Prostate Biopsy-related Infection: A Systematic Review of Risk Factors, Prevention Strategies, and Management Approaches

Transrectal versus transperineal prostate biopsy under intravenous anaesthesia: a clinical, microbiological and cost analysis of 2048 cases over 11 years at a tertiary institution

BACKGROUND

Transrectal (TR) and transperineal (TP) approaches for prostate biopsy have different morbidity profiles. Our institution transitioned to a preference for multiparametric MRI-based triage and TP biopsy since 2014. The aim of this study was to compare clinical, microbiological and health economic outcomes between TR and TP prostate biopsy.

METHODS

A consecutive cohort study considered prostate biopsies over an 11 year period. Hospital presentations across the region within 30 days of biopsy were analysed for details and subsequent outcomes according to biopsy approach. Cost for each encounter (routine and unplanned) were analysed and generalised linear models applied, as well as cost implications for inclusion of mpMRI-based triage and TP biopsy preference.

RESULTS

In total, 2048 prostate biopsies were performed. Similar re-presentation rates per occurred for each biopsy approach (90 patients, TR 4.8%, TP 3.8%, p = 0.29), with 23 patients presenting more than once (119 total presentations). Presentations after TR biopsy were more likely to be of infectious aetiology (TR 2.92%, TP 0.26% de novo, p < 0.001) and result in hospital admission (TR 43/49, 93.4%; TP 14/24, 58.3%; p = 0.007) for similar rates of urinary retention (TR 2.76% vs TP 3.63%, p = 1). The mean overall cost (biopsy and re-presentations) was higher for the TP group (p < 0.001), adjusted for year and age, but reduced over time and was similar for patients who re-presented (p = 0.98). Incorporation of mpMRI (with subsequently avoided biopsies), TP biopsy and re-presentations resulted in AU$783.27 saving per biopsy.

CONCLUSIONS

TR biopsy resulted in more infectious complications and hospital admissions than TP biopsy for similar rates of re-presentation and urinary retention. TP biopsy costs reduced over time and use in conjunction with mpMRI provides an overall cost saving. Routine TP biopsy is safe and feasible, with further cost savings expected with other approaches (local anaesthetic) under investigation.

Antibiotic prophylaxis for transrectal ultrasound-guided prostate needle biopsy: Compared efficacy of ciprofloxacin vs. the ciprofloxacin/fosfomycin tromethamine combination

INTRODUCTION

Some authors advocate an increase in post-prostate needle biopsy (PNB) infections associated with emergent quinolone resistance in E. coli, urging re-evaluation of antibiotic prophylaxis (antibioprophylaxis). In this study, we compared rates of post-PNB urosepsis associated with two oral regimens of antibioprophylaxis: ciprofloxacin (CIP) vs. ciprofloxacin and fosfomycin tromethamine combination (CIP/FOS).

METHODS

This retrospective pre-/post-intervention study included all patients who underwent PNB in two Canadian hospitals from January 2012 to December 2015. The primary outcome was urosepsis within one month of PNB. Urosepsis rates were analyzed according to antibioprophylaxis using log-binomial regression, considering the propensity score weights of collected risk factor data.

RESULTS

We reviewed 2287 PNB patients. A total of 1090 received CIP and 1197 received CIP/FOS. Urosepsis incidence with CIP was 1.1% (12/1090) and fell to 0.2% (2/1197) with CIP/FOS. Our analysis indicates that CIP/FOS significantly decreased the risk of urosepsis compared to CIP alone (adjusted relative risk [aRR] 0.16; p=0.021). The isolated pathogen was E. coli in 12/14 cases, including seven bacteremias. Among E. coli cases, seven strains were CIP-resistant. Eleven of 12 E. coli, including all CIP-resistant strains, were isolated in patients on CIP alone. One case of B. fragilis bacteremia occurred in the CIP/FOS group. No cases of C. difficile were identified in the three months post-PNB.

CONCLUSIONS

The adoption of CIP/FOS antibiotic prophylaxis significantly lowered the rate of post-PNB urosepsis. Conveniently, this regimen is oral, single-dose, and low-cost.

A New Nomogram Allowing Physicians to Predict Patients at High Risk of Fever Occurring After Prostate Biopsy

Background

To facilitate early treatment, we constructed a nomogram to predict risk of postoperative fever before prostate biopsy in patients with high risk of fever.

Material/Methods

We collected information on patients undergoing prostate biopsy from January 2015 to December 2018 from their medical records, including clinical characteristics and laboratory test results. Finally, after strict screening, the prediction model was established in 440 patients who underwent a transrectal prostate biopsy (TRPB). We divided these patients into a training group and validation group at a ratio of 7: 3, respectively. Univariate analysis and multivariate logistic regression analysis were used to select the predictors and to develop the model. Calibration curve and C-index were used to evaluate the accuracy of the nomogram, while DCA was used to assess the clinical value.

Results

The individualized predictive nomogram contained 3 clinical features – Biopsy-positive rate (BPR), Hematuria, and Urine WBC – significantly associated with post-biopsy fever. The nomogram had good discriminating ability in both the training group and validation group – the C-index was 0.774 (95% CI=0.717–0.832) in the training group and 0.808 (95% CI=0.706–0.909) in the validation group. Hosmer-Lemeshow test proved a good calibration curve fit. The DCA curve suggested that the nomogram would have good clinical utility.

Conclusions

This is the first study to develop a nomogram to predict fever after prostate biopsy via Biopsy-positive rate (BPR), Hematuria, and Urine WBC. Use of this nomogram might help prevent fever and infection, and could facilitate individualized medical treatment after prostate biopsy.

Complication Rates After TRUS Guided Transrectal Systematic and MRI-Targeted Prostate Biopsies in a High-Risk Region for Antibiotic Resistances

Introduction: There is still an ongoing debate whether a transrectal ultrasound (TRUS) approach for prostate biopsies is associated with higher (infectious) complications rates compared to transperineal biopsies. This is especially of great interests in settings with elevated frequencies of multidrug resistant organisms (MDRO).

Materials and Methods: Between 01/2018 and 05/2019 230 patients underwent a TRUS-guided prostate biopsy at the department of Urology at University Hospital Frankfurt. Patients were followed up within the clinical routine that was not conducted earlier than 6 weeks after the biopsy. Among 230 biopsies, 180 patients took part in the follow-up. No patients were excluded. Patients were analyzed retrospectively regarding complications, infections and underlying infectious agents or needed interventions.

Results: Of all patients with follow up, 84 patients underwent a systematic biopsy (SB) and 96 a targeted biopsy (TB) after MRI of the prostate with additional SB. 74.8% of the patients were biopsy-naïve. The most frequent objective complications (classified by Clavien-Dindo) lasting longer than one day after biopsy were hematuria (17.9%, n = 32), hematospermia (13.9%, n = 25), rectal bleeding (2.8%, n = 5), and pain (2.2%, n = 4). Besides a known high MDRO prevalence in the Rhine-Main region, only one patient (0.6%) developed fever after biopsy. One patient each (0.6%) consulted a physician due to urinary retention, rectal bleeding or gross hematuria. There were no significant differences in complications seen between SB and SB + TB patients. The rate of patients who consulted a physician was significantly higher for patients with one or more prior biopsies compared to biopsy-naïve patients.

Conclusion: Complications after transrectal prostate biopsies are rare and often self-limiting. Infections were seen in <1% of all patients, regardless of an elevated local prevalence of MDROs. Severe complications (Clavien-Dindo ≥ IIIa) were only seen in 3 (1.7%) of the patients. Repeated biopsy is associated with higher complication rates in general.

Infectious complications of prostate biopsy: winning battles but not war

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.

Bacterial signatures and their inflammatory potentials associated with prostate cancer

Chronic inflammation can create a microenvironment that can contribute to the formation of prostate pathologies. Far less well understood is the origin of inflammation in the prostate. One potential source is microbial infections of the prostate. This review summarizes recent findings regarding the presence of bacteria in the prostate and the dysbiosis of bacterial populations in the urinary tract and the gastrointestinal tract related to prostate cancer, thereby focusing on next-generation sequencing (NGS)-generated data. The current limitations regarding NGS-based detection methods and other difficulties in the quest for a microbial etiology for prostate cancer are discussed. We then focus on a few bacterial species, including Cutibacterium acnes and Escherichia coli that are often NGS-detected in prostatic tissue specimens, and discuss their possible contribution as initiator or enhancer of prostate inflammation and prostate carcinogenesis.

68Ga-PSMA PET/CT better characterises localised prostate cancer after MRI and transperineal prostate biopsy: Is 68Ga-PSMA PET/CT guided biopsy the future?

BACKGROUND

68Ga prostate specific membrane antigen PET/CT (68Ga-PSMA PET/CT) may be superior to multiparametric MRI (mpMRI) for localisation of prostate cancer tumour foci, however the concordance and differences between 68Ga-PSMA PET/CT and mpMRI when applied to all biopsied patients and potential benefit in patients with negative mpMRI is unclear.

METHODS

Retrospective analysis of patients undergoing mpMRI, prostate biopsy and 68Ga-PSMA PET/CT over a 3-year period. Diagnostic performance of 68Ga-PSMA PET/CT and mpMRI were assessed using biopsy histopathology for the entire cohort and radical prostatectomy specimen in a subset of patients. Lesion concordance and additional detection of each modality were determined, including in a dedicated cohort of patients with mpMRI PIRADS 2 scans.

RESULTS

A total of 144 patients were included in the study. Index lesion/foci detection was similar between 68Ga-PSMA PET/CT and mpMRI (sensitivity 83.1% vs 90.1%; p = 0.267), however lesions missed by mpMRI were larger (1.66 cm³ vs 0.72 cm³; p = 0.034). Lesion detection rates were similar across the biopsy histopathology and radical prostatectomy specimen subset, with a high concordance for index (80.1%) and a moderate concordance for total (67%) lesions between the 2 imaging modalities. The additional detection yield favoured 68Ga-PSMA PET/CT over mpMRI for index (13.5% vs 4.3%) and total (18.2% vs 5.4%) lesions; both modalities missed 2.1% and 12.3% of index and total lesions, respectively. 68Ga-PSMA PET/CT identified 9 of 11 patients with PIRADS 2 mpMRI but subsequently diagnosed with Gleason ≥ 3 + 4 disease.

CONCLUSIONS

Despite high concordance rates, 68Ga-PSMA PET/CT incrementally improved tumour localisation compared with mpMRI. These results suggest that 68Ga-PSMA PET/CT may have an incremental value to that of mpMRI in the diagnostic process for prostate.

Rectal Swabs for Detecting Multidrug Resistant Bacteria Prior to Transrectal Prostate Fusion Biopsy: A Prospective Evaluation of Risk Factor Screening and Microbiologic Findings

OBJECTIVE

To assess the prevalence of fluoroquinolone resistant (QR) bacteria, multidrug resistant (MDR) bacteria and Enterococcus faecalis (E. faecalis) in rectal swabs of patients undergoing transrectal prostate biopsy and for evaluating if risk factor assessment is reliable for prediction of QR bacteria, MDR bacteria, or E. faecalis.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Two hundred consecutive patients received a rectal swab examination prior to transrectal magnetic resonance imaging-guided fusion biopsy, for evaluating the prevalence of QR bacteria, MDR bacteria, and E. faecalis. The results of a standardized risk factor questionnaire, assessing known prognosticators for higher prevalence of resistant bacteria in rectal flora were correlated with the occurrence of QR bacteria, MDR bacteria, and E. faecalis in rectal swabs.

RESULTS

QR E. coli was detected in 12 patients (6%). Regarding MDR bacteria, extended spectrum β- lactamase- producing E. coli occurred in 8 patients (4%). E. faecalis was found in 15 patients (7.5%). A total of 193 patients completed the risk factor questionnaire. Of those, 107 (53.2%) patients harbored no risk factors, while 86 (42.8%) had at least 1 risk factor, of which the most common was repeat biopsy. No association was found between any risk factor and occurrence of QR bacteria, MDR bacteria, or E. faecalis (P >.05).

CONCLUSION

The prevalence of resistant germs in our cohort was lower compared to other series. Moreover, the rate of QR bacteria, MDR bacteria, or E. faecalis in rectal swabs was not reliably associated with risk factor assessment.

Transperineal prostate biopsy with cognitive magnetic resonance imaging/biplanar ultrasound fusion: description of technique and early results

OBJECTIVE

To describe our technique and early results performing transperineal prostate biopsy using cognitive magnetic resonance imaging (MRI)/biplanar ultrasound fusion. Key components of this technique include use of the PrecisionPoint Transperineal Access System (Perineologic, Cumberland, MD) and simultaneous transrectal ultrasound guidance in the axial and sagittal planes.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

In total, 95 patients (38 studied retrospectively and 57 studied prospectively) underwent a transperineal MRI-targeted prostate biopsy using the technique detailed in this manuscript. All biopsies were performed by a single urologist (MAG). Data were collected with respect to cancer detection rates, tolerability, and complications. The subset of patients who were studied prospectively was assessed for complications by telephone interviews performed at 4-6 days and 25-31 days following the prostate biopsy.

RESULTS

Between February 2018 and June 2019, 95 men underwent a transperineal prostate biopsy using MRI/biplanar ultrasound fusion guidance. Patients had a total of 124 PI-RADS 3-5 lesions that were targeted for biopsy. In total, 108 (87.1%) lesions were found to harbor prostate cancer of any grade. Grade group ≥ 2 prostate cancer was found in 81 (65.3%) of targeted lesions. The detection rates for grade group ≥ 1 and grade group ≥ 2 prostate cancer rose with increasing PI-RADS score. In 65 (68.4%) cases, the patient's highest grade prostate cancer was found within an MRI target. Additionally, 12 of 55 (21.8%) patients who were found to have no or grade group 1 prostate cancer on systematic biopsy were upgraded to grade group ≥ 2 prostate cancer with MRI targeting. Only 1 (1.1%) patient received periprocedural antibiotics and no patient experienced an infectious complication. Self-limited hematuria and hematospermia were commonly reported following the procedure (75.4% and 40.4%, respectively) and only 1 (1.1%) patient developed urinary retention.

CONCLUSIONS

We demonstrate the safety and feasibility of performing transperineal prostate biopsy using cognitive MRI/biplanar ultrasound fusion guidance. The described technique affords the safety benefits of the transperineal approach as well as obviates the need for a formal fusion platform. Additionally, this method can conveniently be performed under local anesthesia with acceptable tolerability.

A novel method for pain control: infiltration free local anesthesia technique (INFLATE) for transrectal prostatic biopsy using transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation (TENS)

PURPOSE

To describe a novel method for the control of pain during prostate biopsies, infiltration free local anesthesia technique (INFLATE) for transrectal prostatic biopsies with no further needle insertions for local anesthetic infiltration.

METHODS

A total of 138 men with elevated prostate-specific antigen levels and/or abnormal digital rectal examination findings were included in the study. Of the patients, 73 were assigned to the INFLATE group and 65 to the TRUS-PNB group. Demographic data, PSA levels, findings of digital rectal examinations, and multiparametric prostatic magnetic resonance imaging were recorded. In the INFLATE group, a two-channel TENStem eco basic device with two electrodes was used for pain control during the biopsy. For the TRUS-PNB group, 60 mg lidocaine gel was given intrarectally in addition to infiltration of a prilocaine and bupivacaine mixture (5 mL of 2% prilocaine + 5 mL of 0.25% bupivacaine). Pain perception was assessed using a linear numeric rating scale.

RESULTS

The mean ages, BMIs, prostate volumes, and PSA levels were similar between the two groups (p > 0.05). Of the 56 participants with prostate adenocarcinoma, 28 were in the INFLATE group, and 28 were in the TRUS-PNB group with a 40.6% overall cancer detection rate. The mean preoperative and post-operative pain scores during probe insertion, biopsy and post-biopsy were similar between the groups (p > 0.05).

CONCLUSION

The results of the study confirmed that INFLATE for transrectal prostate biopsy using a TENS device could safely and effectively be used for pain control with the advantage of two fewer needle attempts with no increase in significant complications.

Infected Abdominal Aortic Aneurysm After Transrectal Ultrasound-Guided Biopsy of the Prostate: A Report of Two Cases

Primary infected abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) is an uncommon presentation which can be associated with significant morbidity and mortality. In this report, we present 2 cases of infected AAAs less than 10 days after a transrectal ultrasound-guided (TRUS) prostate biopsy. A 63-year-old male presenting with sepsis and back pain 9 days after TRUS biopsy was found to have a 27-mm ectatic abdominal aorta which expanded to 59 mm in the course of a week, despite antibiotic therapy. He underwent successful surgical excision of the infected aortic aneurysm and reconstruction using a vein. A 55-year-old male presented similarly, 7 days after prostate biopsy with a 60-mm aortic aneurysm. His aneurysm ruptured 2 days before planned intervention-he did not survive an emergency repair. In both cases, aortic tissue biopsies confirmed growth of Escherichia coli. Preexistence of an aortic aneurysm was not known in either case as neither patient had imaging of the abdominal aorta. We postulate the pathophysiology was due to hematogenous spread.

Improved detection and reduced biopsies: the effect of a multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging-based triage prostate cancer pathway in a public teaching hospital

PURPOSE

Multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging (mpMRI) improves clinically significant prostate cancer (csPCa) detection by facilitating targeted biopsy (cognitive, fusion technology, or in-gantry MRI guidance) and reducing negative biopsies. This study sought to describe the feasibility of introducing an mpMRI-based triage pathway, including diagnostic performance, applicability to training, and cost analysis.

METHODS

An observational retrospective cohort study of consecutive patients attending a large public tertiary referral training hospital who underwent mpMRI for suspicion of prostate cancer was considered. Standard clinical, MRI-related, histopathological, and financial parameters were collected for analysis of biopsy avoidance, diagnostic accuracy of biopsy approach, and operator (consultant and resident/registrar) and logistical (including financial) feasibility.

RESULTS

653 men underwent mpMRI, of which 344 underwent prostate biopsy resulting in a 47% biopsy avoidance rate. Overall, 240 (69.8%) patients were diagnosed with PCa, of which 208 (60.5%) were clinically significant, with higher rates of csPCa observed for higher PIRADS scores. In patients who underwent both systematic and targeted biopsy (stTPB), targeted cores detected csPCa in 12.7% and 16.6% in more men than systematic cores in PIRADS 5 and 4, respectively, whereas systematic cores detected csPCa in 5% and 3.2% of patients, where targeted cores did not. A high standard of performance was maintained across the study period and the approach was shown to be cost effective.

CONCLUSIONS

Introdution of an mpMRI-based triage system into a large public tertiary teaching hospital is feasible, cost effective and leads to high rates of prostate cancer diagnosis while reducing unnecessary biopsies and detection of insignificant PCa.

Analysis of PI-RADS 4 cases: Management recommendations for negatively biopsied patients

PURPOSE

To evaluate if subgroups of patients assigned to MRI category PI-RADS 4 regarding clinical and MRI imaging aspects have distinct risks of prostate cancer (PCa) to facilitate adequate clinical management of this population, especially after negative targeted biopsy.

METHODS

This prospective, IRB approved single center cross-sectional study includes 931 consecutive patients after mp-MRI at 3 T for PCa detection. 193 patients with PI-RADS assessment category 4 received subsequent combined targeted MRI/US fusion-guided and systematic 12-core TRUS-guided biopsy as reference standard and were finally analyzed. The primary endpoint was PCa detection of PI-RADS 4 with MRI subgroup analyses. Secondary endpoints were analyses of clinical data, location of PCa, and detection of targeted biopsy cores.

RESULTS

PCa was detected in 119 of 193 patients (62%) including clinically significant PCa (csPCa; Gleason score ≥3 + 4 = 7) in 92 patients (48%). MRI subgroup analysis revealed 95% PCa (73% csPCa) in unambiguous PI-RADS 4 index lesions without additional, interfering signs of prostatitis in the peripheral zone or overlaying signs of severe stromal hyperplasia in the transition zone according to PI-RADS v2. Transition zone confined PI-RADS-4-lesions with overlaying signs of stromal hyperplasia showed PCa only in 11% (4% csPCa). Targeted biopsy cores missed the csPCa index lesion in 7% of the patients. PSA density (PSAD) was significantly higher in PCa patients.

CONCLUSIONS

Small csPCa can reliably be detected with mp-MRI by experienced readers, but can be missed by targeted MR/US fusion biopsy alone. Targeted re-biopsy of unambiguous (peripheral) PI-RADS-4-lesions is recommended; whereas transition zone confined PI-RADS-4-lesions with overlaying signs of stromal hyperplasia might be followed-up by re-MRI primarily.

[Fusion biopsies for primary diagnosis of prostate cancer : Implementation, benefits, and clinical aspects]

Prostate carcinoma is one of the most common tumors worldwide. Histological confirmation by biopsy is an obligatory part of the diagnostic approach. The main problem of the 10-12-fold transrectal ultrasound-guided (TRUS) biopsy, which has so far been regarded as the gold standard, is the underdiagnosis of clinically significant cancer. MRI-based procedures, so-called fusion biopsies, have shown superior results when compared to conventional biopsies. There are three different approaches (cognitive and software-based MRI/TRUS fusion and in-bore biopsy) with comparable detection rates but differences in the technical aspects and time involvement. In order to reduce fusion errors, targeted biopsies should consist of multiple cores. There is currently no clear preference for the access pathway (transrectal or transperineal), but clinical parameters such as infection risk or location of the tumor can influence the decision. While the German S3 guideline considers MRI prior to primary biopsy to be optional, the 2019 European Association of Urology guidelines already recommend MRI prior to biopsy for all patients. The combination of MRI-targeted and systematic biopsy offers the highest detection rates with the disadvantage that more low-risk tumors are diagnosed. Both the patient and the urologist benefit from an improved informative value of the biopsy when deciding on active surveillance as well as when planning invasive therapies.

A significant percentage of patients with transrectal biopsy-related infections have positive blood cultures but negative urine cultures. A literature review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Infectious complications after transrectal prostate biopsy are rare. Nevertheless, since these are frequent procedures, the burden of infectious complications is high. Considering the increasing antimicrobial resistance, microbiological confirmation is important to guide antimicrobial therapy.

METHODS

We reviewed PubMed for original studies providing concurrent urine and blood culture data in symptomatic patients with transrectal biopsy-related infectious complications. We performed a proportions meta-analysis (with MedCalc) and calculated the pooled yield of urine and blood cultures and the pooled discordance rate between urine and blood cultures.

RESULTS

Our review identified 41 studies, involving 852 patients with infectious complications after transrectal prostate biopsy and sufficient data to calculate discordance. The pooled yield of urine cultures was 64.6% (95% CI: 56.2-72.3%, I² 83%), the pooled yield of blood cultures was 43% (95% CI: 36.5-49.7%, I² 74%) and the pooled discordance rate was 14% (95% CI: 10.6-17.8%, I² 53%). In subgroup analyses the pooled discordance was; 19.6% (95% CI: 11.8-28.9%, I² 31%) in 113 patients presenting within 2 calendar days after the biopsy and 11.2% (95% CI: 4.5-20%, I² 47%) in 143 patients presenting with fever and symptoms of lower urinary tract symptoms. The statistical and methodological heterogeneity of included studies was high.

CONCLUSION

Obtaining blood cultures is reasonable in all patients presenting with systemic symptoms suggestive of infection after a transrectal prostate biopsy. Blood cultures can provide additional microbiological data in about 1 of 7 patients with post-biopsy infectious complications. Prospective studies are needed to validate these results.

Clinical Importance of Antibiotic Regimen in Transrectal Ultrasound-Guided Prostate Biopsy: A Single Center Analysis of Nine Thousand Four Hundred Eighty-Seven Cases

BACKGROUND

To evaluate the effectiveness of an antibiotic regimen for prostate biopsy by analyzing patients who were hospitalized because of complications after transrectal ultrasound-guided prostate biopsy.

METHODS

We reviewed retrospectively the medical records of 10,339 patients who underwent transrectal ultrasound-guided prostate biopsy at our institution from May 2003 to April 2017. We excluded patients with low quality data. All patients underwent urine culture before transrectal ultrasound-guided prostate biopsy and received intravenous antibiotic agents 30-60 minutes before biopsy. Patients were either given prophylactic quinolone or cephalosporin (second or third generation). Clinicopathologic factors including patient age, antibiotic regimen, number of biopsy cores, body mass index, prostate specific antigen, prostate volume, and infection-related complications that required hospitalization were subsequently analyzed.

RESULTS

A total of 9,487 patients were included in the final analysis, of whom 33 patients (0.35%) were hospitalized because of infection-related complications. Infection-related hospitalization rates were lower in patients who received cephalosporin (0.2%) than in patients who received quinolone (1.59%). At our institution, cephalosporin has been used predominantly to prevent post-biopsy infections since February 2013. Only five patients (0.12%) developed infection-related complications of the 3,863 patient who underwent transrectal ultrasound-guided prostate biopsy since February 2013. Multivariable analysis revealed that use of second- or third-generation cephalosporin was the only independent predictor of infection-related complications.

CONCLUSION

Implementing an effective antibiotic prophylaxis regimen at our institution by using second- or third-generation cephalosporin could reduce infection-related complications after transrectal ultrasound-guided prostate biopsy.

A Population-Based Cohort Study of the Impact of Infectious Complications Requiring Hospitalization after Prostate Biopsy on Radical Prostatectomy Surgical Outcomes

OBJECTIVE

To compare radical prostatectomy outcomes in men with and without exposure to a major infectious event within 30-days of a prior TRUS-biopsy.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

This retrospective cohort study included men who underwent radical prostatectomy from 2002 to 2013 in Ontario, Canada. Several linked administrative databases were used. Exposure was defined as hospitalization with evidence of a urinary tract infection or sepsis during the first 30-days after a prostate biopsy. The primary outcome was a composite of procedures indicative of a likely serious complication of radical prostectomy within the first 12 months after surgery. Secondary outcomes included oncological, functional, and hospital related events within 2 years of radical prostatectomy.

RESULTS

A total of 26,254 patients were included in this study and 530 (2.02%) had a post-TRUS-biopsy infection. A similar proportion of patients with and without a post-TRUS-biopsy infectious event experienced the composite primary outcome (1.7% vs 1.1%; odds ratio [OR] 1.61, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.82-3.14; P = .16). However, exposed patients had significantly higher odds of perioperative blood transfusion (OR 1.61, 95% CI 1.30-2.00; P <.001), bladder neck contracture (OR 1.35, 95% CI 1.12-1.63; P = .002), and 30-day hospital readmission (OR 2.08, 95% CI 1.47-2.95; P <.001), and a small but significant increase in length of hospital stay (P = 0.005). No other significant differences were observed.

CONCLUSION

Although prior infectious events are associated with increased risk of blood transfusion, bladder neck contracture, and hospital readmission following radical prostatectomy, results from this study suggest that major surgical complications, are not adversely affected by TRUS-biopsy related infections.

New Bacterial Infection in the Prostate after Transrectal Prostate Biopsy

BACKGROUND

The prostate is prone to infections. Hypothetically, bacteria can be inoculated into the prostate during a transrectal prostate biopsy (TRPB) and progress into chronic bacterial prostatitis. Therefore, we examined new bacterial infections in biopsied prostates after TRPB and whether they affect clinical characteristics in the biopsied patients.

METHODS

Of men whose prostate cultures have been taken prior to TRPB, 105 men with bacteria-free benign prostate pathology underwent an additional repeated prostate culture within a year after TRPB.

RESULTS

Twenty out of 105 men (19.05%) acquired new bacteria in their naïve prostates after TRPB. Except for one single case of Escherichia coli infection, 19 men had acquired gram-positive bacteria species. Between the culture-positive and negative groups, there were no significant differences in age, serum prostate-specific antigen (PSA) level, white blood cell (WBC) counts in expressed prostatic secretion (EPS), prostate volume, symptom severities in Korean version of the National Institutes of Health-Chronic Prostatitis Symptom Index (NIH-CPSI) questionnaire, and patient-specific risk factors for biopsy associated infectious complications. Additionally, the TRPB procedure increased the WBC counts in post-biopsy EPS (P = 0.031, McNemar test), but did not increase the serum PSA level and symptoms of NIH-CPSI in 20 men who acquired new bacteria after TRPB.

CONCLUSION

The TRPB procedure was significantly associated with acquiring new bacterial infections in the biopsied prostate, but these localized bacteria did not affect patients' serum PSA level and symptoms after biopsy.

Reduced Risk of Sepsis after Prostate Biopsy Using a Cephalosporin-Fluoroquinolone Antibiotic Regimen and Isopropyl Alcohol Needle Washing

OBJECTIVE

To compare 3 prophylactic regimens to assess their impact on postbiopsy sepsis incidence.

METHODS

Data were reviewed for 829 consecutive patients who underwent prostate biopsy in a community practice setting between January 2013 and October 2017. Group 1 patients received ciprofloxacin 500 mg two times a day orally for 4 days starting the day prior to biopsy and gentamicin 80 mg intramuscularly 20 minutes prior to biopsy. From April 2015 to October 2017, 2 groups of patients were followed in parallel in a randomized manner. Group 2 received ciprofloxacin 500 mg two times a day orally for 4 days starting the day prior to biopsy and ceftriaxone 1 g intramuscularly 20 minutes prior to biopsy. Group 3 received the same antibiotic regimen as group 2 and also underwent isopropyl alcohol needle washing.

RESULTS

All study groups were demographically equivalent. Microscopic bacterial counts were substantially decreased after isopropyl alcohol needle washing. Incidence of postbiopsy sepsis in groups 1 (n = 313), 2 (n = 259), and 3 (n = 257) was 3.8%, 2%, and 0%, respectively (analysis of variance; P = .006). Risk factors for sepsis included elevated body mass index, Charlson Comorbidity Score, and presence of type 2 diabetes mellitus.

CONCLUSION

There was a significant reduction in the incidence of sepsis after prostate biopsy using a combination of a ciprofloxacin-ceftriaxone antibiotic regimen and isopropyl alcohol needle washing. The technique for needle washing is inexpensive and quick, and can be easily adopted into current biopsy protocols.

The effectiveness of targeted relative to empiric prophylaxis on infectious complications after transrectal ultrasound-guided prostate biopsy: a meta-analysis

PURPOSE

Rectal culture screening for fluoroquinolone (FQ)-resistant Enterobacteriaceae before transrectal ultrasound guided prostate (TRUSPB) biopsy and targeted antibiotic prophylaxis (TAP) may decrease post-TRUSPB infection rates compared to empiric (EAP) regimens. The objective of this study was to evaluate the effectiveness of targeted relative to empiric prophylaxis regimens on rates of infectious complications after TRUSPB and to determine the baseline prevalence of FQ resistance based on prior rectal swabs.

METHODS

An electronic search within literature databases including EMBASE and Web of Science (all databases) for articles assessing TAP as an approach to TRUSPB prophylaxis was conducted. Quality assessment was performed using the Hoy instrument. Meta-analysis was performed using MetaXL 5.3.

RESULTS

From 15 studies (eight retrospective and seven prospective) representing 12,320 participants, infectious complication incidence was 3.4% in EAP and 0.8% in TAP patients. The number needed to treat with TAP to avoid one more infection when compared to the EAP group was 39. Effect sizes were homogeneous. Prevalence of FQ resistance showed low (15%) and high (28%) subgroups, likely due to region of origin (within and outside USA, respectively).

CONCLUSIONS

Rectal culture prior to TRUSPB and use of TAP adjusts for endemic FQ resistance and is associated with less infectious complications and resulting morbidity when compared to EAP. Overtreatment associated with augmented prophylaxis approaches may be reduced as a result. Further prospective assessment and cost-benefit analyses are required before widespread implementation can be recommended.

Transrectal prostate biopsy sepsis rate following reduced quinolone antibiotic prophylaxis from six doses to single dose

BACKGROUND

This study aimed to evaluate the rates of infective complication related to transrectal prostate biopsy (TRPB) as our centre changed its protocol from six doses over 3 days to a single pre-procedure prophylactic dose.

METHODS

This prospective cohort study identified infective complication in patients who attended and subsequently underwent TRPB at the time of their one-stop prostate clinic at our public tertiary hospital between August 2011 and April 2017. Patients who underwent TRPB between August 2011 and November 2014 received six doses of 500 mg of ciprofloxacin, taken twice daily over 3 days. This protocol was changed to a single dose of 500 mg of ciprofloxacin prior to biopsy from February 2015 to April 2017. Patients who had travelled to South East Asia in the 6 months prior to TRPB received a single dose of 1 g intravenous ertapenem prior to biopsy, and this remained unchanged throughout the study period. The rates of infective complication were recorded and compared between the groups of patients who had undergone six doses versus a single dose of prophylactic ciprofloxacin.

RESULTS

A total of 766 patients underwent TRPB from August 2011 to April 2017. Of these, 357 patients received the 3-day course of prophylaxis (Group 1) and 409 patients received the single dose prophylaxis (Group 2). Fifty-five patients were excluded from analysis. There was no significant difference in infective complications between the two groups (3.4% (11/326) Group 1 versus 4.9% (19/385) Group 2, P = 0.40).

CONCLUSION

Our study supports the use of a single dose of ciprofloxacin as sufficient antibiotic prophylaxis prior to TRPB.

Comparison of fosfomycin against fluoroquinolones for transrectal prostate biopsy prophylaxis: an individual patient-data meta-analysis

PURPOSE

To systematically review and meta-analyse available evidence comparing fosfomycin trometamol (FT) to fluoroquinolone (FQ) prophylaxis to prevent transrectal ultrasound-guided prostate biopsy (TRUSPB) related infectious complications.

METHODS

Electronic databases were queried for studies comparing FT to FQ-based TRUSPB prophylaxis. Studies were assessed for comparable outcomes and methodological quality (ROBINS-I modification). The primary outcome measure was the relative odds of overall infectious complications following TRUSPB according to FT/FQ treatment, which was evaluated with meta-analysis. Safety and tolerability were also assessed. The relative odds of infections of different severity [Grade 1, bacteriuria and afebrile urinary tract infection (UTI); Grade 2, bacteraemia, febrile UTI, and urosepsis] according to FT/FQ treatment were also estimated.

RESULTS

Five studies, being three prospective randomised trials and two retrospective cohort studies, representing 3112 patients, were included. The relative odds of an infectious complication (OR 0.22, 95% CI 0.09-0.54) or of a more severe (Grade 2) infection (OR 0.13, 95% CI 0.07-0.26) were significantly lower in those receiving FT compared to FQ prophylaxis. A low incidence of medication-related side effects was observed. There were less observed infections due to FQ-resistant pathogens in those receiving FT prophylaxis.

CONCLUSIONS

Patients who received FT prophylaxis were less likely than those who received FQ prophylaxis to develop infections overall, as well as severe and resistant infections after TRUSPB. Assessing the performance of FT in other geographic locations or in comparison to targeted prophylaxis based on risk assessment or rectal cultures is desired.

How to Biopsy: Transperineal Versus Transrectal, Saturation Versus Targeted, What's the Evidence?

Until recently, prostate biopsy for the detection of prostate cancer has been performed transrectally and in an untargeted sampling fashion. Consequently, the procedure has suffered a small but significant risk of severe morbidity through infection, and low diagnostic accuracy, with undergrading and missed diagnosis being common. MRI is revolutionizing prostate cancer diagnosis by improving detection accuracy via targeted biopsy. Transperineal biopsy is eradicating sepsis as a risk of prostate biopsy, while avoiding the need for broad-spectrum or combination prophylactic antibiotics. This article analyzes the data on the various current methods of performing prostate biopsy and recommends an optimal technique.

[Prudent use of antimicrobial prophylaxis : Prevention of increasing antibiotic resistance]

BACKGROUND

The use of peri-operative antimicrobial prophylaxis during urological procedures to prevent postoperative complications is very common.

OBJECTIVES

What kind of recommendations for reasonable use of peri-operative antimicrobial prophylaxis during urological procedures to prevent increasing antibiotic resistance and postoperative complications exist?

METHODS

Review of evidence-based recommendations from literature and current Guidelines of the EAU.

RESULTS

For urological procedures there are evidenced-based recommendations for using antimicrobial prophylaxis, although the evidence is not always sufficiently high. For endourological procedures it is recommended to use Cephalosporines group 2 (or 3), Aminopenicillin/Beta-lactamase inhibitor or Cotrimoxazole. For transrectal core biopsy of the prostate, depending on the risk, Fluoroquinolones, Cotrimoxazole or targeted prophylaxis are recommended. For laparoscopic or open procedures, partly optional, Cephalosporines group 2 (or 3), Aminopenicillin/Beta-lactamase inhibitor or Cotrimoxazole and for a cystectomy with opening of the intestinal tract Cephalosporines group 2 or an Aminopenicillin/Beta-lactamase inhibitor, together with Metronidazole are recommended.

CONCLUSIONS

Using prudent peri-operative antimicrobial prophylaxis patient surgical risk factors as well as the expected spectrum of pathogens and the local resistance profile should be considered. Perioperative antibiotic prophylaxis on the one hand aims at preventing postoperative infections, and on the other hand plays an important role in the total antibiotic consumption. It is therefore a pivotal aspect of "Antimicrobial Stewardship" strategies in the health-care system.

Transperineal vs. transrectal biopsy in MRI targeting

Prostate biopsy is typically performed via either the transrectal or transperineal approach. MRI-targeted biopsy, whether using any of the three options of cognitive fusion, MRI-ultrasound fusion software, or in-bore MRI-guided biopsy, can also be performed via either transrectal or transperineal approaches. As an extension of traditional random prostate biopsy, the transrectal approach is far more commonly used for MRI-targeted biopsy due to its convenience. However, in the context of today’s increasing multi-drug resistance of rectal flora, the transperineal approach is being used more often due to its lack of septic complications. In addition, only a first-generation cephalosporin, not a fluoroquinolone, is required as antibiotic prophylaxis. Evidence shows excellent detection rates of significant prostate cancer using magnetic resonance imaging (MRI)-targeted and/or systematic transperineal biopsy (TPB). However, there are no head-to-head studies comparing the different MRI-targeted methods within TPB. To provide truly patient-centred care, the biopsy technique using the safest method with the highest detection rate of significant cancer should be used. Depending on healthcare context and hospital resource utilization, MRI-targeted TPB is an excellent option and should be performed wherever available and feasible. Whilst building capacity for TPB in one’s practice, the routine use of rectal culture swabs prior to any transrectal biopsies is strongly encouraged. Independent of biopsy route, the addition of systematic cores needs to be discussed with the patient weighing maximal detection of significant cancer against increased detection of insignificant lesions.

Is Prostate Biopsy Recommended in Turkish Men with a Prostate-Specific Antigen Level between 2.5 and 4 ng/mL?

BACKGROUND

Prostate cancer is the most common solid tumor. The incidence of prostate cancer shows regional and racial differences. The ideal PSA threshold for prostate biopsy is still being debated.

OBJECTIVE

We aimed to investigate cancer detection rates in Turkish men who underwent transrectal ultrasound-guided prostate biopsy (TRUSPB) who had prostate-specific antigen (PSA) levels in the range of 2.5 to 4.0 ng/mL and compare them with the rates of cancer in patients with PSA levels in the range of 4.0 to 10.0 ng/mL.

METHODS

All Turkish men who underwent TRUSPB in our clinic between January 2012 and May 2014 were included; that is, 101 patients (Group 1) with PSA level in the range of 2.5 to 4.0 ng/mL and 522 patients (Group 2) with PSA level in the range of 4.0 to 10.0 ng/mL. Mean PSA level, age, prostate volume, and cancer detection rates were evaluated.

RESULTS

The mean age was 60.5 and 64 years in Group 1 and Group 2, respectively (P = 0.06). The mean PSA level was determined as 3.1 and 6.8 ng/mL in Group 1 and Group 2, respectively (P = 0.03). The cancer detection rate was 12.7% in Group 1 (n = 13) and 30.8% in Group 2 (n = 161), which revealed a statistically significant difference between the 2 groups (P = 0.001). In Group 1, 9 of 13 patients (69%) had Gleason score of 6, 3 (23%) had Gleason score of 7, and 1 (8%) had a Gleason score of 8.

CONCLUSIONS

The cancer detection rate is lower in Turkish men with PSA level in the range of 2.5 to 4.0 ng/mL when compared with men with PSA level in the range of 4.0 to 10.0 ng/mL. Furthermore, most patients in whom cancer was detected who have a PSA level in the range of 2.5 to 4.0 ng/mL are low risk. Therefore, the benefit of TRUSBP in Turkish men with PSA level between 2.5 and 4 ng/mL is low.