Biópsia Prostática Transretal Após Preparação Profilática do Recto com Iodo-Povidona: Estudo Prospectivo Randomizado
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.24915/aup.35.1-2.51Keywords:
Antibiotic Prophylaxis, Biopsy, Endoscopic Ultrasound- Guided Fine Needle Aspiration, Iodo-Povidona, Povidone- Iodine, ProstateAbstract
Introduction: Transrectal ultrasound guided prostate biopsy (TRUS-Bx), according to the literature, can lead to urinary tract infections in up to 11% and sepsis in up to 2% of patients. We evaluate whether an original way to apply povidone-iodine rectal preparation just prior to TRUS-Bx can reduce infectious complications.
Material and Methods: Between January 2014 and September 2016, 94 men in private office were prospectively randomized to two groups, before TRUS-Bx: • Rectal cleansing (an original transrectal “prostate massage” for about half a minute with 2.5 mL of betadine dermic solution 100 mg/mL) (n=47) or • No cleansing (n=47). All of the patients received prophylactic antibiotics: levofloxacin 500 mg PO for 7 days, beginning the day before procedure. Patients completed a telephone interview 4 days after undergoing the biopsy and went to the office 2 weeks after biopsy. The primary end point was the rate of infectious complications. An infectious complication when one or more of the following events occurred: 1) fever greater than 38.0Cº, 2) urinary tract infection or 3) sepsis (standardized definition). Student t test and multivariate regression analysis were used for data analysis.
Results: Infectious complications developed in 6 cases (12.7%) in the non-rectal preparation group: five patients had fever without sepsis (11%) and one had sepsis (2%). In the povidone-iodine rectal preparation group there were no infectious complications (0.0%). Multivariate analysis did not identify any patient subgroups at significantly higher risk of infection after prostate biopsy. Of the 94 men who underwent TRUS-Bx 45 (47.9%) were diagnosed with prostate cancer and 3 (3.2%) had ASAP in the result. The hospital admission rate for urological complications within 30 days of the procedure was 1%, and only for infection related reasons (sepsis).
Conclusion: The administration of quinolone-based prophylactic antibiotics and the simple use of 2.5 mL of povidone-iodine dermic solution in a transrectal prostate massage for Introduction: Transrectal ultrasound guided prostate biopsy (TRUS-Bx), according to the literature, can lead to urinary tract infections in up to 11% and sepsis in up to 2% of patients. We evaluate whether an original way to apply povidone-iodine rectal preparation just prior to TRUS-Bx can reduce infectious complications. Material and Methods: Between January 2014 and September 2016, 94 men in private office were prospectively randomized to two groups, before TRUS-Bx: • Rectal cleansing (an original transrectal “prostate massage” for about half a minute with 2.5 mL of betadine dermic solution 100 mg/mL) (n=47) or • No cleansing (n=47). All of the patients received prophylactic antibiotics: levofloxacin 500 mg PO for 7 days, beginning the day before procedure. Patients completed a telephone interview 4 days after undergoing the biopsy and went to the office 2 weeks after biopsy. The primary end point was the rate of infectious complications. An infectious complication when one or more of the following events occurred: 1) fever greater than 38.0Cº, 2) urinary tract infection or 3) sepsis (standardized definition). Student t test and multivariate regression analysis were used for data analysis. Results: Infectious complications developed in 6 cases (12.7%) in the non-rectal preparation group: five patients had fever without sepsis (11%) and one had sepsis (2%). In the povidone-iodine rectal preparation group there were no infectious complications (0.0%). Multivariate analysis did not identify any patient subgroups at significantly higher risk of infection after prostate biopsy. Of the 94 men who underwent TRUS-Bx 45 (47.9%) were diagnosed with prostate cancer and 3 (3.2%) had ASAP in the result. The hospital admission rate for urological complications within 30 days of the procedure was 1%, and only for infection related reasons (sepsis). Conclusion: The administration of quinolone-based prophylactic antibiotics and the simple use of 2.5 mL of povidone-iodine dermic solution in a transrectal prostate massage for
Downloads
References
2. Machado MT, Verotti MJ, Aragao AJ, Rodrigues AO, Borrelli M, Wroclawski E. Prospective randomized controlled trial comparing three different ways of anesthesia in TRUS guided Prostate Biopsy. Int Braz J Urol. 2006;32:172-80.
3. Nash PA, Shinohara K. TRUS guided prostatic nerve blockade eases systematic needle biopsy of the prostate. J Urol. 1996;155: 607-9.
4. Soloway MS, Obek C. Periprostatic local anesthesia before ultrasound guided prostatic biopsy. J Urol. 2000;163:172-3.
5. Cadilhe JP. TRUS prostatic Biopsy: the role of the Urologist step by step. J Endourology. 2006;20:170.
6. Autorino R, De Sio M, Di Lorenzo, Damiano R, Damiano R, Perdonà S, Cindolo L, et al. How to decrease pain during TRUS guided biopsy: a look at the literature. J Urol. 2005;174:2091-97.
7. Scattoni V, Zlotta A, Nava L, Rosigno M, Montorsi F. TRUS guided biopsy schemes and TRUS prostatic lesion guided biopsies. Eur Urol. 2002:Supl;28-34.
8. Rocco B, de Cobelli O, Leon ME, Ferruti M, Mastropasqua MG, Matei DV, et al. Sensitivity and detection rate of a 12-core trans-perineal prostate biopsy: preliminary report. Eur Urol. 2006;49:827-33.
9. Eskicorapci SY, Baydar DE, Akball C, Sofikerim M, Günay M, Ekici S, et al. An extended 10-core TRUS prostate guided biopsy protocol improves detection of prostate cancer. Eur Urol. 2004;45 444-9.
10. Emiliozzi P, Scarpone P, DePaula F, Pizzo M, Federico G, Pansadoro A, et al. The incidence of prostate cancer in men with PSA greater than 4,0 ng/ml: a randomized study of 6 versus 12 core transperineal prostate biopsy. J Urol. 2004;171:197-9.
11. Ravery V, Goldblatt L, Royer B, Blanc E, Toublanc M, Boccon-Gibod L. Extensive biopsy protocol improves the detection rate of prostate cancer. J Urol. 2000;164:393-6.
12. Gore JL, Shariat SF, Miles BJ, Kadmon D, Jiang N, Wheeler TM, et al. Optimal combinations of systematic sextant and laterally directed biopsies for the detection of prostate cancer. J Urol.2001;165:1554-9.
13. Chang JJ, Shinohara k, Bhargava V, Presti JC. Prospective evaluation of lateral biopsies of the peripheral zone for prostate cancer detection. J Urol. 1998;160:2111-4.
14. Terris MK, Wallen EM, Stamey TA. Comparison of mid-lobe versus lateral systemic sextant biopsies in detection of prostate cancer. Urol Int. 1997;59:239-42.
15. Cadilhe JP, Veiga da Silva. Esquemas de biopsias prostaticas transrectais ecoguiadas e BPTR dirigidas a lesões. Acta Urol Port. 2007, 24;2:66.
16. Hodge KK, McNeal JE, Terris MK, Stamey TA. Random systematic versus directed ultrasound guided transrectal core biopsies of the prostate. J Urol. 1989;142:71-4.
17. Kuligowska E., Barish MA, Fenlon HM, Blake M. Predictors of prostate carcinoma: accuracy of gray scale and color doppler US and serum markers. Radiology. 2001;220:757-64.
18. Iczkowski KA, Casella G, Seppala RJ, Jones GL, Mishler BA, Qian J, et al. Needle core length in sextant biopsies influences prostate cancer detection rate. Urology. 2002;59:698-703.
19. Cadilhe JP. Transrectal prostate biopsy after prophylatic preparation of the rectum with povidone-iodine – A prospective randomized trial. J Urol. 2017;197:e143.
20. Carey JM, Korman HJ. Transrectal ultrasound guided biopsy of the prostate. Do enemas decrease clinically significant complications? J Urol. 2001; 166:82-5.
21. Zaytoun OM, Anil T, Moussa AS, Jianbo L, Fareed K, Jones JS. Morbidity of prostate biopsy after simplified versus complex preparation protocols: assessment of risk factors. Urology. 2011; 77:910-4.
22. Grabe M, Bjerklund-Johansen T, Botto H, et al. Guidelines on urological infections. European Association of Urology website [accessed April 2016] Available from: http://uroweb.org/wp-content/ uploads/18_Urological-infections_LR.pdf.
23. Hwang EC, Jung SI, Seo YH, Jeong SH, Kwon DD, Park K, et al. Risk factors for and prophylactic effect of povidone-iodine rectal cleansing on infectious complications after prostate biopsy: a retrospective cohort study. Int Urol Nephrol. 2015; 47:595-601.
24. Murphy DG, Weerakoon M, Grummet J. Is zero sepsis alone enough to justify transperineal prostate biopsy? BJU Int. 2014; 114:3-4.
25. Grummet JP, Weerakoon M, Huang S, Lawrentschuk N, Frydenberg M, Moon DA, et al. Sepsis and ‘superbugs’: should we favour the transperineal over the transrectal approach for prostate biopsy? BJU Int. 2014; 114:384-8.
26. Loeb S, Carter HB, Berndt SI, Ricker W, Schaeffer EM. Complications after prostate biopsy: data from SEER-Medicare. J Urol. 2011;186:1830-4.
27. Akduman B, Akduman D, Tokgöz H, Erol B, Türker T, Ayoglu F, et al. Long-term fluoroquinolone use before the prostate biopsy may increase the risk of sepsis caused by resistant microorganisms. Urology. 2011; 78:250-5.
28. Wagenlehner FM, van Oostrum E, Tenke PG, GPIU investigators. Infective complications after prostate biopsy: outcome of the Global Prevalence Study of Infections in Urology (GPIU) 2010 and 2011, a prospective multinational multicentre prostate biopsy study. Eur Urol. 2013;63:521–7.
29. Walker JT, Singla N, Roehrborn CG. Reducing infectious complications following transrectal ultrasound-guided prostate biopsy: a systematic review. Rev Urol. 2016;18:73–89.
30. Womble PR, Linsell SM, Gao Y, Ye Z, Montie JE, Gandhi TN, et al. A statewide intervention to reduce hospitalizations after prostate biopsy. Urological Surgery Improvement Collaborative. J Urol. 2015; 194:403-9.
31. Lorber G, Benenson S, Rosenberg S, Gofrit ON, Pode D. A single dose of 240 mg gentamicin during transrectal prostate biopsy significantly reduces septic complications. Urology. 2013; 82:998-1002.
32. Losco G, Studd R, Blackmore T. Ertapenem prophylaxis reduces sepsis after transrectal biopsy of the prostate. BJU Int. 2014; 113 (Suppl 2):69-72.
33. Issa MM, Al-Qassab UA, Hall J, Ritenour CW, Petros JA, Sullivan JW. Formalin disinfection of biopsy needle minimizes the risk of sepsis following prostate biopsy. J Urol. 2013;190:1769–75.
34. Park DS, Hwang JH, Choi DK, Gong IH, Hong YK, Park S, et al. Control of infective complications of transrectal prostate biopsy. Surg Infect. 2014; 15:431-6.
