Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2014 Aug;32(4):905-9.
doi: 10.1007/s00345-014-1291-8. Epub 2014 Mar 30.

Peri-procedural povidone-iodine rectal preparation reduces microorganism counts and infectious complications following ultrasound-guided needle biopsy of the prostate

Affiliations

Peri-procedural povidone-iodine rectal preparation reduces microorganism counts and infectious complications following ultrasound-guided needle biopsy of the prostate

Justin R Gyorfi et al. World J Urol. 2014 Aug.

Abstract

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.

PubMed Disclaimer

Similar articles

Cited by

References

    1. Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol. 2004 Oct;25(10):873-7 - PubMed
    1. Pharmacoepidemiol Drug Saf. 2005 Oct;14(10):741-5 - PubMed
    1. Can J Urol. 2004 Aug;11(4):2352-3 - PubMed
    1. J Urol. 2001 Sep;166(3):856-60 - PubMed
    1. J Urol. 2011 Apr;185(4):1283-8 - PubMed

MeSH terms

Substances

LinkOut - more resources