Effect of rectal mucosa cleansing on acute prostatitis during prostate biopsy: A randomized prospective study

Preventing Infections After Prostate Biopsy: Prophylactic Antibiotics, Prebiopsy Rectal Culture, and Biopsy Approach

Prostate biopsies are commonly performed for the early detection of prostate cancer and yet are associated with risks of life-threatening infections. Drug-resistant strains of Escherichia coli are the most common etiologic agents. Multiple maneuvers can reduce the risk of postbiopsy infections and sepsis during transrectal prostate biopsy including periprocedural empiric or targeted prophylactic antibiotics (based on previous rectal culture) and prebiopsy rectal cleansing with a povidone-iodine solution. The transperineal approach is associated with a very low risk of infection without requiring antibiotic prophylaxis.

Preventing Infectious Complications Following Prostate Biopsy: A Systematic Review and Network Meta-analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials of Alternative Approaches to Transrectal Biopsy with Empirical Antibiotic Prophylaxis Therapy

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE

Prostate biopsy, conducted frequently through the transrectal route, is associated with significant risks of infectious complications. This study aimed to compare the efficacy of various strategies to reduce these complications, using a network meta-analysis approach.

METHODS

Our study included randomized controlled trials (RCTs) identified from PubMed/MEDLINE, Embase, and the Cochrane database as of March 1, 2024. We included studies that involved adults undergoing transrectal or transperineal prostate biopsy with either standard empirical antibiotic prophylaxis or alternative interventions. The primary outcomes were assessment of sepsis, fever, urinary tract infections (UTIs), and readmissions. The study was registered with PROSPERO (CRD42024532225).

KEY FINDINGS AND LIMITATIONS

Our search yielded 28 RCTs eligible for analysis, encompassing a total of 10 179 participants. Rectal cleansing had the highest rankogram score to reduce infectious complications such as sepsis (odds ratio 0.40, 95% confidence interval [0.28-0.58]; rankogram, p score = 0.917), followed by transperineal biopsy (p score = 0.496). The overall analysis also highlighted a lower incidence of UTIs and readmissions with this method. Heterogeneity among studies was minimal (I2 < 50% for all outcomes).

CONCLUSIONS AND CLINICAL IMPLICATIONS

Rectal cleansing might be the most effective strategy to reduce infectious complications following transrectal prostate biopsy and could be more effective than rectal culture-based antibiotic prophylaxis and transperineal biopsy. Given the indirect nature of our comparisons, further RCTs are needed to determine the safest approach for prostate biopsy, particularly between transperineal biopsy and transrectal biopsy with rectal cleansing or rectal culture-based antibiotic prophylaxis.

PATIENT SUMMARY

In this review, we analyzed different techniques to reduce infectious complications after a prostate biopsy. We found that rectal cleansing prior to performing a transrectal prostate biopsy reduced infectious complications and might be the most effective strategy. We conclude that either transperineal or transrectal prostate biopsies are acceptable approaches, albeit with rectal cleansing or rectal culture-based antibiotic prophylaxis, respectively.

Infection risk reduction with povidone-iodine rectal disinfection prior to transrectal prostate biopsy: an updated systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

To prevent infectious complications after transrectal ultrasound-guided prostate biopsy (TRUS-PB), some studies have investigated the efficacy of rectal disinfection using povidone-iodine (PI) and antibiotic prophylaxis (AP).

OBJECTIVE

To summarize available data and compare the efficacy of rectal disinfection using PI with non-PI methods prior to TRUS-PB.

EVIDENCE ACQUISITION

Three databases were queried through November 2023 for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) analyzing patients who underwent TRUS-PB. We compared the effectiveness of rectal disinfection between PI groups and non-PI groups with or without AP. The primary outcomes of interest were the rates of overall infectious complications, fever, and sepsis. Subgroups analyses were conducted to assess the differential outcomes in patients using fluoroquinolone groups compared to those using other antibiotics groups.

EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS

We included ten RCTs in the meta-analyses. The overall rates of infectious complications were significantly lower when rectal disinfection with PI was performed (RR 0.56, 95% CI 0.42-0.74, p < 0.001). Compared to AP monotherapy, the combination of AP and PI was associated with significantly lower risk of infectious complications (RR 0.54, 95% CI 0.40-0.73, p < 0.001) and fever (RR 0.47, 95% CI 0.30-0.75, p = 0.001), but not with sepsis (RR 0.49, 95% CI 0.23-1.04, p = 0.06). The use of fluoroquinolone antibiotics was associated with a lower risk of infectious complications and fever compared to non-FQ antibiotics.

CONCLUSION

Rectal disinfection with PI significantly reduces the rates of infectious complications and fever in patients undergoing TRUS-PB. However, this approach does not show a significant impact on reducing the rate of sepsis following the procedure.

Antibiotic prophylaxis in urologic interventions: Who, when, where?

BACKGROUND

Periprocedural prophylaxis in medicine encompasses the set of measures (physical, chemical, and pharmacological) used to reduce the risk of infection. Antibiotic prophylaxis (AP) refers to the administration of a short-term regimen of antibiotics shortly before a medical procedure to reduce the risk of infectious complications that can result from diagnostic and therapeutic interventions. The outspreading growth of multidrug-resistant bacterial species and changes in the bacterial local ecosystem have impeded the development of a unique scheme of AP in urology.

OBJECTIVES

To review the literature and current guidelines regarding AP for urological diagnostic and therapeutic procedures, and to define agents, timing, and occasions when administering pharmacological prophylaxis. Secondly, according to current literature, to open new scenarios where AP can be useful or useless.

RESULTS

Major gaps in evidence still exist in this field. AP appears useful in many invasive procedures and some sub-populations at risk of infectious complications. AP is not routinely recommended for urodynamic exams, diagnostic cystoscopy, and extracorporeal shock-wave lithotripsy. The available data regarding the use of AP during the transperineal prostate biopsy are still unclear; conversely, in the case of the transrectal approach AP is mandatory. AP is still considered the gold standard for the prevention of postoperative infective complications in the case of ureteroscopy, percutaneous nephrolithotomy, endoscopic resection of bladder tumor, endoscopic resection of the prostate, and prosthetic or major surgery.

CONCLUSION

The review highlights the complexity of determining the appropriate candidates for AP, emphasizing the importance of considering patient-specific factors such as comorbidities, immunocompetence, and the nature of the urologic intervention. The evidence suggests that a one-size-fits-all approach may not be suitable, and a tailored strategy based on the specific procedure and patient characteristics is essential.

Post-prostate biopsy acute bacterial prostatitis and screening cultures using selective media: An overview

The development of several culture media and the availability to isolate and treat pathogens prior to a surgical procedure give us the ability to minimize treatment-related complications, and ultimately results in better outcomes for patients and avoidance of unwanted post-procedure inpatient admissions. In the last decade, an increasing incidence of multidrug-resistant Escherichia coli, especially extended-spectrum beta-lactamase-producing E. coli and fluoroquinolone-resistant pathogens, has been reported. These resistant species frequently colonize the rectal flora and gain access to the systemic circulation via the rectal plexus following a prostate biopsy. The bacteria can eventually lead to life-threatening complications, which is especially important in high-risk patients with multiple co-morbidities. Previously published studies have focused on the isolation of these pathogens with selective media before an invasive procedure and the potential benefits of incorporating the use of selective media as a mandatory pre-operative step. This preventive measure will allow us to offer a tailored prophylactic treatment that benefits patients and reduces the economic burden for the hospital.