Top

Published in:

01-08-2014 | Original Article

Peri-procedural povidone-iodine rectal preparation reduces microorganism counts and infectious complications following ultrasound-guided needle biopsy of the prostate

Authors: Justin R. Gyorfi, Christopher Otteni, Kevin Brown, Amar Patel, Kathleen Lehman, Brett E. Phillips, Kalyan Dewan, Girish Kirimanjeswara, Jay D. Raman

Published in: World Journal of Urology | Issue 4/2014

Abstract

Purpose

The purpose of the study was to evaluate whether a peri-procedural povidone-iodine rectal preparation (PIRP) prior to transrectal ultrasound-guided prostate needle biopsy (TRUS PNB) can reduce microorganism colony counts and infectious complications.

Methods

Our institutional TRUS PNB database was reviewed to identify infectious post-biopsy complications (defined as fever >38.5 °C with positive culture). The last 570 biopsy patients were divided into those administered only preoperative oral and/or parenteral antibiotics (n = 456; chronologically cohorts A–D) versus men receiving peri-procedural PIRP in conjunction with standard preoperative antibiotics (n = 114; cohort E). Rectal cultures were obtained in the PIRP cohort to quantify changes in microorganism colony counts.

Results

Mean baseline PSA for patients was 11.6 ng/ml, 63 % were undergoing an initial biopsy, and 17 % had documented use of antibiotic therapy within the previous 6 months. A reduction in infectious complications was observed when comparing the conventional antibiotic (cohorts A–D) versus PIRP (cohort E) group (1.8 vs. 0 %), with the largest magnitude of decline occurring in the concurrent contemporary cohorts (cohort D—5.3 % vs. cohort E—0 %, p = 0.03). Rectal cultures obtained in 92 men before and after PIRP administration noted a 97 % reduction in microorganism colonies (2.1 × 10⁵ vs. 6.3 × 10³ CFU/ml, p < 0.001). No adverse reactions to the PIRP were reported by patients 7 days post-biopsy.

Conclusions

Peri-procedural PIRP decreased microorganism colony counts and effectively reduced infectious complications following TRUS PNB. This safe, cheap, and simple strategy may be a reasonable alternative to systemic or targeted antibiotic therapy to reduce post-biopsy infections.

American Cancer Society (2013) Cancer facts & figures 2013. American Cancer Society, Atlanta

Djavan B, Waldert M, Zlotta A et al (2001) Safety and morbidity of first and repeat transrectal ultrasound-guided prostate needle biopsies: results of a prospective European prostate cancer detection study. J Urol 166(3):856–860PubMedCrossRef

Pearle M (2011) Should we change our prophylactic antimicrobial regimen for prostate biopsy? J Urol 185(4):1181–1183PubMedCrossRef

Feliciano J, Teper E, Ferrandino M et al (2008) The incidence of fluoroquinolone resistant infections after prostate biopsy—are fluoroquinolones still effective prophylaxis? J Urol 179(3):952–955PubMedCrossRef

Binsaleh S, Al-Assiri M, Aronson S et al (2004) Septic shock after transrectal ultrasound guided prostate biopsy. Is ciprofloxacin prophylaxis always protecting? Can J Urol 11(4):2352–2353PubMed

Ho HS, Ng LG, Tan YH et al (2009) Intramuscular gentamicin improves the efficacy of ciprofloxacin as an antibiotic prophylaxis for transrectal prostate biopsy. Ann Acad Med Singap 38(3):212–216PubMed

Kehinde O, Al-Maghrebi M, Sheikh M et al (2013) Combined ciprofloxacin and amikacin prophylaxis in the prevention of septicemia after transrectal ultrasound guided biopsy of the prostate. J Urol 189(3):911–915PubMedCrossRef

Liss MA, Chang A, Santos R et al (2011) Prevalence and significance of fluoroquinolone resistant Escherichia coli in patients undergoing transrectal ultrasound guided prostate needle biopsy. J Urol 185(4):1283–1288PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRef

Taylor AK, Zembower TR, Nadler RB et al (2012) Targeted antimicrobial prophylaxis using rectal swab cultures in men undergoing transrectal ultrasound guided prostate biopsy is associated with reduced incidence of postoperative infectious complications and cost of care. J Urol 187(4):1275–1279PubMedCrossRef

10.

Aron M, Rajeev TP, Gupta N (2000) Antimicrobial prophylaxis for transrectal needle biopsy of the prostate: a randomized controlled study. BJU Int 85(6):682–685PubMedCrossRef

11.

Sabbagh R, McCormack M, Péloquin F et al (2004) A prospective randomized trial of 1-day versus 3-day antimicrobial prophylaxis for transrectal ultrasound guided prostate biopsy. Can J Urol 11(2):2216–2219PubMed

12.

Wagenlehner FM, Wagenlehner C, Schinzel S et al (2005) Prospective, randomized, multicentric, open, comparative study on the efficacy of a prophylactic single dose of 500 mg levofloxacin versus 1920 mg trimethoprim/sulfamethoxazole versus a control group in patients undergoing TUR of the prostate. Eur Urol 47(4):549–556PubMedCrossRef

13.

Shigemura K, Tanaka K, Yasuda M et al (2005) Efficacy of 1-day prophylaxis medication with fluoroquinolone for prostate biopsy. World J Urol 23(5):356–360PubMedCrossRef

14.

Urbanek K, Kolar M, Strojil J et al (2005) Utilization of fluoroquinolones and Escherichia coli resistance in urinary tract infection: inpatients and outpatients. Pharmacoepidemiol Drug Saf 14(10):741–745PubMedCrossRef

15.

Lange D, Zappavigna C, Hamidizadeh R et al (2009) Bacterial sepsis after prostate biopsy—a new perspective. Urology 74(6):1200–1205PubMedCrossRef

16.

Otrock ZK, Oghlakian GO, Salamoun MM et al (2004) Incidence of urinary tract infection following transrectal ultrasound guided prostate biopsy at a tertiary-care medical center in Lebanon. Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol 25(10):873–877PubMedCrossRef

17.

Karlowsky JA, Hoban DJ, Decorby MR et al (2006) Fluroquinolone-resistant urinary isolates of Escherichia coli from outpatients are frequently multidrug resistant: results from the North American urinary tract infection collaborative alliance-quinolone resistance study. Antimicrob Agents Chemother 50(6):2251–2254PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRef

18.

Bruyère F, d’Arcier BF, Boutin JM et al (2010) Is urine culture routinely necessary before prostate biopsy? Prostate Cancer Prostatic Dis 13(3):260–262PubMedCrossRef

19.

Park DS, Oh JJ, Lee JH, et al (2009) Simple use of the suppository type povidone-iodine can prevent infectious complications in transrectal ultrasound-guided prostate biopsy. Adv Urol 2009:750598. doi:10.1155/2009/750598

20.

AbuGhosh Z, Margolick J, Goldenberg SL et al (2013) A prospective randomized trial of povidone-iodine prophylactic cleansing of the rectum before transrectal ultrasound guided prostate biopsy. J Urol 189(4):1326–1331PubMedCrossRef

Title: Peri-procedural povidone-iodine rectal preparation reduces microorganism counts and infectious complications following ultrasound-guided needle biopsy of the prostate
Authors: Justin R. Gyorfi
Christopher Otteni
Kevin Brown
Amar Patel
Kathleen Lehman
Brett E. Phillips
Kalyan Dewan
Girish Kirimanjeswara
Jay D. Raman
Publication date: 01-08-2014
Publisher: Springer Berlin Heidelberg
Published in: World Journal of Urology / Issue 4/2014
Print ISSN: 0724-4983
Electronic ISSN: 1433-8726
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00345-014-1291-8

At a glance: The ONWARDS insulin icodec trials

Springer Medicine

Peri-procedural povidone-iodine rectal preparation reduces microorganism counts and infectious complications following ultrasound-guided needle biopsy of the prostate

Abstract

Purpose

Methods

Results

Conclusions

At a glance: The ONWARDS insulin icodec trials

Springer Medicine

Abstract

Purpose

Methods

Results

Conclusions

Please log in to get access to this content

Other articles of this Issue 4/2014

Application of the 2013 American Urological Association early detection of prostate cancer guideline: Who will we miss?

Does HistoScanning™ predict positive results in prostate biopsy? A retrospective analysis of 1,188 sextants of the prostate

The role of MRI-targeted and confirmatory biopsies for cancer upstaging at selection in patients considered for active surveillance for clinically low-risk prostate cancer

Organ-sparing surgery is the treatment of choice in benign testicular tumors

Evolution of repeat prostate biopsy strategies incorporating transperineal and MRI–TRUS fusion techniques

Can we predict the clinical outcomes of genitourinary trauma patients and offer them an evidence-based support? The case for telemedicine network