbapenem-resistant Enterobacteriaceae infections. Emerg Infect Dis 20(7):1170–1175. https://doi.org/10.3201/eid2007.121004CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

50.

Codjoe FS, Donkor ES (2017) Carbapenem resistance: a review. Med Sci (Basel) 6(1):1. https://doi.org/10.3390/medsci6010001CrossRef

51.

Gutierrez-Gutierrez B, Salamanca E, de Cueto M, Hsueh PR, Viale P, Pano-Pardo JR, Venditti M, Tumbarello M, Daikos G, Canton R, Doi Y, Tuon FF, Karaiskos I, Perez-Nadales E, Schwaber MJ, Azap OK, Souli M, Roilides E, Pournaras S, Akova M, Perez F, Bermejo J, Oliver A, Almela M, Lowman W, Almirante B, Bonomo RA, Carmeli Y, Paterson DL, Pascual A, Rodriguez-Bano J (2017) Effect of appropriate combination therapy on mortality of patients with bloodstream infections due to carbapenemase-producing Enterobacteriaceae (INCREMENT): a retrospective cohort study. Lancet Infect Dis 17(7):726–734. https://doi.org/10.1016/s1473-3099(17)30228-1CrossRefPubMed

52.

Patel G, Huprikar S, Factor SH, Jenkins SG, Calfee DP (2008) Outcomes of carbapenem-resistant Klebsiella pneumoniae infection and the impact of antimicrobial and adjunctive therapies. Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol 29(12):1099–1106. https://doi.org/10.1086/592412CrossRefPubMed

53.

Bloomfield MG, Page MJ, McLachlan AG, Studd RC, Blackmore TK (2017) Routine ertapenem prophylaxis for transrectal ultrasound guided prostate biopsy does not select for carbapenem resistant organisms: a prospective cohort study. J Urol 198(2):362–368. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.juro.2017.03.077CrossRefPubMed

54.

Pruthi DK, Liss MA (2017) Sepsis: prophylactic antibiotic for prostate biopsy: the carbapenem gamble. Nat Rev Urol 14(7):394–396. https://doi.org/10.1038/nrurol.2017.73CrossRefPubMed

55.

Eruz ED, Yalci A, Ozden E, Aslaner H, Ogucu-Durgun S, Koseoglu-Taymur DD, Memikoglu KO, Erdem H, Kurt H (2017) Risk factors for infection development after transrectal prostate biopsy and the role of resistant bacteria in colonic flora. J Infect Dev Ctries 11(2):188–191. https://doi.org/10.3855/jidc.7067CrossRefPubMed

56.

Miyazaki Y, Akamatsu S, Kanamaru S, Kamiyama Y, Sengiku A, Iguchi R, Sano T, Takahashi A, Ito M, Takenawa J, Ito N, Ogura K (2016) A prospective randomized trial comparing a combined regimen of amikacin and levofloxacin to levofloxacin alone as prophylaxis in transrectal prostate needle biopsy. Urol J 13(1):2533–2540PubMed

57.

Takenaka A, Hara R, Ishimura T, Fujii T, Jo Y, Nagai A, Fujisawa M (2008) A prospective randomized comparison of diagnostic efficacy between transperineal and transrectal 12-core prostate biopsy. Prostate Cancer Prostatic Dis 11(2):134–138. https://doi.org/10.1038/sj.pcan.4500985CrossRefPubMed

58.

Hara R, Jo Y, Fujii T, Kondo N, Yokoyoma T, Miyaji Y, Nagai A (2008) Optimal approach for prostate cancer detection as initial biopsy: prospective randomized study comparing transperineal versus transrectal systematic 12-core biopsy. Urology 71(2):191–195. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.urology.2007.09.029CrossRefPubMed

59.

Scott S, Samaratunga H, Chabert C, Breckenridge M, Gianduzzo T (2015) Is transperineal prostate biopsy more accurate than transrectal biopsy in determining final Gleason score and clinical risk category? A comparative analysis. BJU Int 116(Suppl 3):26–30. https://doi.org/10.1111/bju.13165CrossRefPubMed

60.

Lo KL, Chui KL, Leung CH, Ma SF, Lim K, Ng T, Wong J, Li JKM, Mak SK, Ng CF (2019) Outcomes of transperineal and transrectal ultrasound-guided prostate biopsy. Hong Kong Med J 25(3):209–215. https://doi.org/10.12809/hkmj187599CrossRefPubMed

61.

Grummet JP, Weerakoon M, Huang S, Lawrentschuk N, Frydenberg M, Moon DA, O'Reilly M, Murphy D (2014) Sepsis and 'superbugs': should we favour the transperineal over the transrectal approach for prostate biopsy? BJU Int 114(3):384–388. https://doi.org/10.1111/bju.12536CrossRefPubMed

62.

Emiliozzi P, Corsetti A, Tassi B, Federico G, Martini M, Pansadoro V (2003) Best approach for prostate cancer detection: a prospective study on transperineal versus transrectal six-core prostate biopsy. Urology 61(5):961–966CrossRefPubMed

63.

Stefanova V, Buckley R, Flax S, Spevack L, Hajek D, Tunis A, Lai E, Loblaw A, Collaborators (2019) Transperineal prostate biopsies using local anesthesia: experience with 1,287 patients. prostate cancer detection rate, complications and patient tolerability. J Urol 201(6):1121–1126. https://doi.org/10.1097/JU.0000000000000156CrossRefPubMed

64.

Zimmerman ME, Meyer AR, Carter HB, Allaf ME, Gorin MA (2019) In-office transperineal prostate biopsy using biplanar ultrasound guidance: a step-by-step guide. Urology. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.urology.2019.07.021CrossRefPubMed

65.

Kum F, Elhage O, Maliyil J, Wong K, Faure Walker N, Kulkarni M, Namdarian B, Challacombe B, Cathcart P, Popert R (2018) Initial outcomes of local anaesthetic freehand transperineal biopsies in the outpatient setting. BJU Int. https://doi.org/10.1111/bju.14620CrossRef

66.

Kasivisvanathan V, Rannikko AS, Borghi M, Panebianco V, Mynderse LA, Vaarala MH, Briganti A, Budaus L, Hellawell G, Hindley RG, Roobol MJ, Eggener S, Ghei M, Villers A, Bladou F, Villeirs GM, Virdi J, Boxler S, Robert G, Singh PB, Venderink W, Hadaschik BA, Ruffion A, Hu JC, Margolis D, Crouzet S, Klotz L, Taneja SS, Pinto P, Gill I, Allen C, Giganti F, Freeman A, Morris S, Punwani S, Williams NR, Brew-Graves C, Deeks J, Takwoingi Y, Emberton M, Moore CM (2018) MRI-targeted or standard biopsy for prostate-cancer diagnosis. N Engl J Med 378(19):1767–1777. https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJMoa1801993CrossRefPubMed

67.

Ahmed HU, El-Shater Bosaily A, Brown LC, Gabe R, Kaplan R, Parmar MK, Collaco-Moraes Y, Ward K, Hindley RG, Freeman A, Kirkham AP, Oldroyd R, Parker C, Emberton M (2017) Diagnostic accuracy of multi-parametric MRI and TRUS biopsy in prostate cancer (PROMIS): a paired validating confirmatory study. Lancet (London, England) 389(10071):815–822. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0140-6736(16)32401-1CrossRef

68.

Zani EL, Clark OA, Rodrigues Netto N Jr (2011) Antibiotic prophylaxis for transrectal prostate biopsy. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. https://doi.org/10.1002/14651858.CD006576.pub2CrossRefPubMed

69.

Pilatz A, Veeratterapillay R, Köves B, Cai T, Bartoletti R, Wagenlehner F, Bruyère F, Geerlings S, Bonkat G, Pradere B (2019) Update on strategies to reduce infectious complications after prostate biopsy. Eur Urol Focus 5(1):20–28. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.euf.2018.11.009CrossRefPubMed

70.

Johnson JR, Polgreen PM, Beekmann SE (2015) Transrectal prostate biopsy-associated prophylaxis and infectious complications: report of a query to the emerging infections network of the infectious diseases society of America. Open Forum Infect Dis 2(1):ofv002. https://doi.org/10.1093/ofid/ofv002CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

71.

Mrkobrada M, Ying I, Mokrycke S, Dresser G, Elsayed S, Bathini V, Boyce E, Luke P (2015) CUA Guidelines on antibiotic prophylaxis for urologic procedures. Can Urol Assoc J 9(1–2):13CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

72.

Roberts MJ, Scott S, Harris PN, Naber K, Wagenlehner FME, Doi SAR (2018) Comparison of fosfomycin against fluoroquinolones for transrectal prostate biopsy prophylaxis: an individual patient-data meta-analysis. World J Urol 36(3):323–330. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00345-017-2163-9CrossRefPubMed

73.

Cimino S, Verze P, Venturino L, Alessio P, Migliara A, Imbimbo C, Mirone V, Russo GI, Morgia G (2018) Complication rate after antibiotic prophylaxis with fosfomycin versus fluorochinolones or beta-lactam antibiotics in patients undergoing prostate biopsy: a propensity score-adjusted analysis. Eur Urol Focus. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.euf.2018.06.014CrossRefPubMed

74.

Carignan A, Sabbagh R, Masse V, Gagnon N, Montpetit LP, Smith MA, Raymond M, Allard C, Bergeron C, Pepin J (2019) Effectiveness of fosfomycin tromethamine prophylaxis in preventing infection following transrectal ultrasound-guided prostate needle biopsy: results from a large Canadian cohort. J Glob Antimicrob Resist 17:112–116. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jgar.2018.11.020CrossRefPubMed

75.

Recabal P, Lee T, Vertosick E, Manasia M, Eastham J, Touijer K, Seo SK, Spaliviero M, Ehdaie B (2019) Quality improvement initiative to reduce variability and improve stewardship of antimicrobial prophylaxis for transrectal prostate needle biopsy. World J Urol. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00345-019-02845-0CrossRefPubMed

76.

Boehm K, Siegel FP, Schneidewind L, Kranz J, Spachmann P, Frank T, Huck N, Imkamp F, Pelzer A (2018) Antibiotic prophylaxis in prostate biopsies: contemporary practice patterns in Germany. Front Surg. https://doi.org/10.3389/fsurg.2018.00002CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

77.

Kim JB, Jung SI, Hwang EC, Kwon DD (2014) Prevalence of antibiotic-resistant bacteria on rectal swabs and factors affecting resistance to antibiotics in patients undergoing prostate biopsy. Korean J Urol 55(3):201–206. https://doi.org/10.4111/kju.2014.55.3.201CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

78.

Roberts MJ, Doi SA (2016) Prostate biopsy, targeted prophylaxis and infectious complications: a critique of methods used. BJU Int 117(5):719–721. https://doi.org/10.1111/bju.13466CrossRefPubMed

79.

Scott S, Harris PN, Williamson DA, Liss MA, Doi SA, Roberts MJ (2018) The effectiveness of targeted relative to empiric prophylaxis on infectious complications after transrectal ultrasound-guided prostate biopsy: a meta-analysis. World J Urol 36(7):1007–1017CrossRefPubMed

80.

Hiyama Y, Takahashi S, Uehara T, Ichihara K, Hashimoto J, Matsukawa M, Taguchi K, Kunishima Y, Hotta H, Yanase M, Itoh N, Hirose T, Takeyama K, Tachiki H, Masumori N (2019) Selective culture of Escherichia coli to prevent infective complications of transrectal ultrasound-guided prostate biopsy: clinical efficacy and analysis of characteristics of quinolone-resistant Escherichia coli. Int J Urol 26(6):655–660. https://doi.org/10.1111/iju.13960CrossRefPubMed

81.

Liss MA, Nakamura KK, Meuleners R, Kolla SB, Dash A, Peterson EM (2013) Screening rectal culture to identify fluoroquinolone-resistant organisms before transrectal prostate biopsy: do the culture results between office visit and biopsy correlate? Urology 82(1):67–73CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

82.

Tchesnokova VL, Ottley LL, Sakamoto K, Fierer J, Sokurenko E, Liss MA (2015) Rapid identification of rectal multidrug-resistant Escherichia coli before transrectal prostate biopsy. Urology 86(6):1200–1205. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.urology.2015.07.008CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

83.

Liss MA, Sherrill A, Barney S, Yunes A, Sokurenko E, Wickes B (2019) Prospective implementation of a point-of-care PCR-based detection method to guide antibiotic use prior to prostate biopsy compared to targeted prophylaxis and physician choice. Urology 129:87–91. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.urology.2019.02.027CrossRefPubMed

84.

Williamson DA, Roberts SA, Paterson DL, Sidjabat H, Silvey A, Masters J, Rice M, Freeman JT (2012) Escherichia coli bloodstream infection after transrectal ultrasound-guided prostate biopsy: implications of fluoroquinolone-resistant sequence type 131 as a major causative pathogen. Clin Infect Dis 54(10):1406–1412. https://doi.org/10.1093/cid/cis194CrossRefPubMed

85.

Xiang J, Yan H, Li J, Wang X, Chen H, Zheng X (2019) Transperineal versus transrectal prostate biopsy in the diagnosis of prostate cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis. World J Surg Oncol 17(1):31–31. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12957-019-1573-0CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

86.

Chang DTS, Challacombe B, Lawrentschuk N (2013) Transperineal biopsy of the prostate—is this the future? Nat Rev Urol 10:690. https://doi.org/10.1038/nrurol.2013.195CrossRefPubMed

87.

Rogers BA, Kennedy KJ, Sidjabat HE, Jones M, Collignon P, Paterson DL (2012) Prolonged carriage of resistant E. coli by returned travellers: clonality, risk factors and bacterial characteristics. Eur J Clin Microbiol Infect Dis 31(9):2413–2420. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10096-012-1584-zCrossRefPubMed

88.

Mottet N vdBR, Briers E, Cornford P, de Santis M, Fanti S, Gillessen S, Grummet J, Henry AM, Lam TB, Mason MD, van der Kwast TH, van der Poel HG, Rouviere O, Tilki D, Wiegel T, van den Broeck T, Cumberbatch M, Fossati N, Gross T, Lardas M, Liew M, Moris L, Schoots IG, Willemse P-PM (2019) EAU guidelines prostate cancer. In: EAU annual congress Barcelona 2019

89.

Salomon G, Prues S, Saul J, Budaus L, Tilki D, Schneider M, Haferkamp A, Graefen M, Boehm K (2018) Antimicrobial lubricant did not reduce infection rate in transrectal biopsy patients in a large randomized trial due to low complication rates. Eur Urol Focus. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.euf.2018.06.005CrossRefPubMed

90.

Chen YC, Chen HW, Huang SP, Yeh HC, Li CC (2018) Adequate rectal preparation reduces hospital admission for urosepsis after transrectal ultrasound - guided prostate biopsy. Int Braz J Urol 44(6):1122–1128. https://doi.org/10.1590/S1677-5538.IBJU.2018.0181CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

91.

Peters J, Thompson A, McNicholas T, Hines J, Hanbury D, Boustead G (2001) Increased patient satisfaction from transrectal ultrasonography and biopsy under sedation. BJU Int 87(9):827–830CrossRefPubMed

92.

Doğanca T, Savsin A, Erdoğan S, Altindas F, Özdemir F, Ekici B, Öbek C (2015) Procedural sedation and analgesia as an adjunct to periprostatic nerve block for prostate biopsy: a prospective randomized trial. J Clin Ultrasound 43(5):288–294CrossRefPubMed

93.

Soloway MS, Öbek C (2000) Periprostatic local anesthesia before ultrasound guided prostate biopsy. J Urol 163(1):172–173CrossRefPubMed

94.

Issa MM, Al-Qassab UA, Hall J, Ritenour CW, Petros JA, Sullivan JW (2013) Formalin disinfection of biopsy needle minimizes the risk of sepsis following prostate biopsy. J Urol 190(5):1769–1775. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.juro.2013.04.134CrossRefPubMed

95.

Tuncel A, Aslan Y, Sezgin T, Aydin O, Tekdogan U, Atan A (2008) Does disposable needle guide minimize infectious complications after transrectal prostate needle biopsy? Urology 71(6):1024–1027. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.urology.2007.11.160(discussion 1027–1028)CrossRefPubMed

Title: Infectious complications of prostate biopsy: winning battles but not war
Authors: Okan Derin
Limírio Fonseca
Rafael Sanchez-Salas
Matthew J. Roberts
Publication date: 01-11-2020
Publisher: Springer Berlin Heidelberg
Keywords: Antibiotic
Carbapenem Antibiotic
Published in: World Journal of Urology / Issue 11/2020
Print ISSN: 0724-4983
Electronic ISSN: 1433-8726
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00345-020-03112-3

At a glance: The STEP trials

Springer Medicine

Infectious complications of prostate biopsy: winning battles but not war

Abstract

Background

Objective and methods

Results

Conclusions

At a glance: The STEP trials

Springer Medicine

Abstract

Background

Objective and methods

Results

Conclusions

Please log in to get access to this content

Other articles of this Issue 11/2020

Current perspectives on urolithiasis management in China

Slingshot homolog-1 expression is a poor prognostic factor of pT1 bladder urothelial carcinoma after transurethral resection

Urinary microbiome in uncomplicated and interstitial cystitis: is there any similarity?

Candida urinary tract infections in adults

TUR-P phantom for resident surgical training: food-based design as a human mimicking model of the prostate

Assessment of the effects of autologous muscle-derived cell injections on urethral sphincter morphometry using 3D/4D ultrasound