TY - JOUR
T1 - Non-antibiotic strategies for the prevention of infectious complications following prostate biopsy
T2 - A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis
AU - Pradere, Benjamin
AU - Veeratterapillay, Rajan
AU - Dimitropoulos, Konstantinos
AU - Yuan, Yuhong
AU - Omar, Muhammad Imran
AU - MacLennan, Steven
AU - Cai, Tommaso
AU - Bruyère, Franck
AU - Bartoletti, Riccardo
AU - Köves, Bela
AU - Wagenlehner, Florian
AU - Bonkat, Gernot
AU - Pilatz, Adrian
N1 - Acknowledgments
Emma Smith from the EAU Guidelines Office assisted with the systematic review, and Robert Pickard (deceased), Newcastle upon Tyne, United Kingdom, initiated this review.
PY - 2021/3/1
Y1 - 2021/3/1
N2 - PURPOSE: We identify which nonantibiotic strategies could reduce the risk of infectious complications following prostate biopsy.MATERIALS AND METHODS: We performed a literature search on MEDLINE®, Embase® and the Cochrane Database for randomized controlled trials (inception to May 2020) assessing nonantibiotic interventions in prostate biopsy. Primary outcome was pooled infectious complications (fever, sepsis and symptomatic urinary tract infection) and secondary outcome was hospitalization. Cochrane risk of bias tool and GRADE approach were used to assess the bias and the certainty of evidence. The study protocol was registered with PROSPERO (CRD42015026354).RESULTS: A total of 90 randomized controlled trials (16,941 participants) were included in the analysis, with 83 trials being categorized into 1 of 10 different interventions. Transperineal biopsy was associated with significantly reduced infectious complications as compared to transrectal biopsy (RR 0.55, 95% CI 0.33-0.92, p=0.02, I
2=0%, 1,330 participants, 7 studies). Rectal preparation with povidone-iodine was also shown to reduce infectious complications (RR 0.50, 95% CI 0.38-0.65, p <0.000001, I
2=27%, 1,686 participants, 8 studies) as well as hospitalization (RR 0.38, 95% CI 0.21-0.69, p=0.002, I
2=0%, 620 participants, 4 studies). We found no difference in infectious complications/hospitalization for 6 other interventions, ie number of biopsy cores, periprostatic nerve block, number of injections for periprostatic nerve block, needle guide type, needle type and rectal preparation with enema. In 2 interventions (needle diameter, rectal preparation with chlorhexidine) meta-analysis was not possible. Finally, 7 studies had unique interventions. The certainty of evidence was rated as low/very low for all interventions.
CONCLUSIONS: Transperineal biopsy significantly reduces infectious complications compared to transrectal biopsy and should therefore be preferred. If transrectal biopsy is performed, rectal preparation with povidone-iodine is highly recommended. The other investigated nonantibiotic strategies did not significantly influence infection and hospitalization after prostate biopsy.
AB - PURPOSE: We identify which nonantibiotic strategies could reduce the risk of infectious complications following prostate biopsy.MATERIALS AND METHODS: We performed a literature search on MEDLINE®, Embase® and the Cochrane Database for randomized controlled trials (inception to May 2020) assessing nonantibiotic interventions in prostate biopsy. Primary outcome was pooled infectious complications (fever, sepsis and symptomatic urinary tract infection) and secondary outcome was hospitalization. Cochrane risk of bias tool and GRADE approach were used to assess the bias and the certainty of evidence. The study protocol was registered with PROSPERO (CRD42015026354).RESULTS: A total of 90 randomized controlled trials (16,941 participants) were included in the analysis, with 83 trials being categorized into 1 of 10 different interventions. Transperineal biopsy was associated with significantly reduced infectious complications as compared to transrectal biopsy (RR 0.55, 95% CI 0.33-0.92, p=0.02, I
2=0%, 1,330 participants, 7 studies). Rectal preparation with povidone-iodine was also shown to reduce infectious complications (RR 0.50, 95% CI 0.38-0.65, p <0.000001, I
2=27%, 1,686 participants, 8 studies) as well as hospitalization (RR 0.38, 95% CI 0.21-0.69, p=0.002, I
2=0%, 620 participants, 4 studies). We found no difference in infectious complications/hospitalization for 6 other interventions, ie number of biopsy cores, periprostatic nerve block, number of injections for periprostatic nerve block, needle guide type, needle type and rectal preparation with enema. In 2 interventions (needle diameter, rectal preparation with chlorhexidine) meta-analysis was not possible. Finally, 7 studies had unique interventions. The certainty of evidence was rated as low/very low for all interventions.
CONCLUSIONS: Transperineal biopsy significantly reduces infectious complications compared to transrectal biopsy and should therefore be preferred. If transrectal biopsy is performed, rectal preparation with povidone-iodine is highly recommended. The other investigated nonantibiotic strategies did not significantly influence infection and hospitalization after prostate biopsy.
KW - prostate
KW - infection
KW - antibiotic prophylaxis
KW - Biopsy
KW - RISK
KW - ULTRASOUND-GUIDED BIOPSY
KW - ANESTHESIA
KW - RATES
KW - CANCER-DETECTION
KW - biopsy
KW - infections
KW - DISPOSABLE NEEDLE GUIDE
KW - POVIDONE-IODINE
KW - ASSOCIATION
KW - TRANSPERINEAL
KW - PSA
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85095809288&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1097/JU.0000000000001399
DO - 10.1097/JU.0000000000001399
M3 - Article
C2 - 33026903
VL - 205
SP - 653
EP - 663
JO - Journal of Urology
JF - Journal of Urology
SN - 0022-5347
IS - 3
ER -