ROLE OF POVIDONE-IODINE-SOAKED GAUZE IN PREVENTING INFECTIOUS COMPLICATIONS FOLLOWING TRANS RECTAL DIGITAL GUIDED PROSTATE BIOPSY

Main Article Content

Khalid Farooq
Muhammad Asif
Najma Hameed

Abstract

Objective: To identify the role of povidone iodine-soaked gauze following transrectal digital guided prostate biopsy in the prevention of infectious complications.


Methodology: This prospective comparative study was conducted in the urology department of Lady Reading Hospital including 201 patients. Patients who had indications for prostate biopsy, including an elevated pros­tate-specific antigen (PSA) or abnormal prostatic nodule on digital rectal findings were included. Patients were distributed into two groups by the closed envelop method. Group, I (n=101) received a povidone-iodine-soaked gauze intrarectally along with xylocaine lubricant for 5 minutes just before biopsy, while group 2 (n=100) did not receive povidone-soaked gauze. The transrectal digital guided prostate biopsy guided method was used in this study. The rectal swab was taken before using povidone-soaked gauze and after doing biopsy in both groups The bacterial colonies were counted in swabs before using povidone-soaked gauze and after biopsy using biopsy Mueller-Hinton agar medium.


Results: The mean age of group 1 was 64 years (range, 39–80) and group 2 was 61.7 years (range, 35–82). The average PSA values were 7.3 ng/ml and 8.34 ng/ml in groups 1 and 2, respectively. The rate of infectious complications in group1 was 0.9% (n=1) whereas in group 2 was 10% (n=10). A single-use of povidone-soaked rectal gauze significantly lowered the risk of infectious complications P<0.05. There was a 99.9% decrease in the mean number of colony-forming units after rectal preparation.


Conclusion: Findings concluded that using povidone iodine-soaked gauze before doing digital guided prostate biopsy is a significant method to minimize complications.

Article Details

How to Cite
1.
Farooq K, Asif M, Hameed N. ROLE OF POVIDONE-IODINE-SOAKED GAUZE IN PREVENTING INFECTIOUS COMPLICATIONS FOLLOWING TRANS RECTAL DIGITAL GUIDED PROSTATE BIOPSY. J Postgrad Med Inst [Internet]. 2021 Dec. 31 [cited 2022 Nov. 30];35(4):225-9. Available from: https://jpmi.org.pk/index.php/jpmi/article/view/2849
Section
Original Article

References

Schröder FH. Review of diagnostic markers for prostate cancer. Recent Result Cancer Res. 2009; 181:173- 82. DOI: 10.1007/978-3-540-69297- 3_16.

Bray F, Ferlay J, Soerjomataram I, Sie¬gel RL, Torre LA, Jemal A. Global cancer statistics 2018: GLOBOCAN estimates of incidence and mortality worldwide for 36 cancers in 185 countries. CA Can¬cer J Clin 2018; 68(6):394-424. DOI: 10.3322/caac.21492

Rawla P. Epidemiology of Prostate Can¬cer. World J Oncol. 2019; 10(2):63-89. doi:10.14740/wjon1191.

Hodge K, McNeal J, Stamey T. Ultra¬sound Guided Transrectal Core Biopsies of the Palpably Abnormal Prostate. J Urol. 1989; 142(1):66-70.

Abughosh Z, Margolick J, Goldenberg SL, Taylor SA, Afshar K, Bell R, et al. A prospective randomized trial of po¬vidone-iodine prophylactic cleansing of the rectum before transrectal ul¬trasound guided prostate biopsy. J Urol. 2013; 189(4):1326-31. DOI: 10.1016/j.juro.2012.09.121.

Ajzen S, Goldenberg S, Allen G, Cooper¬berg P, Chan N, Jones E. Palpable pros¬tatic nodules: comparison of US and digital guidance for fine-needle aspira¬tion biopsy. Radiol. 1989; 171(2):521- 523.

Jesus C, Corrêa L, Padovani C. Com¬plications and risk factors in transrectal ultrasound-guided prostate biopsies. Sao Paulo Med J. 2006; 124(4):198- 202.

Yang Y, Liu Z, Wei Q, Cao D, Yang L, Zhu Y, et al. The Efficiency and Safe¬ty of Intrarectal Topical Anesthesia for Transrectal Ultrasound-Guided Prostate Biopsy: A Systematic Review and Me¬ta-Analysis. Urol Int. 2017; 99(4):373- 383.

Tiong H, Liew L, Samuel M, Consigliere D, Esuvaranathan K. A meta-analy¬sis of local anesthesia for transrec¬tal ultrasound-guided biopsy of the prostate. Prostat Canc Prostatic Dis. 2007;10(2):127-136.

Park B, Kim J, Bae S, Lee Y, Kang S, Han C. The effect of ultrasound-guided com¬pression immediately after transrectal ultrasound-guided prostate biopsy on post-biopsy bleeding: a randomized controlled pilot study. Int Urol Nephrol. 2017; 49(8):1319-1325.

Bullet E, Guevara M, Campo R, Falcóo J, Puig J, Prera A, et al. Massive Rectal Bleeding Following Transrectal Ultra¬sound-Guided Prostate Biopsy. Endos¬copy. 2000; 32(10):792-795.

Loeb S, Vellekoop A, Ahmed H, Catto J, Emberton M, Nam R, et al. Systemat¬ic Review of Complications of Prostate Biopsy. Eur Urol. 2013; 64(6):876-892.

Glaser A, Novakovic K, Helfand B. The Impact of Prostate Biopsy on Urinary Symptoms, Erectile Function, and Anx¬iety. Cur Urol Rep. 2012; 13(6):447- 454.

Klein T, Palisaar R, Holz A, Brock M, Noldus J, Hinkel A. The Impact of Pros¬tate Biopsy and Periprostatic Nerve Block on Erectile and Voiding Func¬tion: A Prospective Study. J Urol. 2010; 184(4):1447-1452.

Aktas B, Bulut S, Gokkaya C, Ozden C, Salar R, Aslan Y, et al. Association of Prostate Volume with Voiding Impair¬ment and Deterioration in Quality of Life After Prostate Biopsy. Urol. 2014; 83(3):617-621.

Fujita K, Landis P, McNeil B, Pavlovich C. Serial prostate biopsies are associ¬ated with an increased risk of erectile dysfunction in men with prostate can¬cer on active surveillance. J Urol. 2009; 182(6):2664-2669.

Lundström K, Drevin L, Carlsson S, Garmo H, Loeb S, Stattin P, et al. Na¬tionwide Population-Based Study of Infections after Transrectal Ultrasound Guided Prostate Biopsy. J Urol. 2014; 192(4):1116-1122.

Bruyère F, Malavaud S, Bertrand P, Decock A, Cariou G, Doublet J, et al. Prosbiotate: A Multicenter, Prospective Analysis of Infectious Complications After Prostate Biopsy. J Urol. 2015; 193(1):145-150.

Antsupova V, Arpi M. Antibiotic prophy¬laxis for transrectal prostate biopsy--a new strategy--authors' response. J An¬timicrob Chemother. 2014; 70(3):957- 958.

Wagenlehner F, van Oostrum E, Tenke P, Tandogdu Z, Çek M, Grabe M, et al. In¬fective Complications After Prostate Bi¬opsy: Outcome of the Global Prevalence Study of Infections in Urology (GPIU) 2010 and 2011, A Prospective Mul¬tinational Multicentre Prostate Biopsy Study. Eur Urol. 2013; 63(3):521-527.

Unnikrishnan R, El-Shafei A, Klein E, Jones J, Kartha G, Goldman H. For Sin¬gle Dosing, Levofloxacin Is Superior to Ciprofloxacin When Combined with an Aminoglycoside in Preventing Severe Infections After Prostate Biopsy. Urol. 2015; 85(6):1241-1246.

Anastasiadis E, van der Meulen J, Em¬berton M. Hospital admissions after transrectal ultrasound-guided biopsy of the prostate in men diagnosed with prostate cancer: A database analysis in England. Int J Urol. 2014; 22(2):181- 186.

Walker JT, Singla N, Roehrborn CG. Reducing infectious complications fol¬lowing transrectal ultrasound-guided prostate biopsy: a systematic review. Rev Urol. 2016; 18: 73–89.

Jordan AL, Kathleen L, Kalyan D, Jay RD. Procedural povidone-iodine rectal preparation reduces bacteriuria and bacteremia following prostate needle biopsy. CJU. 2017;24(4):8883–9

Borghesi M, Ahmed H, Nam R, Schaef¬fer E, Schiavina R, Taneja S, et al. Com¬plications After Systematic, Random, and Image-guided Prostate Biopsy. Eur Urol. 2017; 71(3):353–65.