Skip to main content

Thank you for visiting nature.com. You are using a browser version with limited support for CSS. To obtain the best experience, we recommend you use a more up to date browser (or turn off compatibility mode in Internet Explorer). In the meantime, to ensure continued support, we are displaying the site without styles and JavaScript.

  • Original Article
  • Published:

Clinical Research

Rectal swab testing before prostate biopsy: experience in a VA Medical Center urology practice

Prostate Cancer and Prostatic Diseases volume 18, pages 365–369 (2015)Cite this article

Subjects

Abstract

Background:

Infectious complications following transrectal ultrasound prostate biopsy (TRUSBx) have been increasing. Pre-biopsy prophylaxis with fluoroquinolone (FQL) antibiotics is a recommended and accepted practice. Increasing emergence of FQL-resistant bacteria is believed to be related to the increase in infectious complications. We sought to determine the effect of targeted antibiotic prophylaxis (TAP) before TRUSBx on infectious complications in our practice.

Methods:

TAP was introduced in our practice in 2012. A retrospective analysis was performed analyzing infectious complications from TRUSBx before and after TAP was introduced. Two hundred forty-four patients underwent TRUSBx with TAP directed by bacterial antibiotic sensitivity identified on rectal swab. A group of two hundred sixty-four consecutive patients who underwent TRUSBx in our practice before introduction of TAP were chosen for comparison. Infectious complications were recorded and compared between groups. Prostate volume, PSA, number of biopsy cores, finding of prostate cancer, presence of diabetes, race and age were also compared.

Results:

The infectious complication rate after TRUSBx in the pre-TAP group was 7/264 (2.65%), the rate in the TAP group was 1/244 (0.41%), a statistically significant difference (P=<0.05). There were no differences between groups in regards to prostate volume, number of prostate biopsy cores, race and presence of diabetes. The rectal swab group was younger (65.4±6.0) than the non-swab group (67.9±6.2), had higher PSA values, and a higher chance of prostate cancer on biopsy.

Conclusions:

The use of TAP based on rectal swab testing significantly lowered our infectious complication rate for TRUSBx. TAP is now adopted as standard practice before TRUSBx in our center. The younger age and higher chance of prostate cancer on biopsy in the rectal swab group, we believe, is due to implementation of recent guidelines directing urologists be more selective in recommending prostate biopsy to older men.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution

Access options

Buy this article

  • Purchase on Springer Link
  • Instant access to full article PDF
Buy now

Prices may be subject to local taxes which are calculated during checkout

Figure 1

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Loeb S, Carter HB, Berndt SI, Ricker W, Schaeffer EM . Complications after prostate biopsy: data from SEER-Medicare. J Urol 2011; 186: 1830–1834.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Wagenlehner F, Pilatz A, Waliszewski P, Weidner W, Johansen T . Reducing infection rates after prostate biopsy. Nature 2014; 11: 80–86.

    Google Scholar 

  3. Zlotta AR, Nam RK . To biopsy or not to biopsy - thou shall think twice. Eur Urol 2012; 61: 1115–1118.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Zani EL, Clark OA, Rodrigues NN Jr . Antibiotic prophylaxis for transrectal prostate biopsy. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2011; Art. No CD006576. http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/14651858.CD006576.pub2.

  5. Puig J, Darnell A, Bermudez P, Malet A, Serrate G, Bare M et al. Transrectal ultrasound-guided prostate biopsy: is antibiotic prophylaxis necessary? Eur Radiol 2006; 16: 939–943.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Bootsma AM, Laguna Pes MP, Geerlings SE, Goossens A . Antibiotic prophylaxis in urologic procedures: a systematic review. Eur Urol 2008; 54: 1270–1286.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Gonzalez CM, Averch T, Boyd L, Clemens J, Dowling R, Goldman H et al. AUA/SUNA white paper on the incidence, prevention and treatment of complications related to prostate needle biopsy. AUA [online] 2013. http://www.auanet.org/resources/white-paper-on-the-incidence-prevention-and-treatment-of-complications-related-to-prostate-needle-biopsy.cfm.

  8. Zaytoun OM, Vargo E, Rajan R, Berglund R, Gordon S, Jones J . Emergence of fluoroquinolone-resistant Escherichia coli as cause of postprostate biopsy infection: implications for prophylaxis and treatment. Urology 2011; 77: 1035–1042.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Mosharafa AA, Torky M, El Said W, Meshref A . Rising incidence of acute prostatitis following prostate biopsy: fluoroquinolone resistance and exposure is a significant risk factor. Urology 2011; 78: 511–514.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Wagenlehner F, Stower-Hoffmann J, Schneider-Brachert W, Naber K, Lehn N . Influence of a prophylactic single dose of ciprofloxacin on the level of resistance of Escherichia coli to fluoroquinolones in urology. Int J Antimicrob Agents 2000; 15: 207–211.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. R Core Team . R: A Language and Environment for Statistical Computing. R Foundation for Statistical Computing: Vienna, Austria, 2015; URL http://www.R-project.org/.

    Google Scholar 

  12. Calhoun P . Exact: unconditional exact test. R package version 1.5, 2015. http://CRAN.R-project.org/package=Exact.

  13. Barnard GA . Significance tests for 2x2 tables. Biometrika 1947; 34: 123–138.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Naber KG, Sorgel F . Antibiotic therapy-rationale and evidence for optimal drug concentrations in prostatic and seminal fluid and in prostatic tissue. Andrologia 2003; 35: 331–335.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Taylor AK, Zembower T, Nadler R, Scheetz M, Cashy J, Bowen D et al. Targeted antimicrobial prophylaxis using rectal swab cultures in men undergoing transrectal ultrasound guided prostate biopsy is associated with reduced incidence of postoperative infectious complications and cost of care. J Urol 2012; 187: 1275–1279.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Kehinde EO, Al-Maghrebi M, Sheikh M, Anim JT . Combined ciprofloxacin and amikacin prophylaxis in the prevention of septicemia after transrectal ultrasound guided biopsy of the prostate. J Urol 2013; 189: 911–915.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Issa M, Al-Qassab U, Hall J, Ritenour C, Petros J . Sullivan. Formalin disinfection of biopsy needle minimizes the risk of sepsis following prostate biopsy. J Urol 2013; 190: 1769–1775.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. 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: 910–914.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Carey JM, Korman HJ . Transrectal ultrasound guided biopsy of the prostate. Do enemas decrease clinically significant complications? J Urol 2001; 166: 82–85.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Abughosh Z, Margolick J, Goldenberg SL, Taylor SA, Afshar K, Bell R et al. A prospective randomized trial of povidone-iodine prophylactic cleansing of the rectum before transrectal ultrasound guided prostate biopsy. J Urol 2013; 189: 1326–1331.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Duplessis CA, Bavaro M, Simons MP, Marguet C, Santomauro M, Auge B et al. Rectal cultures before transrectal ultrasound-guided prostate biopsy reduce post-prostatic biopsy infection rates. Urology 2012; 79: 556–561.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Akduman B, Akduman D, Tokgöz H, Erol B, Türker T, Ayoğlu F et al. Long-term fluoroquinolone use before the prostate biopsy may increase the risk of sepsis caused by resistant microorganisms. Urology 2011; 78: 250–255.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Patel U, Dasgupta P, Amoroso P, Challacombe B, Pilcher J, Kirby R . Infection after transrectal ultrasonography-guided prostate biopsy: increased relative risks after recent international travel or antibiotic use. BJU Int 2012; 109: 1781–1785.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Liss MA, Chang A, Santos R, Nakama-Peeples A, Peterson EM, Osann K et al. Prevalence and significance of fluoroquinolone resistant Escherichia coli in patients undergoing transrectal ultrasound guided prostate needle biopsy. J Urol 2011; 185: 1283–1288.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  25. Tsu JH, Ma WK, Chan WK, Lam BH, To KC, To WK et al. Prevalence and predictive factors of harboring fluoroquinolone-resistant and extended-spectrum β-lactamase-producing rectal flora in Hong Kong Chinese men undergoing transrectal ultrasound-guided prostate biopsy. Urology 2015; 85: 15–21.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Carroll P, Albertsen PC, Greene K . PSA testing for the pretreatment staging and posttreatment management of prostate cancer: 2013 revision of 2009 best practice statement. AUA (online) 2013. http://www.auanet.org/education/guidelines/prostate-specific-antigen.cfm.

  27. Moyer V . Screening for prostate cancer: US Preventive Services Task Force recommendation statement. Ann Int Med 2012; 157: 120–134.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Dai J, Leone A, Mermel L, Hwang K, Pareek G, Schiff S et al. Rectal swab culture–directed antimicrobial prophylaxis for prostate biopsy and risk of postprocedure infection: a cohort study. Urology 85 2015; 85: 8–14.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

This work was sponsored by the Department of Veterans Affairs, Lexington, Kentucky, and the University of Kentucky College of Medicine and we thank these institutions for allowing us to conduct this research.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, University of Kentucky, Lexington, KY, USA

    I Cook

  2. Department of Urology, University of Kentucky, Lexington, KY, USA,

    J B Angel, P L Vera, J Demos & D Preston

  3. Department of Urology, VA Medical Center, Lexington, KY, USA

    P L Vera, J Demos & D Preston

Authors
  1. I Cook
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. J B Angel
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. P L Vera
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. J Demos
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. D Preston
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to D Preston.

Ethics declarations

Competing interests

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

Additional information

Disclaimer

The opinions expressed in this work do not reflect the opinions of the Department of Veterans Affairs or the University of Kentucky College of Medicine.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Cook, I., Angel, J., Vera, P. et al. Rectal swab testing before prostate biopsy: experience in a VA Medical Center urology practice. Prostate Cancer Prostatic Dis 18, 365–369 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1038/pcan.2015.38

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/pcan.2015.38

This article is cited by

Search

Advanced search

Quick links