Prophylaxis for transrectal prostatic biopsies: a randomized controlled study of intravenous co-amoxiclav given as a single dose compared with an intravenous dose followed by oral co-amoxiclav for 24 h

Prophylactic Antibiotics in Prostate Biopsy: A Meta-Analysis Based on Randomized Controlled Trials

BACKGROUND

Despite frequent use of prophylactic antibiotics for patients undergoing transrectal prostate biopsy (TRPB), the incidences of urinary tract infection (UTI) and bacteria resistance are increasing. The aim of this study is to evaluate the current regimen of antimicrobial prophylaxis in TRPB.

METHODS

A systematic search of PubMed(®), Embase(®), and the Cochrane Library was performed to identify all randomized controlled trials (RCT) related to the effects of antibiotic prophylaxis for TRPB. The outcomes included bacteriuria, bacteremia, drug-resistant bacteria on urine/blood culture, fever, UTI, sepsis, and hospitalization.

RESULTS

A total of 22 RCTs with 3846 patients were identified and included. Nine trials analyzed antibiotics versus placebo/no treatment, with all outcomes substantially favoring antibiotic use (p<0.05), including bacteriuria (risk ratio [RR] 0.25, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.15-0.42), bacteremia (RR 0.67, 95% CI 0.49-0.92), fever (RR 0.39, 95% CI 0.23-0.64), UTI (RR 0.37, 95% CI 0.22-0.62), and hospitalization (RR 0.13, 95% CI 0.03-0.55). There were no substantial differences between long-course versus short-course treatment and single versus multiple dose respectively, except for a greater risk of bacteriuria for short-course treatment (RR 2.09, 95% CI 1.17-3.73, p=0.01) and single-dose treatment (RR 1.98, 95% CI 1.18-3.33, p=0.01). There were no substantial differences among the groups for bacteriuria, fever, UTI, and hospitalization, when comparing oral versus systemic administration of antibiotics. The efficacy of several classes of antibiotics was compared without any difference among them. Despite the lack of significance, the synthesized data of three RCTs indicated a trend towards the use of combined antibiotics.

CONCLUSIONS

Prophylactic antibiotics could be beneficial for the reduction of infective complications after TRPB. Single-dose or short-course oral administration with any type of antibiotic appears to be optimal. One additional type of antibiotic added to the basic antibiotic agent may contribute to the minimization of severe infection and drug resistance.

Antibiotic prophylaxis for transrectal prostate biopsy

BACKGROUND

Transrectal prostate biopsy (TRPB) is a well established procedure used to obtain tissue for the histological diagnosis of carcinoma of the prostate. Despite the fact that TRPB is generally considered a safe procedure, it may be accompanied by traumatic and infective complications, including asymptomatic bacteriuria (bacteria in the urine), urinary tract infection (UTI), transitory bacteremia (bacteria in the blood), fever episodes, and sepsis (pathogenic microorganisms or their toxins in the blood). Although infective complications after TRPB are well known, there is uncertainty about the necessity and effectiveness of routine prophylactic antibiotics and their adverse effects, as well as a clear lack of standardization.

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the effectiveness and adverse effects of prophylactic antibiotic treatment in TRPB.

SEARCH STRATEGY

The search covered the principal electronic databases: MEDLINE, EMBASE, LILACS and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL). Experts were consulted and references from the relevant articles were scanned.

SELECTION CRITERIA

All randomized, controlled trials (RCTs) of men who underwent TRPB and received prophylactic antibiotics or placebo/no treatment, were selected, and all RCTs looking at one type of antibiotic versus another, including comparable dosages, routes of administration, frequency of administration, and duration of antibiotic treatment.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two reviewers (ELZ, OACC) independently selected included trials and extracted study data. Any disagreements were resolved by a third party (NRNJ).

MAIN RESULTS

Overall, more than 3500 references were considered and 19 original reports with a total of 3599 patients were included.There were 9 trials analysing antibiotics versus placebo/no treatment, with all outcomes significantly favouring antibiotic use (P < 0.05) (I(2) = 0%), including bacteriuria (risk ratio (RR) 0.25 (95% confidence interval (CI) 0.15 to 0.42), bacteremia (RR 0.67, 95% CI 0.49 to 0.92), fever (RR 0.39, 95% CI 0.23 to 0.64), urinary tract infection (RR 0.37, 95% CI 0.22 to 0.62), and hospitalization (RR 0.13, 95% CI 0.03 to 0.55). Several classes of antibiotics were effective prophylactically for TRPB, while the quinolones, with the highest number of studies (5) and patients (1188), were the best analysed. For 'antibiotics versus enema', we analysed four studies with a limited number of patients. The differences between groups for all outcomes were not significant. For 'antibiotic versus antibiotic + enema', only the risk of bacteremia (RR 0.25, 95% CI 0.08 to 0.75) was diminished in the 'antibiotic + enema group'. Seven trials reported the effects of short-course (1 day) versus long-course (3 days) antibiotics. Long course was significantly better than short-course treatment only for bacteriuria (RR 2.09, 95% CI 1.17 to 3.73). For 'single versus multiple dose', there was significantly greater risk of bacteriuria for single-dose treatment (RR 1.98, 95% CI 1.18 to 3.33). Comparing oral versus systemic administration - intramuscular injection (IM), or intravenous (IV) - of antibiotics, there were no significant differences in the groups for bacteriuria, fever, UTI and hospitalization.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Antibiotic prophylaxis is effective in preventing infectious complications following TRPB. There is no definitive data to confirm that antibiotics for long-course (3 days) are superior to short-course treatments (1 day), or that multiple-dose treatment is superior to single-dose.

High prevalence of extended-spectrum beta-lactamase-producing enterobacteriaceae in bacteremia after transrectal ultrasound-guided prostate biopsy: a need for changing preventive protocol

OBJECTIVES

To determine whether the incidence of bacteremia after transrectal ultrasound-guided prostate biopsy (TRUSGPB) significantly diminishes with the setting up of a new preventive protocol. This protocol was set up after detecting an augmented incidence of bacteremia after TRUSGPB with a high prevalence of antibiotic-resistant microorganisms.

METHODS

Retrospective descriptive and prospective intervention study performed at a University Hospital.

PARTICIPANTS

Patients undergoing TRUSGPB under the old preventive protocol (January 2006-February 2007), that is, amoxicillin-clavulanate 500 mg tid the day before, the day of the procedure, and 1 day after the procedure, and after setting up a new protocol (March 2007-April 2008), that is, 2 g cefoxitin 1 hour before the procedure and ciprofloxacin 750 mg p.o. bid the day before, the day of the procedure, and 3 days after the procedure; dipstick urinalysis was performed before the procedure, and patients with positive results were not biopsied.

RESULTS

Incidence of bacteremia with old and new protocols: 9 of 204 procedures (4.4%) vs 2 of 207 (0.9%), (P = .03). Four isolates (44.4%) under the old protocol produced extended-spectrum beta-lactamase (ESBL). With the new protocol, 2 (0.9%) cases of non-ESBL Escherichia coli bacteremia were observed. Sixty-five (23.8%) cases were not biopsied because of positive result of dipstick urinalysis, lack of antibiotic prophylaxis adherence, or altered coagulation parameters.

CONCLUSIONS

Antibiotic prophylaxis for TRUSGPB should take into account local resistance patterns. Cefoxitin could be used as prophylaxis in centers with high prevalence of ESBL enterobacteriaceae. Before TRUSGPB, excluding patients with positive results of dipstick urinalysis is an advisable practice.

Antimicrobial prophylaxis for transrectal prostatic biopsy: a prospective study of ciprofloxacin vs piperacillin/tazobactam

OBJECTIVE

To compare the efficacy of short-term parenteral prophylaxis with piperacillin/tazobactam (P/T) with long-term oral prophylaxis with ciprofloxacin in preventing infective complications after transrectal prostatic biopsy (TPB).

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Patients scheduled for TPB were randomized to receive P/T (2250 mg intramuscular) twice daily for 2 days (Group 1), or ciprofloxacin (500 mg orally) twice daily for 7 days (Group 2), beginning on the evening before the procedure in both groups. All patients received a 100-mL phosphate enema 3 h before TPB. Evaluation included self-recording of body temperature in the 3 days after TPB, and culture of mid-stream urine (MSU) samples taken before and 3 and 15 days after TPB. Patients with indwelling urethral catheters or taking antibiotics or immunosuppressive drugs were excluded, as were patients with positive MSU cultures before TPB.

RESULTS

Of the 138 evaluable patients, 72 received parenteral P/T and 66 oral ciprofloxacin. Bacteriuria (> 105 c.f.u./mL) after TPB occurred in two of 72 (2.8%) patients in Group 1 and in three of 66 (4.5%) patients in Group 2; this difference was not statistically significant (P > 0.1). However, of the five patients with bacteriuria, two were symptomatic and both were in Group 2. Pyrexia occurred in only one patient in Group 2 with symptomatic urinary tract infection, and required hospitalization. No other patient reported a body temperature openface> 37.5 degrees C or drug-related side-effects.

CONCLUSIONS

This prospective study showed that short-term prophylaxis with P/T was associated with a low rate of asymptomatic bacteriuria, requiring no further treatment, whereas although the rate was similar on long-term prophylaxis with ciprofloxacin patients required further treatment, with one needing hospitalization. We recommend short-term prophylaxis with P/T despite its disadvantages of cost and parenteral administration.

Trimethoprim versus gentamicin for the prevention of bacteriuria following transrectal biopsy of the prostate--do patients need additional anaerobic cover?

OBJECTIVES

To study the incidence of aerobic and anaerobic bacteriuria in patients undergoing transrectal ultrasound-guided biopsies of the prostate. A comparative assessment of efficacy of trimethoprim with gentamicin for the prevention of bacteriuria following the transrectal biopsy of the prostate. To assess the need for additional prophylaxis against anaerobes for patients undergoing transrectal biopsies of the prostate gland.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

In a pilot study during 1995-1997, all the patients undergoing transrectal ultrasound-guided biopsy of the prostate were randomised to receive either trimethoprim or gentamicin prophylaxis prior to the procedure. Midstream urine (MSU) samples were taken just prior to biopsy and 72 h later. A patient questionnaire to determine the symptoms of urinary tract infection (UTI) accompanied the 72-hour MSU request form. Urine samples were cultured aerobically, using a semiquantitative technique if dipstick analysis revealed the presence of blood, pus cell or nitrite. In addition to the routine aerobic culture, post-biopsy samples were also cultured for anaerobes by direct and enrichment methods. Bacteriuria was defined as a pure or mixed growth of 10(5) colony-forming units/ml. Fisher's test of exact probability was used for statistical analysis.

RESULTS

115 patients were available for final analysis. 53 had received gentamicin and 62 trimethoprim. Four patients had pre-existing bacteriuria (3.5%), 3 in the trimethoprim group and 1 in the gentamicin group. Post-operative bacteriuria developed in 5 patients given gentamicin (9.4%) and 1 given trimethoprim (1.6%). This difference was not statistically significant (p = 0.085). Post-procedure bacteriuria was asymptomatic in all but 1 case. Anaerobes were detected in only 5 MSUs (4.3%) post-biopsy.

CONCLUSION

Though there was no statistical significant difference in the rates of bacteriuria following administration of trimethoprim and gentamicin, data appear to favour trimethoprim prophylaxis. Further studies are warranted. Transrectal biopsy of the prostate is associated with a low incidence of anaerobic UTI. In view of the very low incidence of anaerobic bacteriuria, routine antibacterial prophylaxis against anaerobes does not appear to be justified.