INTRODUCTION: Transrectal ultrasound-guided needle biopsy of the prostate is a safe technique, but it is not complication-free, and its most serious complications are genitourinary infections (GUI) and the conditions they cause. The purpose of antibiotic prophylaxis is to reduce this GUI incidence rate. However, no established guidelines exist and there are significant differences among centres where this procedure is performed. The objective of the present report is to review antibiotic prophylaxis protocols described in the literature. MATERIAL AND METHODS: We reviewed indexed articles published in English or Spanish and accessible through literature databases. RESULTS: Five articles comparing antibiotic prophylaxis with a placebo observe lower bacteriuria and infectious complications percentage rates in the group receiving prophylaxis. In most cases, E. coli is the microorganism responsible for infection. Oral quinolones are the most commonly prescribed prophylactic antibiotics. Three studies of oral vs. parenteral prophylaxis found no differences between the two groups. Three other articles comparing short term and single-dose prophylaxis found no differences between the two groups. CONCLUSIONS: Administering prophylactic antibiotics is more advantageous than not doing so. The moment for beginning prophylaxis depends on the antibiotic's bioavailability and how it is administered. The chosen antibiotic will preferably be administered orally as a single dose or short term course, according to the sensitivities of prevalent microorganisms. More studies are needed to determine what role pre-biopsy enemas play in reducing infectious complications.
INTRODUCTION: Transrectal ultrasound-guided needle biopsy of the prostate is a safe technique, but it is not complication-free, and its most serious complications are genitourinary infections (GUI) and the conditions they cause. The purpose of antibiotic prophylaxis is to reduce this GUI incidence rate. However, no established guidelines exist and there are significant differences among centres where this procedure is performed. The objective of the present report is to review antibiotic prophylaxis protocols described in the literature. MATERIAL AND METHODS: We reviewed indexed articles published in English or Spanish and accessible through literature databases. RESULTS: Five articles comparing antibiotic prophylaxis with a placebo observe lower bacteriuria and infectious complications percentage rates in the group receiving prophylaxis. In most cases, E. coli is the microorganism responsible for infection. Oral quinolones are the most commonly prescribed prophylactic antibiotics. Three studies of oral vs. parenteral prophylaxis found no differences between the two groups. Three other articles comparing short term and single-dose prophylaxis found no differences between the two groups. CONCLUSIONS: Administering prophylactic antibiotics is more advantageous than not doing so. The moment for beginning prophylaxis depends on the antibiotic's bioavailability and how it is administered. The chosen antibiotic will preferably be administered orally as a single dose or short term course, according to the sensitivities of prevalent microorganisms. More studies are needed to determine what role pre-biopsy enemas play in reducing infectious complications.