Skip to main content
Erschienen in: World Journal of Urology 4/2014

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

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

Erschienen in: World Journal of Urology | Ausgabe 4/2014

Einloggen, um Zugang zu erhalten

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.
Literatur
1.
Zurück zum Zitat American Cancer Society (2013) Cancer facts & figures 2013. American Cancer Society, Atlanta American Cancer Society (2013) Cancer facts & figures 2013. American Cancer Society, Atlanta
2.
Zurück zum Zitat 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 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
3.
Zurück zum Zitat Pearle M (2011) Should we change our prophylactic antimicrobial regimen for prostate biopsy? J Urol 185(4):1181–1183PubMedCrossRef Pearle M (2011) Should we change our prophylactic antimicrobial regimen for prostate biopsy? J Urol 185(4):1181–1183PubMedCrossRef
4.
Zurück zum Zitat 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 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
5.
Zurück zum Zitat 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 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
6.
Zurück zum Zitat 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 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
7.
Zurück zum Zitat 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 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
8.
Zurück zum Zitat 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 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
9.
Zurück zum Zitat 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 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.
Zurück zum Zitat 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 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.
Zurück zum Zitat 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 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.
Zurück zum Zitat 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 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.
Zurück zum Zitat 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 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.
Zurück zum Zitat 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 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.
Zurück zum Zitat Lange D, Zappavigna C, Hamidizadeh R et al (2009) Bacterial sepsis after prostate biopsy—a new perspective. Urology 74(6):1200–1205PubMedCrossRef Lange D, Zappavigna C, Hamidizadeh R et al (2009) Bacterial sepsis after prostate biopsy—a new perspective. Urology 74(6):1200–1205PubMedCrossRef
16.
Zurück zum Zitat 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 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.
Zurück zum Zitat 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 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.
Zurück zum Zitat 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 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.
Zurück zum Zitat 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 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.
Zurück zum Zitat 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 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
Metadaten
Titel
Peri-procedural povidone-iodine rectal preparation reduces microorganism counts and infectious complications following ultrasound-guided needle biopsy of the prostate
verfasst von
Justin R. Gyorfi
Christopher Otteni
Kevin Brown
Amar Patel
Kathleen Lehman
Brett E. Phillips
Kalyan Dewan
Girish Kirimanjeswara
Jay D. Raman
Publikationsdatum
01.08.2014
Verlag
Springer Berlin Heidelberg
Erschienen in
World Journal of Urology / Ausgabe 4/2014
Print ISSN: 0724-4983
Elektronische ISSN: 1433-8726
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s00345-014-1291-8

Weitere Artikel der Ausgabe 4/2014

World Journal of Urology 4/2014 Zur Ausgabe

Update Urologie

Bestellen Sie unseren Fach-Newsletter und bleiben Sie gut informiert.