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 × 10(5) vs. 6.3 × 10(3) 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.
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 × 10(5) vs. 6.3 × 10(3) 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.
Authors: James A Karlowsky; Daryl J Hoban; Melanie R Decorby; Nancy M Laing; George G Zhanel Journal: Antimicrob Agents Chemother Date: 2006-06 Impact factor: 5.191
Authors: Aisha K Taylor; Teresa R Zembower; Robert B Nadler; Marc H Scheetz; John P Cashy; Diana Bowen; Adam B Murphy; Elodi Dielubanza; Anthony J Schaeffer Journal: J Urol Date: 2012-02-16 Impact factor: 7.450
Authors: Karel Urbánek; Milan Kolár; Jan Strojil; Dagmar Koukalová; Luboslava Cekanová; Petr Hejnar Journal: Pharmacoepidemiol Drug Saf Date: 2005-10 Impact factor: 2.890
Authors: B Djavan; M Waldert; A Zlotta; P Dobronski; C Seitz; M Remzi; A Borkowski; C Schulman; M Marberger Journal: J Urol Date: 2001-09 Impact factor: 7.450
Authors: Michael A Liss; Alexandra Chang; Rosanne Santos; Amy Nakama-Peeples; Ellena M Peterson; Kathryn Osann; John Billimek; Richard J Szabo; Atreya Dash Journal: J Urol Date: 2011-02-22 Impact factor: 7.450
Authors: Zaher K Otrock; Gerard O Oghlakian; Mariana M Salamoun; Maurice Haddad; Abdul Rahman N Bizri Journal: Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol Date: 2004-10 Impact factor: 3.254
Authors: Dirk Lange; Christopher Zappavigna; Reza Hamidizadeh; S Larry Goldenberg; Ryan F Paterson; Ben H Chew Journal: Urology Date: 2009-10-07 Impact factor: 2.649
Authors: Daniel M Moreira; Gerald L Andriole; J Curtis Nickel; Claus G Roehrborn; Ramiro Castro-Santamaria; Stephen J Freedland Journal: World J Urol Date: 2017-04-10 Impact factor: 4.226
Authors: Rosa Park; Justin Gyorfi; Kalyan Dewan; Girish Kirimanjeswara; Joseph Y Clark; Matthew G Kaag; Kathleen Lehman; Jay D Raman Journal: Int Urol Nephrol Date: 2018-07-17 Impact factor: 2.370
Authors: Shayann Ramedani; Joseph Y Clark; John J Knoedler; Susan MacDonald; Matthew G Kaag; Suzanne B Merrill; Jay D Raman Journal: Prostate Int Date: 2021-05-27