Literature DB >> 30882162

Comparison of Different Rectal Cleansing Methods for Reducing Post-Procedural Infectious Complications After Transrectal Ultrasound-Guided Prostate Biopsy.

Jong Eun Lee1, Sang Soo Shin2, Taek Won Kang3, Jin Woong Kim4, Suk Hee Heo2, Yong Yeon Jeong2.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: To compare the efficacy of three different rectal cleansing methods for reducing post-procedural infectious complications after transrectal ultrasound (TRUS)-guided prostate biopsy.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: A total of 451 consecutive patients who underwent TRUS-guided prostate biopsy were prospectively included in this study. All patients received targeted antimicrobial prophylaxis and underwent bowel preparation through laxative administration. The patients were divided into three groups on the basis of the method of rectal cleansing immediately before the procedure. Group I patients (n=165) underwent cleansing of the perianal skin using povidone-iodine cotton balls; group II patients (n=116) received an injection of povidone-iodine solution (0.1 g/mL) into the anal and lower rectal canals; and group III patients (n=170) received direct manual cleansing of the mucosal surface of the anus and lower rectum using povidone-iodine cotton balls. The three groups were compared regarding the incidence of post-procedural infectious complications, re-hospitalization rates, and mean length of hospital stay using one-way ANOVA, the Chi-square test, and multiple logistic regression analysis.
RESULTS: Post-procedural infectious complications occurred in 21.8%, 11.2%, and 6.5% of groups I, II, and III, respectively (P < .001). The incidence of overall infectious complications was significantly lower in group II (95% CI: 0.232-0.958, OR = 0.472, P = .038) and group III (95% CI: 0.129-0.555, OR = 0.267, P < .001) than in group I. Re-hospitalization rates were 9.7%, 2.6%, and 0.6% in groups I, II, and III, respectively (P < .001). The incidence of re-hospitalization was significantly lower in group II (95% CI: 0.070-0.869, OR = 0.247, P = .029) and group III (95% CI: 0.007-0.421, OR = 0.055, P = .005) than in group I. The mean length of hospital stay was significantly longer in group I than in group III (P = .009).
CONCLUSION: Combined with targeted antimicrobial prophylaxis, direct manual cleansing of the mucosal surface of the anus and lower rectum using povidone-iodine cotton balls was most effective in preventing post-procedural infectious complications among the three different rectal cleansing methods.

Entities:  

Year:  2020        PMID: 30882162     DOI: 10.22037/uj.v0i0.4583

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Urol J        ISSN: 1735-1308            Impact factor:   1.510


  2 in total

1.  Turkish Urologists' preferences regarding antibiotic prophylaxis for transrectal prostate biopsy.

Authors:  Abdullah Demirtaş; Esma Eren; Gökhan Sönmez; Şevket Tolga Tombul; Emine Alp
Journal:  Turk J Urol       Date:  2019-11-29

Review 2.  Transrectal Ultrasound in Prostate Cancer: Current Utilization, Integration with mpMRI, HIFU and Other Emerging Applications.

Authors:  John Panzone; Timothy Byler; Gennady Bratslavsky; Hanan Goldberg
Journal:  Cancer Manag Res       Date:  2022-03-22       Impact factor: 3.989

  2 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.